paper_id
stringlengths 9
16
| version
stringclasses 26
values | yymm
stringclasses 311
values | created
timestamp[s] | title
stringlengths 6
335
| secondary_subfield
sequencelengths 1
8
| abstract
stringlengths 25
3.93k
| primary_subfield
stringclasses 124
values | field
stringclasses 20
values | fulltext
stringlengths 0
2.84M
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1811.06355 | 1 | 1811 | 2018-11-15T14:06:50 | Cost of selfishness in the allocation of cities in the Multiple Travelling Salesmen Problem | [
"cs.MA"
] | The decision to centralise or decentralise human organisations requires quantified evidence but little is available in the literature. We provide such data in a variant of the Multiple Travelling Salesmen Problem (MTSP) in which we study how the allocation sub-problem may be decentralised among selfish selfmen. Our contributions are (i) this modification of the MTSP in order to include selfishness, (ii) the proposition of organisations to solve this modified MTSP, and (iii) the comparison of these organisations. Our 5 organisations may be summarised as follows: (i) OptDecentr is a pure Centralised Organisation (CO) in which a Central Authority (CA) finds the best solution which could be found by a Decentralised Organisation (DO), (ii) Cluster and (iii) Auction are CO/DO hybrids, and (iv) P2P and (v) CNP are pure DO. Sixth and seventh organisations are used as benchmarks: (vi) NoRealloc is a pure DO which ignores the allocation problem, and (vii) FullCentr is a pure CO which solves a different problem, viz., the traditional MTSP. Comparing the efficiency of pairs of these mechanisms quantify the price of decentralising an organisation. In particular, our model of selfishness in OptDecentr makes the total route length 30% (respectively, 60%) longer with 5 (respectively, 9) salesmen than the traditional MTSP in FullCentr when the computation time is limited to 30 minutes. With this time limit, our results also seem to indicate that the level of coercion of the CA impacts more the total route length than the level of centralisation. | cs.MA | cs |
Cost of selfishness in the allocation of cities in the
Multiple Travelling Salesmen Problem
Thierry Moyaux1 & Eric Marcon2
1. Univ Lyon, INSA-Lyon, DISP, EA 4570, F-69621, France.
Corresponding author.
2. Univ Lyon, INSA-Lyon, UJM-Saint Etienne, DISP, EA 4570, F-69621, France.
November 16, 2018
Abstract
The decision to centralise or decentralise human organisations re-
quires quantified evidence but little is available in the literature. We
provide such data in a variant of the Multiple Travelling Salesmen
Problem (MTSP) in which we study how the allocation sub-problem
may be decentralised among selfish selfmen. Our contributions are
(i) this modification of the MTSP in order to include selfishness, (ii)
the proposition of organisations to solve this modified MTSP, and (iii)
the comparison of these organisations. Our 5 organisations may be
summarised as follows: (i) OptDecentr is a pure Centralised Organisa-
tion (CO) in which a Central Authority (CA) finds the best solution which
could be found by a Decentralised Organisation (DO), (ii) Cluster and
(iii) Auction are CO/DO hybrids, and (iv) P2P and (v) CNP are pure DO.
Sixth and seventh organisations are used as benchmarks: (vi) NoRealloc
is a pure DO which ignores the allocation problem, and (vii) FullCentr is
a pure CO which solves a different problem, viz., the traditional MTSP.
Comparing the efficiency of pairs of these mechanisms quantify the price
of decentralising an organisation. In particular, our model of selfishness in
OptDecentr makes the total route length 30% (respectively, 60%) longer
with 5 (respectively, 9) salesmen than the traditional MTSP in FullCentr
when the computation time is limited to 30 minutes. With this time limit,
our results also seem to indicate that the level of coercion of the CA
impacts more the total route length than the level of centralisation.
Keywords. Centralised Organisation (CO); Decentralised Organisation
(DO); Selfishness; Multiple Travelling Salesmen Problem (MTSP).
1
Introduction
Everybody has an opinion about the centralisation of decision. We believe
that this opinion depends too much on intuition rather than quantified
evidence. In addition, several criteria exist to compare organisations. For
1
instance, Centralised Organisation (CO) is often said to find the opti-
mum solution (or, at least, the best possible solution), while Decentralised
Organisation (DO) is more reactive. Two incomparable metrics are op-
posed here, namely, quality of the solution found and computation speed.
Like comparisons of capitalism and socialism (Ellman, 1989), numerical
comparisons of CO and DO rely on comparisons of specific organisations
instantiating these levels of centralisation.
In other words, it is difficult
to provide numerical evidence of the efficiency of CO and DO in gen-
eral, hence particular mechanisms of these approaches are compared.
In
this article, we call "mechanism" an instance of an "organisation", and
an "organisation" is an instance of an "approach". The possible "ap-
proaches" are pure CO and DO, and CO/DO hybrids. Let us illustrate
these three terms: The CO/DO hybrid approach can be instantiated as
an "organisation" with one or several (coercive) dispatchers, and/or (non-
coercive) mediators such as an auctioneer, or peer-to-peer negotiation,
etc. Next, the "organisation" with an auctioneer can be instantiated as
a "mechanism" as either an English (multiple-shot first-price) or Vickrey
(single-shot second-price) auction.
We think that the choice of a more or less centralised organisation is
a question too often addressed by political discussions as a consequence
of the lack of numerical evidence. This research question is important be-
cause the efficiency of organisations may be greatly improved by selecting
the appropriate decision organisation.
In fact, defenders of CO (respec-
tively, DO) spends much effort in developing their mechanism, while they
may obtain much better performances by introducing some features of
DO (respectively, CO) -- "If your only tool is a hammer then every prob-
lem looks like a nail", as the saying goes. Such a choice between various
organisations requires numerical data about these organisations, such as
the aforementioned quality of the solution and computation time. With
such data, an organisation could be designed depending on its constraints;
for instance, choosing the number of hierarchical levels and the appropri-
ate organisation on each level depending on the time available to make
a decision.
In particular, we believe that our work will shed light on the
organisation of the Physical Internet (Sarraj et al., 2014) since this project
aims at connecting CO logistics networks in a DO way.
The literature provides little quantified comparisons of CO and DO, as
noted in a review co-written by one of us (Moyaux and McBurney, 2012).
In addition to the papers referenced in this review, we now outline others
which compare CO and DO in applications to logistics. In this area, the
scarcity of quantified comparisons has also been noted (Mes et al., 2007,
p. 60). Similarly, Davidsson et al. (2005) regret the few quantitative com-
parisons of DO approaches with CO. One of the earliest such comparisons
in logistics is a work by Fisher et al. (1995, 1996) who propose an ex-
tension of Smith (1980)'s Contract Net Protocol (CNP) in which task
decomposition is decentralised in order to solve a static Vehicle Routing
Problem with Time Windows. Their experiment shows that their protocol
finds a total route length between 3% and 74% worse than the optimal
and is thus comparable to heuristics from Operations Research. Then,
they propose an improvement which reduces these figures by about 12%.
2
Since routing problems are NP-hard, the optimal route is often unknown
and some studies compare the results of DO with those of approximate
CO heuristics. In this context, Mes et al. (2007) report that their Vickrey
auction (DO) performs as good as or even better than centralised heuris-
tics to solve a dynamic Pickup and Delivery Problem with Time Windows
(PDPTW). For the same problem, M´ahr et al. (2010) also compare a
Vickrey auction (DO) to the approximate solution found by CPLEX in
a few 30-second intervals (CO). Their experimentation shows that the
auction outperforms CPLEX when service time duration is highly uncer-
tain. Next, van Lon and Holvoet (2015) compare a cheapest insertion
heuristic (CO) with an implementation of Fisher et al. (1995)'s Contract
Net Protocol (DO). Their results seem to indicate that DO outperforms
CO. Glaschenko et al. (2009) have implemented a real-time multiagent
scheduler for a taxi company in London, UK. The benefit of their tool is
distributed between the drivers and the company, resulting in an increase
of driver wages by 9%. Karmani et al. (2007) use a market-based ap-
proach to solve a capacitated version with multiple depot of the MTSP.
Their experiment shows that their approach scales to thousands of cities
and hundreds of salesmen with a total route length quite close to the op-
timum. Later, Kivelevitch et al. (2013) were inspired by this approach to
propose a distributed meta-heuristic. The total length of the routes are
within 1% of the optimal in 90% of the tested cases. More precisely, the
median total length of the route is 1.7% higher than the optimum and
4.8% higher in the worst of the tested cases, but the median run time
is 8 times faster than CPLEX. Nevertheless, this approach uses agents
with no autonomy at all (e.g., an agent can take one or all cities from
another agent without permission), hence we think it is more related to
parallel algorithms (Talbi, 2006) than to the making of decisions in hu-
man organisations with selfish agents as we investigate. Quite similarly,
others solve logistic problems (e.g., Travelling Salesman Problem (TSP)
by Xie and Liu (2009) and Hanna and Cagan (2009)) with agents who,
again, lack the human characteristics of selfishness and cannot hence be
used to design organisations as well.
The goal of this article is to compare CO with DO by measuring the
efficiency of several mechanisms on various levels of centralisation to solve
a modified Multiple Travelling Salesmen Problem (MTSP) (MTSP is the
Vehicle Routing Problem without capacities) such that the selfishness of
the salesmen is taken into account. It is important to notice that our sales-
men are selfishness because we want to investigate human organisations.
This article has the following contributions:
1. Conceptual contributions: CO and DO are different by nature be-
cause, for example, the social welfare (i.e., utility function of the
group) in CO may have no trivial relationship with the individual
utility functions in DO. Game Theory proposes models and tools to
study CO and DO, e.g., the Prisoner's Dilemma shows that DO may
find a solution (i.e., Nash equilibrium) which is Pareto dominated by
the solution found by CO. Taking this game-theoretic background
into account, we modify the MTSP by adding features represent-
ing the selfishness of the salesmen such that our modified MTSP
3
can be solved in more or less centralised organisations. Selfishness
means that a salesman maximises his1 own utility in a selfish manner
without paying attention to the social welfare of the community of
salesmen.
Subsection 2.2 introduces our MTSP constrained by 1-1 exchanges.
More precisely, the salesmen "own" an initial endowment of cities,
and they use a mechanism to modify this initial allocation of cities
by exchanging one city against one city exclusively, which we refer
to as "1-1 exchanges". This corresponds to our modified MTSP.
Section 6 discusses other possibilities to obtain a pair of CO and
DO versions of a problem.
2. Technical contributions: As said in the above literature review, no
previous work compares more than two kinds of organisations to
solve a same location and routing problem. Our organisations for
the exchange of cities are inspired by the classes of coordination
proposed in (Frayret, 2002, p. 131) as an extension to Mintzberg
(1978). To be precise, this paper studies the following organisations
which have various numbers of hierarchical levels, coercion levels
and number of rounds of interactions, as summarised in Figure 1:
1. OptDecentr makes the Central Authority (CA) find both (i) the
best allocation of cities to salesmen with the constraint of 1-1
exchanges and (ii) for each salesman, the shortest path visiting
all the cities allocated to this salesman -- this is a CO mechanism
which looks for the best solution which may be found by the
following five DO mechanisms;
2. Cluster makes the CA allocate groups of neighbouring cities to
the salesmen with the constraint of 1-1 exchanges, then every
salesman locally solves a TSP with his allocated cities;
3. Auction is similar to Cluster except that the CA is less coercive
since she plays the role of an auctioneer;
4. CNP (Contract Net Protocol) has no CA and every salesman
plays the role of an auctioneer;
5. P2P also has no CA and relies on bilateral negotiations.
Finally, two additional organisations are used as benchmarks:
6. NoRealloc assumes no reallocations of the cities among the
salesmen who only solve a TSP on their initial endowment;
7. FullCentr is the same as OptDecentr without the constraint of
1-1 exchanges, that is FullCentr is the only mechanism that
solves the traditional MTSP.
Since our experimentation simulates more agents than the number
of cores of the CPU in our computers, we perform only sequential
simulations, then we infer what would have happened in real life
with computations carried out in parallel.
As said above, we call "mechanism" an instance of an "organisa-
tion". However, this article uses both terms interchangeably because
1We always use "him" for a salesman and "her" for the Central Authority (CA).
4
y
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a
l
a
r
t
n
e
c
e
v
i
c
r
e
o
C
y
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a
l
a
r
t
n
e
c
s
s
e
l
r
e
w
o
P
y
t
i
r
o
h
t
u
a
l
a
r
t
n
e
c
o
N
Coercion level
d
n
u
o
r
e
l
g
n
i
S
(
)
s
n
o
i
t
c
a
r
e
t
n
i
f
o
MTSP constrained by 1−1 exchanges
Traditional MTSP
Cluster
CA=clustering
OptDecentr
FullCentr
CA=MTSP solver
s
d
n
u
o
r
e
l
p
i
t
l
u
M
)
s
n
o
i
t
c
a
r
e
t
n
i
f
o
(
d
n
u
o
r
e
l
g
n
i
S
(
)
s
n
o
i
t
c
a
r
e
t
n
i
f
o
Auction
CA=auctioneer
P2P
1−1 interactions
1−1 interactions
CNP
1−n interactions
1−n interactions
1−n interactions
NoRealloc
Central authorithy (CA)
Allocation problem
Operator (i.e., salesman)
Routing problem
Centralisation
level
Exchange of messages
Figure 1: Overview of the seven organisations compared.
it deals with one mechanism per organisation only. In fact, each of
the above organisations may be instantiated in mechanisms different
from our descriptions in Section 3, as shall be discussed in Section 6.
Finally, our mechanisms instantiating the above first five organi-
sations are new, since they solve the MTSP constrained by 1-1 ex-
changes which we have never seen in the literature. On the contrary,
benchmarks NoRealloc and FullCentr are not new as they solve a
classic Mixed-Integer Linear Programming (MILP) formulation of
TSP and MTSP.
3. Numerical contributions: Davidsson et al. (2007) compare four mech-
anisms on a same problem and we do not know of any work with
more mechanisms.
In comparison with this work, our work both
consider more mechanisms and present many more experimental re-
sults. In fact, our results are robust since we compare the efficiency
of the mechanisms when they solve the same instance among 130
for given numbers of salesmen and clients, and we present the fifth
and ninth deciles obtained by 130 instances.
The outline of this paper is as follows. Section 2 presents our frame-
work, i.e., our MTSP constrained by 1-1 exchanges, next hypotheses about
how to carry out a fair comparisons of the mechanisms. Section 3 details
the seven mechanisms. Section 4 shows how the duration of the parallel
5
computations of up to 10 agents (9 salesmen + 1 Central Authority (CA))
is inferred from the sequential computations in our experimentation on one
of our computers with a 4-core CPU. Section 5 presents the numerical re-
sults of this experimentation. Section 6 discusses these results, next how
other variants of MTSP may be introduced taking the selfishness of the
salesmen into account. Section 7 concludes.
2 Framework
This section first recalls the formulation of the traditional MTSP solved
by Mechanism FullCentr, next our MTSP constrained by 1-1 exchanges of
cities which is solved by the other six mechanisms. We assume that both
problems have n cities to be visited by one of m salesmen, and dij is the
Euclidean distance between Cities i and j. City i = 0 is the depot shared
by all salesmen.
2.1 Traditional MTSP: FullCentr
The traditional MTSP in Equations 1-8 uses the 2-index decision variable
xij such that xij = 1 only if one of the m salesmen goes from City i to
City j. The objective function in Equation 1 minimises the total distance
U trad travelled by all the salesmen. Equation 2 (respectively, 5) ensures
that m salesmen leave (respectively, enter) the depot. Similarly, Equation
3 (respectively, 4) ensures that a single salesman leaves (respectively, en-
ters) every city. Equation 6 is a constraint eliminating sub-routes by the
method of node potentials proposed by Miller et al. (1960) in which de-
cision variable pi counts the number of cities visited by a salesman before
he visits City i.
min U trad =
Pn−1
j=0,j6=i dijxij
i=0 Pn−1
Pn−1
j=1 x0j = m
Pn−1
j=0,j6=i xij = 1
Pn−1
i=0,i6=j xij = 1
Pn−1
i=1 xi0 = m
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
1 ≤ i < n
1 ≤ j < n
(5)
pi − pj + (n − 1).xij ≤ n − 2 1 ≤ i 6= j < n (6)
(7)
(8)
1 ≤ i < n
0 ≤ i, j < n
xij ∈ {0, 1}
pi ∈ ℜ+
2.2 Modified MTSP (constrained by 1-1 exchanges)
We now explain how we modify this traditional MTSP in order to include
the individual selfishness of the salesmen such that a DO can also solve
our modified problem. The following explanation calls U trad the social
welfare in the traditional MTSP (i.e., the total route length in Eq. 1), and
U mod the social welfare and umod
Salesman k's utility in the modified
MTSP. We make the following assumptions:
k
6
k
k
1. Hyp. 1 -- Individual utilities measure the travelled distance: We
as the distance travelled by Salesman k and U mod =
as the distance travelled by all. Of course, the advantage
define umod
Pk umod
of such a hypothesis is that U mod = U trad.
The drawback is that salesmen all want to get rid of their cities,
but no one accepts cities from other salesmen. Consequently, such
choices of umod
and U mod require the following two assumptions
which operate together.
k
2. Hyp. 2 -- Salesmen "own" an initial endowment of cities: Since
Hyp. 1 makes our distance-minimiser salesmen all want to reduce
the number of cities allocated to them, we cannot assume that they
will "fight" in order to obtain cities from a shared pool. Instead, we
assume that every Salesman k initially "owns" some cities, and he
tries to change this initial allocation by exchanging cities whenever
such an exchange reduces his individual distance umod
.
k
k
k′
and umod
3. Hyp. 3 -- Only 1-1 exchanges of cities are possible: Let us study
what happens when a Salesman k gives n cities to Salesman k′ and
receives n′ cities from k′ in a round of interaction. All exchanges
with n = n′ are rational for both salesmen when they reduce both
umod
, as shown in the next paragraph. This constraint
of n − n exchanges solves the above problem caused by selfishness
which makes salesmen want to give but not receive cities.
In this
article, we only consider the case n = n′ = 1; Cases n = n′ > 1 are
discussed in Section 6.
Let us detail why n < n′ cannot be accepted by k′ (the case n > n′
is similar). Without knowing the cities allocated to Salesman k′
(such a list of clients is private in DO), Salesman k will have trouble
convincing k′ to accept more than n′ = n city in an interaction
round.
In fact, a consequence of the triangular inequality is that
accepting n (respectively, n + 1, n + 2, etc.) cities while giving n − 1
(respectively, n, n + 1, etc.) increases more umod
than accepting
the same number of cities as the number given (except when a city
exactly lies on the optimal route -- which is known by k′ but ignored
by k). As a result, even when k proposes to give n close cities in
exchange for n′ cities, k′ would not be rational to accept n′ < n.
k′
The traditional MTSP is the problem faced, for example, by a home
health care service in which all nurses are employees and have hence no
individual utility function to optimise.
In contrast, our modified MTSP
corresponds to the problem faced by a private nurse association in which
the nurses have an initial endowment of patients (the patients either make
an appointment to their nurse or are provided by a physician) and the
association is a place in which the nurses may exchange patients when
this is mutually beneficial.
In this modified problem, every private nurse
has an individual utility function which they optimise.
7
2.3 Hypothesis Hyp. 4 about the computation time
In this article, we also make Assumption Hyp. 4 which states that we
only take account of the computation time of the MILP solver, namely
CPLEX. We choose to make this assumption as a solution to the problem
of comparing various organisations implemented in various environments
and languages. In fact, Hyp. 4 forbids the comparison of the duration of
the operation of a mechanism which mostly uses CPLEX with the duration
of another which simulates its interactions in AnyLogic2 which runs in
Java. Because of this hypothesis, we ignore the duration of anything not
computed by CPLEX, such as:
• Messages travel instantaneously : DO implies interactions which are
simulated by AnyLogic, not CPLEX. Hence, we ignore the travelling
time of the messages exchanged.
• Some techniques are not possible: We cannot use multiagent tech-
niques, such as BDI (Belief-Desire-Intention) architecture (Caballero et al.,
2011) or reinforcement learning (Gunady et al., 2014), which may
decrease the performance of our DO organisations. Similarly, Or-
ganisation Cluster cannot use the k-means algorithm, but a MILP
formulation usable by CPLEX. Likewise, the salesmen locally solve
a TSP in several of our organisations with CPLEX, but they cannot
use Concorde3 while it is often seen as the most efficient.
3 Allocation mechanisms
We now describe our six mechanisms/organisations to solve the MTSP
constrained by 1-1 exchanges. Figure 1 shows an overview in which we
can see, for example, that OptDecentr is more centralised than Cluster
and Auction, and Cluster has a more coercive CA than Auction. This
figure also points out that OptDecentr is the most centralised in the sense
that the CA solves both the allocation and all routing problems while the
other organisations let the salesmen locally solve a TSP on their allocated
cities. Some organisations operate in a single round while others need more
interactions. Finally, this figure recalls that FullCentr solves a problem
different than the other mechanisms. Each subsequent subsection details
a mechanism.
3.1 Pure DO: NoRealloc, P2P and CNP
We first present NoRealloc since its MILP formulation of TSP is both used
in P2P, Cluster and Auction, and the base of the MILP formulation of the
MTSP constrained by 1-1 exchanges in OptDecentr.
2The AnyLogic model and the outcomes of the experiments will be published on
www.github.com after acceptation of this article for publication.
3http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/tsp/concorde/index.html
8
3.1.1 NoRealloc
As said above, NoRealloc ignores the allocation problem and lets every
salesman find the shortest route leaving the depot, visiting the N cities4
allocated to him in the initial endowment and returning to the depot.
There is a single round in which each of the m salesmen solves the TSP
in Equations 9-14. This formulation uses the 2-index decision variable
xij which equals one only if the considered salesman goes from City i to
City j.
min PN −1
j=0,j6=i dijxij
s.t.
i=0 PN −1
PN −1
PN −1
j=0,j6=i xij = 1
i=0,i6=j xij = 1
0 ≤ i < N
0 ≤ j < N
pi − pj + N.xij ≤ N − 1 1 ≤ i 6= j < N
pi ∈ ℜ+
xij ∈ {0, 1}
1 ≤ i < N
(i, j) ∈ {0, 1, . . . N − 1}2
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
(14)
With this notation, Equation 9 is the same as Equation 1 except that it
minimises the route length of a single salesman and n is thus replaced
by N , Equation 10 (respectively, 11) is similar to Equations 2 and 3
(respectively, 4 and 5) except that it does not need to distinguish the
case of the depot, and Equation 12 is the same constraint of sub-route
elimination as Equation 6.
3.1.2 P2P
Mechanism P2P has several interaction rounds in which instances of TSP
or a derivative of TSP are solved. The bottom of Figure 2 shows that
P2P consists of two state charts which may run concurrently, namely,
P2P host and P2P guest which replies to the former. Therefore, every
salesman may take part in two interactions simultaneously, the first as
guest and the second as host. Please remember that every salesman oper-
ates his own copy of the state charts in Figure 2. The names of the states
and transitions in both state charts all start with P2Pn action where n
indicates their order of activation in a round and action summarises the
action performed. P2P uses the variables at the top of Figure 2. Each of
these variables is a pointer to a city or salesman, except propCities[k][i]
that records previous interactions as a matrix of Booleans which are true
only when the considered salesman has already proposed City i to another
Salesman k in order to prevent infinite loops. allocatedCities (list of
cities currently allocated to the considered salesman), ownedCities (his
initial endowment) and route (similar to allocatedCities but with the
cities ordered according to the shortest route found by the mechanism in
use, thus P2P in this subsection) also are variables but AnyLogic shows
them with a different icon because they are collections of objects.
4 N may be different between salesmen in the two variants of TSP shown in this article.
We do not use Nk because N is a local variable for every salesman-agent k.
9
CPLEX
CPLEX
CPLEX
CPLEX
CPLEX
CPLEX
CPLEX
CPLEX
CPLEX
Figure 2: Implementation of the mechanisms in a salesman. ("CPLEX" ar-
rows point to transitions and states whose duration are taken into account.)
We now detail the operation of P2P. State P2P0 initialisation
mainly sets all entries in propCities[k][i] to f alse. AnyLogic always exe-
cutes the first state in all state charts, and transition P2P0 host starts
only fires when mechanism P2P is selected. The first salesman whose
P2P0 host starts fires first becomes the host in this round.
(This
state chart could generate more than one host at the same time, but
we prevent this by setting AnyLogic to use only one thread, as detailed
in Section 4.) Next, P2P2 host invites guest makes this host se-
lect a guest (i.e., the salesman with the lowest number of f alse in
propCities[k][i]) and send him an invitation. The guest was waiting
in state P2P1 guest waits for invitation and this message fires his
transition P2P3 guest receives invitation from host.
Then, P2P4 guest proposes a city is the first call to CPLEX in this
round of interaction. The guest solves the modified TSP in Equations 15-
23 in order to propose a city to the host. The goal of this model is to
find the city which should be removed from allocatedCities such that
the reduction of route length is maximised.5 Equations 15-23 modify the
formulation of TSP in Equations 9-14 by adding binary decision variable
kept such that kepti = 1 for the N − 1 cities to be kept and kepti = 0
5The problem in Equations 15-23 finds the city which causes the largest increase in
the route length. Instead of this single round, we may solve this problem in N − 1 rounds
in which the TSP in Equations 9-14 is solved with N − 1 cities (the ith round without
the ith city), then the shortest of the N − 1 obtained route lengths indicates the city to
be proposed. We have tested this method and seen that it takes more time than solving
Equations 15-23.
10
for the city to be proposed to the host.6
j=0,j6=i cijxij
i=0 PN −1
j=0,j6=i xij = kepti
min PN −1
s.t. PN −1
PN −1
PN −1
i=0,i6=j xij = keptj
i=1 kepti = N − 2
0 ≤ i < N
0 ≤ j < N
0 ≤ i < N
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)
pi − pj + N.xij ≤ N − 1
kepti = 1
kepti ∈ {0, 1}
pi ∈ ℜ+
xij ∈ {0, 1}
(19)
1 ≤ i 6= j < N
ipropCities[host][i] = true (20)
i ∈ {1, . . . N − 1}
1 ≤ i < N
(i, j) ∈ {0, 1, . . . N − 1}2
(21)
(22)
(23)
Consequently, Equations 15 and 19 are the same as Equations 9 and
12. Equations 16 and 17 are similar to Equations 10 and 11 except for
the city i to be proposed which has kepti = 0. Equation 18 checks
that exactly one city will be proposed to the host. Equation 20 ensures
that a city previously proposed and returned by the guest will not be
proposed again.7 If propCities indicates that all cities have already been
proposed, then the considered guest proposes null, which fires transition
P2P5 host receives negotiation rejection.
Otherwise, the city proposed by the guest fires transition P2P5 host re-
ceives city proposed by guest and state P2P6 host proposes city -
to guest finds the city to be proposed by the host to the guest. This
is the second call to CPLEX in this round of interaction. Again, CPLEX
solves the above modified TSP in Equations 15-23 (with a small modifi-
cation: host needs to be replaced by guest in Equation 20). The guest
may not find a city reducing his route length and, hence, send a null
reply to the guest. Otherwise, he memorises in propCities not to keep
proposing the city he has just proposed.
P2P7 guest receives proposition and sends reply receives this
proposed city. If the city proposed by the host is null, then the guest sends
a message to confirm the failure of this round of negotiation. Otherwise,
he uses a CPLEX to solve the traditional TSP in Equations 9-14 with all his
cities, minus the one previously proposed to the host, plus the one which
has just been proposed by the host. If the proposed exchange reduces his
route length, then the guest sends an acceptation message and updates
his route length by taking this exchange into account, otherwise he sends
a null.
Finally, transition P2P8 host receives acceptation or rejection
If the guest accepts the exchange, the host modifies
receives this reply.
his allocatedCities then updates his route by solving Equations 9-14 and
6When this problem is solved by a salesman in Mechanism Auction, the end of this
sentence reads: ". . . kepti = 0 for the city to be proposed to the auctioneer".
7When Equations 15-23 are solved in Mechanism Auction, the previous sentence reads:
"Equation 20 ensures that a city previously proposed and returned by the auctioneer will not
be proposed again".
11
setting propCities[city][guest] = f alse for all his city in order to propose
any city to this guest again.
P2P9 host does nothing and P2P10 host waits make the host wait
for one millisecond. This tiny pause is requested by AnyLogic in order to
allow other salesmen to become host. Otherwise, Salesman 0 would keep
the control in all subsequent rounds until he has proposed all his cities,
next Salesman 1 would become host as long as he has not proposed all
his cities, then Salesman 2, etc.
Finally, note that P2P does not loop forever because State P2P2 host
invites guest does not send an invitation when propCities[k][i] =
true for all Salesmen k and all Cities i, which eventually causes every
salesman except one to stop acting as host.
3.1.3 CNP
Like (Frey et al., 2003), our Mechanism CNP is inspired by the Contract
Net Protocol. CNP is described by state charts CNP host and CNP guest
in Figure 2. Similarly to P2P, the states and transitions have a name
starting by CNPn action where n is the order of activation of the con-
sidered element and action describes it. CNP runs by rounds in which
a salesman (host) plays the role of an auctioneer who broadcasts a city
to give and the other salesmen (guests) reply by proposing a city to be
exchanged. Conversely to P2P, CNP has several guests.
The detail of this mechanism is as follows. CNP0 initialisation
sets all the entries in propCities[k][i] to f alse; This is performed by
all salesmen because the first state in all state charts is always exe-
cuted. All salesmen wait in state CNP1 guest waits for RFP. Transition
CNP2 host starts in all salesmen may fire because its condition only
checks that Mechanism CNP is selected; This condition fires first in one
of the salesmen who becomes the host in this round. (Like P2P, CNP
could have several hosts and we prevent this by allowing only one thread
in AnyLogic, as detailed in Section 4.) The host does the first use of
CPLEX in this round to select a city to give by solving the modified TSP
in Equations 15-23; This city is sent in a Request For Proposals to all the
guests in CNP3 host broadcasts RFPs. Every guest also uses CPLEX
to solve the problem in Equations 15-23 in order to make a proposal in
CNP5 guest sends proposal. When transitions CNP6 host received-
proposal and CNP6b host received proposal have received all these
proposals, the host selects the winner by calling CPLEX to test each pro-
posed city in CNP9 host sends allocation replies. More precisely,
for each city submitted by the guests, the host solves the traditional
TSP in Equations 9-14 with his allocated cities minus the city broad-
cast in the Request For Proposals (RFP) plus the city submitted by
the considered guest. The guest sends an acceptation message to the
guest who proposed the city reducing the most his route length.
In
this case, the guest updates his variables allocatedCities and route
(route points to the same cities as allocatedCities but in the order
minimising the route length).
If no city causes such a reduction, then
no acceptation is sent. Finally, the guest sends a rejection message to
12
the other guests. After the acceptation (respectively, rejection) message
has been received by CNP10 guest received acceptation (respectively,
CNP10 guest received rejection), another round may start.
After pure DO, we now turn our attention to pure CO.
3.2 CO with constraints of DO: OptDecentr
As previously said, OptDecentr is a CO organisation that mimics DO.
In other words, CA uses CPLEX in order to find the optimal solution of
our MTSP constrained by 1-1 exchanges. Please first notice that this
constraint of 1-1 exchanges of cities makes all salesmen always keep the
same number of cities as in their initial endowment. As a result, the
decision variable must identify the salesmen in order to ensure that their
number of allocated cities equals their number of cities owned in this
endowment. Consequently, OptDecentr uses a MILP model with the 3-
index decision variable xijk which equals one only if Salesmen k goes from
City i to City j:
min
s.t.
umod
k
k
k=1 umod
j=0,j6=i dijxijk
U mod = Pm
= Pn−1
Pn−1
i=0 Pn−1
j=1 x0jk = 1
Pn−1
Pn−1
j=0,j6=i Pm
i=0,i6=j Pm
k=1 xijk = 1
k=1 xijk = 1
Pn−1
i=1 xi0k = 1
Pn−1
pi − pj + n.xijk ≤ n − 1
j=0,j6=i xijk = Pn−1
l=0,l6=j xjlk) − xijk ≥ 0
i=0 Pn−1
(Pn−1
j=0 ojk
pi ∈ ℜ+
xijk ∈ {0, 1}
1 ≤ k ≤ m
1 ≤ k ≤ m
1 ≤ i < n
1 ≤ j < n
1 ≤ k ≤ m
(24)
(25)
(26)
(27)
(28)
(29)
1 ≤ i, j < n, 1 ≤ k ≤ m(30)
1 ≤ k ≤ m
(31)
0 ≤ i, j < n, 1 ≤ k ≤ m(32)
0 ≤ i < n
(33)
0 ≤ i, j < n, 1 ≤ k ≤ m(34)
In this model, Equations 24 and 25 minimise the total distance travelled
by the community of salesmen. Equation 26 (respectively, 29) checks that
all salesmen leave (respectively, enter) the depot. Equation 27 (respec-
tively, 28) checks that all cities are left (respectively, entered) exactly once.
Equation 30 is the same constraint of sub-route elimination as Equations
6, 12 and 19. Equation 32 ensures that the salesmen entering and leav-
ing a city are the same. Equation 31 checks that the number of cities
allocated to a salesman equals the number of cities he owns in his ini-
tial endowment. (The right-hand side in this equation is a constant as
Parameter ojk represents the initial endowment ("ownership") of cities,
modelled by ojk = 1 if City j is "owned" by Salesman k at the beginning
of the experiment, and ojk = 0 otherwise.)
13
3.3 CO/DO hybrids: Cluster and Auction
We now introduce our two hybrid organisations, viz., Cluster and Auction.
They are not pure DO since CA takes part in the allocation and not pure
CO because CA lets the salesmen locally solve the TSP in Equations 9-
14. Cluster is more coercive because the salesmen are supposed to let CA
know about all their cities in order to solve the allocation problem, while
Auction lets them free to never propose some of their cities if they want
for some reason (e.g., a city has an important client they want to keep or
not disclose). Conversely to P2P and CNP which only perform bilateral
exchanges, Cluster and Auction may involve more than two salesmen per
exchange during a round, that is, Salesman s1 may give a city to Salesman
s2, s2 give to s3, . . ., and sq give to s1 for any q ≤ m.
3.3.1 Cluster
Because of Hypothesis Hyp. 4 about the use of CPLEX to make all deci-
sions, Mechanism Cluster cannot use whichever solving methods from the
clustering literature but only those based on a MILP formulation. We use
the model proposed in (Rao, 1971, Sec. 5):
min
s.t.
D
D ≥ dij(xik + xjk − 1)
k=1 xik = 1
Pm
1 + Pn−1
j=1 xjk = Pn−1
xik ∈ {0, 1}, D > 0
j=1 ojk
(35)
1 ≤ i < j < n, 0 ≤ k < m (36)
1 ≤ i < n
0 ≤ k < m
1 ≤ i < n, 0 ≤ k < m
(37)
(38)
(39)
In this model, decision variable xik is a binary equal to one only when
City i is allocated to Salesman/Cluster k. Equations 35 and 36 are the
objective function which minimises the diameter of the cluster which has
the largest diameter. More precisely, Equation 36 includes the linearisation
of Dk ≥ dij xikxjk which ensures that the diameter of Cluster k is at
least the maximum distance between any two Cities i and j allocated to
this cluster; Please notice that such a formulation defines circular clusters
which may hence overlap. Like in any other allocation problem, Equation
37 checks that every city is affected to exactly one cluster/salesman. In
addition to the original model by Rao (1971), we add Equation 38 in
order to ensure that the size of the clusters(/salesmen) correspond to the
number of cities provided by every (cluster/)salesman, that is, if Salesman
k owns Pj ojk cities (again, ojk is a constant which equals one only if
Salesman k "owns" City j in his initial endowment), then a cluster with
Pj ojk cities must exist in order to be allocated to k.
As previously said, Mechanism Cluster operates in a single round: CA
first solves the problem in Equations 35-39 to allocate N cities to ev-
ery salesman8, then these salesmen locally solve the traditional TSP in
Equations 9-14.
8Like in Footnote 4, N may not be that same for all salesmen since it is a local variable.
14
CPLEX
Figure 3: State chart of Auction in the Central Authority (CA).
3.3.2 Auction
Auction is an organisation in which CA is an auctioneer who is thus less
coercive than in Cluster. Conversely to Cluster, Auction operates in several
rounds.
In each round, every salesman gives a city A to CA who either
gives it back if no other salesman wants it, or gives a city B proposed by
another salesman if exchanging A and B reduce the length travelled by
both salesmen. Figure 3 and the top right corner of Figure 2 detail the
states and transitions in this organisation. As above, their name has the
form An action where n helps the reader understand the order of their
activation and action summarises their goal.
At the beginning of a round, all salesmen wait in A1 wait for RFP
until CA sends them a Request For Proposals in A2 broadcast RFPs.
When a salesman receives this message, he uses CPLEX to look for a
city to give in A4 propose a city to give by solving the modified TSP
in Equations 15-23. When all salesmen have replied by sending either a
city or null to CA, CA broadcasts this list of replies to all salesmen in
A8 broadcast proposed cities. For each city in this list, every sales-
man uses CPLEX to compute a bid for it in A10 bid on every proposed-
city. A bid for a city is the additional distance travelled to visit it, or,
more technically, as the differences between:
• the shortest length of the route visiting their remaining N − 1 cities,
that is, their allocated cities except the one proposed to the auc-
tioneer in A4 propose a city to give. This is obtained by each
salesman by solving the TSP in Equations 9-14 once.
• the shortest length of the route visiting their remaining N − 1 cities
15
plus the city proposed by one of the other salesmen. This is obtained
by each salesman by solving the TSP in Equations 9-14 for each city
in the list of bids.
When all salesmen have returned their list of bids, CA uses CPLEX
to solve an allocation problem in A14 send allocation of cities. In
order to describe this problem, let us call savings[k][i] the bid of Sales-
man k for City i and binary decision variable xki equals 1 only if City
i is allocated to Salesman k. For simplicity, we write m the number of
salesmen who have not left the auction before the current round. The
allocation model solved by CA is described by Equations 40-44. The ob-
jective in Equation 40 allocates the cities such that the total route length
of all salesmen is minimum. The constraint in Equation 43 ensures that,
in every auction round, every salesman does not increase his individual
route length.
min
s.t.
Pm
k=1 Pm
i=0 savings[k][i].xki
Pm
Pm
i=0 xki = 1
k=1 xki ≤ 1
(40)
0 ≤ k < m (41)
Pm
0 ≤ i < m (42)
i=0 savings[k][i].xki ≤ savings[k][k] 0 ≤ k < m (43)
0 ≤ i, j ≤ m (44)
xki ∈ {0, 1}
4 Real time spans deduced from sequen-
tial simulations
After the description of the compared mechanisms, we now present how
the computation time span of every organisation is deduced from sequen-
tial experiments, that is, experiments running on a single thread of Any-
Logic. In fact, our experimentation involves up to 10 agents (9 salesmen
+ 1 CA) while each of our computers has a CPU with 4 cores only. Thus,
configuring AnyLogic to simulate this parallelism would require studying
how AnyLogic schedules up to 4 agents in parallel, then deduce how 10
agents would have behaved in reality. Instead, we prefer to make AnyLogic
carry out all computations sequentially, then infer how (pure and mixed)
DO would occur concurrently in real life. The time span of the CPLEX
computation (duration between the beginning of the first computation and
the end of the last one) in an experiment is deduced as follows.
• OptDecentr and FullCentr: CO uses no parallelism and the compu-
tation time span is thus equal to the computation time recorded in
our sequential experiments. More technically, this duration is the
difference between the two System.currentTimeMillis() after
and before cplex.solve(). This is also the Java code to measure
the duration of all CPLEX calls in all our organisations below.
• Auction: Figure 4a illustrates how AnyLogic sequentially runs the
operation of two salesmen, and Figure 4b how reality would look
like with parallelism:
-- AnyLogic: Figure 4a shows that Salesman 1 calls CPLEX for 5
ms in State A4 propose a city to give (summarised as "A4:
16
Round 1
Round 2
Round 1
Round 2
Salesman 1
Salesman 2
Salesman 3
Auctioneer
A4: 5 ms
A10: 15 ms
A10: 13 ms
A4: 7 ms
A4: 4 ms
A10: 11 ms
Salesman 1
A4: 5 ms
A10: 15 ms
Salesman 2
A4: 7 ms
A10: 13 ms
Salesman 3
A4: 4 ms
A10: 11 ms
A14: 27 ms
Auctioneer
A14: 27 ms
a) Simulation: Sequential experimentations find that Round 1
lasts (5+7+4)+(15+13+11)+27=82ms.
b) Reality: Round 1 with parallel decisions would
last max(5;7;4)+max(15;13;11)+27=49ms.
Figure 4: Difference between the computation time (a) in our experiments
and (b) in real (b) of one round of Auction. ("Ax:" is the beginning of the
the name in the state charts in Figures 2 and 3).
5ms" in Figures 4a and 4b), and Salesman 2 and 3 spend 7 ms
and 4 ms in this state. Next CA (auctioneer) receives the result
of these computations and broadcasts it to all salesmen (not
shown in Figures 4 because performed without CPLEX). Later,
Salesman 1 computes for 15 ms, Salesman 2 for 13 ms and
Salesman 3 for 11 ms in A10 bid on every proposed city.
Finally, the auctioneer computes for 27 ms in A14 send allo-
cation of cities. The duration observed in AnyLogic is the
sum of these durations, as shown in Figure 4a.
-- Reality :
In real
life, all states with the same name can be
computed in parallel, as shown in Figure 4b. It follows that the
duration of the CPLEX computations in a state is the maximum
of the durations of all salesmen in this state, i.e., this round
would take max(5; 7; 4) + max(15; 13; 11) + max(27) = 49ms.
• Cluster: The method for Cluster is the same as for Auction except
that (i) there is a single round, and (ii) every salesman solves the
TSP only once in this round. Shortly, the real-life duration is (i) the
time spent by CA solving the clustering problem in Equations 35-39
plus (ii) the maximum of the time spent by the salesmen solving the
TSP in Equations 9-14.
• NoRealloc: The method for NoRealloc is the same as Cluster without
CA, that is, the real-life duration is the maximum of the time spent
by the salesmen solving the TSP in Equations 9-14.
• P2P and CNP: The inference of the duration of interactions in pure
DO is the most complicated because several interactions of various
durations may take place concurrently. In contrast, the CA in Auc-
tion ensures that a new round starts only after the end of the previous
one. On the contrary, no CA synchronises interactions in P2P and
CNP because the state charts in Figure 2 allow every salesman to
be host and guest at the same time in two concurrent interactions.
We assume that interactions do not overlap, that is, an interaction
is never stopped between its start and end. This complies with our
observation of the operation of AnyLogic when only one thread is
17
a) Simulation
Salesman 1
I1−P2P4
I1−P2P7
I3−P2P6
I3−P2P8
Salesman 2
Salesman 3
Salesman 4
b) Reality
Salesman 1
I1−P2P4
I1−P2P6
I1−P2P8
I2−P2P6
I2−P2P8
I3−P2P4
I3−P2P7
I4−P2P6
I4−P2P8
I2−P2P4
I2−P2P7
I4−P2P4
I4−P2P7
Interaction I1
Interaction I2
Interaction I3
Interaction I4
I1−P2P7
I3−P2P6
I3−P2P8
Salesman 2
Salesman 3
Salesman 4
I1−P2P6
I2−P2P6
I2−P2P8
I1−P2P8
I3−P2P4
I3−P2P7
I4−P2P6
I4−P2P8
I2−P2P4
I2−P2P7
I4−P2P4
I4−P2P7
0
100
200
Time
300
Figure 5: Difference between the computation time (a) in our experiments
and (b) in real life in four rounds (called I1, I2, I3 and I4) of P2P interactions.
("Ix" refers to Interaction Ix and "-P2Py" to the names in the state charts in
Figure 2).
used.
In addition, using more threads would not change the total
duration of interactions and would just make it more complicated to
observe what we now explain. This explanation is provided for P2P
because it is the most complex as several bilateral interactions may
occur concurrently; CNP is slightly simpler because such overlaps
are made impossible by the fact that an interaction always involves
all salesmen.
In every round of a P2P interaction, we make AnyLogic record the
(i) identities of the host and guest in this round, (ii) the starting time
in AnyLogic of this round, and (iii) its duration (i.e., sum of (1) the
CPLEX computation time of the guest in P2P4 guest proposes a-
city, (2) the time of the host in P2P6 host proposes city to-
guest, (3) the time of the guest in P2P7 guest receives propo-
sition and sends reply and (4) the time of host in P2P8 host-
receives acceptation or rejection -- please notice that this
is a summation because everything also happens sequentially in real
life). Figure 5 illustrates how this information is used after the
completion of the mechanism with an example of four interactions
named I1, I2, I3 and I4:
-- AnyLogic: Salesman 2 is the host of Interaction I1 (Figures 5a
and 5b only show CPLEX computations, thus P2P2 host invi-
tes guest is not shown) and the first CPLEX computation is
performed by his guest Salesman 2 in State P2P4 guest propo-
ses a city, which is represented by I1-P2P4 in Figure 5a.
AnyLogic carries out the computations one after the other:
I1-P2P4, then I1-P2P6, I1-P2P7 and I1-P2P8 for Interaction
1, next Interaction 2 with I2-P2P4, I2-P2P6, I2-P2P7 and I2-
18
P2P8, then Interaction 3, etc.
-- Reality : Figure 5b shows that Interactions I1 and I2 will start
at the same time in reality since they involve two different pairs
of salesmen. Hence, the CPLEX calls in {I1-P2P4, I1-P2P6, I1-
P2P7, I1-P2P8} would be in parallel with those in {I2-P2P4,
I2-P2P6, I2-P2P7, I2-P2P8}. After that, I3 would start as soon
as its host Salesman 1 is available, i.e., just after I1-P2P7, then
this host would wait for the reply of Salesman 2 at the end of I3-
P2P3 because this guest would be taking part to I2. Similarly,
I4 starts just after its host Salesman 3 finished I3-P2P7, which
is not shown on Salesman 3 but with the effect on Salesman 4
who computes I4-P2P4.
Finally, both Figures 5a and 5b are incomplete because they show
interactions without the initialisation of the salesmen who first solve
the TSP in Equations 9-14 before t = 0, and the salesmen in Fig-
ures 5b would be ready for their first interaction at different times.
More technically, the computation time in P2P is calculated by up-
dating a vector clockk after each computation of Salesman k. clockk
represents the total computation time of Salesman k up to the con-
sidered interaction. We also call Ts the computation time of CPLEX
in state s:
-- Duration of initialisation: Every salesman k solves the TSP in
Equations 9-14, which takes a duration TP2P0k . Since these
computations are parallel, the duration of this initialisation is
maxk(TP2P0k ). Hence, at the end of this initialisation, clockk =
maxk(TP2P0k ) for all Salesmen k.
-- For every round of bilateral interactions:
∗ An interaction starts as soon as its host and guest are both
ready, thus an interaction starts at max(clockhost, clockguest).
Hence, clockhost = clockguest = max(clockhost, clockguest).
∗ The end dates of the current round is clockguest = clockhost+
TP2P4 guest proposes a city+TP2P6 host proposes city to guest+
TP2P7 guest receives proposition and sends reply and clockhost =
clockguest + TP2P8 host receives acceptation or rejection.
-- Total computation time: The searched duration of Mechanism
P2P is maxk(clockk) calculated when all interaction rounds are
completed.
5 Numerical experimentation
Instead of performing Monte Carlo simulations to assess the mechanisms,
we allow the reader to replicate our results by generating 130 instances
by circular permutations on problem "CH130" in TSPLIB.9 In order to
describe these circular permutations, let us call (xi, yi) the coordinates of
the ith city in our simulation and (Xi, Yi) the coordinates of the ith city
in TSPLIB. For a given number of cities n, our Instance zero uses the first
9http://comopt.ifi.uni-heidelberg.de/software/TSPLIB95/tsp/ch130.tsp.gz
19
n instances in TSPLIB such that City i has xi = Xi and yi = Yi (cities
i ≥ n in TSPLIB are ignored), i.e., Salesman 1 is at (334.5 . . . , 161.7 . . .),
2 at (397.6 . . . , 262.8 . . .), 3 at (503.8 . . . , 172.8 . . .), etc. Next, Instance
∆Y uses xi = Xi and yi = Yi + ∆Y , i.e., for Instance 1, Salesman 1 is at
(334.5 . . . , 262.8 . . .), 2 at (397.6 . . . , 172.8 . . .), 3 at (503.8 . . . , 384.6 . . .),
etc. (We noticed that Instance ∆Y = 122 is often very long to solve for
several mechanisms.)
This generation of instances allows us to present results in which the
mechanisms work on the same instances. For example, the ratios in Fig-
ures 7, 8, 9, 10 are obtained by (i) setting n and m, (ii) comparing all
mechanisms (i.e., computing the ratios of the total route length of two
mechanisms) on Instance ∆ = 0, (ii') repeating ii for ∆ varying between
1 and 129, and (iii) writting in these figures the fifth and ninth deciles of
these 130 ratios.
Our numerical experimentation have been performed on the 17 Per-
sonal Computers of a student laboratory in the department of Industrial
Engineering at INSA-Lyon, Lyon, France. These computers are all iden-
tical and run Windows 7 professionnel SP1 64 bits on Intel Core i5-3470
[email protected] with 8.00 Gb RAM. The softwares used were IBM ILOG
CPLEX 12.6.3.0 and AnyLogic 7.3.2.
5.1 Results with a time limit of 24 hours
We consider two metrics to assess our mechanisms, viz., total route length
(also referred to as quality of the solution) and computation time. In this
article, all graphs in a same figure use the same ranges on the y-axis. For
each mechanism, Figure 6 shows the box-plots of the computation time
of the 130 instances for various number of cities n when there are m = 9
salesmen. The main point to notice is the quick increase of the duration
of OptDecentr from n = 20, which corresponds (n − 1)/m ≈ 2.1 cities
per salesman ("minus one" prevents counting the depot). In this figure,
the number of salesmen m is increased until one of the 130 instances
cannot reach its end within 24 hours. As can be seen, this limit is set by
OptDecentr which cannot find the optimal solution of at least one of the
130 instances for m = 9 salesmen and n = 23 cities. We do not show the
equivalent of Figure 6 with the quality of the solution because it would be
difficult to see a difference between the mechanisms.
Instead, we show Figures 7 and 8 which show ratios of quality (com-
pared to OptDecentr in Figure 7 and to FullCentr in Figure 8) for m = 5
(left) and m = 9 salesmen (right). More precisely, Figure 7 compares the
total route length found by the mechanisms solving the MTSP constrained
by 1-1 exchanges and this comparison is carried out against the optimal
value found by OptDecentr. As said above, for given instance ∆Y and
values of m and n, the route length found by a mechanism is divided by
the route length found by OptDecentr for each of the 130 instances; Both
top graphs in 7 show the ninth decile of these 130 ratios and both bottom
graphs show their median. Figure 8 is computed the same way, but the
base of comparison is FullCentr instead of OptDecentr.
In other words,
Figure 7 compares mechanisms solving the same problem, while Figure 8
20
Computation time of FullCentr (m=9)
Computation time of OptDecentr (m=9)
)
s
m
(
e
m
i
t
n
o
i
t
a
t
u
p
m
o
c
l
a
t
o
T
)
s
m
(
e
m
i
t
n
o
i
t
a
t
u
p
m
o
c
l
a
t
o
T
)
s
m
(
e
m
i
t
n
o
i
t
a
t
u
p
m
o
c
l
a
t
o
T
6
0
+
e
1
4
0
+
e
1
2
0
+
e
1
0
0
+
e
1
6
0
+
e
1
4
0
+
e
1
2
0
+
e
1
0
0
+
e
1
6
0
+
e
1
4
0
+
e
1
2
0
+
e
1
0
0
+
e
1
)
s
m
(
e
m
i
t
n
o
i
t
a
t
u
p
m
o
c
l
a
t
o
T
6
0
+
e
1
4
0
+
e
1
2
0
+
e
1
0
0
+
e
1
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Number of cities (n)
Number of cities (n)
Computation time of Cluster (m=9)
Computation time of Auction (m=9)
)
s
m
(
e
m
i
t
n
o
i
t
a
t
u
p
m
o
c
l
a
t
o
T
6
0
+
e
1
4
0
+
e
1
2
0
+
e
1
0
0
+
e
1
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Number of cities (n)
Number of cities (n)
Computation time of CNP (m=9)
Computation time of P2P (m=9)
)
s
m
(
e
m
i
t
n
o
i
t
a
t
u
p
m
o
c
l
a
t
o
T
6
0
+
e
1
4
0
+
e
1
2
0
+
e
1
0
0
+
e
1
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Number of cities (n)
Number of cities (n)
Computation time of NoRealloc (m=9)
)
s
m
(
e
m
i
t
n
o
i
t
a
t
u
p
m
o
c
l
a
t
o
T
6
0
+
e
1
4
0
+
e
1
2
0
+
e
1
0
0
+
e
1
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Number of cities (n)
Figure 6: Box-plots of the computation time of the 130 instances for m = 9
salesmen and various number of cities n.
21
r
t
n
e
c
e
D
p
O
o
t
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
t
o
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
r
t
n
e
c
e
D
p
O
o
t
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
t
o
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
m=5 salesmen, quantile=0.9, time limit = 24h.
m=9 salesmen, quantile=0.9, time limit = 24h.
160
140
120
100
1
r
t
n
e
c
e
D
p
O
o
t
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
t
o
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
160
140
120
100
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
2
3
1
2
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P CNP Cluster
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P CNP Cluster
m=5 salesmen, quantile=0.5, time limit = 24h.
m=9 salesmen, quantile=0.5, time limit = 24h.
160
140
120
100
1
r
t
n
e
c
e
D
p
O
o
t
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
t
o
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
160
140
120
100
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
2
3
1
2
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P CNP Cluster
22
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P CNP Cluster
Figure 7: Ratios of quality compared to OptDecentr for m = 5 (left) and
m = 9 (right) salesmen with no time limit.
m=5 salesmen, quantile=0.9, time limit = 24h.
m=9 salesmen, quantile=0.9, time limit = 24h.
r
t
n
e
C
l
l
u
F
o
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
t
o
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
200
175
150
125
100
1
2
3
1
2
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P
CNP
Cluster
OptDecentr
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P
CNP
Cluster
OptDecentr
m=5 salesmen, quantile=0.5, time limit = 24h.
m=9 salesmen, quantile=0.5, time limit = 24h.
r
t
n
e
C
l
l
u
F
o
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
t
o
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
200
175
150
125
100
r
t
n
e
C
l
l
u
F
o
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
t
o
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
r
t
n
e
C
l
l
u
F
o
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
t
o
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
200
175
150
125
100
200
175
150
125
100
1
2
3
1
2
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P
CNP
Cluster
OptDecentr
23
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P
CNP
Cluster
OptDecentr
Figure 8: Ratios of quality compared to FullCentr for m = 5 (left) and
m = 9 (right) salesmen with no time limit.
compares DO mechanisms to the CO mechanism.
We think that the most interesting points are the presence of plateaus.
Some mechanisms seem to reach a plateau in Figure 7: Cluster seems to
be about 5% worse, CNP about 11% worse, P2P about 12% and Auction
about 20% worse than OptDecentr with the median for both m = 5
and m = 9, and the ninth decile also seems to stabilise on slightly higher
figures. This indicates that these decentralised mechanisms do not explore
the entire search space of the possible 1-1 exchanges since the CA in DO
is sometimes able to find a better allocation which satisfies the selfishness
of the salesmen. Unfortunately, there does not seem to be such plateaus
in Figure 8, because either they do not exist or n has not been increased
enough to reach them. We believe that the latter explanation is true. In
order to check that we are right, the next subsection reduces the time
limit and keeps increasing n even when the computation time reaches this
limit.
5.2 Results with a time limit of 30 minutes
In order to obtain figures with much larger numbers of cities n, we limit the
computation time to 30 minutes. (Hence, we only show the ratios of total
route lengths since the equivalent of Figure 6 would only show that this
time limit is respected.) In both Figures 7 and 8, the real-life duration of
the operation of the mechanisms inferred from sequential simulations, as
explained in Section 4, was computer after the end of the simulations (of-
fline). In order to obtain more data, we have modified our AnyLogic mod-
els such that this computation is done throughout the simulation (online)
by updating get Main().remainingComputationTime which is shared
by all salesmen, and added cplex.setParam(IloCplex.Param.TimeLi-
mit, get Main().remainingComputationTime/1000) in order to make
CPLEX stop before or at the time limit.
In Figures 9 and 10, this time
limit is set to 30 minutes in parallel simulations. That is, DO mechanisms
may run much longer sequential simulations in AnyLogic, but they cannot
last more than 30 minutes when we infer what they would last in reality.
As a consequence, OptDecentr and FullCentr find the optimal solution
of their respective version of MTSP in Figures 7 and 8 because we stopped
the experimentation as soon as the time limit is reached. Hence, it was
not possible to have a point below 100%. On the contrary, Figure 9 shows
points below 100% for high values of n when the simulation stops before
CPLEX has found the optimal solution of OptDecentr. (Figure 10 has no
points below 100% because FullCentr is much quicker to optimiser.)
The most salient points to observe in Figures 9 and 10 are as follows:
• The cost of selfishness is about 30% higher for m = 5 and 60%
higher for m = 9 than the cost in the traditional MTSP: In order
to see this, we compare FullCentr (MTSP without our constraint
modelling selfishness) and OptDecentr (benchmark showing the best
results that Cluster, CNP, P2P and Auction could find):
-- For the instances of small size (i.e., less than 6 cities per sales-
man for m = 5 in the lower left graph in Figure 10, and less
24
m=5 salesmen, quantile=0.9, time limit = 30 min.
m=9 salesmen, quantile=0.9, time limit = 30 min.
180
150
120
90
r
t
n
e
c
e
D
t
p
O
o
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
t
o
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
60
1
2
r
t
n
e
c
e
D
t
p
O
o
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
t
o
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
180
150
120
90
60
13
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
4
5
3
12
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
10
11
6
7
9
8
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P CNP Cluster
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P CNP Cluster
m=5 salesmen, quantile=0.5, time limit = 30 min.
m=9 salesmen, quantile=0.5, time limit = 30 min.
r
t
n
e
c
e
D
p
O
o
t
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
o
t
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
180
150
120
90
60
1
2
r
t
n
e
c
e
D
p
O
o
t
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
o
t
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
13
14
5
4
3
12
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
10
11
9
8
7
6
180
150
120
90
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P CNP Cluster
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P CNP Cluster
Figure 9: Ratios of quality compared to OptDecentr for m = 5 (left) and
m = 9 (right) salesmen when the time limit is 30 minutes.
25
300
250
200
150
100
300
250
200
150
100
r
t
n
e
C
l
l
u
F
o
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
t
o
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
r
t
n
e
C
l
l
u
F
o
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
o
t
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
m=5 salesmen, quantile=0.9, time limit = 30 min.
m=9 salesmen, quantile=0.9, time limit = 30 min.
300
250
200
150
100
r
t
n
e
C
l
l
u
F
o
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
t
o
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
13
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P
CNP
Cluster
OptDecentr
1
2
5
4
3
12
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
10
11
8
9
7
6
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P
CNP
Cluster
OptDecentr
m=5 salesmen, quantile=0.5, time limit = 30 min.
m=9 salesmen, quantile=0.5, time limit = 30 min.
300
250
200
150
100
r
t
n
e
C
l
l
u
F
o
t
d
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
)
h
t
g
n
e
l
e
t
u
o
r
l
a
o
t
t
(
y
t
i
l
a
u
q
%
13
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P
CNP
Cluster
OptDecentr
1
2
5
4
3
12
Number of cities per salesman [ (n−1)/m ]
10
11
6
7
8
9
Mechanism NoRealloc
Auction
P2P
CNP
Cluster
OptDecentr
Figure 10: Ratios of quality compared to FullCentr for m = 5 (left) and
m = 9 (right) salesmen when the time limit is 30 minutes.
26
than 4 cities per salesman for m = 9 in lower right), OptDe-
centr finds the best DO solution because the time limit of 30
minutes does not stop this mechanism too early.
-- For larger instances, OptDecentr does not have enough time to
find the optimum. Therefore, we look at the quality of Cluster
instead, because it is the best DO mechanism. In other words,
we use Cluster in order to infer the quality that OptDecentr
would obtain without the time limit for such larger instances.
In fact, OptDecentr would find the optimal solution of our mod-
ified MTSP if there were no time limit, hence we assume that
the quality of the solution found by Cluster is an upper bound
of a perfect DO mechanism.
Since the median route length of Auction reaches a plateau at about
130% (respectively, 160%) the length of FullCentr for m = 5 (re-
spectively, m = 9), we conclude that these figures are upper bounds
of the median route length of OptDecentr. As a conclusion, the
modelling of selfishness in our modified MTSP increases the total
route length by 30% (respectively, 60%) for m = 5 (respectively,
m = 9) in comparison with the traditional MTSP.
• (De-)centralisation seems to have a negligible impact on the quality
of the solution: CNP, Auction and P2P have very close results in
Figure 10 when n is large, while the second of these mechanisms
has a CA, i.e., an auctioneer. The next bullet point indicates that
this may due to the fact that this CA is not coercive.
• Coercion seems to improve the quality of the solution: Both Figures
9 and 10 suggest that the more coercive the CA in a mechanism,
the better the quality of the solution found by this mechanism:
-- Ranking of mechanisms by quality of the solution: If we write
> for "is more efficient than", then we can see in Figures 9 and
10 that FullCentr > OptDecentr > Cluster > Auction.
-- Ranking of mechanisms by coercion level of their CA: The
same order applies to the coercion level of the CA in these four
mechanisms:
1. FullCentr has a more coercive CA than OptDecentr because
she ignores the selfishness of the salesmen.
2. The CA in OptDecentr is more coercive in Cluster because
she controls both allocation and routing.
3. The CA in Cluster requires to know of all cities while, as
said in the previous bullet point, she is just a mediator in
Auction.
Shortly, Figures 9 and 10 for high value of n suggest the following
ranking (from most to least efficient): FullCentr > OptDecentr > Cluster
> (Auction ≈ CNP ≈ P2P) > NoRealloc.
27
6 Discussion
This discussion puts into perspective this article with regard to the general
question of the price of the selfishness in DO. This presentation is carried
out according to our contributions:
6.1 Conceptual contributions
This article focuses on one way to include DO features in human organisa-
tions -- namely, the selfishness of the salesmen -- into the traditional MTSP
addressed by CO. However, please notice that other pairs of CO/DO prob-
lems are possible. These other possibilities may be summarised as follows:
• Relax Assumption Hyp. 3: As aforementioned, Hyp. 3 may be re-
laxed by replacing the constraint of 1-1 exchanges by n-n exchanges.
Clearly, the cases with n > 1 may find better exchanges but a com-
binatorial number of possible exchanges would have to be considered
by salesmen.
• Modify the objective function in MTSP: As shown in Subsection
2.2, we choose to keep the same social welfare as the objective
function in the traditional MTSP, which eventually result in adding
the constraint of 1-1 exchanges with an initial endowment of cities.
Instead of such a modification of the constraints, we could have mod-
ified the objective function. For example, we could have i) given a
value vik to each City i for each Salesman k (for instance, Sales-
man 1 earns v11=e3 for visiting City 1 and v21=e4 for City 2 while
Salesman 2 receives v12=e6 and v22=e5 respectively) and ii) mod-
ified the objective function to make a trade-off between the distance
travelled and the value earned for visiting cities (for example, this
distance is transformed into a cost of fuel and this cost is subtracted
from the money earned in the cities). With such a utility function,
the salesmen would agree to increase the number of their cities when
their value is high enough.
Other examples of modifications rely on the fact that our modified
MTSP relies on the utilitarian social welfare (i.e., sum of individual
utilities), but other mappings of individual utilities to a social wel-
fare have been proposed (e.g., maximum, minimum or product of
individual utilities).
• Derive a CO problem from a DO one:
Instead of adding the self-
ishness of the decision makers to a CO problem, other work in the
literature do the contrary. For instance, Sallez et al. (2010) compare
the dynamic allocation and routing in a real flexible manufacturing
system managed by a DO mechanism to a CO benchmark which
does not take all the constraints into account because of the com-
binatorial explosion.
• Change who make decisions: We assume that salesmen fight for
cities, but the opposite is also possible. It is even possible that both
salesmen and cities make decisions.
28
Finally, we observe that CO can estimate the performance of DO. In
fact, OptDecentr implements CO in order to find the best solution of our
modified MTSP, and this solution is a benchmark for Cluster, CNP, P2P
and Auction.
6.2 Technical contributions
Our main technical contribution is the implementation of various mecha-
nisms solving our modified MTSP. It is interesting to notice that we have
implemented one mechanism per organisation, but other mechanisms are
possible for all the organisations in Figure 1. For example, Cluster uses
the MILP formulation proposed by Rao (1971), but others exist.10
We have chosen to measure the computation time of CPLEX only. On
the one hand, we first started to program our mechanisms with a MILP
solver written in Java, namely ojAlgo v40 (http://www.ojalgo.org in
order to have only pure Java in AnyLogic. We stopped this and turned to
CPLEX because it is a recognised benchmark while we know little about
the performance of ojAlgo. On the other hand, we also first thought
about using various tools and environments (Concorde, k-means, etc.),
next use benchmarks to compare their computation times. Unfortunately,
no recognised benchmarks exist and contradicting information may even
be found, such as "C runs faster than Java because it operates on a lower
level" and "Java runs faster than C because its virtual machine adapts the
program to the computer".
6.3 Numerical contributions
Besides the data shown in Section 5, especially the bullet points in Sub-
section 5.2, our results are robust because each point in Figures 7, 8, 9
and 10 represent a decile calculated on 130 instances. Of course, our
conclusions at the end of Subsection 5.2 may turn out to be wrong with
other instances, as well as with other hypotheses about how to modify
MTSP in order to take the selfishness of the salesmen into account.
7 Conclusion
This article compares more or less centralised organisations in order to
quantify the cost of having selfish decision makers. For that purpose, our
first contribution is to introduce a same problem with features for both
Centralised Organisation (CO) and Decentralised Organisation (DO). We
address this issue by constraining the Multiple Travelling Salesmen Prob-
lem (MTSP) with both 1-1 exchanges of cities an an initial endowment.
Our second contribution is to be the first article comparing five decision
organisations to solve a same joint allocation and routing problem, while
10We have also tested Mechanism Cluster with the formulation by Saglam et al. (2006) to
which we added our constraint for 1-1 exchanges. Our experimentation (not presented in this
article) shows similar performance than the formulation by Rao (1971) described in Paragraph
3.3.1, even though the obtained clusters sometimes differ.
29
the few other similar comparisons only address two organisations. Our
third contribution is the quantification of the cost of decentralising the
making of decisions. We think that the most interesting result is the fact
that DO (i.e., our modified MTSP) has a median total route length which
reaches a plateau ≈30% (respectively, ≈60%) longer than CO (i.e., the
traditional MTSP) when there are five (respectively, nine) salesmen and
many cities. This stabilisation was hoped but unpredictable without exper-
imentation. We also notice that the coercion level of CA seems to impact
much more on the quality of the solution than the level of centralisation
of a mechanism.
As future work, we plan to study how our model of selfishness im-
pacts on the efficiency of the mechanisms. For that purpose, we will use
the model of preferences detailed in the discussion section in which the
salesmen make a trade-off between the value of cities and the distance
travelled, and then adapt our mechanisms to this other variant of MTSP.
Acknowledgement
We would like to thank the department of Industrial Engineering of INSA-
Lyon, France for the use of the computers in one of its student laboratories
in order to obtain all the results in this article.
References
Caballero, A., Bot´ıa, J., and G´omez-Skarmeta, A. (2011). Using cognitive
agents in social simulations. Engin. Appl. of Artif. Intel., 24(7):1098 --
1109.
Davidsson, P., Henesey, L., Ramstedt, L., Tornquist, J., and Wernstedt, F.
(2005). Agent-based approaches to transport logistics. Transportation
Research - Part C Emerging Technologies, 13(4):255 -- 271.
Davidsson, P., Persson, J. A., and Holmgren, J. (2007). On the inte-
gration of agent-based and mathematical optimization techniques.
In
Carbonell, J. G. and Siekmann, J., editors, Proc. 1st KES Int. Sympo-
sium, Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies and Applications,
Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4496 (Springer), pages 1 -- 10, Wro-
claw, Poland.
Ellman, M. (1989). Socialist Planning, 2d edition. Cambridge University
Press.
Fisher, K., Muller, J. P., Pischel, M., and Schier, D. (1995). A model for
cooperative transportation scheduling. In Proc. 1st Int. Conf. MultiA-
gent Systems, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Fisher, K., Muller, J. P., Pischel, M., and Schier, D. (1996). Cooperative
transportation scheduling: An application domain for DAI. J. of Applied
Artificial Intelligence, 10(1):1 -- 33.
30
Frayret, J.-M. (2002). A conceptual framework to operate collaborative
manufacturing networks. Ph. D. thesis, Univ. Laval, Quebec City, PQ,
Canada.
Frey, D., Nimis, J., Worn, H., and Lockemann, P. (2003). Benchmarking
and robust multi-agent-based production planning and control. Engi-
neering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 16(4):307 -- 302.
Glaschenko, A., Ivaschenko, A., Rzevski, G., and Skobelev, P. (2009).
Multi-agent real time scheduling system for taxi companies. In Proc. 8th
Int. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS
2009), Budapest, Hungary.
Gunady, M. K., Walid, Gomaaa, and Takeuchi, I. (2014). Aggregate
Reinforcement Learning for multi-agent territory division: The Hide-
and-Seek game. Engin. Applic. of Artif. Intel., 34:122 -- 136.
Hanna, L. and Cagan, J. (2009). Evolutionary multi-agent systems: An
adaptative and dynamic approach to optimization. J. of Mechanical
Design, 131:011010 -- 8 -- 011010 -- 1.
Karmani, R. K., Latvala, T., and Agha, G. (2007). On scaling multi-agent
task reallocation using market-based approach. In Proc. 1st Int. Conf.
on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems (SASO'07), Boston, MA,
USA.
Kivelevitch, E., Cohen, K., and Kumar, M. (2013). A market-based so-
lution to the multiple traveling salesmen problem. J. Intel. & Robotic
Sys., 72:21 -- 40.
M´ahr, T., Srour, J., de Weerdt, M., and Zuidwijk, R. (2010). Can agents
measure up? A comparative study of an agent-based and on-line opti-
mization approach for a drayage problem with uncertainty. Transporta-
tion Research - Part C, 18:99 -- 119.
Mes, M., van der Heijden, M., and van Harten, A. (2007). Comparison
of agent-based scheduling to look-ahead heuristics for real-time trans-
portation problems. Eur. J. of Operational Research, 181(0):59 -- 75.
Miller, C. E., Tucker, A. W., and Zemlin, R. A. (1960).
Interger pro-
gramming formulation of traveling salesmen problems. J. Association
of Computing Machinery, 7:326 -- 9.
Mintzberg, H. (1978). The Structuring of Organizations: A Synthesis of
the Research. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Moyaux, T. and McBurney, P. (2012). Centralised vs. market-based
and decentralised decision-making: A review. Cybernetics & Systems,
43(7):567 -- 622.
Rao, M. R. (1971). Cluster analysis and mathematical programming. J.
of the American Statistical Association, 66(335):622 -- 626.
31
Sallez, Y., Berger, T., Raileanu, S., Chaabane, S., and Trentesaux, D.
(2010). Semi-heterarchical control of FMS: From theory to application.
Eng. Applic. Artif. Intell., 23:1314 -- 1326.
Sarraj, R., Ballot, E., Pan, S., Hakimi, D., and Montreuil, B. (2014). Inter-
connected logistic networks and protocols: Simulation-based efficiency
assessment. Int. J. Production Research, 52(11):3185 -- 3208.
Saglam, B., Salman, F. S., Sayn, S., and Turkay, M. (2006). A mixed-
integer programming approach to the clustering problem with an ap-
plication in customer segrmentation. Eur. J. of Operational Research,
173:866 -- 879.
Smith, R. G. (1980). The contract net protocol: High level communication
and control in distributed problem solver. IEEE Trans. on Computers,
C-29(12):1104 -- 1113.
Talbi, E.-G. (2006). Parallel Combinatorial Optimization. Wiley.
van Lon, R. R. S. and Holvoet, T. (2015). Towards systematic evalu-
ation of multi-agent systems in large scale and dynamic logistics.
In
Proc. 18th Inter. Conf. Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems
(PRIMA 2015), Bertinoro, Italy.
Xie, X.-F. and Liu, J. (2009). Multiagent optimization system for solving
IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, and
the traveling saleman problem (TSP).
Cybernetics -- Part B: Cybernetics, 39(2):489 -- 502.
32
|
1711.07510 | 2 | 1711 | 2018-03-20T14:38:08 | Robust Environmental Mapping by Mobile Sensor Networks | [
"cs.MA"
] | Constructing a spatial map of environmental parameters is a crucial step to preventing hazardous chemical leakages, forest fires, or while estimating a spatially distributed physical quantities such as terrain elevation. Although prior methods can do such mapping tasks efficiently via dispatching a group of autonomous agents, they are unable to ensure satisfactory convergence to the underlying ground truth distribution in a decentralized manner when any of the agents fail. Since the types of agents utilized to perform such mapping are typically inexpensive and prone to failure, this results in poor overall mapping performance in real-world applications, which can in certain cases endanger human safety. This paper presents a Bayesian approach for robust spatial mapping of environmental parameters by deploying a group of mobile robots capable of ad-hoc communication equipped with short-range sensors in the presence of hardware failures. Our approach first utilizes a variant of the Voronoi diagram to partition the region to be mapped into disjoint regions that are each associated with at least one robot. These robots are then deployed in a decentralized manner to maximize the likelihood that at least one robot detects every target in their associated region despite a non-zero probability of failure. A suite of simulation results is presented to demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of the proposed method when compared to existing techniques. | cs.MA | cs | Robust Environmental Mapping by Mobile Sensor Networks
Hyongju Park, Jinsun Liu, Matthew Johnson-Roberson and Ram Vasudevan
8
1
0
2
r
a
M
0
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
2
v
0
1
5
7
0
.
1
1
7
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract- Constructing a spatial map of environmental pa-
rameters is a crucial step to preventing hazardous chemical
leakages, forest fires, or while estimating a spatially distributed
physical quantities such as terrain elevation. Although prior
methods can do such mapping tasks efficiently via dispatching
a group of autonomous agents, they are unable to ensure satis-
factory convergence to the underlying ground truth distribution
in a decentralized manner when any of the agents fail. Since the
types of agents utilized to perform such mapping are typically
inexpensive and prone to failure, this results in poor overall
mapping performance in real-world applications, which can
in certain cases endanger human safety. This paper presents a
Bayesian approach for robust spatial mapping of environmental
parameters by deploying a group of mobile robots capable of
ad-hoc communication equipped with short-range sensors in
the presence of hardware failures. Our approach first utilizes
a variant of the Voronoi diagram to partition the region
to be mapped into disjoint regions that are each associated
with at least one robot. These robots are then deployed in a
decentralized manner to maximize the likelihood that at least
one robot detects every target in their associated region despite
a non-zero probability of failure. A suite of simulation results
is presented to demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of
the proposed method when compared to existing techniques.
I. INTRODUCTION
This paper studies environmental mapping via a team
of mobile robots equipped with ad-hoc communication and
sensing devices which we refer to as a Mobile Sensor
Network (MSN). In particular, this paper focuses on the
challenge of trying to estimate some unknown, spatially
distributed target of interest given some a priori measure-
ments under the assumption that each robot in this net-
work has limited sensing/processing capabilities. MSNs have
been an especially popular tool to perform environmental
mapping due to their inexpensiveness which enables large-
scale deployments [1]–[6]; however, this economical price-
point betrays their susceptibility to hardware failures such
as erroneous sensor readings. This paper aims to develop
a class of cooperative detection and deployment strategies
that enable MSNs to autonomously and collectively obtain
an accurate representation of an arbitrary environmental map
efficiently while certifying robustness to a bounded number
of sensor failures.
Few methods have been proposed to accurately perform
environmental mapping using a large number of mobile
robots that can guarantee robustness to hardware failures
while making realistic assumptions about a MSN. For ex-
ample, one of the most popular methods for addressing
*This work was supported by Ford Motor Company
Hyongju Park, Jinsun Liu, Matthew Johnson-Roberson, and Ram Va-
sudevan are at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109 USA
{hjcpark,jinsunl,mattjr,ramv}@umich.edu.
Fig. 1: An illustration of the application of the robust, mobile sensor network
deployment and reconstruction algorithm developed in this paper (top right,
robots are shown in stars, robots with failed sensors are shown in red, sensor
footprints are drawn in dotted lines, and the partition is drawn as polygons)
when applied to 100 robots that are trying to build an elevation map of a
mountainous region in Oregon USA (top left) when 20 sensors have failed
(red stars). Despite the sensor failures, the root mean square error of the
reconstructed map when compared to the ground truth using the method
presented in this paper (bottom right) is significantly better than existing
methods (bottom left).
environmental mapping via MSNs has utilized the notion
of mutual information to design controllers that follow an
information gradient [2]–[5]. These approaches focus on
linear dynamics and Gaussian noise models. Recently this
technique was utilized to enable MSNs to estimate a map of
finite events in the environments while avoiding probabilistic
failures that arose due to nearby encounters with unknown
hazards [2]. The computational complexity for computing
this information gradient is exponential in the number of
robots, sensor measurements, and environmental discretiza-
tion cells [2], [5]. More problematically, the computation
of the gradient requires that every robot be omniscient, i.e.,
have current knowledge of every other robots position and
sensor measurements. For this reason, mutual information-
based methods are generally restricted to small groups of
robots with fully connected communication networks which
has limited their potential real-world application.
To overcome this computational complexity related prob-
lem, others have focused on devising relaxed techniques
to perform information gathering. For instance, some have
proposed a fully decentralized strategy where the gradient
of mutual information is used to drive a network of robots
to perform environmental mapping [5]. To improve com-
putational efficiency they relied on a sampling technique;
however this restricted their ability to perform mapping of a
general complex environment instead they focus on cell en-
vironments. Others have tried to develop particle filter based
techniques to enable the application of nonlinear and non-
Gaussian target state and sensor models while approximating
the mutual information [7]. This method is shown to localize
a target efficiently. However this approach still assumes the
existence of a centralized algorithm to fuse together the
information from multiple sensors.
In addition, this paper presents a novel combined sensor
model that assigns different weights to robots by taking into
account the spatial relationship between robots and a target
state. This detection model is based on a classical binary
Rather than rely on the information gradient, others have
employed algorithms that use information diffusion through
communication network for environmental modeling [6]. By
utilizing the Average Consensus filter to share information
among the robots in the network, this approach is scalable
to large numbers of agents, is fully decentralized, and can
even work under a switching network topology as long
as the network is connected; however the approach is not
spatially distributed and requires an additional connectivity
maintenance algorithm [8] to ensure its convergence.
This paper presents a class of computationally efficient,
scalable, decentralized deployment strategy that is robust to
sensor failures. We employ classical higher order Voronoi
tessellation [9] to achieve a spatially distributed allocation
of MSNs for efficient environmental mapping. In particular
each region from the partition is assigned to multiple robots
to provide robustness to sensor failures. Although others
have employed ordinary Voronoi tessellation for robot-target
assignment towards efficient information gathering [3], [10]–
[12], these approaches are not guaranteed to converge to an
underlying distribution in the case of even a single sensor
failure [13]. To best of our knowledge, almost all studies
about environmental mapping by MSNs have not take into
account such adversarial scenarios, nor presented perfor-
mance guarantees in terms of convergence to some ground
truth value. In addition, we consider a broad class of sensor
failures which are not restricted to just failures associated
with proximity to a hazard. Our cost function is the likeli-
hood that the MSN will fail to make reliable measurement
of the spatially distributed environmental parameters. We
use gradient descent on the cost to design a decentralized
deployment strategy for the MSN. By doing so, each robot
can compute its gradient using merely local
information
without requiring communication with a central server. In
this paper, a central entity is only required to fuse and update
the information gathered from MSNs, but not to generate
control policies for robots as in typical mutual information
gathering approaches [2], [5]. To generate an estimate for the
underlying target distribution of the environment, this paper
employs a particle filter with low discrepancy sampling.
model that depends on the configuration of robots [14], [15].
To connect the detection model to the measurement model
we rely on a nonrestrictive assumption that if a robot fails to
discern one target from another, it may not provide the cor-
rect sensor reading for the target. This assumption is similar
to one used in a previous approach that also built a combined
sensor model that was experimentally verified with the laser
range finder and a panoramic camera measurement [16].
This sensor model enables one to decouple the information
state from the detection task, which can make computing
the gradient computationally sound with a complexity that
is linear with respect to the number of sensors.
The main contributions of this paper are three-fold: First,
we adopt a higher order Voronoi tessellation for optimal
robots-to-target assignment to provide robustness under a
general class of sensor failures whose number is bounded.
Second, we present a novel sensor model, to remove the
computational burden of maintaining mutual information in
MSNs by decoupling information gathering and detection,
while ensuring satisfactory mapping performance. Finally,
we propose a scalable, spatially distributed, computationally
efficient, decentralized controller for MSNs which can per-
form environmental mapping task rapidly.
Organization: The rest of the paper is organized as fol-
lows. Section II presents notation used in the remainder of
the paper, formally defines the problem of interest. Section
III presents our combined probabilistic sensor model, and
the deployment strategy is formally presented in Section IV.
Section V discusses an approximate belief update method
via particle filters. The robustness of our deployment and
effectiveness of the belief update approach is evaluated via
numerical simulations in Sections VI. Finally, Section VII
concludes the paper.
II. PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
This section presents the notation used throughout the
paper, an illustrative example, and the problem of interest.
A. Notations and Our System Definition
The italic bold font is used to describe random quantities,
a subscript t indicates that the value is measured at time
step t, and Z≥0 denotes non-negative integers. Given a
continuous random variable x, if it is distributed according
to a Probability Density Function (PDF), we denote it by
fx. Given a discrete random variable y, if it is distributed
according to a Probability Mass Function (PMF), we denote
it by py. Consider a group of m mobile robots deployed in
a workspace, i.e., ambient space, Q ⊆ Rd where d = 2, 3.
This paper assumes d = 2 though the presented framework
generalizes to d = 3. Let Sd−1 = {s ∈ Rd (cid:107)s(cid:107) = 1} be
a unit circle/sphere, then the state of m robots is the set of
locations and orientations at time t, and it is represented as
t ∈ Q × Sd−1. The
an m-tuple xt = (x1
state of robots are assumed completely known. We denote
by the set x0:t := {x0, . . . , xt} the robot states up to time t.
We assume that subsequent states satisfy some controlled
dynamical system where ut ∈ U ⊆ Rd is the control that
t ), where xi
t , . . . , xm
to xt+1. We define a target
takes a system from xt
to
be a physical object or some measurable quantity that is
spatially distributed over a bounded domain. Let z be the
random vector representing target state which consists of
locations, q ∈ Q, and an information state (i.e., quantitative
information about the target), I ∈ I ⊆ R where we let
I = [Imin, Imax]. We define Z = Q × I as the target state
space. Finally, we let F (cid:40) {1, . . . , m} be the index set of
robots whose sensors have failed.
Example 1 (Airborne LIDARs for DEM generation):
Consider a group of autonomous aerial vehicles trying to
acquire an accurate Digital Elevation Model (DEM)1 of
some bounded region using airborne LIDAR measurements.
Suppose the state of the robot is some 2D location at some
fixed height above the terrain. In this instance, the target
state space would be made up of a longitude and latitude,
q ∈ Q and an elevation at that point which belongs to the
set I ⊂ R. This paper explores how to determine the best
way to deploy a finite number of agents to minimize the
probability that they fail to detect a set of targets dispersed
over a region. Unfortunately,
the LIDAR measurements
from a part of the fleet may be corrupt or unreliable. To
ensure that we can guarantee the optimal target detection
performance in adversarial scenarios, we develop a robust
deployment strategy. Subsequently, this paper explores how
to efficiently reconstruct the terrain map (i.e. the distribution
over the target state space) from a set of deployed robots.
B. Robust Deployment Strategy
D,txt, q, . . . , ym
Suppose we are given z ∈ Z,
t z, . . . , ym
then we let ytz =
t z) be a binary random m-tuple which indi-
(y1
cates whether an observation is made by m robots at time
tz ∈ {0, 1} for
step t at a given target state z, where yi
each i. Let the set y1:tz := {y1z, . . . , ytz} denote the
observations made by robots up to time t. For a given
q ∈ Q and robot state xt ∈ Q × S1, let yD,txt, q :=
D,txt, q) be a binary random m-tuple
(y1
which indicates whether m robots with state xt are able to
D,txt, q ∈ {0, 1} for
detect a target located at q. We let yi
each i. We let p(yD,t = 0 xt, q = q) be the probability
of a joint event that a group of m robots with location and
orientation given by xt fail to detect a target at time t if it
is located at q, where 0 is an m-tuple of zeros. For the case
when each sensor belonging to the index set F has failed
at time t, our aim is to find an optimal configuration that
solves:
p(yD,t = 0 xt)
min
xt∈Qm
s.t. p(yD,t = 0 xt, q = q,F) < 1,
(1)
where a given F and a target, there must be at least one robot
that is able to make a reliable measurement. Unfortunately,
obtaining the global solution to this problem is proven to be
NP-Hard by reduction from the simpler static "locational"
∀q ∈ Q,
1A digital elevation model (DEM) is a digital 3D model of a terrain's
surface created from terrain elevation data.
optimization problem, the m-median problem2. To overcome
the computational complexity, we apply a gradient descent
approach where the control policy at each time step mini-
mizes the missed-detection probability of targets by robots
at their future locations (one-step look-ahead). We utilize the
higher order Voronoi tessellation for robot target assignment,
which guarantees that the solution to (1) is found under such
an assignment [9].
C. Combined Sensor Model
We assume that a sensor can correctly measure a given
the target a priori.
target only if the sensor can detect
We further assume that, if a sensor can detect a target, a
measurement of the target by the sensor may be corrupted by
noise. These assumptions have been experimentally validated
for example on a mobile robot that uses a laser range finder
and a panoramic camera measurement [16].
D. Evaluation of Mapping Performance
We derive a particle filter to recursively update approx-
imate beliefs on a particular unknown environment. Let bt
represent the approximate posterior probability distribution
of the target state at time t ∈ Z≥0, the initial belief b0 is
assumed to be a uniform density if no prior information on
the target is available. We let b(cid:63) be the PMF estimate of the
true posterior belief 3. To this end, we quantify the difference
between the true posterior belief, b(cid:63) and our method via
the Kullback-Leibler (K-L) divergence. We demonstrate via
a suite of numerical simulations in Section VI that for a
given > 0 and F (cid:54)= ∅, there is a T > 0 such that if
robots use the proposed deployment strategy, t > T implies
DKL(btb(cid:63)) < .
III. PROBABILISTIC RANGE-LIMITED SENSOR MODEL
This sections present our combined sensor model. Each
mobile robot is equipped with a range-limited sensor that
can measure quantitative information from afar and a radio to
communicate with other nodes to share its belief. We assume
that a sensor can correctly measure a given target only if
the sensor can detect the target a priori, and if a sensor can
detect a target, a measurement of the target by the sensor may
be corrupted. The combined sensor model joins the generic
noisy sensor model with the binary detection model which
generalizes existing methods [14]–[16] to large-scale MSNs.
In fact, this combined sensor model has been experimentally
validated during an object mapping and detection task using
a laser scanner [16]. We postulate that this model is general
enough to model other range-limited sensors as long as
the sensor is capable of distinguishing the target from the
environment and has uniform sensing range, i.e. 360-degree
camera, wireless antenna, Gaussmeter, heat sensor, olfactory
2The m-median problem is one of the popular locational optimization
problems where the objective is to locate m facilities to minimize the
distance between demands and the facilities given some uniform prior. The
problem is NP-Hard for a general graph (not necessarily a tree).
3We shall assume, for the sake of discussion, that the true posterior target
distribution can be obtained, e.g., via exhaustive search and measurements
made by a MSN.
receptor, etc. While performing the detection task, we assume
that each sensor returns a 1 if a target is detected or 0
otherwise. The ability to detect a target for each ith robot at
time t is a binary random variable yi
D,t with a distribution
that depends on the relative distance between the target
and robot. This binary detection model, however, does not
account for false positive or negatives. For example, the
probability of the event that all m sensors with configuration
xt fail to detect the target located at q ∈ Q is:
p (yD,t = 0 xt, z = (q, I)) =
p(cid:0)yi
D,t = 0 xt, q = q(cid:1) .
m(cid:89)
i=1
For measuring a quantity of interest from a given environ-
ment, we consider a generic, noisy sensor model, where each
sensor reports binary output given a target state consisting
of information and location. The likelihood function at time
t is:
p(yt = 1 xt, z = (q, I)),
(2)
which is the probability that ith robot measured the target
with intensity value of I at location q, i.e., positive mea-
surement. A general example of the likelihood function is a
Gaussian, ωN (I (cid:63), σ2
I ) where I (cid:63) the ground truth intensity
I is the variance of the intensity at the target
value at q, σ2
located at q, and ω is a normalization constant. Note that
since the observations made by m robots are independent,
p(yt = 1 xt, z = (q, I)) =
t = 1 xt, z = (q, I)),
m(cid:89)
p(yi
i=1
or (2) can also be obtained via other distributed sensor fusion
techniques (see e.g., [17]). In our sensor model, we assume
that at each t, the random vector yt depends on yD,t, so that
the conditional PDF can be computed as:
p(yt = 1 xt, z)
=p(yt = 1 xt, yD,t (cid:54)= 0, z) p(yD,t (cid:54)= 0 xt, z)
+p(yt = 1 xt, yD,t = 0, z) p(yD,t = 0 xt, z),
D,t = 1 and yD,t = 0 means yj
(cid:54)= 0 means there is j ∈ {1, . . . , m} such
where yD,t
that yj
D,t = 0 for all
j ∈ {1, . . . , m}. If the target cannot be detected,
i.e.,
yD,t = 0, the measurement is taken as random and the
likelihood function is modeled by uniform distribution, i.e.,
p(yt = 1 z, xt, yD,t = 0) = U(I) supported on an interval
I = [Imin, Imax]. By the law of total probability,
p(yt = 1 xt, z) = (1 − p(yD,t = 0 xt, z)
)
(cid:124)
(cid:123)(cid:122)
× p(yt = 1 xt, yD,t (cid:54)= 0, z)
+U(I) p(yD,t = 0 z, xt)
.
likelihood of reliable measurements
For the given target z ∈ Z, by minimizing ((cid:63)), the prob-
ability of missed-detection, one can ensure that the reliable
measurements on the target state has been given more weight
than the unreliable ones.
(cid:124)
(cid:125)
(cid:123)(cid:122)
((cid:63))
(cid:124)
(cid:125)
(cid:123)(cid:122)
((cid:63))
(cid:125)
IV. DEPLOYMENT STRATEGY
This section presents a class of deployment strategies
for target detection capable of providing relative robustness.
At each time, m robots move to new locations so as to
minimize the missed-detection probability to promote the
next observations. Since the set of robots with faulty sensors
is unknown, we chose not to pose our problem to deal
with the worst-case sensor failure scenarios which could be
too conservative (e.g., the probability that multiple sensors
fail at the same time is low). Instead, we adopt a provably
optimal robot–target assignment method which can ensure
that every target will be detected by at least one robot. This
so called partitioned-based deployment is common to multi-
robot coverage problems [13], [18], [19]. The most popular
one is based on the Voronoi tessellations (see e.g., [18],
which we call a non-robust deployment). There are, in fact
more general methods, which partition the workspace into
l regions and assign k ∈ {1, . . . , m} robots at each region
(note that if k = m, the method becomes centralized) [13].
By doing so, one can ensure that each target has a chance to
be detected by at least one of the k sensors. This approach,
which we call the robust deployment, can provide relative
robustness by varying the value of k from 2 to m.
A. The Higher-Order Voronoi Partition for Robust Deploy-
ment
Recall
that given F, we want
to ensure that at
least
one robot is detecting each target. One possible way of
handling such robot–target assignment problem is the k-
coverage method [20] which will guarantee that every target
is covered by at least k sensors. Another way is to use
the higher order Voronoi partition, under which, for a given
number of sensors (generators), exactly k number of sensors
are assigned to every region from the partition. As long as
k ≥ f +1, if either of the two methods is used for the robot–
target assignment, the constraint from (1) will be satisfied.
Due to the bounded availability of sensor nodes, we will
adopt the second approach in this study.
Consider m sensors and a workspace partition of Q into
l disjoint regions W = (W 1, . . . , W l), where ∪iW i = Q,
and W i ∩ W j = ∅ for all i (cid:54)= j. Suppose the target location
is a random variable q with a PDF, fq : Q → R≥0. For
a given target at q ∈ Q, we define the probability that a
sensor located at xi ∈ Q can detect target, by using a real-
valued function h((cid:13)(cid:13)q − xi(cid:13)(cid:13)) as a probability measure, which
is assumed to decrease monotonically as a function of the
distance between the target and the ith sensor. Consider a
bijection kG that maps a region to a set of k-points where the
pre-superscript k explicitly states that the region is mapped
to exactly k points. Additionally we make the following
definitions:
Definition 1 (An Order−k Voronoi Partition [9]): Let x
be a set of m distinct points in Q ⊆ Rd. The order-k Voronoi
partition of Q based on x, namely kV , is the collection of
regions that partitions Q where each region is associated with
the k nearest points in x.
(cid:90)
Note that there is an O(k2n log n) algorithm [21] to construct
the order-k Voronoi diagram for a set of n points in R2.
We define another bijection kG(cid:63) that maps a region to a
set of k nearest points (out of x) to the region. The total
probability that all m sensors fail to detect a target drawn
by a distribution fq from Q is:
Q
pyDx,q (yD = 0 x, q = q) fq(q) dq.
(3)
By substituting Q with the workspace partition W , and
pyDx,q (yD = 0 x, q = q) with h, we have
l(cid:88)
H(x, W, kG) :=
(cid:0)1 − h(cid:0)(cid:13)(cid:13)q − xi(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:1) fq(q) dq
(cid:89)
(cid:90)
(4)
j=1
W j
xi∈kG(W j )
where we note again that the joint missed-detection events
are conditionally independent, if conditioned on x. In fact,
the order-k Voronoi tessellation is the optimal workspace
partition which minimizes H for each choice of x and k:
x
H(x, kV, kG(cid:63)) ≤ H(x, W, kG) for all W , kG.
Note that the order-k Voronoi partition Vk, along with the
map kG(cid:63) are uniquely determined given x, fq, and Q.
Theorem 1 ( [19]): For
given
and
k,
a
In addition, we introduce an additional constraint for the
model, the effective sensing radius, reff > 0, to take into
account the fact that each sensor has its own maximum
sensing range. For a given k, x, i, and the target at z = (q, I),
our range-limited binary detection model in its final form
becomes:
(cid:0)yi
D = 1 x, q = q(cid:1)
(cid:40)
h(cid:0)(cid:13)(cid:13)q − xi(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:1) ,
Dq,x
pyi
=
0,
if q ∈ kG(cid:63)(xi) ∩ B(xi, reff),
otherwise,
where B(p, r) is an open ball with radius r centered at p.
B. Gradient Algorithm for Deployment
This section will present gradient descent-based deploy-
ment strategy. Given the current configurations, robots solve
decentralized counterpart of the original problem (1), move
towards the solution, and the posterior belief is updated at
robots' new locations given the information collected from
their sensors. By using fq, and (4), for a given xt, we want
to obtain the next way-point x(cid:63)
t by
where L(xt) takes the identical form as (4) by adding
subscript t to xis and W is. If h is differentiable, our
deployment strategy can use the gradient ∇L(xt) =
(cid:105)
, . . . , ∂L(xt)
∂xt
m
where for each i,
(cid:104) ∂L(xt)
∂xt
1
(cid:40)
t ← arg min
(cid:90)
x(cid:63)
(cid:89)
l(cid:88)
xt
j=1
W j
t
t∈kG(cid:63)(W j
xi
t )
L(xt) :=
(cid:0)1 − h(cid:0)(cid:13)(cid:13)q − xi
t
(cid:41)
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:1) fq(q) dq
.
(5)
∂L(xt)
∂xi
t
= − (cid:88)
× (cid:89)
W
j∈{1,...,l}:
t ∈k G(cid:63)−1(xi
j
t)
(cid:13)(cid:13))
∂h((cid:13)(cid:13)q − xi
(cid:90)
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:1)(cid:1) fq(q) dq,
(cid:0)1 − h(cid:0)(cid:13)(cid:13)q − xi
∂xi
t
W j
t
t
t
l∈{1,...,m}:
t∈k G(cid:63) (W
xl
t ),l(cid:54)=i
j
to find the desirable way-points of the robots as described
in Algorithm 1. For each t, Algorithm 1 uses coordinate
gradient descent in cyclic fashion4 to converge to a sub-
optimal solution, namely, x(cid:63)
t .
Algorithm 1: Gradient Algorithm
Input: Lk, xt, > 0
Output: x(cid:63)
k ← 0, ∆ ←
t
while ∆ > do
foreach i ∈ {1, . . . , m} do
∆ ← Lk(xt,k) − Lk(xt,k+1)
k ← k + 1
t ← xt,k, return x(cid:63)
x(cid:63)
t
t,k+1 ← xi
xi
t,k is a step-size obtained using a line search method
// αi
t,k∇iLk(xt,k)
t,k − αi
V. IMPLEMENTATION: ENVIRONMENTAL MAPPING
In this section, we first introduce Bayesian filtering equa-
tions for our particular target distribution, and then present a
particle filter to reduce the complexity of the map construc-
tion process.
A. Recursive Bayesian Filter
We present a brief overview of the Bayesian filter, and
the derivation of the filtering equations for our primary
goal: environmental mapping by m robots. Recall that bt(z)
represent a belief on target state-the posterior probability
distribution of the target state described by a random vector
z ∈ Z-at time t ∈ Z≥0. In a similar manner, the belief of
target information state I given the target located at q is
bt(I q = q) = fIb0,x0:ty1:t,q (I b0, x0:t, y1:t, q = q) (6)
where we denote the initial belief on target state by b0. The
belief on the complete target state z is:
bt(z) = fzb0,x0:t,y1:t (z b0, x0:t, y1:t) = bt(I q = q)fq(q).
(7)
In our problem, the observation yt is conditionally indepen-
dent of b0, y1:t−1, and x0:t−2 when it is conditioned on z
and xt. Applying Bayes' Theorem, (6) becomes:
bt(I q = q) =
ηt fytz,xt (yt = 1 z = (I, q), xt) bt−1(I q = q)
(8)
4A general version of Algorithm 1, which uses block coordinate descent,
has been shown to be convergent using the Invariance Principle [19].
:= (cid:0)fytq,b0,xt (yt = 1 q = q, b0, xt)(cid:1)−1 is a
(cid:32) t(cid:89)
where ηt
normalization constant. By joining the (7) and (8), one can
obtain a simplified form of the filtering equation:
(cid:33)
bt(z) = ηt fytz,xt (yt = 1 z, xt) bt−1(z)
ηifyiz,xi (yi = 1 z, xi)
b0(z).
=
i=1
B. Belief Approximation via SIR Particle Filter
For our numerical simulations, we consider a low dis-
crepancy sampling method, namely, Halton-Hammersley se-
to sample continuously distributed targets in Z.
quence,
This approach has been used for sampling-based algorithms
for robot motion planning [22]. We consider Sequential
Importance Resampling (SIR) for the particle filtering pro-
cess. For a given distribution on target locations, fq(q), at
each time t, based on the observations, the locations belief
hypothesis is populated for N1 samples initially generated
with Halton-Hammersley sequence. In a similar manner,
for each sample qi
the information belief hypothesis is
populated for N2 samples from I initially generated by the
Halton-Hammersley sequence. q1, . . . , qN1 Thus, for each
i ∈ {1, . . . , N1}, j ∈ {1, . . . , N2},
(cid:101)wij
t ∝ fytzt,xt(yt = 1 xt, z = (qi, I ij)).
:= (qi, I ij
{{(zi1,(cid:101)wi1
t ), then the collection of N := N1×N2
t ), . . . , (ziN2,(cid:101)wiN2
If we let zij
t
tuples-where each tuple is a particle-weight pair-is:
where for each t and i = 1, . . . , N1, (cid:80)N2
)}i∈{1,...,N1}}
j=1 (cid:101)wij
t = 1. After
resampling and normalizing, the approximate belief becomes
t
N(cid:88)
bt(z) =
t δ(z − zk)
wk
where the w1
such that(cid:80)N
t , . . . , wN
t
k=1 wk
k=1
are resampled, normalized weight
t = 1, and δ(z−zk) is Dirac-delta function
evaluated at zk. The whole filtering process is depicted in
Algorithm 2. Note that as discussed in previous studies [23],
our particle filter uses a standard re-sampling scheme to
ensure the convergence of the mean square error toward zero
with a convergence rate of 1/N2 for all q ∈ Q.
VI. NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS
a
rectangular
This section presents a suite of numerical simulations
to validate both our sensor model and deployment strategy
under sensor failures.
Simulation Settings: Let Q be
space
[42.00, 41.51] × [−73.49,−72.83] in R2 which corresponds
to a mountainous region in Connecticut, U.S.A, where each
coordinate corresponds to latitude and longitude, respec-
tively. We let I = [−1000, 4000] be a range of elevations
in feet. Targets are uniformly distributed over Q, and the
ground truth target information over Q is depicted in Fig.
4 (right). The robots have no prior knowledge of the target
information. A number of particles used for the SIR filter
Algorithm 2: Filtering Algorithm
Input: bt−1 = {zl, wl
Output: bt
// SIR Particle Filter
// 1) Update using the observation model
foreach i ∈ {1, . . . , N1} do
t−1}N
l=1, yt, xt, Irange
foreach j ∈ {1, . . . , N2} do
(cid:101)wij
t ← pyD,tq,xt (yD,t = 0 q = qi, xt)(I−1
t−1fytz,xt,yD,t (yt = 1 z = zij
wij
0)) + wij
t−1fytz,xt,yD,t (yt = 1 z, xt, yD,t (cid:54)= 0)
range −
t , xt, yD,t (cid:54)=
l=1)
l=1
wi
l=1)
t}N
t}N
t−1}N
t−1}N
t}N
l=1, {wl
t}N
l=1, {wl
// 2) Resample and Normalize
{wl
return bt ← {zl, wl
// Low Variance Resampling [24]
forall i ∈ {1, . . . , N} do
l=1 ← Resample({(cid:101)wl
function Resample({(cid:101)wl
t ← (cid:101)wi
(cid:80)N
i=1 (cid:101)wi
t·wi
t−1
t·wi
δ ← rand((0; N
cdf ← 0, k ← 0, cj ← [] for all j
for j = 0, j < N2 do
u ← δ + j · N2
−1
while u > cdf do
k ← k + 1
cdf ← cdf + wik
foreach i ∈ {1, . . . , N1} do
−1
2 ))
t−1
t
for j = 1; j ≤ N2 do
cj+1 ← k
t ← cj
wij
N2
return bt = {zl, wl
t}N
l=1
TABLE I: Summary of deployment methods considered in current section.
algorithm type:
non-robust
robust (k = 2)
max. information gain
gradient computation
fully decentralized
decentralized
centralized
related studies
[3], [10], [11]
current paper
[1], [2], [4]–[6]
is N = N1 × N2 = 5000 × 100. We consider Gaussian
distribution to for both the perception and the detection
model. Each sensor's measurement noise covariance matrix
is ΣI = 0.5I, and the binary detector's noise covariance
matrix is ΣB = 0.04I where I ∈ Rd×d is an identity
matrix. In our simulation, we compare the three methods
summarized in Table I.
Convergence of Our Deployment Strategy: First, the behavior
of the deployment strategy is discussed. Given a uniform
initial prior belief and an initial configuration at t = 0
(Fig. 2 (top-left)), three algorithms, summarized in Table
I, were tested. Fig. 2 shows positions of robots after the
T number of iterations with (a) the non-robust method
and (b) robust method (k = 2). Fig. 3(a) compares the
convergence speeds between the three methods. The cost on
the y-axis corresponds to the probability of missed detection.
Notice that the maximum information algorithm has a lower
cost, but it relies on a centralized scheme that is typically
impossible to realize in practice.
Environmental Mapping/Filtering Performance Without Sen-
randomly chosen initial configuration, with different fault
compositions well. Fig. 7 shows a distribution of K-L di-
vergence values at t = 10 for 100 test examples consisting
of random initial configurations with uniformly sampled
number of faults between 1 and 5 with 10 robots.
Scalability of our Method: Fig. 3 shows an example with 100
robots (with 20 sensors failures) where the robust method
outperforms the non-robust method. This is due to the
presence of central information fusion server which requires
a full communication throughout the MSN. This is typically
infeasible in real-world applications.
VII. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
This paper presents a deployment strategy for a mobile
sensor network to enable the recovery of an environmental
map over a bounded space in a manner that is robust to sensor
failures. We plan to employ multi-agent patrolling [12], [25]
or sweep coverage [26] to resolve problems associated with
not having enough sensors to fully cover a target space. Also,
as reported in the literature [16], our combined sensor model
has been adopted to emulate the real-world laser scanner's
behavior; nevertheless, we plan to conduct extensive real
world multi-robot experiments for further validation of our
range sensor model.
Fig. 2: An illustration of the convergence of two different deployment
strategies, top: non-robust, bottom: robust (k = 2) (stars: positions of robots,
polygons: partition).
(a)
(b)
Fig. 3: (a) convergence test for one-time deployment with different methods,
(b) comparison of K-L divergence values between different methods.
REFERENCES
sor Failure: Next, we present the evolution of the belief to
build an estimate of the elevation map after the deployment
strategy has been completed. Fig. 3(b) compares the K-L
divergence values between the different strategies during the
filtering process. While the maximum information gain ap-
proach shows the best result, the robust deployment strategy
has competitive mapping performance relative to the ground
truth despite being a decentralized approach.
Robustness to Sensor Failure: We next present several ex-
amples with varying numbers of sensor failures wherein the
robust method clearly illustrates appealing behavior when
compared to its less robust counterparts. In this experi-
ment, the number of sensor failures was varied by F ∈
{{1}, {1, 2}, {1, 2, 3}}. Results for robots configuration and
target distributions after the 10th step with the non-robust,
robust, and maximum information methods in the case
when F = {1} are shown in Fig. 5. Fig. 4 shows the
time evolutions of root-mean-square error (RMSE) between
constructed map and the ground truth map for the non-robust
(top) and robust (bottom) methods when F = {1, 2, 3}. Fig.
6 compares the K-L divergence between different methods
when F was varied between 1 and 3. As can be seen from
Fig 5–6, the map retrieved by the proposed method when
k = 2 is consistently more robust to sensor failure when
compared to existing methods. Note in Fig 5 (middle and
right) the unmapped area is due to the limited sensing range.
Statistical Results with Varying Initial Conditions and Fault
Compositions: Statistical results shows that our method can
be used to estimate an arbitrary target distribution given a
[1] D. Connor, P. Martin, and T. Scott, "Airborne radiation mapping:
overview and application of current and future aerial systems," Inter-
national Journal of Remote Sensing, vol. 37, no. 24, pp. 5953–5987,
2016.
[2] M. Schwager, P. Dames, D. Rus, and V. Kumar, "A multi-robot control
policy for information gathering in the presence of unknown hazards,"
in Robotics Research. Springer, 2017, pp. 455–472.
[3] R. A. Cortez, H. G. Tanner, R. Lumia, and C. T. Abdallah, "Infor-
mation surfing for radiation map building," International Journal of
Robotics and Automation, vol. 26, no. 1, p. 4, 2011.
[4] C. D. Pahlajani, I. Poulakakis, and H. G. Tanner, "Networked decision
making for poisson processes with applications to nuclear detection,"
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 193–198,
2014.
[5] B. J. Julian, M. Angermann, M. Schwager, and D. Rus, "Distributed
robotic sensor networks: An information-theoretic approach," The
International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 1134–
1154, 2012.
[6] K. M. Lynch, I. B. Schwartz, P. Yang, and R. A. Freeman, "Decen-
tralized environmental modeling by mobile sensor networks," IEEE
Transactions on Robotics, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 710–724, 2008.
[7] J. A. Hoffman, J. R. Cunningham, A. J. Suleh, A. Sundsmo, D. Dekker,
F. Vago, K. Munly, E. K. Igonya, and J. Hunt-Glassman, "Mobile
direct observation treatment for tuberculosis patients: a technical
feasibility pilot using mobile phones in nairobi, kenya," American
journal of preventive medicine, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 78–80, 2010.
[8] P. Yang, R. A. Freeman, G. J. Gordon, K. M. Lynch, S. S. Srinivasa,
and R. Sukthankar, "Decentralized estimation and control of graph
connectivity for mobile sensor networks," Automatica, vol. 46, no. 2,
pp. 390–396, 2010.
[9] M. I. Shamos and D. Hoey, "Closest-point problems," in Foundations
IEEE, 1975,
of Computer Science, 1975., 16th Annual Symposium on.
pp. 151–162.
[10] S. Bandyopadhyay and E. J. Coyle, "An energy efficient hierarchical
clustering algorithm for wireless sensor networks," in INFOCOM
2003. 23nd Annual Joint Conference of
the IEEE Computer and
Communications., vol. 3.
IEEE, 2003, pp. 1713–1723.
[11] T. Patten, R. Fitch, and S. Sukkarieh, "Large-scale near-optimal
decentralised information gathering with multiple mobile robots," in
Proceedings of Australasian Conference on Robotics and Automation,
2013.
020406080100iteration (k)00.050.10.150.2costnon-robustrobustmax. info.0246810time step (t)00.020.040.060.080.1K-L divergencenon-robustrobustmax. info. Fig. 4: An illustration of the time evolution of the root-mean-square error (RMSE) (in ft) between the constructed map and the ground truth map for
non-robust method (top) and robust method (bottom) where 3 nodes have randomly failed (left 4 images). An illustration of the robot deployment (depicted
with stars, where the red stars are failed sensors) sensor footprint (dashed lines), and partition (polygons) for the non-robust (top) and robust method
(bottom) is also shown (5th column). The computed expected belief is also depicted from the non-robust (top) and robust (bottom) methods (6th column)
and the ground truth image is depicted (right). The colormap is using MATLAB's jet colormap.
[12] S. Kemna, J. G. Rogers, C. Nieto-Granda, S. Young, and G. S.
Sukhatme, "Multi-robot coordination through dynamic voronoi par-
titioning for
informative adaptive sampling in communication-
constrained environments," in Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2017
IEEE International Conference on.
IEEE, 2017, pp. 2124–2130.
[13] S. Hutchinson and T. Bretl, "Robust optimal deployment of mobile
sensor networks," in Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2012 IEEE
International Conference on, 2012, p. 671676.
[14] R. Viswanathan and P. K. Varshney, "Distributed detection with
the IEEE,
i. fundamentals," Proceedings of
multiple sensors part
vol. 85, no. 1, pp. 54–63, 1997.
[15] P. M. Djuric, M. Vemula, and M. F. Bugallo, "Target tracking by
particle filtering in binary sensor networks," IEEE Transactions on
Signal Processing, vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 2229–2238, 2008.
[16] D. Anguelov, D. Koller, E. Parker, and S. Thrun, "Detecting and
modeling doors with mobile robots," in Robotics and Automation,
2004. Proceedings. ICRA'04. 2004 IEEE International Conference on,
vol. 4.
IEEE, 2004, pp. 3777–3784.
[17] A. W. Stroupe, M. C. Martin, and T. Balch, "Distributed sensor fusion
for object position estimation by multi-robot systems," in Robotics
and Automation, 2001. Proceedings 2001 ICRA. IEEE International
Conference on, vol. 2.
IEEE, 2001, pp. 1092–1098.
[18] J. Cort´es, S. Mart´ınez, T. Karatas, and F. Bullo, "Coverage control for
mobile sensing networks," Robotics and Automation, IEEE Transac-
tions on, vol. 20, no. 2, p. 243255, 2004.
[19] H. Park and S. Hutchinson, "Robust optimal deployment in mobile
sensor networks with peer-to-peer communication," in Robotics and
Automation (ICRA), 2014 IEEE International Conference on.
IEEE,
2014, pp. 2144–2149.
[20] S. Kumar, T. H. Lai, and J. Balogh, "On k-coverage in a mostly sleep-
ing sensor network," in Proceedings of the 10th annual international
conference on Mobile computing and networking. ACM, 2004, pp.
144–158.
[21] D.-T. Lee, "On k-nearest neighbor voronoi diagrams in the plane,"
IEEE Trans. Computers, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 478–487, 1982.
[22] S. M. LaValle, Planning algorithms.
Cambridge university press,
2006.
[23] D. Crisan and A. Doucet, "A survey of convergence results on particle
filtering methods for practitioners," IEEE Transactions on signal
processing, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 736–746, 2002.
[24] H. M. Choset, Principles of robot motion: theory, algorithms, and
implementation. MIT press, 2005.
[25] D. Portugal and R. Rocha, "A survey on multi-robot patrolling
algorithms," in Doctoral Conference on Computing, Electrical and
Industrial Systems. Springer, 2011, pp. 139–146.
[26] I. Rekleitis, V. Lee-Shue, A. P. New, and H. Choset, "Limited
communication, multi-robot team based coverage," in Robotics and
Automation, 2004. Proceedings. ICRA'04. 2004 IEEE International
Conference on, vol. 4.
IEEE, 2004, pp. 3462–3468.
Fig. 5: The expected beliefs at t = 10 from the non-robust method (left),
robust method (middle), and max. information gain method (right) along
with robot configurations (stars are robot locations and red stars are robots
whose sensors have failed), footprints (dashed line), and partition (polygons)
is depicted. The ground truth elevation map is on the right of Fig. 4. The
colormap is using MATLAB's jet colormap.
Fig. 6: Comparison of K-L divergence of the ground truth distribution
between different methods during belief propagation when a component
of the nodes have failed.
Fig. 7: Comparison of robustness between different methods on 100
randomly generated tests at t = 10.
012345678910time step (t)00.050.10.150.2K-L divergencenon-robust F=1non-robust F=1,2non-robust F=1,2,3robust F=1robust F=1,2robust F=1,2,3max. info. F=1max. info. F=1,2max. info. F=1,2,300.020.040.060.080.10.12KL divergence (t=10)0510152025303540frequencynon-robustrobustmax. Info. |
1601.04952 | 1 | 1601 | 2016-01-19T15:29:52 | Emergence of Consensus in a Multi-Robot Network: from Abstract Models to Empirical Validation | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.RO",
"cs.SI",
"physics.soc-ph"
] | Consensus dynamics in decentralised multiagent systems are subject to intense studies, and several different models have been proposed and analysed. Among these, the naming game stands out for its simplicity and applicability to a wide range of phenomena and applications, from semiotics to engineering. Despite the wide range of studies available, the implementation of theoretical models in real distributed systems is not always straightforward, as the physical platform imposes several constraints that may have a bearing on the consensus dynamics. In this paper, we investigate the effects of an implementation of the naming game for the kilobot robotic platform, in which we consider concurrent execution of games and physical interferences. Consensus dynamics are analysed in the light of the continuously evolving communication network created by the robots, highlighting how the different regimes crucially depend on the robot density and on their ability to spread widely in the experimental arena. We find that physical interferences reduce the benefits resulting from robot mobility in terms of consensus time, but also result in lower cognitive load for individual agents. | cs.MA | cs |
Emergence of Consensus in a Multi-Robot Network:
from Abstract Models to Empirical Validation
Vito Trianni1, Daniele De Simone2, Andreagiovanni Reina3 and Andrea Baronchelli4
1ISTC, National Research Council, 00185 Rome, Italy
[email protected]
2DIAG, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy
[email protected]
3University of Sheffield, Sheffield S1 4DP, UK
[email protected]
4City University London, London EC1V 0HB, UK
[email protected]
Abstract
Consensus dynamics in decentralised multiagent systems are subject to intense studies, and several different models have
been proposed and analysed. Among these, the naming game stands out for its simplicity and applicability to a wide range of
phenomena and applications, from semiotics to engineering. Despite the wide range of studies available, the implementation of
theoretical models in real distributed systems is not always straightforward, as the physical platform imposes several constraints
that may have a bearing on the consensus dynamics. In this paper, we investigate the effects of an implementation of the naming
game for the kilobot robotic platform, in which we consider concurrent execution of games and physical interferences. Consensus
dynamics are analysed in the light of the continuously evolving communication network created by the robots, highlighting how
the different regimes crucially depend on the robot density and on their ability to spread widely in the experimental arena. We
find that physical interferences reduce the benefits resulting from robot mobility in terms of consensus time, but also result in
lower cognitive load for individual agents.
1
Introduction
Collective decision-making is an essential capability of large-scale decentralised systems like robot swarms, and is often key
to achieve the desired goal. In swarm robotics, a large number of robots coordinate and cooperate to solve a problem, and
often consensus among the robots is necessary to maximise the system performance [12, 18, 15]. The design of controllers for
consensus decision is often inspired by models of collective behaviour derived from studies in the ethology of social systems
[19, 14], as well as from studies about the emergence of social conventions and cultural traits [21, 6, 5]. Theoretical models
represent idealised instances of collective decentralised systems in which consensus can be somehow attained. Among the
different available models, a particularly interesting case is the one of the naming game (NG), which represents the emergence
of conventions in social systems, such as linguistic, cultural, or economic conventions [23, 4, 7]. The appeal of this model
consists in the ability to describe the emergence of consensus out of a virtually infinite set of equivalent alternatives, yet requiring
minimal cognitive load from the agents composing the system [4, 2]. Moreover, the NG has been successfully demonstrated on
a network of mobile point-size agents [3]. Such a collective decision-making behaviour can be very useful in swarm robotics in
case consensus is required with respect to a possibly large number of alternatives (e.g., the location and structure for cooperative
construction [24, 20], or the most functional shape for self-assembly [11, 17]).
When dealing with the implementation of physical systems starting from theoretical models, however, several constraints
may arise which may have a bearing on the collective dynamics. Indeed, small implementation details at the microscopic scale
may have a large impact at the macroscopic level. Hence, it is important to study the effects of such constraints in relation to
the dynamics predicted by the theoretical models. In this paper, we propose an implementation of the NG for the kilobot robotic
platform [16]. Kilobots are low-cost autonomous robots designed for experimentation with large groups [17]. They can move on
a flat surface and interact with close neighbours by exchanging short messages sent on an infrared channel. The collective be-
haviour of a kilobot swarm results solely from the individual decisions and inter-individual interactions, without any central unit
directing the group dynamics. As a consequence, the implementation of the NG for the kilobots needs to be fully decentralised
with games autonomously triggered by any robot at any time. Additionally, within a decentralised system, the concurrent exe-
cution of games by neighbouring robots becomes possible, in opposition to the rigorously sequential scheme typically adopted
in theoretical studies. Hence, the interaction pattern among robots may be significantly altered, and the corresponding dynam-
ics need to be carefully characterised. Finally, the embodiment of the robots determines physical interferences (i.e., collisions)
that strongly influence the overall mobility pattern. It follows that abstract models of agent mobility must be contrasted with
experimentation with robots, in which all the details of the physical platform can be taken into account.
1
procedure NG(nm, ns)
nt ← nt + 1
if nt mod nm = 0 then
RandomTurn()
end if
MoveStraight()
W ←ReceiveWords()
Randomise(W)
for w ∈ W do
UpdateInventory(w)
end for
if nt mod ns = 0 then
w ← SelectWord()
Broadcast(w)
end if
end procedure
(cid:46) Implementation of the NG
(cid:46) Change motion direction
(cid:46) Play the hearer role
(cid:46) Play the speaker role
Figure 1: The NG algorithm exploited in multi-agent simulations.
In this paper, we study the effects of the motion and interaction patterns on the consensus dynamics, and we pay particular
attention to both concurrent executions of games and physical interferences. First, we provide an abstract model of mobile
agents playing the NG, in which physical interferences are ignored. Following previous studies [3], we analyse this model in the
light of the communication network established by the agents, we show how the consensus dynamics are determined by agent
density, mobility and interaction frequency, and we link our empirical findings with theoretical studies [2, 10]. Then, we contrast
abstract models with large-scale simulations of the kilobots, as well as with real-world experiments. Here, physical interferences
impact on the consensus dynamics by limiting the free diffusion of robots in the experimental arena, hence increasing consensus
times. Still, the cognitive load for the individual agents is reduced for physical implementations, due to the lower number of
alternatives that each agent must consider in average. Our adapted implementation of the NG is presented in Section 2, while the
corresponding consensus dynamics are discussed in Section 3. Conclusions and future directions are presented in Section 4.
2 Model and Implementations
The naming game in its basic form [4] models pairwise interactions in which two players—the speaker and the hearer—interact
by exchanging a single word chosen by the speaker, and updating their inventory on the basis of the game success. Previous
extensions of the model take into account different inventory updating and communication schemes [1] and also consider mobile
agents [3]. In this work, we adopt a broadcasting scheme for the speaker agent, while inventory updating is performed only by
the hearer agent, as detailed in the following (for details, see [1]).
When engaging in a NG, the speaker agent as selects a word w either randomly from its inventory, or inventing it anew should
the inventory be empty (i.e., the set of possible choices for a new word w is virtually infinite). Then, it broadcasts w to all agents
in its neighbourhood. Upon reception of w, the hearer agent ah updates its inventory by either storing w if it was not found in
ah’s inventory, or by removing all words but w if the latter was already known to ah. By iterating the game multiple times, the
entire system converges toward the selection of a single word shared by all agents [4, 1].
2.1 Multiagent simulations
We implement a decentralised version of the NG by letting each agent a autonomously take the role of speaker every τs s. Given
that agents update their state at discrete steps of δt = 0.1s, they communicate every ns steps so that a word is broadcast every
τs = nsδt s to all neighbours within the range di = 10cm. In this way, concurrent execution of games becomes possible, hence
introducing an important difference from previous theoretical studies in which at any time only one game is executed by a
randomly chosen agent and one of its neighbours [3, 4, 1, 10]. At the hearer side, multiple interactions are possible within any
time interval δt, depending on the local density of agents. Hence, all words received in a single δt period are used sequentially
to update the inventory. The list of received words is randomised before usage to account for the asynchronous reception of
messages by the physical platform (see Section 2.3). The algorithm for the multiagent implementation is shown in Fig. 1.
At the beginning of each simulation run, N agents are deployed uniformly random within a squared box of side L with periodic
boundary conditions (e.g., a torus). This allows to focus on the effects of agent mobility and density without constraints from a
bounded space [3]. Agents are dimensionless particles and therefore do not collide with each other. The agents neighbourhood
is determined by all the agents within the interaction range di. By moving in space, the agent neighbourhood varies so that a
dynamic communication network is formed. Agent mobility follows an uncorrelated random walk scheme, with constant speed
v = 1cm/s and fixed step length vτm, where τm represents the constant time interval between two consecutive uncorrelated
changes of motion direction. This leads to a diffusive motion with coefficient D ∼ v2τm [3]. In practice, agents change direction
every nm steps, so that τm = nmδt (see Fig. 1).
2
2.2 Robot simulations
We have developed a custom plugin for simulating kilobots within the ARGoS framework [13], paying particular attention to
match the real robot features in terms of body size, motion speed and communication range. Communication is implemented by
allowing the exchange of messages between neighbours within the range di. No failures in communication have been simulated,
assuming that the channel can support communication even with high densities. We will discuss this choice in the light of the
obtained results in Section 4.
Concerning the motion pattern, kilobots are limited to three modes of motion: forward motion when both left and right motors
are activated, and left or right turns when only one motor is activated. Turning is performed while pivoting on one of the kilobot
legs. We have therefore implemented a differential drive motion scheme centred between the two backward legs of the kilobot,
with speed v = 1cm/s for forward motion and angular speed ω = π/5s−1 for turning. A multiplicative gaussian noise applied at
every simulation cycle (standard deviation σ = 0.4) simulates the imprecise motion of kilobots. With such an implementation,
the individual motion is still diffusive, but with a lower coefficient due to the delay introduced by turning. Additionally, collision
avoidance is not possible with the kilobot onboard sensors, and robots are let free to crash into walls and each other. The ARGoS
framework provides a 2D dynamics physics engine that handles collisions between robots and with walls with an integration
step size δt = 0.1s, which proves sufficient for our purposes. Collisions determine a further reduction in the diffusion speed, as
we will discuss in Section 3.2. Robots are deployed randomly within a squared box of side L surrounded by walls. To avoid
overlapping of robots, the initial positions are determined by dividing the arena in cells wide enough to contain a single kilobot,
and randomly placing kilobots into free cells.
2.3 Kilobot implementation
The implementation of the NG for kilobots requires handling transmission and reception of messages, and implementing the
random walk. We use the kilobot API from Kilobotics [22], which provides two callback functions for transmission and reception
of 10-byte messages, functions for distance estimation of the message source, and a counter that is updated approximately 32
times per second (i.e., δt (cid:39) 1/32). Broadcast is allowed every τs seconds by opportunely activating the transmission callback.
Communication interferences among robots are treated through the CSMA-CD protocol (carrier-sensing multiple access with
collision detection) with exponential back-off, meaning that upon detection of the occupied channel, message sending is delayed
within an exponentially increasing range of time slots. This introduces an additional level of asynchrony that must be tolerated by
the collective decision-making process, as the exact timing of communication cannot be completely controlled. Upon reception
of any message, the corresponding callback function is activated, and the NG is immediately played exploiting the content of the
received message. Given that the maximum communication distance may vary across different robots, we capped the maximum
distance to di by software, estimating the source distance and ignoring messages from sources farther than di.
The motion pattern implements the random walk exactly as performed in simulation, exploiting the internal random number
generator for uniformly distributed turning angles. Forward motion v and angular speed ω of each kilobot have been calibrated
to obtain a roughly constant behaviour across different robots and to match the parameter values used in simulation. The code
for the controller is written in a C-like language (AVR C) and fits in about 200 lines. In experimental runs, kilobots are initially
positioned randomly following indications from the ARGoS simulator in equivalent conditions. This provides an unbiased
initialisation and supports comparison with simulations in Section 3.3.
3 Consensus Dynamics
The most important quantity to evaluate the consensus dynamics following the NG process is the time of convergence tc, i.e.,
the time required for the entire group to achieve consensus. Previous studies demonstrated that consensus is the only possible
outcome, even though in particular cases it can be reached only asymptotically [4]. Another relevant metric for the NG in
multiagent systems is the maximum memory M required for the agents, in average, until convergence: given that each agent
needs to store a possibly large number of words, it is important to study how the memory requirements scale with the system
size, especially in the perspective of the implementation for real robots that entail limited memory and minimal processing power
to search large inventories.
Following previous studies, it is useful to look at the (static) interaction network resulting by linking all agents that are within
interaction range. Given N agents confined in a L× L space and interacting over a range di, the resulting network has average
degree (cid:104)k(cid:105) = πNd2
i /L2 [8, 3]. Given that in our case all parameters are constant but the agent density (as determined by N), two
values are critical:
1. N1 = N(cid:104)k(cid:105)=1 is the group size at which the average degree is around 1, meaning that each agent has in average one other
agent to interact with. Below this value, interactions are sporadic and determined by the agent mobility, while above this
value interactions are frequent as small clusters of agents appear.
2. Nc = N(cid:104)k(cid:105)(cid:39)4.51 corresponds to the critical group size for a percolation transition [8]. Above Nc, the network is characterised
by a giant component of size N.
Given the broadcasting rule employed for the NG in this paper, it is clear that the characteristics of the interaction network are
fundamental. If there exists a giant component, information can spread quickly. If otherwise robots are mostly isolated, they will
not be able to interact and convergence would be slower, as discussed in the following.
3
Figure 2: Results from multiagent simulations. Each panel shows the dependence of the convergence time tc on the system size
N for different parameterisation. Statistical error bars are not visible on the scale of the graphs. Vertical dotted lines indicate the
thresholds for N1 = 32 and Nc = 143. The insets show the memory requirements M plotted against the system size N for the
same parameterisations.
Influence of density, mobility and interaction frequency
3.1
To determine the consensus dynamics and the effects of the different parameters of the system, we run multiagent simulations
with small and large groups in a squared arena of size L = 1m. In this condition, we have N1 (cid:39) 32 and Nc (cid:39) 143. Figure 2 reports
the consensus time tc for different parameterisations varying N ∈ [10,500] and τm,τs ∈ [10,50 ]s.
Looking at the results, we note that tc is a decreasing function of N. Indeed, a higher density corresponds to a higher number
of concurrently executed games, and results in a faster convergence. For N > Nc and small τs, the consensus time collapses to the
same value for varying τm (see for instance the top-left panel in Fig. 2). Above the percolation threshold, agent mobility plays
a minor role and the consensus dynamics can be related to the characteristics of the static network of interactions. Especially
for low values of τm, the dynamics closely correspond to those of static agents interacting on a random geometric network [10].
Here, the agreement process proceeds through the formation of clusters of agents with local consensus separated by an interface
of “undecided” agents, and consensus dynamics recall the coarsening on regular lattices [2]. This is confirmed by the left panel
in Fig. 3, which shows how the convergence time tc scales with τs ∈ [1,500 ]s for N = 300. It is possible to appreciate a kind
s , with γ (cid:39) 0.5. This indicates that the convergence dynamics are mostly determined by τs, while
of power-law scaling tc (cid:39) τγ
τm plays a relatively minor role, hence confirming the above mentioned resemblance with coarsening on lattices or random
geometric networks. Similarly to fully-connected networks [4], log-periodic oscillations are visible in the power law scaling, so
that for some values of τs, mobility happens to be more relevant, with large τm determining a lower convergence time (see also
Fig. 2 top-right).
Below the percolation threshold Nc, agents form temporary clusters that dissolve due to the agent mobility. If the density is
still high enough to ensure frequent interactions (N > N1), the dynamics are determined more by the mobility of agents than by
the broadcasting period τs. This is visible in the bottom-left and bottom-right panels of Fig. 2, where convergence times tend to
coalesce for different values of τs and N ∈ [N1,Nc]. Instead, for very low densities (N < N1), agent-agent contacts are infrequent
and last for short periods of time, so that many broadcasts go unnoticed. In this condition, high mobility is important as much as
short broadcasting periods to ensure faster convergence (see Fig. 2).
To evaluate the effects of the broadcasting period more thoroughly, it is useful to look at the rescaled time tc/τs indicating the
average number of broadcasts each agent transmitted (see Fig. 3 right). We note lower values of the rescaled agreement time for
larger values of τs, meaning that the number of broadcasts required for convergence diminishes for longer broadcasting periods,
recalling the slower-is-faster effect observed in many complex systems [9].
A look at the memory requirements reveals that M is generally constrained to low values, which makes the NG implemen-
tation affordable for physical systems (see the insets in Fig. 2). For N1 < N < Nc, mobility plays a significant role, with larger
4
101102103102103tcτs=10sτm1020304050101102103102103τs=50sτm1020304050101102103N102103tcτm=10sτs1020304050101102103N102103τm=50sτs1020304050N1Nc101102103N2345MN1Nc101102103N2345MN1Nc101102103N2345MN1Nc101102103N2345M Figure 3: (Left) Scaling of convergence time as a funciton of τs. The black solid line tc (cid:39) τ0.5
serves as a guide for the eye to
appreciate the power law scaling of the convergence time tc. (Right) Rescaling convergence time by τs, representing the average
number of broadcasts before convergence. Statistical error bars are not visible on the scale of the graphs.
s
values of τm corresponding to larger M. The transient formation of small clusters enhances the requirements of memory the more
the agents are able to travel between clusters that agree on different words. Similarly, if we look at the bottom panels, we notice
that higher values of τs determine higher values for M. Here, slow convergence leads to agents diffusing in the arena and being
exposed to multiple options, hence increasing the memory requirements. For N > Nc, instead, mobility is less important and the
memory requirements are bound to the interaction period. The scaling analysis presented in the left panel of Fig. 3 shows that the
memory requirements increase drastically with τs, confirming that slower convergence implies also larger memory requirements.
On the other hand, frequent interactions lead to the quick formation of few clusters, so that the individual memory requirements
are limited to few words, especially for those agents at the interface between clusters. As τs decreases further, the effect of con-
current executions of games starts to be visible with an increase in the memory requirements as a result of the higher probability
of agents to simultaneously exchange different words.
Influence of physical interferences
3.2
The consensus dynamics described above refer to an ideal system that neglects the physical embodiment of robots. Embodiment
leads to collisions with walls and among robots that constrain mobility. We study the influence of embodiment by comparing
multiagent with robotics simulations performed in similar conditions to what described above (see Fig. 4 for selected param-
eterisations). We first note that the convergence time tc is in general higher for robotic simulations, as a consequence of the
slower diffusion in space resulting from the turning time, which introduces a stochastic delay in the random walk pattern, and
due to the physical boundaries that prevent robots to freely move. For instance, in the top-left panel of Fig. 4 we show the case
for τm = 50s: here, collisions lead to an approximately constant tc for N1 < N < Nc, no matter what is the broadcasting time
τs. Indeed, the slower diffusion and the formation of small clusters determine the convergence time more than the interaction
frequency. Collisions with walls and with other robots lead to the formation of stable clusters in which consensus can be quickly
achieved. Such clusters dissolve at a slower pace for larger values of τm, due to robots turning away less often. Hence, the effects
of mobility are diluted especially when it is supposed to play an important role, i.e., when N < Nc. Collisions influence the
convergence dynamics also for N > Nc, although to a lesser extent, as can be seen in the top-right panel in Fig. 4: for large τm,
convergence is slower due to the formation of clusters that do not interact frequently, as collisions prevent robots to mix as much
as in the ideal multiagent case.
The low ability to mix due to collisions has an effect also on the required memory M, which is in general lower for robot
simulations (see bottom panels of Fig. 4). The slower diffusion of robots in space and the existence of boundaries limit the
spreading of different words into the robot network, hence resulting in lower memory requirements.
3.3 Experiments with real robots
To validate our results with respect to the real robotic platform, we performed comparative experiments in a smaller arena
(L = 45cm). In this condition, we have N1 (cid:39) 6 and Nc (cid:39) 29, which led us to use smaller groups of robots (N ∈ {5,20,35}) to
explore the system behaviour as the characteristics of the static interaction network vary. Given the smaller dimensions, we also
explored smaller values for the latencies τs and τm, and we decided to set both to the same value τa ∈ {2.5,5,7.5}s. We have
performed 20 runs with real robots for each of the 9 experimental conditions (3 group sizes × 3 latencies), for a total of 180 runs.
Figure 5 shows a sequence of frames from one run performed with 20 kilobots. It is possible to note that initially multiple small
clusters are present in which robots have the same word (here represented by the color of the onboard LED). As time goes by,
clusters disappear and eventually one single word is chosen.
For each experimental run, we have recorded the convergence time tc, and the obtained results have been contrasted with
5
100101102τs102103tcN=300τm1020304050101102103N101102tc/τsτm=30sτs1020304050N1Nc100101102τs2345M Figure 4: Comparison between multiagent and robot simulations. Average values from multiagent simulations are shown with
transparent colours, and serve as reference to appreciate the results from robotic simulations. Statistical error bars are not visible
on the scale of the graphs. (Top) Convergence time tc. (Bottom) Required memory M. (Left) Results for τm = 50s, and varying
τs. (Right) Results for τs = 10s, and varying τm.
simulations in comparable conditions—same arena dimensions L and same latencies as determined by τa—with multiagent and
robotic simulations. Figure 6 shows that the statistics are aligned between kilobot simulations and real kilobots, and both present
a slightly larger convergence time with respect to multiagent simulations. We also note that in general, the convergence time for
τa = 2.5s is lower in case of real robots than in simulation, while this is not always true for larger latencies. This is an effect
of interferences in communication due to simultaneous broadcasts, which leads to the loss of some communication messages.
When messages get lost, the convergence dynamics are actually faster because the exchanging of different words by robots
broadcasting at the same time gets reduced. This is in line with the observations made in Section 3 about the influence of the
broadcasting period, indicating that convergence is faster when there are less broadcasts. With kilobots, a reduction of the number
of broadcasts due to interference results from small τs and large N (see Fig. 6).
4 Conclusions
This study finds itself at the interface between theoretical investigations and robotics implementation. The results observed in the
multiagent simulations can be of interest for complex systems studies as they highlight the effects of concurrency and of different
latencies in the motion and interaction patterns, as determined by implementation constraints. Concurrency is customary in
t = 10s
t = 23s
t = 45s
t = 60s
t = 80s
Figure 5: Different shots of an experiment with 20 kilobots, with τs = τm = 2.5s. Robots lighting their LED have only one word
in their inventory, while no color signal indicates more than one word or an empty inventory. Different words correspond to
different colours.
6
101102103N102103tcτm=50sτs1020304050101102103102103τs=10sτm1020304050101102103N2.02.53.03.54.04.55.0M101102103N2.02.53.03.54.04.55.0N1NcN1NcN1NcN1Nc Figure 6: Comparison between multiagent simulations, kilobot simulations and real kilobots. For each condition, 200 runs were
performed in simulation, while 20 runs were performed with physical robots. Boxes represent the interquartile range, horizontal
lines mark the median, whiskers extend to 1.5 times the first quartiles, and dots represent outliers.
multi-robot systems and artificial decentralised systems in general. Hence, accounting for it into abstract models is important
to provide usable predictions. We have found here that concurrent executions of games are particularly important for aspects
like the maximum memory M, and future studies should better characterise such effects in terms of the probability of observing
concurrent executions at any time.
Robotics simulations and experiments with kilobots showed how embodiment influences the consensus dynamics by limiting
the diffusion of information into the system: on the one hand, collisions lead to the formation of clusters that dissolve slower for
larger τm, leading to slower convergence times. On the other hand, the memory requirements of robots is reduced as only few
robots at the interface between clusters experience more than two words at the same time. Future studies should attempt a more
precise description of the diffusive motion of agents under physical constraints, in order to obtain better predictions in terms of
the expected interaction network. Additionally, the communication protocol employed by kilobots and the observed interferences
need to be better characterised. Simulations should account for uncertain reception of messages, as well as for the exponential
back-off used during transmission when the channel is busy. By including such features, we expect to deliver precise estimations
of the system behaviour even for very large group sizes and short broadcasting periods.
References
[1] A. Baronchelli. Role of feedback and broadcasting in the naming game. Physical Review E, 83(4):046103, 2011.
[2] A. Baronchelli, L. Dall’Asta, A. Barrat, and V. Loreto. Topology-induced coarsening in language games. Physical Review
E, 73(1):015102, 2006.
[3] A. Baronchelli and A. D´ıaz-Guilera. Consensus in networks of mobile communicating agents. Physical Review E,
85(1):016113, 2012.
[4] A. Baronchelli, M. Felici, V. Loreto, E. Caglioti, and L. Steels. Sharp transition towards shared vocabularies in multi-agent
systems. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2006(06):P06014, 2006.
[5] D. Brockmann and D. Helbing. The hidden geometry of complex, network-driven contagion phenomena. Science,
342(6164):1337–1342, 2013.
[6] C. Castellano, S. Fortunato, and V. Loreto. Statistical physics of social dynamics. Reviews of Modern Physics, 81(2):591–
646, 2009.
[7] D. Centola and A. Baronchelli. The spontaneous emergence of conventions: An experimental study of cultural evolution.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(7):1989–1994, 2015.
[8] N. Fujiwara, J. Kurths, and A. D´ıaz-Guilera. Synchronization in networks of mobile oscillators. Physical Review E,
83(2):025101, 2011.
[9] C. Gershenson and D. Helbing. When slower is faster. Complexity, 21(2):9–15, 2015.
[10] Q. Lu, G. Korniss, and B. K. Szymanski. Naming games in two-dimensional and small-world-connected random geometric
networks. Physical Review E, 77(1):016111, 2008.
[11] R. O’Grady, A. L. Christensen, and M. Dorigo. SWARMORPH: Multirobot morphogenesis using directional self-assembly.
IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 25(3):738–743, 2009.
[12] C. A. C. Parker and H. Zhang. Cooperative decision-making in decentralized multiple-robot systems: the best-of-n problem.
IEEE Transactions on Mechatronics, 14(2):240–251, 2009.
[13] C. Pinciroli, V. Trianni, R. O’Grady, G. Pini, A. Brutschy, M. Brambilla, N. Mathews, E. Ferrante, G. A. Di Caro,
F. Ducatelle, M. Birattari, L. M. Gambardella, and M. Dorigo. ARGoS: a modular, parallel, multi-engine simulator for
multi-robot systems. Swarm Intelligence, 6(4):271–295, 2012.
7
tc110102103lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllta=2.5ta=5ta=7.5ta=2.5ta=5ta=7.5ta=2.5ta=5ta=7.5N=5N=20N=35multiagentkilobot sim.kilobot real [14] C. R. Reid, S. Garnier, M. Beekman, and T. Latty.
Information integration and multiattribute decision making in non-
neuronal organisms. Animal Behaviour, 100(C):44–50, 2015.
[15] A. Reina, G. Valentini, C. Fern´andez-Oto, M. Dorigo, and V. Trianni. A design pattern for decentralised decision making.
PLoS ONE, 10(10):e0140950–18, 2015.
[16] M. Rubenstein, C. Ahler, N. Hoff, A. Cabrera, and R. Nagpal. Kilobot: A low cost robot with scalable operations designed
for collective behaviors. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 62(7):966–975, 2014.
[17] M. Rubenstein, A. Cornejo, and R. Nagpal.
345(6198):795–799, 2014.
Programmable self-assembly in a thousand-robot swarm.
Science,
[18] G. Sartoretti, M.-O. Hongler, M. E. de Oliveira, and F. Mondada. Decentralized self-selection of swarm trajectories: from
dynamical systems theory to robotic implementation. Swarm Intelligence, 8(4):329–351, 2014.
[19] T. D. Seeley, P. K. Visscher, T. Schlegel, P. M. Hogan, N. R. Franks, and J. A. R. Marshall. Stop signals provide cross
inhibition in collective decision-making by honeybee swarms. Science, 335(6064):108–11, 2012.
[20] T. Soleymani, V. Trianni, M. Bonani, F. Mondada, and M. Dorigo. Bio-inspired construction with mobile robots and
compliant pockets. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 74:340–350, 2015.
[21] V. Sood and S. Redner. Voter model on heterogeneous graphs. Physical Review Letters, 94(17):178701–4, 2005.
[22] SSR Lab, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Kilobotics. all the resources needed to get started with the kilobots.
https://www.kilobotics.com, 2013. [Online; accessed 12 January 2016].
[23] L. Steels. A self-organizing spatial vocabulary. Artificial life, 2(3):319–332, 1995.
[24] J. Werfel, K. Petersen, and R. Nagpal. Designing Collective Behavior in a Termite-Inspired Robot Construction Team.
Science, 343(6172):754–758, 2014.
8
|
1304.4051 | 1 | 1304 | 2013-04-15T11:09:41 | Coordinating metaheuristic agents with swarm intelligence | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.NE"
] | Coordination of multi agent systems remains as a problem since there is no prominent method to completely solve this problem. Metaheuristic agents are specific implementations of multi-agent systems, which imposes working together to solve optimisation problems with metaheuristic algorithms. The idea borrowed from swarm intelligence seems working much better than those implementations suggested before. This paper reports the performance of swarms of simulated annealing agents collaborating with particle swarm optimization algorithm. The proposed approach is implemented for multidimensional knapsack problem and has resulted much better than some other works published before. | cs.MA | cs | Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing manuscript No.
(will be inserted by the editor)
Coordinating metaheuristic agents with swarm intelligence
Mehmet E. Aydin
3
1
0
2
r
p
A
5
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
1
5
0
4
.
4
0
3
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
the date of receipt and acceptance should be inserted later
Abstract Coordination of multi agent systems remains as a problem since there is
no prominent method to completely solve this problem. Metaheuristic agents are
specific implementations of multi-agent systems, which imposes working together
to solve optimisation problems with metaheuristic algorithms. The idea borrowed
from swarm intelligence seems working much better than those implementations
suggested before. This paper reports the performance of swarms of simulated an-
nealing agents collaborating with particle swarm optimization algorithm. The pro-
posed approach is implemented for multidimensional knapsack problem and has
resulted much better than some other works published before.
Keywords metaheuristic agents, · swarm intelligence, · particle swarm optimiza-
tion, · simulated annealing
1 Introduction
Metaheuristic agents are collaborating agents to solve large scale optimisation
problems in the manner of multi agent systems in which metaheuristic algorithms
are adopted by the agents as the problem solvers. They are multi-agent systems
identified to describe teams of search agents to operate for optimisation. This
type of multi-agent systems is specific to implementations of metaheuristics to
solve large scale optimisation problems (Aydin 2007). Coordination of multi agent
systems remains as a problem since there is no prominent method to completely
solve this problem. The-state-of-the-art of coordinating multi agents via machine
learning has been extensively discussed in Panait and Luke (2005) while Vazquez-
Salcada et al (2005) and Kolp et al (2006) bring forward organizational and archi-
tectural issues of multi-agent systems. Since metaheuristic agents are more spe-
cific and heavily loaded in duty, their coordination is more than those are used in
M. E. Aydin
University of Bedfordshire,
Dept. of Computer Science and Technologies,
Luton, UK
E-mail: [email protected]
2
Mehmet E. Aydin
modelling social problems. The coordination problem with metaheuristic agents
constitutes of the eminent problem with metaheuristics, which is that there is no
guarantee provided to find optimum solutions within a reasonable time with any
metaheuristic algorithm. Instead, they usually provide with local optimum, which
may not be satisfactory sometimes. One way to overcome this problem is to di-
versify the search conducted with the heuristics. On the other hand, distributed
problem solving is mainly expected to bring more simplicity and reduction in
computational time and complexity, which leads to more diversity, and more rea-
sonable solutions. A well studied multi agent system can tackle multiple regions
of the search space simultaneously. Multiple independent runs of the algorithms,
which offer distributing the systems over the particular metaheuristic agents, have
capabilities to carry out concurrent search within search spaces.
In this paper, the coordination problem of multi-agent systems has been tack-
led once again, but, with swarm intelligence algorithms this time. It is observed
as expected that swarm intelligence algorithms help for better interactions and
information/experience exchange. We illustrated the idea in coordinating simu-
lated annealing agents with particle swarm optimisation algorithms implemented
to solve multidimensional knapsack problem. Although there are various hybrid
implementations of particle swarm optimisation and simulated annealing to solve
combinatorial problems (Chan et al 2006;Dong and Qui 2006;Wang et al 2007), we
have not come across with implementation of particle swarm optimisation algo-
rithms to coordinate any metaheuristic agent such as simulated annealing agents
neither any distributed versions of such hybrid algorithms. In addition, multidi-
mensional knapsack problem has not been tackled with such hybrid algorithm
either.
Previously, a couple of multi agent coordination approaches applied to meta-
heuristic agent teams to examine their performance in coordinating them (Aydin
2007; Hammami and Ghediera 2005). Obviously, each one provides with different
benefits in tackling search and problem solving. However, swarm intelligence has
not been considered for this coordination problems, whereas the notion of swarm
intelligence is to substantiate artificial societies inspiring of the natural life. That
is that the individuals form up a swarm are to be considered as particular agents.
In contrary, the individuals remain as ordinary solutions not agents enabled with
various artificial skills. In this paper, we try to prove the concept of coordinating
agents with swarm intelligence algorithms.
Multidimensional knapsack problem is one of the most tackled combinatorial
optimisation problems due to its flexibility in convertibility into the real world
problems. The problem briefly is to maximise the total weighted p index subject
to the constraints where x is a binary variable and r is a matrix of coefficients that
is imposed to limit the capacities and b is the vector of upper limits.
Subject to:
M aximise
n
X
j=1
pj xj
n
X
j=1
rij xj ≤ bii = (1, ..., m)
xj ∈ [0, 1]j = (1, ..., n)
(1)
(2)
(3)
Coordinating metaheuristic agents with swarm intelligence
3
Equation (1) is the objective function which measures the overall capacity of the
knapsacks used while Equation (2) and (3) provide the hard constraints where (2)
declares the upper limit of each knapsack and (3) makes sure that the decision
variable, x, can only take binary integer values. The knapsack problem has been
inspired by many application areas such as networking problems, supply chain
modeling problems etc. Wilbaut et al (2008) introduce a survey on the variety of
knapsack problems and the ways to solve them.
The rest of the paper is organised as follows. The second section is to briefly
introduce the notions of metaheuristic agents and swarm intelligence with short
presentation of considered metaheuristics within the study; they are particle swarm
optimisation (PSO), bee colony optimisation (BCO), and simulated annealing
(SA) algorithms. The third section is to describe how to deliver the coordination
of a swarm of simulated annealing agents using BCO and PSO. The experimental
results are provided in section four following by the conclusions in section five.
2 Metaheuristic Agents and Swarm Intelligence
The concept of metaheuristic agents is identified to describe multi agent systems
equipped with metaheuristics to tackle hard optimisation problems. The idea of
multi agency is to build up intelligent autonomous entities whose form up teams
and solve problems in harmony. The agents equipped with metaheuristics aim to
solve hard and large-scale problems with their own intelligent search skills. Since
standalone heuristic search usually face with local minima, ideas such as memetic
algorithms, hybrid algorithms etc. have received intensive attention to overcome
such shortcomings. On the other hand, the idea of multi agency eases building
collaboration among various methods and approaches in a form of collaborating
independent computational entities (Panait and Luke 2005;Vazquez-Salcada et al
2005;Kolp et al 2006).
Metaheuristic applications have been implemented as mostly standalone sys-
tems in an ordinary sense and examined under the circumstances of their own
standalone systems. Few multi agent implementations in which metaheuristics
have been exploited are examined in the literature. Various implementations of
metaheuristic agents have been overviewed with respect to topologies and achieve-
ments in Aydin (2007) and Hammami and Ghediera (2005).
Swarm intelligence is referred to artificial intelligence (AI) systems where an
intelligent behaviour can emerge as the outcome of the self-organisation of a col-
lection of simple agents, organisms or individuals. Simple organisms that live in
colonies; such as ants, bees, bird flocks etc. have long fascinated many people for
their collective intelligence that is manifested in many of the things that they do.
A population of simple units can interact with each other as well as their envi-
ronment without using any set of instruction(s) to proceed, and compose a swarm
intelligence system.
The swarm intelligence approaches are to reveal the collective behaviour of
social insects in performing specific duties; it is about modelling the behaviour
of those social insects and use these models as a basis upon which varieties of
artificial entities can be developed. In such a way, the problems can be solved by
models that exploit the problem solving capabilities of social insects. The moti-
vation is to model the simple behaviours of individuals and the local interactions
4
Mehmet E. Aydin
with the environment and neighbouring individuals, in order to obtain more com-
plex behaviours that can be used to solve complex problems, mostly optimisation
problems (Colorno et al 1994; Kennedy and Eberhart 1995; Tasgetiren et al 2007).
2.1 Bee colonies
Bee colonies are rather recently developed sort of swarm intelligence algorithms,
which are inspired of the social behaviour of bee colonies. This family of algo-
rithms has been successfully used for various applications such as modelling oh
communication networks (Farooq 2008), manufacturing cell formation (Pham et
al 2007), training artificial neural networks (Pham et al 2006). There is a rather
common opinion on that bee colony algorithms are more successful in continuous
problems than combinatorial problems. The main idea behind a simple bee colony
optimisation algorithm is to follow the most successful member of the colony in
conducting the search. The scenario followed is that once a bee found a fruitful
region, then it performs the waggle dance to communicate to the rest of the colony.
Once any member of the colony realises that there is a waggle dance performance
by a peer fellow, then it moves to that member's neighbourhood to collect more
food. Inspiring of this natural process, bee colony optimisation algorithms are
implemented for efficient search methodologies borrowing this idea to direct the
search to a more fruitful region of the search space. That would result a quicker
search for an appropriate solution to be considered as a neat near-optimum. For
further information Pham et al (2006), (2007) and Farooq (2008) can be seen.
2.2 Particle swarm optimisation (PSO)
PSO is a population-based optimization technique inspired of social behaviour of
bird flocking and fish schooling. PSO inventors were implementing such scenarios
based on natural processes explained below to solve the optimization problems.
Suppose the following scenario: a group of birds are randomly searching for food
in an area, where there is only one piece of food available and none of them knows
where it is, but they can estimate how far it would be. The problem here is "what
is the best way to find and get that food". Obviously, the simplest strategy is to
follow the bird known as the nearest one to the food. In PSO, each single solution,
called a particle, is considered as a bird, the group becomes a swarm (population)
and the search space is the area to explore. Each particle has a fitness value
calculated by a fitness function, and a velocity of flying towards the optimum,
food. All particles search across the problem space following the particle nearest
to the optimum. PSO starts with initial population of solutions, which is updated
iteration-by-iteration.
The pure PSO algorithm builds each particle based on, mainly, two key vectors;
position xi, and velocity vi. Here, xi = {xi1, ..., xin}, denotes the ith position vector
in the swarm, where xik, is the position value of the ith particle with respect to
the kth dimension (k = 1, 2, 3, , n), while vi = {vi,1, ..., vi,n} denotes the ith velocity
vector in the swarm, where vik is the velocity value of the ith particle with respect
to the kth dimension. Initially, the position and velocity vectors are generated as
continuous sets of values randomly uniformly. Personal best and global best of the
Coordinating metaheuristic agents with swarm intelligence
5
swarm are determined at each iteration following by updating the velocity and
position vectors using :
vik(t + 1) = δ(wtvik(t) + c1r1(yik(t) − xik(t)) + c2r2(gk(t) − xik(t)))
(4)
where w is the inertia weight used to control the impact of the previous velocities
on the current one, which is decremented by β, decrement factor, via wt+1 = wt ×β,
δ is constriction factor which keeps the effects of the randomized weight within
the certain range. In addition, r1 and r2 are random numbers in [0,1] and c1 and
c2 are the learning factors, which are also called social and cognitive parameters.
The next step is to update the positions in the following way.
xik(t + 1) = xik(t) + vik(t).
(5)
After getting position values updated for all particles, the corresponding solu-
tions with their fitness values are calculated so as to start a new iteration if the
predetermined stopping criterion is not satisfied. For further information, Kennedy
and Eberhart (1995) and Tasgetiren et al (2007) can be seen.
PSO has initially been developed for continuous problems not for discrete ones.
As MKP is a discrete problem, we use one of discrete PSO, which is proposed by
Kennedy and Eberhart (1997). The idea is to create a binary position vector based
on velocities as follows:
xik(t + 1) =
.
(6)
1
evik (t+1)
where equation (5) is replaced with (6) so as to produce binary values for
position vectors.
2.3 Simulated annealing
Simulated annealing (SA) is one of the most powerful metaheuristics used in op-
timisation of many combinatorial problems, which relies on a stochastic decision
making process in which a control parameter called temperature is employed to
evaluate the probability of moving within the neighbourhood of a particular so-
lution. The algorithm explores across the whole search space of the problem un-
dertaken throughout a simulated cooling process, which gradually cools a given
initial hot temperature to a predefined frozen level. Given a search space S, and a
particular state in search space, x ∈ S, a neighbourhood function, N(x), conducts
a move from x, to ´x ∈ S, where the decision to promote the state is made subject
to the following stochastic rule:-
xi+1 =
−∆x
´xi ∆x > 0
´xi e
ti ≥ ρ
xi otherwise
(7)
where ∆x = ´xi − xi, i is the iteration index, ρ is the random number gen-
erated for making a stochastic decision for the new solution and ti is the level
of temperature (at the ith iteration), which is controlled by a particular cooling
schedule, f(ti). This means that, in order to make the new solution, ´xi, qualified
for the next iteration, either the arithmetic difference, ∆x, needs to be negative or
the probability determined with e−∆x/ti is required to be higher than the random
6
Mehmet E. Aydin
number generated, ρ, where the probability is decayed by cooling the temperature.
Every state qualified to the next iteration as the consequence of the abovemen-
tioned stochastic rule gives away to a perturbation in which the solution state
can be refreshed and diversified to prevent the possible local optima. A prede-
fined number of moves attempted in this stage are repeated per iteration so as
to stabilise cooling the temperature. Obviously, the stochastic rule does not allow
only promoting the better solutions, but also the worse ones. However, since the
probability of promoting a worse state exponentially decays towards zero, it is get-
ting harder to exploit the perturbation facility in advanced stages of this process.
That is because the temperature approaches zero as the number of iterations goes
higher. More details can be found in literature such as Kolonko (1999), Aydin and
Fogarty (2004) and Hammami and Ghediera (2005).
3 SA agents collaborating with swarm intelligence
As explained above, simulated annealing (SA) is one of the most commonly used
metaheuristic approaches that offer a stochastic problem solving procedure. It
is used for numerous and various successful applications (Kolonko 1999; Aydin
and Fogarty 2004) in combinatorial and real optimisation domains. However, it
is realised that the performance of implementations significantly depend on the
neighbourhood structure as well as the hardness of the problem. In order to avoid
poor performance due to such reasons, SA has been either hybridised with other
peer metaheuristic algorithms such as genetic algorithm or parallelised. The main
problem remains as the diversification of the search in one way or another. In this
study, agents enabled with simulated annealing algorithm are used and named as
SA agents.
The original idea of swarm intelligence is to form up populations of enabled
individuals for collaboratively problem solving spurposes. However, due to com-
putational complexity and the hardship in furnishing the enabled individuals with
multiple advanced functionalities, swarms are usually designed as population of
individual static solutions evolved with various genetic and/or heuristic opera-
tors/algorithms. In this study, individuals forming up the swarms are agentified
with various advance functionalities such as problem solving and communicating
independently.The idea is cultivated as follows: a population of agents is created
and developed with a search skill operating in the way of simulated annealing
algorithm. Then, the population is organised to team up a swarm to solve the
problems with their search functionalities and interaction abilities. Previously, SA
agents have been organised in a variety of fashions such as with hill climbing al-
gorithm or metropolis rule (Aydin and Fogarty 2004; Aydin 2007). The idea was
to build a way of collaboration through system architecture, and gained a slight
improvement in performance.
This study has aimed to find out a better way of organising agents in a more
proactive collaboration so that the agents are to be enabled with contributing
problem solving whilst coordinating. For this purposes, few algorithms have been
examined; evolutionary simulated annealing, bee colony optimization and particle
swarm optimization algorithms. Evolutionary simulated annealing is the one ex-
amined earlier for a similar purpose, to solve some other combinatorial problems
(Aydin and Fogarty 2004; Yigit et al 2006; Kwan et al 2009) in which a population
Coordinating metaheuristic agents with swarm intelligence
7
Fig. 1 The progress of evolving solutions through a typical swarm of SA agents
of solutions is created and then evolved with a fast-track simulated annealing oper-
ator on generation basis. It imposes that once an individual solution is operated by
an SA, the resulting new solution is replaced with the old one. On the other hand,
bee colony optimisation algorithm applies waggle dance principle of bee colonies
in which the best found solution is given to every agent to kick-off a fresh search
around the most promising neighbourhood. The resulted solutions are counted
and sorted accordingly, and the best of them is chosen for the next generation.
Ultimately, the third examined algorithm , which is found as the most promising
method, is particle swarm optimization algorithm. It considers a swarm of SA
agents interacting in the way of particle swarm optimisation algorithm operating.
Figure 1 sketches the progress of searching for optimum solution through gener-
ations reflecting how each agent plays its role and how the collaboration algorithm
merges the intelligence produced by each agent. First of all, a swarm of SA agents
is created, where each agent starts searching with a randomly generated prob-
lem state, xi(0). Once they finish a single run, the improved solutions, x′
i(0), are
collected into a pool and applied with a particular collaboration algorithm for ex-
changing information purpose. This step puts very significant impact on the speed
of approximation with which the collected solutions are operated with a second
algorithm to exchange information for further steps, which helps the search with
diversification. There, whichever algorithm is operating will shake up and reshuffle
the set of solutions, and as a result the diversifications will be re-cultivated each
time. This brings an easy way of switching to different neighbourhoods within the
search space. This procedure continues until a pre-defined criterion is satisfied,
which is indicated in Figure 1 as the termination state of the process. The final
set of results, x′
i(t), are merged into the final pool, and a near optimum is finally
determined.
The interaction of the SA agents in this way reminds the idea of variable neigh-
bourhood search (Hansen et al 2004; Sevkli and Aydin 2006) where a systematic
switch-off between search algorithms is organised in order to diversify the solu-
tions. In an overall point of view, the swarm of SA agents sounds borrowing this
idea to implement it in a wider context of exploration.
8
Mehmet E. Aydin
The multidimensional knapsack problem is represented in a binary way to
be inline with the integer programming model in which a decision variable of
x = {x1, ..., xK } plays the main role in process of optimisation, where x is a vector
of K binary variables. This is also the way how to present a problem state. Here,
once a corresponding amount is decided to be included in knapsack k, then xk
becomes 1 otherwise 0. The heuristic search for optimum value is conducted via use
of neighbourhood structure of inverter function, which simply inverts the value of
a randomly selected variable at a time. The main search is conducted by a so-called
fast-track SA algorithm embedded in each agent with inverting values of up to 3
variables at a time. A complete search operation by a SA agent is measured based
a cost/fitness function, which relates each state of the problem to a corresponding
real value.
fi : xi(t) −→ ℜ
(8)
where xi is the ith vector of decision variables within the swarm, which corre-
sponds to the ith SA agent. In the case of multidimensional knapsack problem,
the fitness/cost function, fi, corresponds to the objective function (Equation (1)).
An agent embedded with fast-track SA explores for better state of the problem
taking xh
i(t) following the main procedure of SA
algorithm,
i = xi(t) and producing xf
i = x′
xf
i = SAi(xh
i )
(9)
where i is the index for agents, h and f represent "hot" and "frozen" keywords 1
and SAi(.) is the problem solving process of the ith agent. There, the improvement
towards the optimum value is measured as fhot to ff rozen. As expected, the overall
search by the whole swarm of SA agents is conducted generation-by-generation as
is done in other evolutionary methodologies. Hence, implementing these multiple
SA agents, there will be N number of initial states of the problem considered by
N agents and N number of improved results produced per generation. The whole
swarm will include a set of fitness values representing the state of the swarm with
respect to the solution quality. F(t) = {f0, ..., fK } is the fitness vector of genera-
tion t through the overall problem solving process. The swarm of SA agents will
find the best of the generation, xb(t), based on the fitness vector, which provides
fbest. Moving to the next generation is subject to the level of satisfaction with the
solution quality. If it is not sufficiently optimised, yet, the next generation will be
gone through the determination of new set of hot solutions, where a coordination
algorithm is needed to combine all the experiences of the agents, and let them
select their new hot states. As explained before, the coordination algorithms con-
sidered in this research are evolutionary simulated annealing (ESA), bee colony
optimisation (BCO) and particle swarm optimisation (PSO). ESA imposes each
agent to take up x
i (t+1), where t is the index for generations, while BCO
imposes xb(t) to every agents to kick off search for next generation. PSO runs the
usual interaction procedure, which explained above, to determine the new hot so-
lutions. Therefore, a new hot solution will be produced as the result of xh
i (t + 1)
= psot(xf
i and xb are personal and global best solutions. The
whole procedure of coordination by PSO lasts between pso0(.) and psoT (.), where
T is the final generation through the whole process.
i , xb), where xpb
f
i (t) as xh
i , xpb
1 "Hot" and "frozen" are two preferred keywords to express the "initial" and "final", re-
spectively, in order to be inline with the jargon used in simulated annealing studies.
Coordinating metaheuristic agents with swarm intelligence
9
4 Experimental Study
This experimental study is not especially to solve multidimensional knapsack prob-
lem (MKP), but to test the performance of various approaches including swarm
intelligence to coordinate metaheuristic agents. The abovementioned swarm in-
telligence model for SA agents has been examined with solving multidimensional
knapsack problem, which is one of well-known NP-Hard combinatorial optimiza-
tion problems. For this purpose, a swarm of SA agents, each was configured with
a fast-track SA procedure, was created. Three approaches are examined for the
purpose of an efficient coordination: an evolutionary simulated annealing (ESA)
algorithm (Aydin and Fogarty 2004), a bee colony optimisation (BCO) algorithm
(Pham et al; 2006;2007), and a binary represented PSO algorithm (Kennedy and
Eberhart 1997), were implemented to work as a coordinator algorithm. The mul-
tidimensional knapsack problem was represented with a binary coding scheme.
SA procedure to be run by each agent was investigated for whether to be a 100
iteration long SA to run through 300 generations or a 200 iteration long SA to run
300 generations. The preliminary results confirmed that a 200 iteration long SA
algorithm with varying number of generations (Aydin 2008). That was inline with
previous researches. In addition, the size of swarm was investigated in a range of
5 to 50. The experimentation is conducted with only two moderately hard MKP
benchmarks, namely MKP6 and MKP7 collected from OR library (Beasley 1990).
The results are summarised in Table 1, 2 and 3 with the solution quality and com-
putational time, where the solution quality is measured with relative percentage
of error (RPE).
RP E =
fopt − favrg
fopt
(10)
where fopt and favrg are the optimum and the average values of experimented
results. The average value, favrg , is the mean calculated over 50 replications. The
second performance measure is the averaged CPU time, which is the mean of the
50 replications. The performance with respect to the solution quality is primarily
considered and the one with respect to CPU is secondarily considered in case of
any tight comparisons.
The implementation of the systems has been done using POP C++, which
is a GRID programming language developed by Nguyan and Kuonen (2007). It
is such a unique distributed programming language that uses object distribution
over the targeted infrastructure, and arrange automatic communications among
the distributed entities. This property of POP C++ eases its use in development
of multi agent systems. All experiments were conducted on GRID infrastructure
in Computer Science department of Applied University of Western Switzerland in
Fribourg.
Table 1 presents experimental results with the most fast-track SA agents coor-
dinated with all three approaches against various swarm sizes. The SA algorithm
is configured to run 200 iterations without any inner replications, which means
that the cooling schedule allows operating once per level of temperature. All three
algorithms, ESA, BCO and PSO, are separately applied to the same swarm of SA
agents under the same circumstances. The swarm size varies between 5 and 50
agents. The multidimensional knapsack benchmark problems tackled are MKP6
and MKP7 in all cases. All experiments are replicated for 50 times. The worst
level of achievement with respect to quality of solution is delivered by BCO while
10
Mehmet E. Aydin
Table 1 Experimental results of the swarm of fast-track SA agents with single inner iteration
and coordinated with various approaches
Swarm Size
ESA
BCO
PSO
MKP6
MKP7
RPE
CPU
RPE
CPU
RPE
CPU
0.03495
0.01183
0.00899
0.01052
0.00762
0.00768
0.00633
0.03748
0.02170
0.01528
0.01407
0.00961
0.00821
0.00865
0.11
0.43
0.86
1.08
1.80
1.86
2.56
0.14
0.52
1.01
1.17
2.34
2.20
2.66
0.02808
0.02021
0.01694
0.01530
0.01344
0.01226
0.01093
0.04077
0.03270
0.02782
0.01906
0.01516
0.01736
0.01979
0.73
1.29
1.73
2.25
2.79
4.34
5.28
0.59
1.18
1.57
2.10
2.95
4.35
5.38
0.00257
0.00214
0.00170
0.00203
0.00098
0.00122
0.00061
0.00307
0.00175
0.00112
0.00064
0.00014
0.00030
0.00028
0.84
1.38
2.31
2.40
2.56
3.67
4.09
0.78
1.30
1.31
1.31
0.93
1.21
1.15
5
10
15
20
30
40
50
5
10
15
20
30
40
50
PSO has the best and ESA has an intermediate level of achievement. On the other
hand, the shortest computational time achieved by ESA while the longest one is
done by BCO and PSO is in the middle. The overall gain by PSO over BCO, which
is the worst case, remain between 90-95% and 25-33% by ESA. The time-wise gain
is 49% and 31% by ESA and PSO, respectively. The swarm-size-wise performance
is a significant too. For both benchmarks, the size of the swarm indicates a gradual
increase in performance in all cases; the solution quality index linearly decreases.
Another most interesting fact is that the error level indicated by PSO is nearly
about 10% of both ESA's and BCO's levels.
Table 2 presents the results of experimentations sets which considered 5 inner
iterations per SA cycle. These results are much better ones comparing to the single
inner iteration case. All three algorithms that coordinate fast-track SA agents, with
5 inner iterations per cycle this time, and improve their performance gradually
through the growing size of the swarm. ESA hits 100% achievement with 30 and
40-agent swarms, while PSO hits about 99% in both cases. BCO remains improving
in comparison with the single inner case, but outperformed by both ESA and PSO.
The overall gain by PSO over BCO, which is the worst case remain between 65-
95% and 84-95% by ESA. The gain with respect to CPU times is 82% and 39%
by ESA and PSO, respectively.
Table 3 shows the experimental results of more focused SA agents, which are
replicating 10 times per step of cooling schedule. Since this way of search is more
focused, the results of both ESA and PSO hit the optimum 100% with swarm
size of 20. Therefore, the experimentation has not proceeded further. As the table
manifests, PSO and ESA compete each other, but outperform BCO with respect
to both quality of solution and computational time, where the gain over BCO in
terms of solution quality is 82-89% and 82-92% by ESA and PSO, respectively.
The achievement via CPU time is 64% and 22% by ESA and PSO, respectively.
Fig. 2 indicates the averaged-RPE results of each coordinating approach per
benchmark per level of inner iterations in fast-track SA agents. The averaged
results are tabulated across horizontal axis pointing out the overall achievement
Coordinating metaheuristic agents with swarm intelligence
11
Table 2 Experimental results of swarm of fast-track SA agents with 5 inner iterations and
coordinated with various approaches
Swarm Size
ESA
BCO
PSO
RPE
CPU
RPE
CPU
RPE
CPU
0.00069
0.00031
0.00013
0.00005
0.00000
0.00000
0.00031
0.00009
0.00006
0.00003
0.00000
0.00000
0.03
0.34
0.32
0.29
0.27
0.20
0.08
0.30
0.32
0.28
0.25
0.28
0.00182
0.00139
0.00143
0.00100
0.00090
0.00121
0.00190
0.00128
0.00118
0.00120
0.00078
0.00082
0.64
1.21
1.65
1.64
1.91
2.73
0.56
0.92
1.15
1.27
1.37
1.59
0.00076
0.00066
0.00068
0.00042
0.00021
0.00011
0.00013
0.00004
0.00009
0.00009
0.00002
0.00002
0.70
1.07
1.81
1.33
1.08
1.42
0.24
0.26
0.51
0.65
0.57
0.44
5
10
15
20
30
40
5
10
15
20
30
40
MKP6
MKP7
Table 3 Experimental results of ESA agents with 10 inner iterations and coordinated with
various approaches
Swarm Size
ESA
BCO
PSO
RPE
CPU
RPE
CPU
RPE
CPU
0.00027
0.00002
0.00000
0.00000
0.00072
0.00000
0.00000
0.00000
0.09
0.17
0.14
0.14
0.16
0.13
0.13
0.14
0.00086
0.00063
0.00066
0.00060
0.00141
0.00130
0.00070
0.00073
0.44
0.66
0.80
0.97
0.45
0.62
0.64
0.75
0.00029
0.00013
0.00008
0.00000
0.00019
0.00013
0.00002
0.00000
0.48
0.66
0.49
0.33
0.35
0.55
0.44
0.48
5
10
15
20
5
10
15
20
MKP6
MKP7
of each approach, where the benchmark problems are indicated as MPK6 and
MPK7 with each inner iteration case. INN 1, INN 5 and INN 10 indicate the inner
iteration level of 1, 5 and 10. As both the graph and the tabulated values reveal, the
performance of ESA and PSO comparable beyond the inner iterations of 5 onward.
However, their achievements remain significantly different in the case of inner
iteration 1, which is the simplest form of cooling process in SA procedure. PSO
clearly and significantly outperform both ESA and BCO approaches, while ESA
does better than BCO. Depending on their level of difficulty, simulated annealing
algorithms are configured with the level of inner iterations, whereas some problems
favour of higher level of inner iterations, but some do not do at all, especially those
are time sensitive such as resource scheduling problem of radio access networks
(Kwan et al 2009), where the speed of the algorithms are measured in nano-
second level. Therefore, more focused and intensified search will not help solving
such problems at all.
12
Mehmet E. Aydin
Fig. 2 Average performance of agent swarms in various sizes operating with all three algo-
rithms and all three inner-iteration levels
5 Conclusions
Metaheuristic agent swarms need collaboration in one way or another to deliver
an efficient problem solving services. In this paper, three collaboration algorithms
have been examined with respect to efficiency in solution quality. The agents form
up the swarms, which are configured as simulated annealing agents to solve mul-
tidimensional knapsack problem. Evolutionary simulated annealing, bee colony
optimisation and particle swarm optimisation algorithms are used for collabora-
tion purposes. The algorithm found best to be paired with SA agents is PSO,
which is a relatively newer swarm intelligence approach that has good record for
continuous problems, but usually needs a local search embedded in for combina-
torial problems. On the other hand SA needs to incorporate with other search
methods for diversification. It is significantly concluded that collaborating meta-
heuristic agents with swarm intelligence algorithm adds up value into the quality
of solution. This incorporation works in the form of a variable search algorithm in
an overall point of view. It also keeps the properties of ESA (Yigit et al 2006) as
it reheats the temperature, and works with a population.
Acknowledgements A part of this study has been carried out in Engineering College of
Fribourg in Applied University of Western Switzerland, Fribourg, Switzerland, while the author
was visiting GRID research group there. The author is particularly grateful to Prof Pierre
Kuonen, the head of GRID research group and Mr. Jean-Francois Roche, senior technician
of the group for their sincere and kind support in both use of POP C++ and making use of
their GRID infrastructure. The author is also grateful to Prof. Jie Zhang from University of
Bedfordshire, Luton, UK, for his sponsorship to the author during his visit to GRID research
group.
Coordinating metaheuristic agents with swarm intelligence
13
References
1. Aydin, M. E., Fogarty, T. C., (2004). A distributed evolutionary simulated annealing algo-
rithm for combinatorial optimisation problems". Journal of Heuristics, 10(3), 269-292.
2. Aydin, M.E., Yigit, V., (2005). Parallel simulated annealing, In: E. Alba (Ed): Parallel
Meta-Heuristics, pp. 267-288, Wiley.
3. Aydin, M. E., (2007). Meta-heuristic agent teams for job shop scheduling problems. Lecture
Notes in Artificial Intelligence 4659, 185-194.
4. Aydin, M. E., (2008). Swarm Intelligence to coordinate metaheuristic agents. In: Proc. of
IMS 2008, 14-16 October 2008, Adapazari, Turkey.
5. Beasley, J.E. (990). Obtaining test problems via Internet. Journal of Global Optimisation
8, 429-433, http://people.brunel.ac.uk/∼mastjjb/jeb/info.html.
6. Colorni, A., Dorigo, M., Maniezzo, V., Trubian, M. , (1994). Ant system for job-shop
scheduling. Belgian Journal of Operations Research, Statistics and Computer Science (JOR-
BEL), 34(1), 39-53.
7. Chen, A., Yang, G., Wu, Z., (2006). Hybrid discrete particle swarm optimization algorithm
for capacitated vehicle routing problem. Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE A, 7(4),
607-614.
8. DONG, C., QIU, Z., (2006). Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm Based on the Idea
of Simulated Annealing. International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security,
6(10), 152-157.
9. Farooq, M., Bee-Inspired Protocol Engineering: From Nature to Networks. Springer, 2008,
Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany.
10. Hammami, M., Ghediera K., (2005). COSATS, X-COSATS: Two multi-agent systems co-
operating simulated annealing, tabu search and X-over operator for the K-Graph Partitioning
problem. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3684, 647-653.
11. Hansen, P., Mladenovic, N., Dragan, U., (2004). Variable neighborhood search for the
maximum clique Discrete Applied Mathematics, 145(1), 117-125.
12. Kennedy, J. and Eberhart, R. C., (1995). Particle swarm optimization. Proceedings of
IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, Perth, Austrailia. pp. 1942-1948.
13. Kennedy, J. and Eberhart, R. C., (1997). A discrete binary version of the particle swarm
optimization. Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Systems Man and Cybernetics, Pisctaway,
NY, USA, pp. 4104-4108.
14. Kolonko, M. (1999). Some new results on simulated annealing applied to the job shop
scheduling problem. European Journal of Operational Research 113, 123-136.
15. Kolp, M., Giorgini, P., Mylopoulos, J., (2006). Multi-agent architectures as organizational
structures. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 13, 3-25.
16. Kwan, R. Aydin, M. E., Luang, C. and Zhang, J., (2009). Multiuser scheduling in high
speed downlink packet access. IET Communications, 3(8), 1363-1370.
17. Nguyen, T.-A., Kuonen, P., (2007). Programming the Grid with POP C++. Future Gen-
eration Computer Science, 23(1), 23-30.
18. Panait, L., Luke, S., (2005). Cooperative multi-agent learning: The state of the art. Au-
tonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 11, 387-434.
19. Pham, D. T., Otri, S., Ghanbarzadeh, A. , Koc, E., (2006). Application of the Bees Al-
gorithm to the training of learning vector quantisation networks for control chart pattern
recognition. In: Proc Information and Communication Technologies (ICTTA'06), p. 1624-
1629, Syria.
20. Pham, D.T., Afify A., Koc, E., (2007). Manufacturing cell formation using the Bees Al-
gorithm. In: Pham et al (Ed): IPROMS'2007 Innovative Production Machines and Systems
Virtual Conference, pp: Cardiff, UK.
21. Sevkli, M., Aydin, M. E. (2006). A variable neighbourhood search algorithm for job shop
scheduling problems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3906, 261-271.
22. Tasgetiren, M.F., Liang, Y.C., Sevkli, M. Gencyilmaz, G, (2007). Particle swarm opti-
mization algorithm for makespan and total flowtime minimization in permutation flowshop
sequencing problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 177( 3), 1930-1947
23. Vazquez-Salceda, J., Dignum, V., Dignum, F., (2005). Organizing Multiagent Systems.
Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 11, 307-360.
24. Wang, X., Ma, J.-J., Wang, S., Bi, D.-W., (2007). Distributed particle swarm optimization
and simulated annealing for energy-efficent coverage in wireless sensor networks. Sensor, 7,
628-648.
14
Mehmet E. Aydin
25. Wilbaut, C., Hanafi, S., Salhi, S., (2008). A survey of effective heuristics and their ap-
plications to a variety of knapsack problems. IMA Journal of Managment Mathematics, 19,
227-244.
26. Yigit, V., Aydin, M. E., Turkbey, O., (2006). Solving large-scale uncapacitated facility lo-
cation problems with evolutionary simulated annealing. International Journal of Production
Research. 44 (22), 4773-4791.
|
1912.06860 | 1 | 1912 | 2019-12-14T15:06:35 | Resolving Congestions in the Air Traffic Management Domain via Multiagent Reinforcement Learning Methods | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI"
] | In this article, we report on the efficiency and effectiveness of multiagent reinforcement learning methods (MARL) for the computation of flight delays to resolve congestion problems in the Air Traffic Management (ATM) domain. Specifically, we aim to resolve cases where demand of airspace use exceeds capacity (demand-capacity problems), via imposing ground delays to flights at the pre-tactical stage of operations (i.e. few days to few hours before operation). Casting this into the multiagent domain, agents, representing flights, need to decide on own delays w.r.t. own preferences, having no information about others' payoffs, preferences and constraints, while they plan to execute their trajectories jointly with others, adhering to operational constraints. Specifically, we formalize the problem as a multiagent Markov Decision Process (MA-MDP) and we show that it can be considered as a Markov game in which interacting agents need to reach an equilibrium: What makes the problem more interesting is the dynamic setting in which agents operate, which is also due to the unforeseen, emergent effects of their decisions in the whole system. We propose collaborative multiagent reinforcement learning methods to resolve demand-capacity imbalances: Extensive experimental study on real-world cases, shows the potential of the proposed approaches in resolving problems, while advanced visualizations provide detailed views towards understanding the quality of solutions provided. | cs.MA | cs | Resolving Congestions in the Air Traffic Management Domain via Multiagent
Reinforcement Learning Methods
Theocharis Kravarisa, Christos Spatharisb, Alevizos Bastasa, George A. Vourosa, Konstantinos Blekasb, Gennady
Andrienkoc, Natalia Andrienkoc, and Jose Manuel Cordero Garciad
bDept. of Computer Science & Engineering, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece e-mail: [email protected]
cFrauhofer Institute IAIS, Sankt Augustin, Germany e-mail: {gennady.andrienko, natalia.andrienko}@iais.frauhofer.de
aUniversity of Piraeus, Piraeus, Greece e-mail: [email protected]
dCRIDA, Spain e-mail: [email protected]
9
1
0
2
c
e
D
4
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
0
6
8
6
0
.
2
1
9
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract
In this article, we report on the efficiency and effectiveness of multiagent reinforcement learning methods (MARL) for the
computation of flight delays to resolve congestion problems in the Air Traffic Management (ATM) domain. Specifically,
we aim to resolve cases where demand of airspace use exceeds capacity (demand-capacity problems), via imposing ground
delays to flights at the pre-tactical stage of operations (i.e. few days to few hours before operation). Casting this into
the multiagent domain, agents, representing flights, need to decide on own delays w.r.t. own preferences, having no
information about others' payoffs, preferences and constraints, while they plan to execute their trajectories jointly with
others, adhering to operational constraints. Specifically, we formalize the problem as a multiagent Markov Decision
Process (MA-MDP) and we show that it can be considered as a Markov game in which interacting agents need to reach
an equilibrium: What makes the problem more interesting is the dynamic setting in which agents operate, which is also
due to the unforeseen, emergent effects of their decisions in the whole system. We propose collaborative multiagent
reinforcement learning methods to resolve demand-capacity imbalances: Extensive experimental study on real-world
cases, shows the potential of the proposed approaches in resolving problems, while advanced visualizations provide
detailed views towards understanding the quality of solutions provided.
Keywords:
congestion problems, air traffic management, multi agents reinforcement learning, coordination graph
1. Introduction
Congestion problems, modelling situations where mul-
tiple agents demand to use resources of a specific capac-
ity simultaneously, exceeding resources capacity, are ever
present in the modern world. Most notably, congestion
problems are typically very complex and large-scale and
appear regularly in various real-life domains (urban traffic
congestion, air traffic management and network routing).
Consequently, it is of no surprise that they have drawn
much attention in the AI and autonomous agents research
(e.g. [2],[6],[23],[35],[37]) for at least two decades [13] and
have been the focus of game theoretic models for much
longer [27][24].
In the air-traffic management (ATM) domain, conges-
tion problems arise naturally whenever demand of airspace
use exceeds capacity, resulting to hotspots. This is known
as the Demand - Capacity Balance (DCB) problem. Hotspots
are resolved via airspace management or flow management
solutions, including regulations that generate delays and
unforeseen effects for the entire system, increasing the fac-
tors of uncertainty regarding the scheduling of operations.
For instance, they cause the introduction/increase of time
buffers in operations schedules and may accumulate de-
mand for resources within specific periods per day. These
effects present further multiple negative effects to ATM
stakeholders and are also translated into costs and loss of
reliability, including customers satisfaction and environ-
mental effects. Today, delays are imposed to flights with-
out considering the propagated effects to the entire ATM
system (e.g. to other flights and airspaces), which is in-
herently highly complex and dynamic. While delays may
be due to several reasons, the high share is allocated to
the increased demand for airspace use (over 90% in some
airspaces) [14]. It got significantly worse in 2018 [17] when
delays across Europe more than doubled, due to the in-
crease in traffic among other factors. In general, all per-
formance analysis and studies lead to the idea that the
ATM system is very close to, or already at, a saturation
level. These issues, in conjunction to the forecasted in-
crease in air traffic (e.g. Eurocontrol as Network Manager
forecasts increases in traffic of +50% in 2035 compared
to 2017, meaning 16 million flights across Europe [15][16])
impose the need for the assessment and minimization of
delays at the pre-tactical phase of operations (i.e.
from
several days to few hours before operations), also consid-
ering the effects of delays to the overall ATM system and
the highly dynamic environment in which airspace users
Preprint submitted to Expert Systems with Applications
December 17, 2019
operate.
Indeed, resolving hotspots at the pre-tactical phase of
operations and assessing delays early enough, support in-
creasing the predictability of the overall system, alleviat-
ing many of the negative effects. One of the major ob-
jectives here is to minimize ground delays while ensuring
efficient utilisation of airspace and fair distribution of de-
lays among flights. The reduction of the average ground
delay per flight for 1 minute, means vast cost savings for
all ATM stakeholders. Therefore, in this paper we con-
sider only ground delays and subsequently we succinctly
call these delays.
To resolve the DCB problem, this article formalises the
problem as a multiagent Markov Decision Process (MA-
MDP), where agents, representing flights, aim to decide
on own ground delays, jointly with others, with respect to
own preferences and operational constraints on the use of
airspace, while possessing no information about the prefer-
ences and payoffs of others: As said, the goal is to detect
and resolve all hotspots at the pre-tactical phase of op-
erations, considering the joint and propagated effects of
agents ground delays to the evolution of airspace demand,
so as to minimise delay costs, while ensuring efficient util-
isation of airspace and fair distribution of ground delays
among flights, i.e. without penalizing a small number of
them.
We show that this problem can be considered as a
Markov game, in which interacting agents need to reach
an equilibrium to conflicting delay preferences, while re-
solving hotspots in which they participate. As part of the
formulation, we devise a reward function that considers
agents' contribution to hotspots and implied cost when
agents deviate from their schedule. To solve the problem,
we propose multiagent Reinforcement Learning (MARL)
methods, whose efficiency and efficacy is evaluated in real-
world DCB problem cases, each one comprising flight plans
for a specific day (i.e. 24 hours) above Spain. The data
sources include real-world operational data regarding flight
plans submitted just before take-off per day of operation,
data regarding changing sector configurations per day of
operation, and reference values for the cost of strategic de-
lay to European airlines, currently used by SESAR 2020
Industrial Research [9]. Details are provided in Section 2.
The agent-based paradigm introduced in this paper
is in contrast to regulating flights in a first-come-first-
regulated basis - as it is the case today in ATM: Reg-
ulations are imposed to airspaces, resulting to delays for
flights entering that airspace using a first-come-first-delayed
rule, without considering the implications of these delays
to other flights operating in different airspaces and/or time
periods.
A major conclusion of this article is that collaborative
MARL methods reduce the average delay per flight quite
effectively, managing to provide solutions to DCB prob-
lems, thus, imposing delays that result to zero hotspots.
Indeed, results are quite significant, since in most of the
cases the average delay per flight (i.e. the ratio of summing
2
all delays to the total number of flights) is reduced consid-
erably compared to the solutions provided by the Network
Management organization (NM), while a small percentage
of flights have been imposed delay more than half an hour,
and only a small percentage of flights get delay.
We envisage the work laid out in this paper to be seen
as a first step towards devising multiagent methods for de-
ciding on delay policies for correlated aircraft trajectories,
answering the call of ATM domain for a transition to a
Trajectory Based Operations (TBO) paradigm (SESAR1
in Europe and Next Gen in the US2).
The contributions made in this paper are as follows:
• The Demand-Capacity Balance problem is formu-
lated as a multiagent Markov Decision Process (MA-
MDP). We also show that equivalently, it can be
considered as a Markov game in which interacting
agents need to reach an equilibrium. The problem
formulation takes into account the dynamics of the
real-world setting.
• All methods are evaluated in real-world cases com-
prising large number of flights in busy days above
Spain.
• We show the effectiveness of multiagent reinforce-
ment learning (MARL) methods to provide solutions
to the DCB problem.
• We show how visualizations of solutions allow to
understand the merits and limitations of methods,
proving a first level of explaining solutions and the
rationale behind these.
Our previous works [22, 31, 30], reported on the po-
tential of alternative multi-agent reinforcement learning
methods, providing initial results. The differences between
this article and our previous publications are as follows:
• In this article we provide a problem formulation as
a Markov game,
• We focus on the efficacy of a collaborative multi-
agent reinforcement learning method, in comparison
to independent reinforcement learning agents, show-
ing also the tolerance of the method to incorporate
preferences of agents, without reducing the quality
of solutions,
• The properties of the reward function proposed are
discussed in comparison to those of other rewards
used in resolving congestion problems,
• An extensive literature review is provided, showing
the exact contributions of our work,
1https://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/air/sesar_en
2https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/
• Results from extensive number of experiments are
reported in a more systematic way, providing results'
statistical analysis,
• We show how visualisations can advise on the qual-
ity of solutions, delving into the details of methods'
strengths and limitations.
The structure of this paper is as follows: Section 2
provides a specification for the DCB problem and intro-
duces terminology from the ATM domain. In section 3 we
give the related work on reinforcement learning techniques
in resolving congestion problems. Section 4 presents the
problem formulation within an MA-MDP framework and
shows that the problem can be considered as a Markov
Game. Section 5 then presents the reinforcement learn-
ing methods proposed for solving the problem. Section 6
presents the formulation of the reward function and dis-
cusses desired properties from that function. Section 7
presents evaluation cases and results. Finally, section 8
concludes the article outlining future research directions.
The article is complemented by two Appendices: The first
presents the methodology for exploiting data sources to-
wards the construction of evaluation cases, and the sec-
ond explores the capacity of the multiagent reinforcement
learning methods to incorporate into their solutions airspace
users constraints on delays.
2. Problem Specification
The current Air Traffic Management (ATM) system
leads to congestion problems, casted as demand-capacity
balance (DCB) problems, i.e. cases where imbalances re-
garding the demand of airspace use and the provided airspace
capacity do occur. With the aim of overcoming ATM sys-
tem drawbacks, different initiatives, notably SESAR in
Europe and Next Gen in the US have promoted the trans-
formation of the current ATM paradigm towards a new,
trajectory-based operations (TBO) one: The trajectory be-
comes the cornerstone upon which all the ATM capabilities
will rely on.
Flight trajectories cannot be considered in isolation
from the overall ATM system: Intertwined operational as-
pects and factors of uncertainty introduced, lead to in-
efficiencies to trajectory planning and huge inaccuracies
to assessing trajectory execution. Accounting for network
effects and their implications on the joint execution of in-
dividual flights, requires considering interactions among
trajectories, in conjunction to considering dynamic opera-
tional conditions that influence any flight.
Being able to devise methods that capture aspects of
that complexity and take the relevant information into
account, would greatly improve planning and decision-
making abilities in the ATM domain.
Towards this goal, our specific aim is to assess ground
delays that need to be imposed to planned flight trajecto-
ries before the actual operations, towards resolving DCB
3
problems well-in-advance, considering ATM system dy-
namics and network effects due to interactions among tra-
jectories.
More specifically, the DCB problem (or DCB process)
considers two important types of objects in the ATM sys-
tem: aircraft trajectories and airspace sectors. Sectors are
air volumes segregating the airspace, each defined as a
group of airblocks. Airblocks are specified by a geome-
try (the perimeter of their projection on earth) and their
lowest and highest altitudes. Airspace sectorization may
be done in different ways, depending on sectors config-
uration determining the active (open) sectors, as Fig.1
shows. Only one sector configuration can be active at a
time. Airspace sectorization changes frequently during the
day, given different operational conditions and needs. This
happens transparently for flights.
The capacity of sectors is of utmost importance: this
quantity determines the maximum number of flights flying
within a sector during any time period of specific duration
(typically, in 60' periods).
The demand for each sector is the quantity that speci-
fies the number of flights that co-occur during a time pe-
riod within a sector. The duration of any such period is
equal to the duration of the period used for defining ca-
pacity.
There are different types of measures to monitor the
demand evolution, with the most common ones being the
Hourly Entry Count and the Occupancy Count.
In this
work we consider Hourly Entry Count, as this is the one
used by the Network Manager (NM) at the pre-tactical
phase.
The Hourly Entry Count (HEC) for a given sector is
defined as the number of flights entering the sector during
a time period, referred to as an Entry Counting Period (or
simply, counting period). HEC is defined to give a picture
of the entry traffic, taken at every time step value along a
period of fixed duration: The step value defines the time
difference between two consecutive counting periods. For
example, for a 20 minutes step value and a 60 minutes
duration value, entry counts correspond to pictures taken
every 20 minutes, over a total duration of 60 minutes.
Aircraft trajectories are series of spatio-temporal points
of the generic form (longi, lati, alti, ti), denoting the lon-
gitude, latitude and altitude, respectively, of the aircraft
at a specific time point ti. Casting them into a DCB res-
olution setting, trajectories may be seen as time series of
events specifying the entry and exit 3D points, and the
entry and exit times for the sectors crossed, or the time
that the flight will fly over specific sectors. Thus, given
that each trajectory is a sequence of timed positions in
airspace, this sequence can be exploited to compute the
series of sectors that each flight crosses, together with the
entry and exit time for each of these sectors.
Specifically, let us consider a finite set of discrete air
sectors R={R1, R2, ...} segregating the airspace. As al-
ready pointed out, sectors are related to operational con-
straints associated to their capacity, whose violation re-
Figure 1: Two of the configurations of sectors in the Spanish airspace. Colours are for distinguishing between sectors. Illustrations have been
created using the V-Analytics platform [5].
sults to demand-capacity imbalances: These are cases where
DR,p > CR, where p is a counting period of pre-defined du-
ration d, DR,p is the demand for sector R during counting
period p, and CR is the capacity of the sector for any pe-
riod of duration d (equal to the counting period duration),
in which the sector is open.
Thus, a trajectory T in T is a time series of elements
of the form:
T = {(R1, entry1, exit1)....(Rm, entrym, exitm)},
(1)
where Rl, l = 1, ..., m, is a sector in the airspace and en-
try/exit are time points of entering/exiting that sector.
This information per trajectory suffices to measure the de-
mand for each of the sectors R ∈ R in the airspace, in any
counting period p. Specifically, the demand in sector R in
period p is DR,p = TR,p, i.e. the number of trajectories
in TR,p, where:
temporal interval
TR,p = {T ∈ TT = (, (R, entryt, exitt), ), and the
[entryt, exitt] overlaps with period p }.
Trajectories requiring the use of a sector R at the same
period p causing a congestion, i.e. trajectories in TR,p s.t.
DR,p > CR, are defined to be interacting trajectories for p
and R.
We assume a trajectory-based operations environment,
with an enhanced accuracy of pre-tactical flight informa-
tion provided by airlines flight plans. Pre-tactical flow
management is applied prior to the day of operations and
consists of planning and coordination activities. This oper-
ational environment is close to the one existing today, but
it requires airlines to specify their flight plans during the
pre-tactical phase, allowing the detection of hotspots based
on planned trajectories and airspace operational constraints.
While today the resolution of hotspots is done either by
the Network Manager at the pre-tactical phase, or by the
Air Traffic Controller at the tactical phase of operations,
we aim towards their resolution at the pre-tactical phase.
Resolving DCB problems at the pre-tactical phase of op-
erations implies an iterative, collaborative process among
4
stakeholders, during which flight plans submitted may change
even just before take-off: The methods presented here pave
the way to such a collaboration, through automation, but
this is not within the scope of this work.
In addition, our efforts complement research on trajec-
tory planning and accurate prediction of trajectories, as
well as efforts towards enhanced information sharing abil-
ities between stakeholders. Results from these orthogonal
to our domain areas would further enhance the DCB pro-
cess at the pre-tactical phase of operations and are out of
the scope of our current work.
In this operational context we consider an agent Ai to
be the aircraft performing a planned flight trajectory, in a
specific date and time. Thus, we consider that agents and
trajectories coincide, and we may interchangeably speak
of agents Ai, trajectories Ti, flights, or agents Ai execut-
ing trajectories Ti. Agents, as it will be specified, have
own interests and preferences, and take autonomous deci-
sions on resolving hotspots: It must be noted that agents
do not have communication and monitoring restrictions,
given that hotspots are resolved at the pre-tactical phase,
rather than during operation.
To resolve hotspots, agents have several degrees of free-
dom: They may either change their trajectory to cross sec-
tors other than the congested ones, or change the schedule
of crossing sectors in terms of changing the entry and exit
time for each of the crossed sectors.
In this paper we
consider only changing the schedule of crossing sectors by
imposing ground delays: i.e., shifting the whole trajectory
by a specific amount of time.
Now, the problem is about agents to decide on their
delays so as to execute their trajectories jointly, in an ef-
ficient and safe way, w.r.t. sectors capacities. Specifically,
in the DCB problem the goal is to:
• Resolve all demand-capacity imbalances, providing a
solution with zero hotspots, in conjunction to
• minimizing the average delay per flight (ratio of total
delay to the number of flights); so as to
• distribute delays among flights without penalising a
small number of them, and
• utilise efficiently the airspace so as to have an even
distribution of demand to sectors in all counting pe-
riods within a total period of trajectories execution
H.
To resolve a hotspot occurring in period p and sector
R, a subset of interacting trajectories in TR,p must be
delayed.
It must be noted that agents have conflicting
preferences towards resolving hotspots, since they prefer
to impose the smallest delay possible (preferably none) to
their own trajectory (i.e. at least one of them should have
a greater delay than others, else the hotspot occurs later
in time), or they may have different requirements on the
maximum delay to be imposed to their flights. In any case
they do need to execute their planned trajectories safely
and efficiently.
Clearly, imposing delays to trajectories may cause the
emergence of hotspots to another time period for the same
and/or other sectors crossed. This is due to the fact that
the sets of interacting trajectories in different periods and
sectors may change. This can be done in many differ-
ent ways when imposing delays to flights, resulting to a
dynamic setting for any of the agents. Thus, the sets of
interacting trajectories do change unpredictably for the
individual agents, according to agents' decisions and ac-
cording to the changes in sectors configurations.
Agents executing interacting trajectories and contribut-
ing to hotspots are considered to be interdependent, given
that the decision of one of them directly affects the oth-
ers. These dependencies provide a way to take advantage
of the spatial and temporal sparsity of the problem: For
instance, a flight crossing the northwest part of Spain in
the morning, will never interact in any direct manner with
a flight crossing the southeast part of the Iberian Penin-
sula at any time, or with an evening flight that crosses the
northwest part of Spain. However, a flight may indirectly
affect any other flight, due to ATM network effects.
In
addition, as mentioned above, dependencies between tra-
jectories must be dynamically updated when delays are
imposed to flights, given that trajectories that did not in-
teract prior to any delay may result to be interacting when
delays are imposed, and vice-versa.
The dynamic society of agents (A, Et) is modelled as a
dynamic coordination graph [20] with one vertex per agent
Ai in A and any edge (Ai, Aj) in Et connecting agents
with interacting trajectories in T, at time t. The set of
edges are dynamically updated when the set of interacting
pairs of trajectories changes.
Nt(Ai) denotes the neighbourhood of agent Ai in the
society, i.e. the set of agents interacting with agent Ai at
time instant t and in sector R, including also itself.
The ground delay options available in the inventory of
any agent Ai for contributing to the resolution of hotspots
may differ between agents: These, for agent Ai are in Di =
{0, 1, 2, ..., M axDelayi}. We consider that these options
may be ordered by the preference of agent Ai to any of
: Di → (cid:60). We do
them, according to the function pi
not assume that agents in A − {Ai} have any information
about pi. This represents the situation where airlines set
own options and preferences for delays, even in different
own flights, depending on operational circumstances, goals
and constraints. We expect that the order of preferences
should be decreasing from 0 to M axDelayi, although, with
a different pace/degree for different agents.
2.1. Problem statement (Multiagent DCB problem resolu-
tion
Considering any pair of interacting agents Ai and Aj
in the society (A, Et), with Aj in Nt(Ai) − {Ai}, they
must select among the sets of available options Di and Dj
respectively, so as to increase their expected payoff w.r.t.
their preferences pi and pj (thus, minimizing flights de-
lays): A solution consists of assignment of delays to flights,
such that all imbalances are resolved, resulting to zero
hotspots.
This problem specification emphasises on the following
problem aspects:
• Agents (i.e.
individual flights) need to coordinate
their strategies (i.e. chosen options to delays) to ex-
ecute their trajectories jointly with others, consid-
ering traffic and network effects, w.r.t. their prefer-
ences and operational constraints;
• Agents need to jointly explore and discover how dif-
ferent combinations of delays affect the joint perfor-
mance of their trajectories, given that the way dif-
ferent trajectories do interact is not known before-
hand: This is true, given that agents do not know in
advance (a) the interacting trajectories that emerge
due to own decisions and decisions of others, (b) the
emergence of sectors open configurations, and (c)
they do not know whether trajectories crossing sec-
tors in new/emerging airspace configurations result
to new hotspots;
• Agents' preferences and constraints on the options
available may vary depending on the trajectory per-
formed, and are kept private;
• There are multiple and interdependent hotspots that
occur in the total period H and agents have to re-
solve them jointly;
• The setting is highly dynamic given that the agents
society, the occurring hotspots and the sector config-
urations change unpredictably for individual agents.
3. Related Work
In this section we consider prior work related to (a) the
resolution of the DCB problem, (b) the use of reinforce-
ment learning techniques in resolving congestion problems
5
and computing equilibria in coordination games, and (c)
reward functions and their properties.
A comprehensive review of mathematical modelling and
various formulations of demand-capacity imbalance prob-
lem is presented in [3]. This work reviews methods ad-
dressing congestions due to excess of the airport arrival
and departure capacities, or of the airspace sector capac-
ity. While most of early work refers to the simplest models,
which do not consider airspace sectors, a category of meth-
ods addressing the Air Traffic Flow Management Prob-
lem attempts to solve real situations, also considering the
airspace sector capacity. Additionally, while ground and
en-route delays are important measures studied towards
resolving congestions, methods addressing the Air Traffic
Flow Management Rerouting Problem consider also the
case where the flights can be diverted to alternative routes.
As the authors point out, the problem becomes more re-
alistic when changes in capacity are considered, which has
led to incorporating stochastic methodologies for possible
unforeseen changes. These methods focus mostly on the
tactical phase of operations, rather on the pre-tactical.
More recent work has shown the importance and po-
tential of multiagent reinforcement learning methods to
address congestion problems in Air Traffic Management
at the tactical level [2][1][10][11][35]. This provides a shift
from the current ATM paradigm, which rely on a cen-
tralized, hierarchical process, where decisions are based
on flow projections ranging from one to six hours, result-
ing to slow reactions to developing conditions, potentially
causing minor local delays to cascade into large regional
congestion.
The potential of reinforcement learning methods (ei-
ther centralized or multiagent methods) to congestion prob-
lems, other than those in the aviation domain (e.g.
to
urban traffic) has received much attention in the recent
years, with the most challenging issue being the coor-
dination among agents, so as the solutions to increase
agents individual payoff, in conjunction to increasing the
whole system utility. Towards this target there are several
proposals, among which the use of coordination graphs
[23], where agents coordinate their actions only with those
whose tasks somehow interact.
The use of coordination graphs, where agents connected
in pairs have to decide on joint policies, connects the com-
putation of joint policies to computing equilibria in Markov
games between interacting agents. Towards this goal, stud-
ies (e.g.[25][32][38]), have shown that Q-learners are com-
petent to learners using for instance WoLF [8], Fictitious
Play [18], Highest Cumulative Reward -based [29] models.
Based on these conclusions, going beyond the state of the
art and providing evidence on the potential of collabora-
tive reinforcement learning methods to compute social con-
ventions in complex settings, the work in [36] proposes so-
cial Q-learning methods, according to which agents inter-
act with all of their acquaintances, considering their tasks
in their social contexts, w.r.t.
operational constraints.
This happens in contrast to other approaches where agents
learn by iteratively interacting with a single opponent from
the population [32][28], or by playing repeatedly with ran-
domly chosen neighbours [4].
Our work goes beyond state of the art methods in re-
solving congestion problems in any domain, where either
a centralized agent learns a global policy, or multiple inde-
pendent (i.e. non-interacting) Q-learners learn their poli-
cies, considering the other agents as part of their envi-
ronment. Exceptions to this is the method proposed in
[23], where instead of collaborative reinforcement learning
methods, the max-plus algorithm has been used, and the
method proposed in [34], where a model for incorporat-
ing multiple deep reinforcement learns is proposed. The
multiagent reinforcement learning methods that this pa-
per proposes, can be seen as a continuation of the effort
reported in [36]: Indeed, we propose multiagent Q-learning
methods in which each agent interacts with all its neigh-
bours in the coordination graph, towards computing joint
policies to resolve DCB problems. We show through exper-
imentation that these methods are efficient to converging
into agents joint policies, even when the structure of the
coordination graph changes, due to the emergence of new
pairs of interacting agents. Also, experiments with col-
laborative methods provide evidence, in agreement with
the results in [36], that agents through collaboration pro-
vide solutions of better quality than methods where agents
learn in isolation from others.
It is true that the choice of the reward function is crit-
ical to the efficiency and effectiveness of the multiagent
reinforcement learning method used: Indeed, previous ef-
forts study the use of reward functions (e.g. [1][10][11][12][26])
and argue on desirable properties of these functions (i.e.
factoredness and learnability), using a specific type of re-
inforcement learners: Independent learners. Difference re-
wards have been utilized in multiagent congestion prob-
lems [12] and have repeatedly demonstrated to help with
credit assignment by shaping the global reward, to reward
agents contributing to the system's performance and pun-
ish agents that do not. Difference rewards have also been
used in the Air Traffic Management domain [2]. While
these have been shown to satisfy desirable properties when
independent learners are used, these are computationally
demanding, thus only approximations are used, while their
suitability in collaborative settings, is a research aspect
that should be thoroughly investigated: This is deemed
important in settings where phenomena emerge due to
agents joined action. In this work we propose a local re-
ward function that is shaped to estimate the cost incurred
to an agent due to its participation in hotspots and due to
its own delay. The properties of this reward function are
thoroughly discussed in section 6.
Finally, and in contrast to the rich literature and var-
ious formulations of demand-capacity balance problem in
the context of the Air Traffic Flow Management prob-
lem (among which those mentioned above) at the tactical
phase (i.e. during operation), we consider the DCB prob-
lem at the pre-tactical phase. Thus, conflicts resolved by
6
air traffic controllers (ATC) during the tactical phase are
not within the scope of our work. This, in conjunction
to considering trajectories as the main objects regulated,
supports moving to collaborative decision making for the
planning of trajectories, resolving Air Traffic Flow Man-
agement problems at the pre-tactical phase, also consider-
ing real-world phenomena due to dynamic effects emerging
by means of trajectory interactions, and dynamic changes
in the airspace sectors configurations, including changes in
sectors capacities.
4. Multiagent DCB Policy Search Problem Formu-
lation
According to the problem specification stated above,
and using the model of multiagent MDP framework [19],
we formulate the multiagent DCB policy search problem
as an MDP comprising the following constituents:
• A time horizon H and a time step t = t0, t1, t2, t3, ..., tmax,
where tmax − t0 = H.
• The dynamic society of agents (A, Et) at time t, as
described above.
• A set of agent states: A local state per agent Ai at
time t, comprises state variables that correspond to
(a) the delay imposed to the trajectory Ti executed
by Ai, ranging to Di = 0, , M axDelayi, and (b) the
number of hotspots in which Ai is involved in. Such
a local state is denoted by st
Ag
of a set of agents Ag at time t is the tuple of all
agents in Ag local states. A global (joint) state st
at time t is the tuple of all agents' local states. The
set of all joint states for any subset Ag of agents is
denoted StateAg, and the set of joint society states
is denoted by State.
i. The joint state st
• The set of agent strategies: A local strategy for agent
Ai at time t, denoted by strt
is the delay for Ai
i
at that specific time point. This delay results from
agents decisions (actions) at any time point: At each
time point until take-off the agent has to take a bi-
nary decision. It may either add to its total delay
a unit of time, or not. The joint strategy of a sub-
set of agents Ag of A at time t (e.g. of Nt(Ai)),
is a tuple of local strategies, denoted by strt
Ag (e.g.
strt
Nt(Ai)). The joint strategy for all agents A at
any time instant t is denoted strt. The set of all
joint strategies for any subset Ag of A is denoted
StrategyAg, and the set of joint society strategies is
denoted by Strategy.
• The state transition function Tr gives the transition
to the joint state st+1 based on the joint strategy
strt taken in joint state st. Formally:
T r : State × Strategy → State,
(2)
(a)
(b)
Figure 2: Payoff matrices for 2X2 games.
It must be noticed that the state transition per agent
is stochastic, given that no agent has a global view
of the society, of the decisions of others, and/or of
changing sector configurations, while its neighbour-
hood gets updated. Thus, no agent can predict how
the joint state can be affected in the next time step.
Thus, from the point of view of agent Ai this tran-
sition function is actually:
T r : StateAi × StrategyAi × StateAi → [0, 1],
st
denoting the transition probability p(st+1
i, strt
i).
• The local reward of an agent Ai, denoted Rwdi, is the
reward that the agent gets in a specific state at time
t. The joint reward, denoted by RwdAg for a set of
agents Ag specifies the reward received by agents in
Ag by executing their trajectories according to their
joint strategy, in a joint state. Further details on the
reward function are provided in section 6.
(3)
i
• A (local) policy of an agent Ai is a function πi
:
StateAi → StrategyAi that returns local strategies
for any given local state, for agent Ai to execute its
trajectory.
The objective for any agent in the society is to find an
i that maximizes the expected discounted
optimal policy π∗
future return:
V ∗
i (s) = maxπ∗
i
E[
∞(cid:88)
t=1
γt−1Rwdi(st
i, π∗
i))s = s1
i ]
i (st
(4)
for each state st
i for Ai, given the initial state s1
i . The
discount factor γ ranges in [0,1].
This model assumes the Markov property, assuming
also that rewards and transition probabilities are indepen-
dent of time. Thus, the state next to state s given a (joint)
strategy is denoted by s' and it is independent of time.
Subsequently, subscripts and superscripts are avoided in
cases where it is clear where a state or strategy refers to.
The problem is a specific instance of the problem spec-
ified in [36], where each agent has several options (minutes
of delay in our case) to execute a single task (trajectory in
this case), and tasks interact among themselves given some
operational constraints. As proposed there, the problem
can be formulated as a Markov game: Let us consider a
7
coordination graph with two agents executing interacting
trajectories (i.e. trajectories crossing the same sector) and
causing a hotspot. Let us also assume that each agent
has two delay options: a low-delay (Ld) and a high-delay
(Hd). Assuming, without loss of generality, that one of
the agents should have a Hd strategy to resolve the DCB
problem (otherwise either there would be no hotspot, or
the hotspot occurs later in time), agents are assumed to
play a game of the form shown in Fig.2(a): All entries in
this matrix are different than zero; x, x, y, y can be con-
sidered positive integers (in case the hotspot is resolved);
u, v, u, v can be negative integers (in case agents do par-
ticipate in the hotspot). As it can be noticed, this can be a
coordination game, with two Nash equilibria, namely the
joint options providing payoffs (x, y) or (x, y). However,
this is not necessarily a symmetric game, considering that
the payoff incorporates agents preferences and delay costs.
The game can be extended to multiple strategies and/or
agents executing interacting trajectories.
Given that the information concerning the effects of
agents joint decision is not known to any agent in the so-
ciety, and given that agents do not know about the pay-
offs of other agents when choosing specific delay strategies,
agents need to learn about the structure of the game to be
played, and they have to coordinate with others, as well.
The information that an agent has about a 2 × 2 game is
as shown in Fig.2(b). Question marks indicate the missing
information: For instance, none of the two agents knows
whether a strategy is effective in resolving hotspots, nor
the payoffs from joint strategies. Our goal is any pair of
interacting agents Ak, Al in the society to converge to a
joint delay strategy, so as to resolve hotspots that occur,
jointly with all society members.
5. MARL Algorithms
We now describe the proposed MARL methods to deal
with the multiagent DCB policy search problem. Q-functions,
or action-value functions, represent the future discounted
reward for a state s when acting with a specific strategy str
for that state and behaving optimally from then on [33].
The optimal policy for any agent Ai in state s is the one
maximizing the expected future discounted reward, i.e.
π∗(s) = argmaxstrQ(s, str).
(5)
In the next paragraphs we describe multiagent rein-
forcement learning approaches, considering that agents do
not know the transition model, and interact concurrently
with all their neighbours in the society.
learning agents in the literature for resolving congestion
problems.
The independent Q-learning variant proposed in [20]
decomposes the global Q-function into a linear combination
of local agent-dependent Q-functions:
A(cid:88)
Q(s, str) =
Qi(si, stri)
(6)
i=1
Each local value, Qi, for agent Ai is calculated according
to the local state, si, and the local strategy, stri. The local
value Qi is updated according to the temporal-difference
error, as follows:
Qi(si, stri) = Qi(si, stri) + α[Rwdi(si, stri) +
i, str) − Qi(si, stri)]
+γmaxstrQi(s(cid:48)
(7)
It must be noted that instead of the global reward Rwd(s, str)
used in [20], we use the reward Rwdi received by the agent
Ai, taking into account only the local state and local strat-
egy of that agent. Thus, this method is in contrast to the
approach of Coordinated Reinforcement Learning model
proposed in [20], since that model needs agents to know
the maximizing joint action in the next state, the associ-
ated maximal expected future return, and needs to esti-
mate the Q-value in the global state.
5.2. Edge Based Collaborative Reinforcement Learners (Ed-
MARL)
The Edge Based Collaborative Reinforcement Learn-
ing (Ed-MARL) is a variant of the Edge Based update
sparse cooperative Q-learning method proposed in [21].
Given two neighbour agents Ai and Aj connected by an
edge in the coordination graph (i.e. representing interact-
ing flights), the Q-function for these agents is denoted as
Qij(sij, strij), where sij, with abuse of notation, denotes
the joint state related to the agents Ai and Aj, and strij
denotes the joint strategy for these two agents.
Half the sum of all edge-specific Q-functions defines the
global Q-function, i.e.
Q(s, str) =
1
2
(cid:88)
i,j∈E
Qij(sij, strij)
(8)
The Q-learning update rule in this case is given by the
following equation:
(cid:20)
Qij(sij, strij) = (1 − α)Qij(sij, strij) +
+α
ri
N (Ai) +
rj
N (Aj) + γQij(s(cid:48)
ij, str∗
ij)
(9)
(cid:21)
5.1. Independent Reinforcement Learners (IRL)
In the Independent Reinforcement Learners (IRL) frame-
work, each agent learns its own policy independently from
the others and treats other agents as part of the envi-
ronment. This is the main paradigm for reinforcement
where t is the time instant that the agents reach the joint
state sij, and str∗
ij in [21] is the best joint strategy for
agents Ai and Aj for the joint state s(cid:48)
ij.
In our method, the strategy str∗
ij comprises the best
strategy known by agents for the occurring state and it is
depicted directly from the agent's value function, Qi(s, str),
8
which is calculated as the summation of local Qij values
in its neighbourhood:
For an agent Ai, the degree of factoredness between the
rewards Rwdi, and Rwd, at joint state s is defined as:
((cid:80)
(10)
(11)
FRwdi =
s(cid:48) u[(Rwdi(s) − Rwdi(s(cid:48)))(Rwd(s) − Rwd(s(cid:48)))])
((cid:80)
s(cid:48) 1)
str∗ = argmaxstrQi(s, str)
(cid:88)
Aj∈N (Ai)
Qi(s, stri) =
Qij(sij, strij)
where, sij is the agents joined state having s as one of
its components. This approximates the best strategy in
each state, which is improved as the agents learn. We ex-
perimentally found out that this approximation method
offers comparable quality and considerable improvement
in methods computational efficiency than using compu-
tationally/communication intensive approximation meth-
ods, such as the max-sum method used in [21]. Succinctly,
according to the Ed-MARL approach agents update Q-
values by propagating edge-specific temporal differences to
their neighbouring agents, and only along the correspond-
ing edges, sharing their local rewards with their neigh-
bours.
The main difference between the collaborative Ed-MARL
and the IRL method, is that while IRL agents consider
own states and strategies without sharing any information
with others (i.e. treating others as noise), the collabora-
tive approach assumes interacting agents, supporting them
to explore joint policies, by means of computing joint Q-
values.
6. Reward Function
In many multiagent reinforcement learning problems,
the task of determining the reward function in order to
produce good performance is quite demanding. The re-
ward function can be approximated in cases where training
examples provide ground truth, e.g. via inverse reinforce-
ment learning methods, which is not the case for the DCB
problem considered in this work (although it happens in
other instances of the problem, as in [7]). The utilization
of a reward that facilitates coordination is crucial to the
majority of multiagent problems, especially to learning in
dynamic and complex environments where the actions of
individual agents affect the local and global agents payoff.
6.1. Properties of reward functions
Considering a multiagent system where (a) each agent
Ai is taking actions to maximize its local reward Rwdi,
and (b) the performance of the full system is measured
by the global reward Rwd; and assuming that the system
joint state s is decomposed into a component that depends
on the state of agent Ai, denoted by si, and a component
that does not depend on the state of agent Ai, denoted
by s−i, we aim to produce rewards that facilitate learning
joint strategies efficiently. In doing so, we may consider
two properties of the reward function, already proposed in
[1]:
The first property, called factoredness, concerns align-
ing the individual agent rewards with the global reward.
9
(12)
where the states s and s only differ in the states of agent
Ai, and u[x] is the unit step function, equal to 1 if x > 0.
Intuitively, the degree of factoredness gives the percentage
of states in which the action of agent Ai has the same
impact on Rwdi and Rwd.
The second property, called learnability, measures the
dependence of the reward on the actions of a particular
agent as opposed to all the other agents. The point learn-
ability of reward Rwdi between state s and s is defined as
the ratio of the change in Rwdi due to a change in the
state of agent Ai over the change in Rwdi due to a change
in the states of other agents:
L(Rwdi, s, s(cid:48)) =
(cid:107) Rwdi(s) − Rwdi(s − si + s(cid:48)
(cid:107) Rwdi(s) − Rwdi(s(cid:48) − s(cid:48)
i + si) (cid:107) (13)
where, addition and subtraction operators remove or
i) (cid:107)
add components into states.
The learnability of a reward Rwdi is then given by:
(cid:80)
s(cid:48) L(Rwdi, s, s(cid:48))
((cid:80)
s(cid:48) 1)
L(Rwdi, s) =
(14)
Intuitively, the higher the learnability, the more Rwdi de-
pends on the move of agent Ai, i.e., the better the associ-
ated signal-to-noise ratio for Ai.
6.2. The proposed reward function
For the DCB problem we have formulated the individ-
ual delay reward Rwdi: For an agent Ai in A this reward
depends on the participation (contribution) of that agent
in hotspots occurring while executing its trajectory, ac-
cording to its strategy strt
i, i.e. according to its
decided delay. Formally:
i in state st
Rwdi(st
i, strt
i) = C(st
i, strt
i) − λ ∗ DC(strt
i)
(15)
where,
• C(st
i, and
• DC(strt
i, strt
i) is a cost function that depends on the
participation of Ai in hotspots, given the strategy
strt
i) is a function of agents ground delay cost
given by that strategy.
The (user-defined) parameter λ balances between the cost
the participation in hotspots implies, and the cost of the
ground delay imposed towards. The goal is for any agent
to participate in zero hotspots with the minimum possible
delay.
Actually, both functions C(st
i) rep-
resent delay costs at the pre-tactical phase of operations.
i) and DC(strt
i, strt
i, strt
We have chosen C(st
i) to depend on the total duration
of the period in which agents fly over congested sectors:
This gives a measure of the severity of the imbalances in
which agent Ai contributes, and it is equal to the maxi-
mum delay that it may get if it is the sole agent causing
the congestion. This is multiplied by 81 which is the aver-
age strategic delay cost per minute (in Euros) in Europe
when 92% of the flights do not have delays [9]. If there is
not any congestion, then this is a positive constant that
represents the reward agents get by not participating in
any hotspot. Overall, the actual form of C(st
i) is as
follows:
i, strt
(cid:26) −T DC × 81
,
P ositiveReward ,
C(st
i, strt
i) =
if T DC > 0
if T DC = 0
(16)
where, TDC is the total duration for agent Ai in congested
sectors. The first case holds when there are hotspots in
which the agent participates (thus, the total duration in
hotspots, TDC, is greater than 0), while the second case
holds when agents do not participate in hotspots.
The DC(strt
i) component of the reward function cor-
responds to the strategic delay cost when flights delay at
gate. In our implementation, this depends solely on the
minutes of delay and the aircraft type, as specified in [9].
As such, the actual form of this function is as follows:
DC(strt
i) = StrategicDelayCost(strt
i, Aircraf t(Ai))
(17)
where strt
i is the delay imposed to the agent Ai and Strate-
gicDelayCost is a function that returns the strategic delay
cost given the aircraft type of agent Ai and its delay. In the
general case the function DC(strt
i) could be taking into ac-
count additional airline-specific strategic policies and con-
siderations regarding flight delays.
Coming to the properties of the individual delay reward
function, and specifically to its factoredness, the impact
Rwdi has on the global reward Rwd, given as the summa-
tion of individual agents rewards, depends on the effect
that the strategy of Ai has on the states of other agents.
Specifically, we may distinguish the following cases: (a)
For agents that do not interact with Ai, i.e.
for agents
with which Ai does not co-occur in hotspots, the action
of Ai has not any direct effect to their reward (it may af-
fect their reward, but only indirectly via the strategy of
other agents). Specifically, for these agents, neither the
C nor the DC part of their reward changes due to the
action of Ai. (b) For agents in N (Ai) − Ai with whom
Ai interacts, and in case these agents do not change their
strategy, their reward changes only by changing Ai's strat-
egy. In this case, the C part of their reward may change
due to a possible change in occurring hotspots, and the
DC part changes due to the change of Ai delay, only. (c)
For agents in N (Ai) − Ai with whom Ai interacts, and in
case these agents do change their strategy synchronously
to Ai, then the strategy of Ai impacts the rewards of these
agents, given that rewards consider the hotspots occurring
due to agents joint action (C part of the reward). On the
10
other hand, while each agent considers the cost incurred
due to its own strategy (DC part of the reward) only, the
total reward is aligned with individual agents rewards.
As a conclusion, the individual delay reward has a high
degree of factoredness given that rewards of agents in the
society are affected by the strategies of others, and the
global reward is aligned with individual agents rewards.
As far as learnability is concerned, in the DCB domain, as
in other domains where the joint strategy of agents is of
importance, the reward received by the agent Ai depends
on the joint strategy of all agents: The resulting hotspots
emerge as an effect of agents joint strategy, even if agents
did not interact directly with Ai. Thus, the ratio of the
change in Rwdi due to a change in the state of agent Ai,
over the change in Rwdi due to a change in the states of
other agents, may not be always proportional to the effec-
tiveness of agents strategy, as it depends on the strategies
of the other agents.
7. Experimental Results
7.1. Description of evaluation cases
To evaluate the proposed MARL methods, we have
constructed evaluation cases of varying difficulty. Ap-
pendix A describes the general procedure we follow for
constructing an evaluation case. Although the difficulty
of DCB problems cannot be determined in a rigorous way,
we did this empirically, by inspecting problem parame-
ters (explained subsequently) in conjunction to the aver-
age delay per flight according to the delays imposed by the
Network Management organization (NM). While the NM
specifies the delay to be imposed to each flight towards
resolving demand-capacity imbalances, this is not always
a DCB problem solution: Hotspots do occur even if de-
lays are imposed to flights. This shows the tolerance of
the system, as well its reliance to resolving imbalances in
the tactical phase of operations, as opposed to resolving
hotspots in the pre-tactical phase, according to our aim.
Having said that, it is important to point out that delays
imposed by the NM cannot be compared in a direct way
to solutions provided by the proposed methods, given that
in the former case many decisions are to be taken at the
tactical phase. However, comparison shows the merits of
MARL methods to solve DCB problems.
Each evaluation case corresponds to a specific day in
2016, above Spain, and its difficulty has been determined
by means of the number of flights involved, the average
number of interacting flights per flight (which is translated
to the average degree for each agent in the coordination
graph, at starting time t0), the maximum delay imposed
to flights for that day to resolve DCB problems according
to the NM, the average delay per flight for all flights ac-
cording to NM, and the number of hotspots in relation to
the number of flights participating in these hotspots, at
starting time t0.
Table 1 presents the different cases, named by the day
to which they correspond. Columns specify the following:
Evaluation # flights
Case ID
Aug4
Aug13
Jul2
Jul12
Sep3
5544
6000
5572
5408
5788
6.41(17-20)
10.89(22-105)
6.39(29-107)
5.84(21-95)
5.24(18-77)
66
147
80
95
61
0.383
1.152
1.663
0.95
0.732
Table 1: Description of the evaluation cases used in our experimental study.
Average Degree in MaxDelay Average # flights
Coordination Graph
(non-zero min/max)
Delay
with
delay
146
415
498
254
280
# hotspots
(participating)
(flights)
33 (853)
53 (1460)
29 (778)
28 (820)
26 (783)
• Number of flights: The number of flights for that
particular day above Spain.
• Average Degree in Coordination Graph (min/max):
This indicates in average the traffic (i.e. the num-
ber of interacting flights) experienced by each of the
agents (flights) in each evaluation case at starting
time t0. This number changes while agents decide
on their strategies. It is expected that as the coordi-
nation graph becomes denser, i.e. as the average de-
gree of nodes in the coordination graph increases, the
problem becomes more computationally demanding.
Min/Max indicates the minimum and the maximum
degree reported in the coordination graph per eval-
uation case at starting time t0, ignoring zeros.
• MaxDelay: This is the maximum delay imposed to
any flight according to the NM for that particular
day, and we use this in our experiments as the maxi-
mum delay that can be imposed to any flight for the
corresponding case.
• Average Delay: This is the average delay per flight
reported by the NM for that particular day, ignoring
all delays with less than 4 min (considered as no
delay, according to experts advise).
• Number of flights with delay: This is the number of
flights with delays more than 4 min, due to demand-
capacity imbalances, as reported by NM for that
particular day. Delays due to other reasons (e.g.
weather conditions) are ignored.
• Max number of hotspots (number of flights): It indi-
cates the number of hotspots of each individual case
at starting time t0, together (in parenthesis) with the
number of flights that participate in these hotspots
(each flight may participate in multiple hotspots).
As far as the difficulty of cases is concerned, it turns out
that there are many other crucial features that determine
the difficulty of each case, such as the duration of flights in
hotspots, the specific excess on capacity for these hotspots,
the number of consecutive counting periods in which the
demand exceeds the capacity of a sector etc. We have
not determined the exact features (this is out of scope of
this work), but after extensive experimentation, we can
11
Figure 3: NM solution for July 2: (Left) Flight delays are repre-
sented by circles positioned at the sector centroids. The sizes are
proportional to the delay durations. (Right) The space-time cubes
show the spatio-temporal distribution of the delays. The time axis
is oriented upwards, towards the end of the day.
conclude that the degree of difficulty is proportional to
the average delay per flight that should be imposed, and
to the ratio of flights with delay to the flights participating
in hotspots at time t0. Specifically, it can be assessed as
follows:
DegreeOf Dif f iculty =
AverageDelayP erF light ∗ N umberOf F lightsW ithDelay
F lightsP artcipatingInHotspots
(18)
Based on this rule the most difficult case among our
cases in Table 1 is the case Jul2. To understand the dif-
ficulty of the Jul2 case we need to delve into the visu-
alizations shown in Fig.3. Visual exploration of to DCB
cases and solutions, provide insights about the situations
occurring and the rationale behind imposed delays. We
have used the V-Analytics tool [5] to produce maps and
space-time cubes that show the spatio-temporal distribu-
tions of the delays. Delays are represented by circles and
the sizes are proportional to the delay duration. The spa-
tial positions of the cycles are the positions of the sector
centroids, depicting delays per sector. The temporal axis
in the cubes goes from the bottom to the top.
The maps show that the NM imposes increased de-
lays on the east (areas of Barcelona, Canary Islands, and
Valencia) and on the south (Seville and Granada), while
delays on the northwest of Spain, compared to the others,
are not that many or large. Space-time cubes show that
delays are distributed during the day, except in the north-
• Learning curves: the progress of the average delay
per flight as agents learn. As algorithms converge to
solutions, the number of hotspots should be reduced
and eventually reach to zero, signifying the computa-
tion of a solution, while the average delay should be
reduced. Therefore, the speed of reaching that point
(zero hotspots) and the round at which methods sta-
bilize3 the agents joint policy, signify the computa-
tional efficiency of the method to reach solutions. It
must be noted that, in case that a method cannot
reach a solution for a specific case, it may converge
to a joint policy that do not resolve all hotspots.
• Distribution of delays to flights: histograms showing
the number of flights in discrete time intervals, such
as 5-9 minutes of delay, 10-29 minutes of delay, 30-59
minutes of delay, etc., up to the M axDelay specified
per case.
Results reported are averages of results computed by
20 independent experiments per case and method. Specif-
ically, we report results from two methods: Independent
(IRL), and Collaborative (Ed-MARL) Reinforcement Learn-
ing. Finally, and in order to show the tolerance of the
methods in specific delay preferences per flight, we ex-
plore their potential to resolve DCB problems by consid-
ering constraints on the M axDelay imposed to specific
flights. In other words, these are cases where some of the
flights impose a constraint to their maximum delay, much
less than the M axDelay imposed to the other flights (Ap-
pendix B).
The proposed MARL methods have been executed for
15000 rounds (episodes) following an -greedy exploration-
exploitation strategy starting from probability 0.9, which
every 120 rounds is diminished by the value of 0.01. At
episode 10800 the probability becomes 0.001 and is hence-
forth considered zero. Then, a pure exploitation phase
starts. In addition to the above, and in order to enhance
the efficiency of the proposed methods, we have considered
a deterministic rule for the flights that do not participate
in any hotspot (i.e. agents with no neighbours): These
are set to have delay equal to 0. It must be pointed out
that any of these flights may participate in hotspots in
any past/future state, due to the joint strategies of the
other agents. In any such case the corresponding agents
participate in the multiagent RL process.
Fig.5 illustrates the learning curves obtained by the
training procedure in terms of the average delay, where we
show the mean delay and its standard deviation at every
episode of the learning process. Both methods converge
effectively after a period of exploration. In most case their
performance is remarkable since they reach (almost) al-
ways the same solution with a low variability. However,
3I.e. remaining to zero hotspots and to a specific value for flights
average delay -without oscillating between non-solutions and/or so-
lutions, and/or different average delay values.
12
Figure 4: (upper) A 3D view shows the 3D shapes of the sectors
whose capacities were exceeded with the NM solution provided for
Jul2. The colouring from yellow to red represents the maximal ca-
pacity excess.
(lower) Demand evolution for the most demanded
sector in northwest Spain for Jul2, prior to applying any delay. The
capacity of this highly-demanded sector is 34 (indicated with the
horizontal red line).
west of Spain where they increase slightly by the end of
the day.
Concerning the details of the problem, we have ex-
tracted the sectors capacity excess events from the time
series of the sector demand differences to the capacities.
Fig.4 shows the 3D shapes of the sectors whose capaci-
ties were exceeded with the NM solution provided. The
red colour of the north-west sector shows the large de-
mand compared to the capacity for this sector. This is
further shown in the histogram in Fig.4 The histogram
shows the demand evolution per counting period for the
highly-congested sector in the initial problem state (i.e.
prior to imposing any delay).
Therefore, while there is an excess of capacity for many
sectors, this happens at a large degree in the northwest
part of Spain for Jul2: As the evolution of demand shows
for this highly-demanded sector (Fig.4), the excess of ca-
pacity is high, especially in consecutive periods at the
second-half of the day. This means that while delays may
resolve demand-capacity imbalances for specific periods,
imbalances in adjacent periods may become more severe.
7.2. Evaluation Results
In our experimental study we have evaluated our meth-
ods using the following metrics:
• Number of flights with delay: also mentioned as reg-
ulated flights.
• Average delay per flight: the ratio of total delay to
the number of flights ignoring delays less than 4 min-
utes.
Figure 5: The learning curves of the proposed methods per evaluation case, showing how agents manage to learn joint policies to resolve
DCB problems, resulting to 0 hotspots, while reducing the average delay per flight. The x-axis corresponds to the learning episodes, while
the y-axis to the average delay per flight.
13
the Ed-MARL approach offers more qualitative solutions
with less average delay per flight. The IRL method man-
ages to converge much faster (earlier than episode 10000)
since it is simpler, without any overhead due to the col-
laboration among agents. However, it should be noticed
that convergence does not imply solving the problem. A
method may converge to a joint policy, imposing delays to
flights, which may not resolve all hotspots. This is not the
case for the methods, which resolve all imbalances, in all
evaluation cases.
Delving into the quality of results, Fig.6 shows the aver-
age delay per flight (Fig.6(a)) and the number of regulated
flights (Fig.6(b)) reported by each method. In particular,
Fig.6(a) provides the average delay (y-axis) per flight on
every evaluation case (x-axis). For comparative purposes,
we show also the average delay reported by the NM. Eval-
uation cases are ordered according to the average delay
per flight reported by NM in increasing order (green bar).
As it can be observed, the average delay per flight re-
ported by MARL methods does not increase consistently
to the average delay per flight reported by NM. This dif-
ference with the NM reflects the shift of paradigm MARL
methods provide. While the NM imposes delays to flights
in a first come first regulated basis, MARL methods reg-
ulate flights jointly, so as to reach a solution that is of
best interest to all agents. Among the MARL methods,
the Ed-MARL (blue bar) is consistently better than the
IRL method except for the Sep3 case where both meth-
ods achieve similar results in terms of average delay. We
can also notice that the NM solution provides lower av-
erage delay per flight in every evaluation case except for
Jul12. However, as already pointed out, delays imposed
by the NM do not resolve all the demand-capacity imbal-
ances. For instance, the NM delays resolve only 2 hotspot
occurrences out of 33 in Aug4 scenario. Regarding the
number of flights to which our methods impose delays
(regulated), as shown in Fig.6(b), the Ed-MARL method
manages to provide solutions with consistently less regu-
lated flights than the IRL approach. Again, the number
of regulated flights reported by the NM is lower than the
flights regulated by the proposed methods (except for the
Jul2 and Jul12 cases), but they do not manage to resolve
all the imbalances. Looking at the results, we can con-
clude that the Ed-MARL collaborative method provides
the most promising results. Visualizations of their solu-
tions provide more evidence on their quality and on the
rationale behind agents strategies.
We further present in Fig.7 the results of both MARL
methods using box plots as calculated by executing 20 in-
dependent experiments at every evaluation case. The left
diagram Fig.7(a) shows the average delay per flight and
the right diagram Fig.7(b) the number of regulated flights.
Moreover, in an attempt to gain a clearer picture of the
performance of our methods, we provide in Tables 2, 3
several statistical measures calculated by 20 experiments:
mean value (Avg), standard deviation (Std), median and
the p-value of test analysis, respectively. The last statis-
tic, p-value, refers to the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test
that performs a test for normal distribution of data. The
greater this value, the most evidence to accept the null
hypothesis, i.e.
that data follow a normal distribution,
and to consider the obtained experimental results more
statistically significant and representative. From these re-
sults we can see the small variability of two evaluation
measurements, as well as the high p-values. Only in one
case (Jul12) the obtained average delays of the Ed-MARL
method gave a small p-value (0.016). However, looking
carefully in Table 2, its standard deviation (Std) is very
small (0.009) that indicates almost constant behavior.
Results can be further explained by the conjunction of
the following facts:
• The collaborative Ed-MARL method guide agents to
form joint policies within their neighbours by shar-
ing their local rewards via edges in the coordination
graph.
• Any agent using the IRL method does not have the
capability to shape joint strategies with peers via
sharing rewards, and does not affect in any direct
way the Q-values learnt by other agents.
Furthermore, Fig.8 provides the distribution of delays
to flights reported by both MARL methods and the NM,
in all evaluation cases. Although it seems that the NM
avoids imposing large delays on flights, we need to recall
that the NM delays do not provide solutions to the DCB
problems. The Ed-MARL method ends up in giving de-
lays to fewer flights, while both methods reduce drastically
the number of regulated flights as moving from small to
large delay intervals. A last remark is about the increased
number of flights with large delays in three of the cases
(Aug4, Sep3, Jul2). Using appropriate visualizations that
show distribution of delays in space and time we can delve
into the details of each case and offer further advise to
choosing solutions, explaining the rationale behind meth-
ods solutions. We discuss the solution for the most difficult
case: Jul2.
Figs. 9 and 10 present spatial and spatio-temporal dis-
tribution of delays imposed by MARL methods, superim-
posed to NM delays. In particular, Fig.9 presents the so-
lution from the Ed-MARL method, while Fig.10 presents
the solution from the IRL method. The maps show that,
compared to the NM, the methods reduce the delays on
the east (areas of Barcelona, Canary Islands, and Valencia)
and on the south (Seville and Granada) but increase the
delays on the northwest of Spain. Space-time cubes also
show that MARL methods perform notably better in the
first half of the day. In all areas except the northwest of
Spain they also perform well in the second half of the day.
The delays in the northwest area significantly increase by
the end of the day according to both MARL methods.
We need to recall that extracting the sectors capacity
excess events from the time series of the sector demand,
we observed an excess of capacity for many sectors, which
14
Figure 6: Comparative results in bar charts: (a) Average delays per flight and (b) Number of flights with delays from: Ed-MARL (blue bar),
IRL (red bar), NM (green bar). The x-axis shows evaluation cases that have been sorted according to NM solutions average delay per flight.
Figure 7: Comparative results of (a) average delays and (b) number of regulated flights, presented in box plots for Ed-MARL and IRL
methods per evaluation case.
Table 2: Statistical measurements of average delays obtained by 20 intependent experiments.
Evaluation Case ID
Aug4
Sep3
Jul12
Aug13
Jul2
Avg
0.868
0.895
0.112
1.266
1.729
Ed-MARL
IRL
Std Median P-Value Avg
0.049
1.074
0.905
0.063
0.369
0.006
1.516
0.049
0.050
1.802
0.875
0.890
0.110
1.275
1.730
0.443
0.794
0.018
0.952
0.556
Std Median P-Value
0.042
0.042
0.017
0.062
0.037
1.070
0.890
0.370
1.515
1.805
0.691
0.222
0.726
0.996
0.480
Table 3: Statistical measurements of number of regulated flights obtained by 20 intependent experiments.
Evaluation Case ID
Aug4
Sep3
Jul12
Aug13
Jul2
Avg
219.4
202.7
70.42
482.1
454.2
Ed-MARL
IRL
Std Median P-Value Avg
374.7
20.1
350.0
18.2
4.0
221.1
639.9
15.8
9.8
463.4
216.5
195.0
71.0
481.0
452.0
0.723
0.275
0.739
1.000
0.694
Std Median P-Value
14.3
12.4
6.3
13.1
9.4
0.722
0.582
0.787
0.963
0.645
376.5
351.0
223.0
640.5
466.0
15
Figure 8: The distribution of delays to flights per evaluation case. The x-axis indicates the delay imposed while the y-axis corresponds to the
number of flights with delay. Notice that the maximum delay (and thus x-axis values) differs among evaluation cases.
16
Figure 9: Ed-MARL solutions (in orange) for Jul2 compared to NM
solutions (in blue).
Figure 10: IRL solutions (in orange) for Jul2 compared to NM solu-
tions (in blue).
happens at a large degree in the northwest part of Spain
for Jul2, especially in consecutive periods at the second-
half of the day. MARL methods, thus, to resolve these
hotspots, increase the delays imposed to flights, especially
for flights crossing the parts of the airspace in the periods
of high demand.
8. Conclusions
In this paper we formulate the problem of resolving
demand-capacity imbalances (DCB) in ATM as a coor-
dination problem of agents that operate to a multiagent
MDP framework. We propose the use of MARL tech-
niques to solve this problem, as a new paradigm for resolv-
ing demand-capacity imbalances at the pre-tactical phase
of operations. A novel, generic reward function was con-
structed that takes into account the agents' participation
in hotspots, and also the strategic cost of delay. The pro-
posed methods were evaluated on real-world cases encom-
passing thousands of agents in complex / dynamic set-
tings, where we measure their efficiency (speed of conver-
gence) and effectiveness (quality of solutions). The re-
sults were very promising as our collaborative MARL ap-
proaches were able to successfully resolve complex DCB
problems in ATM.
More than that, we envisage the work laid out in this
paper to be seen as a first step towards devising multia-
gent methods for prescribing the effect of traffic to corre-
lated aircraft trajectories, contributing to the transition to
a trajectory-based air-traffic management paradigm. This
will hopefully help overcome the shortcomings of the cur-
rently used ATM paradigm, and as such, could in time
allow commercial aircrafts to fly their preferred trajecto-
ries without being constrained by airspace configurations.
It is our intention to further pursue and develop the
proposed scheme, mainly on the following directions:
• Extend our work in deep reinforcement learning schemes
by considering continues state spaces and value func-
tion approximation models.
• Validate the proposed framework on other real-world
evaluation cases in a more systematically way.
• Study the effectiveness alternative reward functions
that may contain richer discriminating features.
Acknowledgment This work has been supported by the
DART project, which has received funding from the SESAR
Joint Undertaking under grant agreement No 699299 un-
der European Union Horizon 2020 research and innova-
tion programme; It has been partially funded by National
Matching Funds 2017-2018 of the Greek Government, and
more specifically by the General Secretariat for Research
and Technology (GSRT), related to DART and datAcron
project. For more details, please see the DART project's
website, http://www.dart-research.eu.
References
References
[1] Agogino, A.K., Field, M., 2005. Multiagent reward analysis
for learning in noisy domains. International Conference on Au-
tonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 05) , 81 --
88.
[2] Agogino, A.K., Tumer, K., 2012. A multiagent approach to
managing air traffic flow. Autonomous Agents and Multiagent
Systems 24, 1 -- 25.
[3] Agustn, A., Alonso-Ayuso, A., Escudero, L., Pizarro-Romero,
C., 2010. Mathematical optimizationg models for air traffic flow
management: A review. Stud. Inform. Univ. 8, 141 -- 184.
[4] Airiau, S., Sen, S., Villatoro, D., 2014. Emergence of conven-
tions through social learning. Autonomous Agents and Multi-
Agent Systems 28, 779 -- 804.
[5] Andrienko, G., Andrienko, N., Bak, P., Keim, D., Wrobel, S.,
2013. Visual analytics of movement. Springer .
[6] Bazzan, A.L.C., 2009. Opportunities for multiagent systems
and multiagent reinforcement learning in traffic control. Au-
tonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 18, 342 -- 375.
[7] Bloem, M., Bambos, N., 2015. Ground delay program analyt-
ics with behavioral cloning and inverse reinforcement learning.
Journal of Aerospace Information Systems 12, 299 -- 313.
[8] Bowling, M., Veloso, M., 2002. Multiagent learning using a
variable learning rate. Artificial Intelligence 136, 215 -- 250.
A.J.,
delay
[9] Cook,
airline
http://www.eurocontrol.int/publications/
european-airline-delaycost-reference-values.
Tanner,
cost
reference
values.
G.,
2015.
European
URL:
[10] Crespo, A., Weigang, L., Barros, A.D., 2012. Reinforcement
learning agents to tactical air traffic flow management. Inter-
national Journal of Aviation Management 1, 145 -- 161.
17
Cooperative deep reinforcement learning for large-scale traffic
grid signal control. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics , 1 -- 14.
[35] Tumer, K., Agogino, A., 2007. Distributed agent-based air traf-
fic flow management. International Conference on Autonomous
Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 07) .
[36] Vouros, G.A., 2017. Learning conventions via social reinforce-
ment learning in complex and open settings. Proceedings of
the 16th Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent
Systems , 455 -- 463.
[37] Walraven, E., Spaan, M.T.J., B.Bakker, 2016. Traffic flow op-
timization: A reinforcement learning approach. Engineering
Applications of Artificial Intelligence 52, 203 -- 212.
[38] Yu, C., Zhang, M., Ren, F., Luo, X., 2013. Emergence of so-
cial norms through collective learning in networked agent so-
cieties. Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on
Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems , 475 -- 482.
[11] Cruciol, L.B.V., de Arruda, A., Weigang, L., Li, L., Crespo,
A., 2013. Reward functions for learning to control in air traffic
flow management. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging
Technologies 35, 141 -- 155.
[12] Devlin, S., Yliniemi, L., Kudenko, D., Tumer, K., 2014.
Potential-based difference rewards for multiagent. International
Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems
(AAMAS 14) , 165 -- 172.
[13] Dresner, K., Stone, P., 2004. Multiagent traffic management:
A reservation-based intersection control mechanism.
Interna-
tional Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Sys-
tems (AAMAS 04) .
[14] Eurocontrol, 2017. Performance review 2017.
[15] Eurocontrol, 2018a. European aviation 2040: Challenges of
growth.
[16] Eurocontrol, 2018b. European aviation in 2040 challenges of
growth annex 1 flight forecast to 2040.
[17] Eurocontrol, 2018c. Performance review 2018.
[18] Fudenberg, D., Levine, D., 1998. The theory in learning in
games.
[19] Guestrin, C., 2003. Planning Under Uncertainty in Complex
Structured Environments. Ph.D. thesis. Stanford University.
[20] Guestrin, C., Lagoudakis, M., Parr, R., 2002. Coordinated
International Conference on Machine
reinforcement learning.
Learning (ICML 02) , 227 -- 234.
[21] Kok, J.R., Vlassis, N., 2006. Collaborative multiagent reinforce-
ment learning by payoff propagation. The Journal of Machine
Learning Research 7, 1789 -- 1828.
[22] Kravaris, T., Vouros, G., Spatharis, C., Blekas, K., Chalki-
adakis, G., 2017. Learning policies for resolving demand-
capacity imbalances during pre-tactical air traffic management.
Multiagent System Technologies - 15th German Conference
(MATES 17) , 238 -- 255.
[23] Kuyer, L., Whiteson, S., Bakker, B., Vlassis, N., 2008. Multia-
gent reinforcement learning for urban traffic control using coor-
dination graphs. Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery
in Databases , 656 -- 671.
[24] Milchtaich, I., 2004.
Social optimality and cooperation in
nonatomic congestion games. Journal of Economic Theory 114,
56 -- 87.
[25] Mukherjee, P., Sen, S., Airiau, S., 2008. Norm emergence under
constrained interactions in diverse societies. Proceedings of the
7th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and
Multiagent Systems - Volume 2 , 779 -- 786.
[26] Proper, S., Tumer, K., 2013. Multiagent learning with a noisy
global reward signal. AAAI'13 Proceedings of the Twenty-
Seventh AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , 826 -- 832.
[27] Rosenthal, R.W., 1973. A class of games processing pure-
strategy nash equilibria. International Journal of Game Theory
2, 65 -- 67.
[28] Sen, S., Airiau, S., 2007. Emergence of norms through social
learning. Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference
on Artifical Intelligence , 1507 -- 1512.
[29] Shoham, Y., Tennenholtz, M., 1997. On the emergence of so-
cial conventions: modeling, analysis, and simulations. Artificial
Intelligence 94, 139 -- 166.
[30] Spatharis, C., Kravaris, T., Vouros, G.A., Blekas, K., Chalka-
diakis, G., Garcia, J.M.C., Fernndez, E.C., 2018a. Multiagent
reinforcement learning methods to resolve demand capacity bal-
ance problems. Hellenic A.I. Conference(SETN 2018) .
[31] Spatharis, C., Kravaris, T., Vouros, G.A., Blekas, K., Cordero,
J.M.G., 2018b. Multiagent reinforcement learning methods for
resolving demand - capacity imbalances. Digital Avionics Sys-
tems Conference (DASC18) .
[32] Sugawara, T., 2014. Emergence of conventions for efficiently
resolving conflicts in complex networks. 2014 IEEE/WIC/ACM
International Joint Conferences on Web Intelligence (WI) and
Intelligent Agent Technologies (IAT) , 222 -- 229.
[33] Sutton, R.S., Barto, A.G., 2014. Reinforcement learning: An
introduction. MIT Press, Cambridge .
[34] Tan, T., Bao, F., Deng, Y., Jin, A., Dai, Q., Wang, J., 2019.
18
• The counting step for computing demand evolution
(set to 30);
• The maximum possible delay (derived from the cor-
responding maximum delay imposed by the NM, as
indicated in Table 1);
• The time horizon H (here 24 hours);
• The learning rate α (set to 0.01 for all methods, as
a default value although no such default exits);
• The discount factor γ (set to 0.99 for all methods,
as a default value although no such default exits);
• The reward parameter λ (set to 20 for all methods,
after experimentation made).
Appendix B. Incorporating preferences on delays
We have explored the capabilities of the MARL meth-
ods to solve DCB problems by incorporating strict con-
ditions and preferences to the M axDelay for some of the
flights. We denote the strict M axDelay imposed to a sub-
set of flights with Local MaxDelay, while for the rest of the
flights the M axDelay is as specified in Table 1.
In doing so, we simulate situations where constraints
of airlines to ground delays are specified and incorporated
into the problem. In these evaluation cases, the subset of
flights is chosen according to the arrival airport: All flights
arriving to one of the five biggest airports in Spain have
a Local MaxDelay constraint, representing the need of less
delay in airports that are hubs and with high traffic.
In these cases, roughly 30% of the flights have a con-
straint on Local MaxDelay,. These flights are also respon-
sible to roughly the 30% of the occurring hotspots. We
considered sub-cases with Local MaxDelay, varying in {5,
10, 15, 25, 35, 45, 55}.
We present results for the most difficult case, among
the cases considered: Jul2. Tables B.4 and B.5 show that
MARL methods manage to solve DCB problems using the
individual delay reward, even if very strict constraints on
Local MaxDelay are set to a subset of the flights. However,
for Local MaxDelay = 5, both methods could not provide
a solution and for Local MaxDelay = 10 only IRL could
resolve all hotspots.
In the cases were both methods succeed to provide solu-
tions, the Ed-MARL approach provides the lower average
delay per flight, and the lower number of regulated flights,
consistently with the results already provided in previous
sections. It must be noticed, that the results of all MARL
methods are close to the results obtained when all flights
adhere to the same M axDelay.
Appendix A. Construction of evaluation cases
The following procedure describes how we have created
evaluation cases:
The first step is to collect all planned flight trajectories
(Flight Plans) for that day as provided by the Spanish Op-
erational Data. According to the domain experts, we con-
struct evaluation cases using the Flight Plans specified just
before take-off. This makes solutions provided by MARL
methods comparable to the delays imposed by the NM.
Some Flight Plans span in two consecutive days. These
Flight Plans are considered to be part of the problem for
both days. Finally, all flights participating to the evalua-
tion case are distinguished between commercial and non-
commercial. Delays cannot be imposed to non-commercial
flights (e.g. military). In addition, the model of each air-
craft executing a trajectory is stored for the calculation of
strategic delay costs.
After identifying the Flight Plans, we cross-check them
with the flights considered by the NM. In doing so, Flight
Plans that do not correspond to an NM entry are dropped,
and delays imposed by the NM to resolve hotspots occur-
ring inside the Spanish Airspace are identified.
While Flight Plans specify trajectories crossing air vol-
umes, this sequence is exploited to compute the series of
active sectors that each flight crosses - depending on the
open sector configurations in different periods during the
day - together with the entry and exit time per crossed
sector. For the first (last) sector of the flight, where the
departure (resp. arrival) airport resides, the entry (resp.
exit) time is the departure (resp. arrival) time. However,
there may exist flights that cross the airspace but do not
depart and/or arrive in any of the sectors of our airspace:
In that case we consider the entry and exit time from sec-
tors within the airspace of our interest. Since airspace
sectorization changes frequently during the day, we need
to exploit the mappings from air volumes to open sectors,
translating air volumes crossed by trajectories to open sec-
tors. It must be noticed that:
• Given any delay imposed to a trajectory, sectors
crossed may vary due to the changing sector con-
figurations.
• This may result in alternative representations of a
single trajectory; one for each possible delay (each
crossing a different set of open sectors).
The trajectories specifying the Flight Plans, in con-
junction to the list of all the necessary sectors with their
capacities, comprise an evaluation case.
In addition to the above, each evaluation case contains
the following parameters:
• The number of flights (i.e. participating agents);
• The duration of the counting period for computing
demand evolution (set to 60);
19
Local MaxDelay Average Delay(NM) Average Delay(Ed-MARL) Average Delay(IRL)
Table B.4: Average delay for the Jul2 case with various preferences on the local max delay.
5
10
15
25
35
45
55
1.66
1.66
1.66
1.66
1.66
1.66
1.66
1.66
1.67
1.78
1.74
1.70
1.69
1.71
1.76
1.77
1.81
1.78
1.80
1.79
1.81
Table B.5: Remaining hotspots and number of regulated flights for the Jul2 case with various preferences on the local max delay.
Number of Resulting Hotspots Number of Regulated Flights
Ed-MARL
Ed-MARL
IRL
430.4
461.7
461.7
460.2
462.2
465
466.5
Local MaxDelay
IRL
5
10
15
25
35
45
55
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
402.2
408.7
432.4
448.2
442.6
438.2
439.1
20
|
1609.07845 | 2 | 1609 | 2016-09-28T14:20:05 | Decentralized Non-communicating Multiagent Collision Avoidance with Deep Reinforcement Learning | [
"cs.MA"
] | Finding feasible, collision-free paths for multiagent systems can be challenging, particularly in non-communicating scenarios where each agent's intent (e.g. goal) is unobservable to the others. In particular, finding time efficient paths often requires anticipating interaction with neighboring agents, the process of which can be computationally prohibitive. This work presents a decentralized multiagent collision avoidance algorithm based on a novel application of deep reinforcement learning, which effectively offloads the online computation (for predicting interaction patterns) to an offline learning procedure. Specifically, the proposed approach develops a value network that encodes the estimated time to the goal given an agent's joint configuration (positions and velocities) with its neighbors. Use of the value network not only admits efficient (i.e., real-time implementable) queries for finding a collision-free velocity vector, but also considers the uncertainty in the other agents' motion. Simulation results show more than 26 percent improvement in paths quality (i.e., time to reach the goal) when compared with optimal reciprocal collision avoidance (ORCA), a state-of-the-art collision avoidance strategy. | cs.MA | cs | Decentralized Non-communicating Multiagent Collision Avoidance
with Deep Reinforcement Learning
Yu Fan Chen, Miao Liu, Michael Everett, and Jonathan P. How
6
1
0
2
p
e
S
8
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
2
v
5
4
8
7
0
.
9
0
6
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract- Finding feasible, collision-free paths for mul-
tiagent
systems can be challenging, particularly in non-
communicating scenarios where each agent's intent (e.g. goal) is
unobservable to the others. In particular, finding time efficient
paths often requires anticipating interaction with neighboring
agents, the process of which can be computationally prohibitive.
This work presents a decentralized multiagent collision avoid-
ance algorithm based on a novel application of deep reinforce-
ment learning, which effectively offloads the online computation
(for predicting interaction patterns)
to an offline learning
procedure. Specifically, the proposed approach develops a value
network that encodes the estimated time to the goal given an
agent's joint configuration (positions and velocities) with its
neighbors. Use of the value network not only admits efficient
(i.e., real-time implementable) queries for finding a collision-
free velocity vector, but also considers the uncertainty in the
other agents' motion. Simulation results show more than 26%
improvement in paths quality (i.e., time to reach the goal) when
compared with optimal reciprocal collision avoidance (ORCA),
a state-of-the-art collision avoidance strategy.
I. INTRODUCTION
Collision avoidance is central to many robotics applications,
such as multiagent coordination [1], autonomous navigation
through human crowds [2], pedestrian motion prediction [3],
and computer crowd simulation [4]. Yet, finding collision-free,
time efficient paths around other agents remains challenging,
because it may require predicting other agents' motion and
anticipating interaction patterns, through a process that needs
to be computationally tractable for real-time implementation.
If there is a reliable communication network for agents
to broadcast their intents (e.g. goals, planned paths), then
collision avoidance can be enforced through a centralized
planner. For instance, collision avoidance requirements can
be formulated as separation constraints in an optimization
framework for finding a set of jointly feasible and collision-
free paths [1], [5], [6]. However, centralized path plan-
ning methods can be computationally prohibitive for large
teams [1]. To attain better scalability, researchers have also
proposed distributed algorithms based on message-passing
schemes [7], [8], which resolve local (e.g. pairwise) conflicts
without needing to form a joint optimization problem between
all members of the team.
This work focuses on scenarios where communication
cannot be reliably established, which naturally arises when
considering human-robot interactions and can also be caused
by hardware constraints or failures. This limitation poses
additional challenges for collision avoidance, because mobile
Laboratory of Information and Decision Systems, Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Ave., Cambridge, MA, USA
{chenyuf2, miaoliu, mfe, jhow}@mit.edu
Fig. 1: Autonomous ground vehicles navigating alongside pedes-
trians. Collision avoidance is essential for coordinating multiagent
systems and modeling interactions between mobile agents.
agents would need to cooperate without necessarily hav-
ing knowledge of the other agent's intents. Existing work
on non-communicating collision avoidance can be broadly
classified into two categories, reaction-based and trajectory-
based. Reaction-based methods [9]–[11] specify one-step
interaction rules for the current geometric configuration. For
example, reciprocal velocity obstacle (RVO) [12] is a reaction-
based method that adjusts each agent's velocity vector to
ensure collision-free navigation. However, since reaction-
based methods do not consider evolution of the neighboring
agents' future states, they are short-sighted in time and have
been found to create oscillatory and unnatural behaviors in
certain situations [10], [13].
In contrast, trajectory-based methods explicitly account
for evolution of the joint (agent and neighbors) future states
by anticipating other agents' motion. A subclass of non-
cooperative approaches [14], [15] propagates the other agents'
dynamics forward in time, and then plans a collision-free path
with respect to the other agents' predicted paths. However,
in crowded environments, the set of predicted paths often
marks a large portion of the space untraversable/unsafe, which
leads to the freezing robot problem [13]. A key to resolving
this issue is to account for interactions, such that each
agent's motion can affect one another. Thereby, a subclass of
cooperative approaches [16]–[18] has been proposed, which
first infers the other agents' intents (e.g. goals), then plans
a set of jointly feasible paths for all neighboring agents
in the environment. Cooperative trajectory-based methods
often produce paths with better quality (e.g. shorter time for
all agents to reach their goal) than that of reaction-based
methods [16]. However, planning paths for all other agents
is computationally expensive, and such cooperative approach
typically requires more information than is readily available
(e.g. other agent's intended goal). Moreover, due to model
and measurement uncertainty, the other agents' actual paths
might not conform to the planned/predicted paths, particularly
beyond a few seconds into the future. Thus, trajectory-based
methods also need to be run at a high (sensor update) rate,
which exacerbates the computational problem.
The major difficulty in multiagent collision avoidance is
that anticipating evolution of joint states (paths) is desirable
but computationally prohibitive. This work seeks to address
this issue through reinforcement learning – to offload the
expensive online computation to an offline training procedure.
Specifically, this work develops a computationally efficient
(i.e., real-time implementable) interaction rule by learning a
value function that implicitly encodes cooperative behaviors.
The main contributions of this work are (i) a two-agent
collision avoidance algorithm based on a novel application of
deep reinforcement learning, (ii) a principled way for general-
izing to more (n > 2) agents, (iii) an extended formulation to
capture kinematic constraints, and (iv) simulation results that
show significant improvement in solution quality compared
with existing reaction-based methods.
II. PROBLEM FORMULATION
A. Sequential Decision Making
t , sh
A non-communicating multiagent collision avoidance prob-
lem can be formulated as a partially-observable sequential
decision making problem. Let st, at denote an agent's
state and action at time t. The agent's state vector can
be divided into two parts, that is st = [so
t ], where so
t
denotes the observable part that can be measured by all
other agents, and sh
t denotes the hidden part that is only
known to the agent itself. In this work, let position and
velocity vectors in 2D be denoted by p and v, respectively;
let action be the agent's velocity, a = v; let the observable
states be the agent's position, velocity, and radius (size),
so = [px, py, vx, vy, r] ∈ R5; and let the hidden states
be the agent's intended goal position, preferred speed, and
heading angle, sh = [pgx, pgy, vpref , θ] ∈ R4.
The following presents a two-agent1 collision avoidance
problem formulation, where an agent's own state and the
other agent's state are denoted by s and s, respectively. The
objective is to minimize the expected time, E[tg], of an agent
0:t) (cid:55)→ at,
to reach its goal by developing a policy, π : (s0:t, so
that selects an action given the observed state trajectories,
argmin
π(s, so)
s.t.
0, π, π]
E [tgs0, so
pt − pt2 ≥ r + r
ptg = pg
pt = pt−1 + ∆t · π(s0:t, so
pt = pt−1 + ∆t · π(s0:t, so
∀t
0:t)
0:t),
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
where (2) is the collision avoidance constraint, (3) is the goal
constraint, (4) is the agents' kinematics, and the expectation
in (1) is with respect to the other agent's policy and hidden
1This formulation can be generalized to multiagent (n > 2) scenarios
t =
n,t], and expand (2) to include all pairwise collision constraints.
by replacing the other agent's state so
[ so
t with all other agents' states So
1,t, . . . , so
states (intents). Note that static obstacles can be modeled as
stationary agents, which will be discussed in more details in
Section IV-D.
0:t) = π(st, so
Although it is difficult to solve for the optimal solution of
(1)-(4), this problem formulation can be useful for understand-
ing the limitations of the existing methods. In particular, it
provides insights into the approximations/assumptions made
by existing works. A common assumption is reciprocity,
that is π = π, such that each agent would follow the same
policy [11], [16]. Thereby, the main difficulty is in handling
the uncertainty in the other agent's hidden intents (e.g. goals).
Reaction-based methods [10], [11] often specify a Marko-
vian policy, π(s0:t, so
t ), that optimizes a one-
step cost while satisfying collision avoidance constraints.
For instance, in velocity obstacle approaches [11], an agent
chooses a collision-free velocity that is closest to its preferred
velocity (i.e., directed toward its goal). Given this one-
step nature, reaction-based methods do not anticipate the
other agent's hidden intent, but rather rely on a fast update
rate to react quickly to the other agent's motion. Although
computationally efficient given these simplifications, reaction-
based methods are myopic in time, which can sometimes
lead to generating unnatural trajectories [17] (e.g., Fig. 4a).
Trajectory-based methods [16]–[18] solve (1)-(4) in two
steps. First, the other agent's hidden state is inferred from its
0:t), where f (·) is a inference
observed trajectory, sh
function. Second, a centralized path planning algorithm,
t , sh
t ),
is employed to find
π(s0:t, so
jointly feasible paths. By planning/anticipating complete paths,
trajectory-based methods are no longer myopic. However,
both the inference and the planning steps are computationally
expensive, and need to be carried out online at each new
observation (sensor update so
t ).
0:t) = πcentral(st, so
t = f (so
Our approach uses a reinforcement learning framework
to solve (1)-(4) by pre-computing a value function V (s, so)
that estimates the expected time to the goal. As a result,
the proposed method offloads computation from the online
planning step (as in trajectory-based methods) to an offline
learning procedure. The learned value function enables the use
of a computationally efficient one-step lookahead operation,
which will be defined in (11) and explained in Section III.
Repeating this one-step lookahead operation at each sensor
update leads to generating better paths, as shown later in
Fig. 4d.
B. Reinforcement Learning
Reinforcement learning (RL) [19] is a class of machine
learning methods for solving sequential decision making
problems with unknown state-transition dynamics. Typically,
a sequential decision making problem can be formulated as a
Markov decision process (MDP), which is defined by a tuple
M = (cid:104)S, A, P, R, γ(cid:105), where S is the state space, A is the
action space, P is the state-transition model, R is the reward
function, and γ is a discount factor. By detailing each of these
elements and relating to (1)-(4), the following provides a RL
formulation of the two-agent collision avoidance problem.
could be very small. The optimal policy can be retrieved
from the value function, that is
π∗(sjn
R(s0, a)+
0 ) = argmax
(cid:90)
a
γ∆t·vpref
P (sjn
0 , sjn
1 a)V ∗(sjn
1 )dsjn
1 .
(7)
sjn
1
This work chooses to optimize V (sjn) rather than the more
common choice Q(sjn, a), because unlike previous works
that focus on discrete, finite action spaces [20], [21], the
action space here is continuous and the set of permissible
velocity vectors depends on the agent's state (preferred speed).
III. APPROACH
The following presents an algorithm for solving the two-
agent RL problem formulated in Section II-B, and then gen-
eralizes its solution (policy) to multiagent collision avoidance.
While applications of RL are typically limited to discrete,
low-dimensional domains, recent advances in Deep RL [20]–
[22] have demonstrated human-level performance in complex,
high-dimensional spaces. Since the joined state vector sjn is
in a continuous 14 dimensional space, and because a large
amount of training data can be easily generated in a simulator,
this work employs a fully connected deep neural network
with ReLU nonlinearities to parametrize the value function, as
shown in Fig. 3a. This value network is denoted by V (·; w),
where w is the set of weights in the neural network.
A. Parametrization
From a geometric perspective, there is some redundancy in
the parameterization of the system's joint state sjn, because
the optimal policy should be invariant to any coordinate
transformation (rotation and translation). To remove this
ambiguity, an agent-centric frame is defined, with the origin
at the agent's position, and the x-axis pointing toward the
agent's goal, that is,
s(cid:48) = rotate(cid:0)sjn(cid:1)
x, v(cid:48)
y, p(cid:48)
x, p(cid:48)
y, r,
= [dg, vpref , v(cid:48)
y, r, θ(cid:48), v(cid:48)
r + r, cos(θ(cid:48)), sin(θ(cid:48)), da],
x, v(cid:48)
(8)
where dg = pg − p2 is the agent's distance to goal,
and da = p − p2 is the distance to the other agent. An
illustration of this parametrization is shown in Fig. 2a. Note
that this agent-centric parametrization is only used when
querying the neural network.
B. Generating Paths Using a Value Network
Given a value network V , an RL agent can generate a path
to its goal by repeatedly maximizing an one-step lookahead
value (7), as outlined in Algorithm 1. This corresponds to
choosing the action that on average, leads to the joint state
with the highest value. However, the integral in (7) is difficult
to evaluate, because the other agent's next state so
t+1 has an
unknown distribution (depends on its unobservable intent).
We approximate this integral by assuming that the other agent
would be traveling at a filtered velocity for a short duration
(a) Input joint state
(b) Value function
Fig. 2: RL policy. (a) shows a joint state of the system (geometric
configuration) in the red agent's reference frame, with its goal
aligned with the x-axis and marked as a star. (b) shows the red
agent's value function at taking each possible action (velocity vector).
Given the presence of the blue agent, ORCA [11] would choose an
action close to the current heading angle (black vector), whereas
the RL policy chooses to cut behind (green vector) the blue agent,
leading to generating better paths similar to that in Fig. 4.
State space: The system's state is constructed by concatenat-
ing the two agents' individual states, sjn = [s, so] ∈ R14.
Action space: The action space is the set of permissible
velocity vectors. Here, it is assumed that an agent can travel in
any direction at any time, that is a(s) = v for v2 < vpref .
It is also straightforward to impose kinematic constraints,
which will be explored in Section III-D.
Reward function: A reward function is specified to award
the agent for reaching its goal (3), and penalize the agent for
getting too close or colliding with the other agent (2),
R(sjn, a) =
−0.25
−0.1 − dmin/2
1
0
if dmin < 0
else if dmin < 0.2
else if p = pg
o.w.
, (5)
t
t+1, sjn
where dmin is the minimum separation distance between
the two agents within a duration of ∆t, assuming the agent
travels at velocity v = a, and the other agent continues to
travel at its observed velocity v. Note that the separation
dmin can be calculated analytically through simple geometry.
State transition model: A probabilistic state transition model,
at), is determined by the agents' kinematics as
P (sjn
defined in (4). Since the other agent's choice of action also
depends on its policy and hidden intents (e.g. goal), the
system's state transition model is unknown. As in existing
work [11], this work also assumes reciprocity π = π, which
leads to the interesting observation that the state transition
model depends on the agent's learned policy.
Value function: The objective is to find the optimal value
function
V ∗(sjn
0 ) =
γt·vpref R(sjn
t
, π∗(sjn
t )),
(6)
t=0
where γ ∈ [0, 1) is a discount factor. Recall vpref is an
agent's preferred speed and is typically time invariant. It is
used here as a normalization factor for numerical reasons,
because otherwise the value function of a slow moving agent
T(cid:88)
Algorithm 1: CADRL (Coll. Avoidance with Deep RL)
1 Input: value network V(·; w)
2 Output: trajectory s0:tf
3 while not reached goal do
4
5
6
7
8
update t, receive new measurements st, so
t
vt ← filter(v0:t)
t+1 ← propagate(so
so
A ← sampleActions()
at ← argmaxat∈A R(sjn
where ¯γ ← γ∆t·vpref , st+1 ← propagate(st, ∆t· at)
, at) + ¯γV (st+1, so
t , ∆t · vt)
t+1)
t
9 return s0:tf
(a) Value network
(b) Convergence
Fig. 3: Convergence of a Deep RL policy. (a) shows a neural network
used to parameterize the value function. (b) shows the values of three
distinct test cases converge as a function of RL training episodes.
For example, the blue line corresponds to the test case shown in
the bottom row of Fig. 4.
∆t (line 5-6)2. The use of a filtered velocity addresses a subtle
oscillation problem as discussed in [12]. This propagation
step amounts to predicting the other agent's motion with
a simple linear model, which has been shown to produce
good accuracy over small time scales [23]. It is important
to point out that this approximation is not assuming a linear
motion model for t > ∆t; uncertainty in the other agent's
future motion is captured in the projected next state's value,
V (st+1, so
t+1). Furthermore, the best action is chosen from
a set of permissible3 velocity vectors (line 8). An example
of this one-step lookahead operation is visualized in Fig. 2a,
in which the red agent chooses the green velocity vector to
cut behind the blue agent, because this action maximizes the
value of the projected state shown in Fig. 2b.
C. Training a Value Network
The training procedure, outlined in Algorithm 2, consists
of two major steps. First, the value network is initialized by
supervised training on a set of trajectories generated by a
baseline policy (line 3).
Specifically, each training trajectory is processed to gen-
erate a set of state-value pairs, {(sjn, y)k}N
k=1, where y =
γtg·vpref and tg is the time to reach goal. The value network
is trained by back-propagation to minimize a quadratic
2This work calculates the average velocity of the past 0.5 seconds and
sets ∆t to 1.0 second.
3This work uses 25 pre-computed actions (e.g. directed toward an agent's
goal or current heading) and 10 randomly sampled actions.
//step 1: initialization
//step 2: RL
← CADRL(V )
(cid:16)
← findValues(V (cid:48), s0:tf , s0:tf )
E, (y, sjn)0:tf , (y, sjn)0:tf
(cid:17)
for m times do
Algorithm 2: Deep V-learning
1 Input: trajectory training set D
2 Output: value network V (·; w)
3 V (·; w) ← train nn(D)
4 duplicate value net V (cid:48) ← V
5 initialize experience set E ← D
6 for episode=1, . . . , Neps do
7
8
9
10
s0, s0 ← randomTestcase()
s0:tf ← CADRL(V ), s0:tf
y0:T , y0:tf
E ← assimilate
e ← randSubset(E)
w ← backprop(e)
for every C episodes do
Evaluate(V ), V (cid:48) ← V
11
12
13
14
15
16 return V
(cid:80)N
(cid:16)
(cid:17)2
yk − V (sjn
regression error, argminw
. This
work uses optimal reciprocal collision avoidance (ORCA) [11]
to generate a training set of 500 trajectories, which contains
approximately 20,000 state-value pairs.
k ; w)
k=1
We make a few remarks about this initialization step. First,
the training trajectories do not have to be optimal. For instance,
two of the training trajectories generated by ORCA [11] are
shown in Fig. 4a. The red agent was pushed away by the
blue agent and followed a large arc before reaching its goal.
Second, the initialization training step is not simply emulating
the ORCA policy. Rather, it learns a time to goal estimate
(value function), which can then be used to generate new
trajectories following Algorithm 1. Evidently, this learned
value function sometimes generates better (i.e. shorter time to
goal) trajectories than ORCA, as shown in Fig. 4b. Third, this
learned value function is likely to be suboptimal. For instance,
the minimum separation dmin between the two agents should
be around 0.2m by (5), but dmin is greater than 0.4m (too
much slack) in Fig. 4b.
The second training step refines the policy through rein-
forcement learning. Specifically, a few random test cases
are generated in each episode (line 8), and two agents are
simulated to navigate around each other using an -greedy
policy, which selects a random action with probability
and follows the value network greedily otherwise (line 9).
The simulated trajectories are then processed to generate a
set of state-value pairs (line 10). For convergence reasons,
as explained in [20], rather than being used to update the
value network immediately, the newly generated state-value
pairs are assimilated (replacing older entries) into a large
experience set E (line 11). Then, a set of training points is
randomly sampled from the experience set, which contains
state-value pairs from many different simulated trajectories
(line 12). The value network is finally updated by stochastic
gradient descent (back-propagation) on the sampled subset.
To monitor convergence of the training process, the value
network is tested regularly on a few pre-defined evaluation
test cases (line 15), two of which are shown in Fig. 4. Note
that the generated paths become tighter as a function of
the number of training episodes (i.e. dmin reduces from
0.4m to 0.2m). A plot of the test cases' values V (sjn
0 )
shows that the value network has converged in approximately
800 episodes (Fig. 3b). It is important to point out that
training/learning is performed on randomly generated test
cases (line 8), but not on the evaluation test cases.
In addition to the standard Q-learning update [19], an
important modification is introduced when calculating the
state-value pairs (line 10). In particular, cooperation is encour-
aged by adding a penalty term based on a comparison of the
two agents' extra time to reach the goal, te = tg − dg/vpref .
4, which corresponds to a scenario
If te < el and te > eu
where the agent reached its goal quickly but the other agent
took a long time, an penalty of 0.1 would be subtracted from
the training value. Albeit simple, this modification is crucial
for discouraging aggressive behaviors such as exhibited by
the blue agent in Fig. 4a. Without this modification, an agent
would frequently travel straight toward its goal, expecting the
other agent to yield.
D. Incorporating Kinematic Constraints
Kinematics constraints need to be considered for operating
physical robots. Yet, in many existing works, such constraints
can be difficult to encode and might lead to a substantial
increase in computational complexity [5], [12]. In contrast,
it is straightforward to incorporate kinematic constraints in
the RL framework. We impose rotational constraints,
vs < vpref , φ − θ < π/6
for
a(s) = [vs, φ]
θt+1 − θt < ∆t · vpref ,
(9)
(10)
where (9) limits the direction that an agent can travel, and
(10) specifies a maximum turning rate that corresponds to
a minimum turning radius of 1.0m. Figure 5a illustrates the
application of these rotational constraints to the same test
case in Fig. 2a. Here, the red agent chooses to slow down
given the set of more constrained actions. Notice the agent
is allowed to spin on the spot, which leads to an interesting
optimal control problem when an agent's current heading
angle is not perfectly aligned with its goal. In this case, an
agent can either travel at its full speed while turning toward
its goal, or first spin on the spot before traveling in a straight
line. Figure 5b shows that CADRL has learned a policy that
balances between these two options to minimize the time
to goal. With the thin lines showing its heading angle, the
red agent chooses to initially turn on the spot, and then start
moving before its heading angle is perfectly aligned with its
goal.
E. Multiagent Collision Avoidance
The two-agent value network can also be used for multia-
i denote the observable part
gent collision avoidance. Let so
4This work uses el = 1.0 and eu = 2.0.
(a) Constrained action
(b) Sample trajectories
Fig. 5: Rotational kinematic constraint. Top left shows the same
test case as in Fig. 2a, but here the red agent chooses to slow down
due to a rotational kinematic constraint (9). Bottom left shows the
set of permissible velocity vectors for the red agent. Right shows
a pair of sample trajectories generated by CADRL with rotational
constraints, where the thin lines show the agents' heading angles.
To minimize the time to goal, the red agent initially turns on the
spot, and then starts moving (while continuing to turn) before its
heading angle is aligned with its goal.
i = [s, so
of the ith neighbor's state, and sjn
i ] denote the joint
state with the ith neighbor. CADRL (Algorithm 1) can be
extended to n > 2 agents by propagating every neighbor's
state one step forward (line 5-6), and then selecting the action
that has the highest value with respect to any neighbor's
projected state; that is, replace line 8 with
argmax
at∈A
R(sjn
i,t, at) + γ∆t·vpref V (st+1, so
i,t+1).
min
i
(11)
Note that the agent's projected next state st+1 also depends
on the selected action at. Although using a two-agent value
network, CADRL can produce multiagent trajectories that
exhibit complex interaction patterns. Figure 6a shows six
agents each moving to the opposite side of a circle. The
agents veer more than the two-agent case (bottom row of
Fig. 4), which makes more room in the center to allow
every agent to pass smoothly. Figure 6b shows three pairs of
agents swapping position horizontally. The pair in the center
slows down near the origin so the outer agents can pass first.
Both cases demonstrate that CADRL can produce smooth,
natural looking trajectories for multiagent systems, which
will be explored in further detail in Section IV. However,
we acknowledge that (11) is only an approximation to a true
multiagent RL value function – an n-agent value network by
simulating n agents navigating around each other – which
will be studied for future work.
A. Computational Complexity
IV. RESULTS
This work uses a neural network with three hidden layers
of width (150, 100, 100), which is the size chosen to achieve
real-time performance.5 In particular, on a computer with
an i7-5820K CPU, a Python implementation of CADRL
5We also experimented with other network structures. For example, a
network with three hidden layers of width (300, 200, 200) produced similar
results (paths) but was twice as slow.
(a) ORCA
(b) Episode 0
(c) Episode 50
(d) Episode 1000
Fig. 4: Training the value network. Circles show each agent's position at the labeled time, and stars mark the goals. (a) illustrates trajectories
generated by the two agents each following ORCA [11], and (b-d) illustrate trajectories generated by following the value network at
various training episodes. Top (a) shows a test case which ORCA results in unnatural trajectories, where the red agent has traversed a large
arc before reaching its goal. Top (b-d) show CADRL has learned to produce cooperative behaviors, as the blue agent slows down and cuts
behind the red agent. Bottom (b-d) show the trajectories become more tight (better performing) during the training process, since the
minimum separation dmin reduces from 0.4m to 0.2m, as specified in (5).
remains 0.1 thereafter. The RL step took approximately 2.5
hours to complete 1,000 training episodes. The entire training
process was repeated on three sets of training trajectories
generated by ORCA, and the value network converged in
all three trials. The paths generated by the value networks
from the three trials were very similar, as indicated by a less
than 5% difference in time to reach goal on all test cases in
the evaluation set.
B. Performance Comparison on a Crossing Scenario
To evaluate the performance of CADRL over a variety of
test cases, we compute the average extra time spent to reach
goals, that is
(cid:20)
ti,g − pi,0 − pi,g2
(cid:21)
vi,pref
n(cid:88)
i=1
¯te =
1
n
,
(12)
where ti,g is the ith agent's time to reach its goal, and the
second term is a lower bound of ti,g (to go straight toward
goal at the preferred speed). This metric removes the effects
due to variability in the number of agents and the nominal
distance to goals.
A crossing scenario is shown in Fig. 7a, where two identical
agents with goals along collision courses are run into each
other at different angles. Thus, cooperation is required for
avoiding collision at the origin. Figure 7a shows that over a
wide range of angles (α ∈ [90, 150] deg), agents following
CADRL reached their goals much faster than that of ORCA.
Recall a minimum separation of 0.2m is specified for CADRL
in the reward function (5). For this reason, similar to the
bottom row of Fig. 4, CADRL finds paths that are slightly
slower than ORCA around α = 0. It is also interesting to
note that CADRL with rotational constraints (CADRL w/
cstr) performs slightly better than the unconstrained. This is
(a)
(b)
Fig. 6: Multiagent trajectories produced by CADRL. Circles show
each agent's position at the labeled time, and stars mark the goals.
Although CADRL uses a two-agent value network for multiagent
scenarios (11), more complex interaction patterns have emerged.
In particular, although both test cases involve three pairs of agents
swapping position, each agent follows a path much different from
the two agent case shown in the bottom row of Fig. 4.
(Algorithm 1), on average, takes 5.7ms per iteration on two-
agent collision avoidance problems. By inspection of (11),
computational time scales linearly in the number of neigh-
boring agents for a decentralized implementation where each
agent runs CADRL individually; and scales quadratically in a
centralized implementation where one computer controls all
agents. For decentralized control on ten agents, each iteration
of CADRL is observed to take 62ms. Moreover, CADRL
is parallelizable because it consists of a large number of
independent queries of the value network (11).
Furthermore, offline training (Algorithm 2) took less than
three hours and is found to be quite robust. In particular, using
mini-batches of size 500, the initialization step (line 3) took
9.6 minutes to complete 10,000 iterations of back-propagation.
The RL step used an -greedy policy, where decays linearly
from 0.5 to 0.1 in the first 400 training episodes, and
(a) Crossing configuration
(b) Time to reach goal
(a) ORCA
(b) CADRL
Fig. 7: Performance comparison on a crossing scenario. (a) shows
the crossing configuration, where a red agent travels from left to
right, and a blue agent travels at a diagonal angled at α. Both
agents have a radius of 0.3m and a preferred speed of 1.0m/s, and
they would collide at the origin if both travel in a straight line. (b)
compares the extra time spent to reach goal (12) using different
collision avoidance strategies. CADRL performs significantly better
than ORCA on a wide range of angles α ∈ [90, 150] deg.
because CADRL w/ cstr is more conservative (yielding) early
on, which is coincidentally good for the crossing scenario.
More specifically, if the other agent has stopped (reached
goal) or turned before it reached the origin, unconstrained
CADRL would have performed better. In short, as will be
shown later in Fig. 9, unconstrained CADRL is better on
average (randomized test cases), but can be slightly worse
than CADRL w/ cstr on particular test cases.
C. Performance Comparison on Random Test Cases
In addition to showing that CADRL can handle some
difficult test cases that fared poorly for ORCA (Figs. 4
and 7), a more thorough evaluation is performed on randomly
generated test cases. In particular, within square shaped
domains specified in Table I, agents are generated with
randomly sampled speed, radius, initial positions and goal
positions. This work chooses vpref ∈ [0.5, 1.5]m/s, r ∈
[0.3, 0.5]m, which are parameters similar to that of typical
pedestrian motion. Also, the agents' goals are projected to
the boundary of the room to avoid accidentally creating a
trap formed by multiple stationary agents. A sample four-
agent test case is illustrated in Fig. 8, where agents following
CADRL were able to reach their goal much faster than that
of ORCA. For each configuration in Table I, one hundred
test cases are generated as described above. ORCA, CADRL,
and CADRL w/cstr are employed to solve for these test cases.
The average extra time to reach goal, ¯te, is computed for
each set of generated trajectories and plotted in Fig. 9. Key
statistics are computed and listed in Table I, and it can be seen
that CADRL performs similarly (slightly better) than ORCA
on the easier test cases (median), and more than 26% better
on the hard test cases (>75 percentile). Also, performance
difference is more clear on test cases with more agents, which
could be a result of more frequent interactions.
D. Navigating around Non-cooperative Agents
Recall CADRL's value network is trained with both agents
following the same collision avoidance strategy, which is the
reciprocity assumption common to many existing works [11],
Fig. 8: Four-agent test case. (a) shows agents following ORCA
traversed long arcs before reaching their goals, which reflects the
similar two-agent problem shown in Fig. 4a. (b) shows agents
following CADRL were able to reach their goal much faster.
(a) 2 agents
(b) 4 agents
(c) Box-and-whisker plot
Fig. 9: Performance comparison on randomly generated test cases.
The extra time to goal te is computed on one hundred random
test cases for each configuration listed in Table I. (a) and (b) show
scatter plots of the raw data, and (c) shows a box whisker plot.
CADRL is seen to perform similarly (slightly better) to ORCA on
the easier test cases (median), and significantly better on the more
difficult test cases (>75 percentile).
[12]. Figure 10 shows that the proposed method can also
navigate efficiently around non-CADRL agents. Figure 10a
shows a CADRL agent navigating static obstacles modeled
as stationary agents (vi = 0). We acknowledge that CADRL
could get stuck in a dense obstacle field, where traps/dead-
ends could form due to positioning of multiple obstacles.
Recall CADRL is a collision avoidance (not path planning)
algorithm not designed for such scenarios. Figure 10b shows
a CADRL agent navigating around a non-cooperative agent
(black), who traveled in a straight line from right to left. In
comparison with the cooperative case shown in Fig. 4d, here
the red CADRL agent chooses to veer more to its left to
avoid collision.
V. CONCLUSION
This work developed a decentralized multiagent collision
avoidance algorithm based on a novel application of deep
α(-2,0)(2,0) TABLE I: Extra time to reach goal (¯te) statistics on the random test cases shown in Fig. 9. CADRL finds paths that on average, reach
goals much faster than that of ORCA. The improvement is more clear on hard test cases (>75 percentile) and in multiagent (n > 2)
scenarios that require more interactions.
Test case configuration
Extra time to goal ¯te (s) [Avg / 75th / 90th percentile]
Average min separation dist. (m)
num agents
2
4
6
8
domain size (m)
4.0 × 4.0
5.0 × 5.0
6.0 × 6.0
7.0 × 7.0
ORCA
0.46 / 0.45 / 0.73
0.69 / 0.85 / 1.85
0.65 / 0.83 / 1.50
0.96 / 1.33 / 1.84
CADRL
0.27 / 0.33 / 0.56
0.31 / 0.40 / 0.76
0.44 / 0.56 / 0.87
0.54 / 0.70 / 1.01
CADRL w/ cstr
0.31 / 0.42 / 0.60
0.39 / 0.53 / 0.86
0.48 / 0.63 / 1.02
0.59 / 0.77 / 1.09
OCRA
0.122
0.120
0.118
0.110
CADRL
0.199
0.192
0.117
0.171
CADRL w/ cstr
0.198
0.191
0.180
0.170
[7] O. Purwin, R. D'Andrea, and J.-W. Lee, "Theory and implementation
of path planning by negotiation for decentralized agents," Robotics
and Autonomous Systems, vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 422–436, May 2008.
[8] V. R. Desaraju and J. P. How, "Decentralized path planning for
multi-agent teams in complex environments using rapidly-exploring
random trees," in 2011 IEEE International Conference on Robotics
and Automation (ICRA), May 2011, pp. 4956–4961.
[9] J. Snape, J. Van den Berg, S. J. Guy, and D. Manocha, "The hybrid
reciprocal velocity obstacle," IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 27,
no. 4, pp. 696–706, Aug. 2011.
[10] G. Ferrer, A. Garrell, and A. Sanfeliu, "Social-aware robot navigation in
urban environments," in 2013 European Conference on Mobile Robots
(ECMR), Sept. 2013, pp. 331–336.
[11] J. Van den Berg, S. J. Guy, M. Lin, and D. Manocha, "Reciprocal
n-body collision avoidance," in Robotics Research, ser. Springer Tracts
in Advanced Robotics. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011, no. 70, pp.
3–19.
[12] J. Van den Berg, M. Lin, and D. Manocha, "Reciprocal velocity
obstacles for real-time multi-agent navigation," in Proceedings of the
2008 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation
(ICRA), 2008, pp. 1928–1935.
[13] P. Trautman and A. Krause, "Unfreezing the robot: Navigation in dense,
interacting crowds," in 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on
Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Oct. 2010, pp. 797–803.
[14] M. Phillips and M. Likhachev, "SIPP: Safe interval path planning for
dynamic environments," in 2011 IEEE International Conference on
Robotics and Automation (ICRA), May 2011, pp. 5628–5635.
[15] G. S. Aoude, B. D. Luders, J. M. Joseph, N. Roy, and J. P. How,
"Probabilistically safe motion planning to avoid dynamic obstacles with
uncertain motion patterns," Autonomous Robots, vol. 35, no. 1, pp.
51–76, May 2013.
[16] H. Kretzschmar, M. Spies, C. Sprunk, and W. Burgard, "Socially
compliant mobile robot navigation via inverse reinforcement learning,"
The International Journal of Robotics Research, Jan. 2016.
[17] P. Trautman, J. Ma, R. M. Murray, and A. Krause, "Robot navigation
in dense human crowds: the case for cooperation," in Proceedings of
the 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation
(ICRA), May 2013, pp. 2153–2160.
[18] M. Kuderer, H. Kretzschmar, C. Sprunk, and W. Burgard, "Feature-
based prediction of trajectories for socially compliant navigation," in
Robotics:Science and Systems, 2012.
[19] R. S. Sutton and A. G. Barto, Introduction to Reinforcement Learning,
1st ed. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press, 1998.
[20] V. Mnih, K. Kavukcuoglu, D. Silver, A. A. Rusu, J. Veness, M. G.
Bellemare, A. Graves, M. Riedmiller, A. K. Fidjeland, G. Ostrovski,
S. Petersen, C. Beattie, A. Sadik, I. Antonoglou, H. King, D. Kumaran,
D. Wierstra, S. Legg, and D. Hassabis, "Human-level control through
deep reinforcement learning," Nature, vol. 518, no. 7540, pp. 529–533,
Feb. 2015.
[21] D. Silver, A. Huang, C. J. Maddison, A. Guez, L. Sifre, G. van
den Driessche, J. Schrittwieser, I. Antonoglou, V. Panneershelvam,
M. Lanctot, S. Dieleman, D. Grewe, J. Nham, N. Kalchbrenner,
I. Sutskever, T. Lillicrap, M. Leach, K. Kavukcuoglu, T. Graepel, and
D. Hassabis, "Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks
and tree search," Nature, vol. 529, no. 7587, pp. 484–489, Jan. 2016.
[22] M. Zhang, Z. McCarthy, C. Finn, S. Levine, and P. Abbeel, "Learning
deep neural network policies with continuous memory states," in 2016
IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA),
May 2016, pp. 520–527.
[23] A. Bera and D. Manocha, "Realtime multilevel crowd tracking using
reciprocal velocity obstacles," in 2014 22nd International Conference
on Pattern Recognition (ICPR), Aug. 2014, pp. 4164–4169.
(a) Static obstacles
(b) Non-cooperative agent
Fig. 10: Navigating around non-CADRL agents. (a) shows a red
agent navigating around a series of static obstacles. (b) shows a red
CADRL agent avoids collision with a non-cooperative black agent,
who traveled in a straight line from right to left.
reinforcement learning. In particular, a pair of agents were
simulated to navigate around each other to learn a value
network that encodes the expected time to goal. The solution
(value network) to the two-agent collision avoidance RL
problem was generalized in a principled way to handle
multiagent (n > 2) scenarios. The proposed method was
shown to be real-time implementable for a decentralized
ten-agent system. Simulation results show more than 26%
improvement in paths quality when compared with ORCA.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work is supported by Ford Motor Company.
REFERENCES
[1] D. Mellinger, A. Kushleyev, and V. Kumar, "Mixed-integer quadratic
program trajectory generation for heterogeneous quadrotor teams," in
2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation
(ICRA), May 2012, pp. 477–483.
[2] S. Choi, E. Kim, and S. Oh, "Real-time navigation in crowded dynamic
environments using Gaussian process motion control," in 2014 IEEE
International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), May
2014, pp. 3221–3226.
[3] S. Kim, S. J. Guy, W. Liu, D. Wilkie, R. W. Lau, M. C. Lin, and
D. Manocha, "BRVO: predicting pedestrian trajectories using velocity-
space reasoning," The International Journal of Robotics Research,
vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 201–217, Feb. 2015.
[4] S. J. Guy, J. Chhugani, C. Kim, N. Satish, M. Lin, D. Manocha,
and P. Dubey, "ClearPath: Highly parallel collision avoidance for
multi-agent simulation," in Proceedings of
the 2009 ACM SIG-
GRAPH/Eurographics Symposium on Computer Animation, ser. SCA
'09. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2009, pp. 177–187.
[5] F. Augugliaro, A. P. Schoellig, and R. D'Andrea, "Generation of
collision-free trajectories for a quadrocopter fleet: A sequential convex
programming approach," in 2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference
on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Oct. 2012, pp. 1917–1922.
[6] Y. Chen, M. Cutler, and J. P. How, "Decoupled multiagent path planning
via incremental sequential convex programming," in proceedings of
the 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation
(ICRA), May 2015, pp. 5954–5961.
|
1808.01878 | 1 | 1808 | 2018-08-03T09:22:33 | From traffic conflict simulation to traffic crash simulation: introducing traffic safety indicators based on the explicit simulation of potential driver errors | [
"cs.MA"
] | This paper introduces a general simulation framework that can allow the simulation of crashes and the evaluation of consequences on existing microsimulation packages. A specific family of simple and reproducible conflict indicators is proposed and applied to many case studies. In this approach driver failures are simulated by assuming that a driver stops reacting to an external stimulus and keeps driving at the current speed for a given time. The trajectory of the distracted driver vehicle is thus evaluated and projected, for the given time steps, for the established distraction time, over the actual trajectories of other vehicles. Every occurring crash is then evaluated in terms of energy involved in the crash, or with any other severity index (which can be easily calculated since the accident dynamics can be accurately simulated). The simulation of a driver error allows not only the typology of crashes to be included, normally accounted for with surrogate safety measures, but also many other type of typical crashes that it is impossible to simulate with microsimulation and traditional methodologies being caused by vehicles who are driving on non-conflicting trajectories such as drivers speeding at a red light, drivers taking the wrong lane or side of the street or just driving off the road in isolated accidents against external obstacles or traffic barriers. The total crash energy of all crashes is proposed as an indicator of risk and adopted in the case studies. Moreover, the concepts introduced in this paper allow scientists to define other relevant variables that can be used as surrogate safety indicators that consider driving errors. Preliminary results on different case studies have shown a great accordance of safety evaluations with statistical data and empirical expectations and also with other traditional safety indicators that are commonly used in microsimulation. | cs.MA | cs | From traffic conflict simulation to traffic crash simulation:
introducing traffic safety indicators based on
the explicit simulation of potential driver errors
Vittorio Astarita* and Vincenzo Pasquale Giofré
Università della Calabria, Rende (CS) 87040, Italy
Electronic preprint
This electronic preprint is a draft version still not published and currently under revision.
Please quote and give reference only to published version when available.
If published version is not yet available just give reference to :
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale Giofré. (2019) "From traffic conflict simulation to
traffic crash simulation: introducing traffic safety indicators based on the explicit
simulation of potential driver errors".
Many thanks for your interest in this paper.
Please feel free to add comment on Research Gate or write me at: [email protected]
Thanking for your interest and help in any case!
Best Regards
Vittorio
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +39-0984-49-6780; fax: +39-0984-49-6787.
E-mail address: [email protected]
From traffic conflict simulation to traffic crash simulation:
introducing traffic safety indicators based on
the explicit simulation of potential driver errors
Vittorio Astarita* and Vincenzo Pasquale Giofré
Università della Calabria, Rende (CS) 87040, Italy
Abstract
Traffic safety conflict indicators have been used to assess the level of safety in different traffic conditions. Traffic safety
indicators can be evaluated by numerical elaboration given vehicles trajectories. Real vehicle trajectories are not always easy to
obtain and often microsimulation has been used to generate vehicular trajectories on which to apply numerical elaboration to
evaluate surrogate safety measures for different scenarios.
However, commonly used traffic conflict indicators do not consider the severity of a potential resulting crash. Only recent
works propose to correct common indicators to take into account the amount of energy involved in near-crashes events. The use
of conflict-energy-based indicators in simulation has not been yet well explored and could offer interesting results promoting the
use of microsimulation for road safety evaluations.
Moreover, commonly used traffic conflict indicators do not consider roadside obstacles or barriers and vehicles which are
travelling on non-conflicting trajectories.
This paper presents a complete new approach for microscopic evaluation of traffic safety. The proposed safety indicators
are based on the explicit simulation of possible driver errors and possible crashes.
Drivers can be distracted in many different ways such as by being occupied in some other tasks (for example a mobile
call) or by a momentary breakdown in attention and/or awareness to external changes due to some psychological or physical
failure.
This paper originated from the following consideration: in the real world, most accidents involving human drivers occur
because one (or more than one) driver has a temporary failure and nowadays modern computers are able to simulate rather
complex systems (including human behaviors and errors).
This paper, thus, introduces a general simulation framework that can allow the simulation of crashes and the evaluation of
consequences on existing microsimulation packages. A specific family of simple and reproducible conflict indicators is proposed
and applied to many case studies. In this approach driver failures are simulated by assuming that a driver stops reacting to an
external stimulus and keeps driving at the current speed for a given time. The trajectory of the distracted driver vehicle is thus
evaluated and projected, for the given time steps, for the established distraction time, over the actual trajectories of other
vehicles. Every occurring crash is then evaluated in terms of energy involved in the crash, or with any other severity index
(which can be easily calculated since the accident dynamics can be accurately simulated). The simulation of a driver error allows
not only the typology of crashes to be included, normally accounted for with surrogate safety measures, but also many other type
of typical crashes that it is impossible to simulate with microsimulation and traditional methodologies being caused by vehicles
who are driving on non-conflicting trajectories such as drivers speeding at a red light, drivers taking the wrong lane or side of the
street or just driving off the road in isolated accidents against external obstacles or traffic barriers. The total crash energy of all
crashes is proposed as an indicator of risk and adopted in the case studies. Moreover, the concepts introduced in this paper allow
scientists to define other relevant variables that can be used as surrogate safety indicators that consider driving errors.
Preliminary results on different case studies have shown a great accordance of safety evaluations with statistical data and
empirical expectations and also with other traditional safety indicators that are commonly used in microsimulation.
Keywords: Traffic simulation; traffic safety; traffic theory.
"You progress not through improving what has been done, but reaching toward what has yet to be done."
Kahlil Gibran
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +39-0984-49-6780; fax: +39-0984-49-6787.
E-mail address: [email protected]
1. Introduction
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
1.1. State of the art in safety evaluation: from traffic conflicts to more elaborated surrogate safety measures
and the need for a methodological breakthrough
The classical methodology to estimate road safety levels is based on applying inferential statistics to
crashes databases (Hauer 1986, Jovanis and Chang 1986, Miaou and Lum 1993, Miaou 1994, Shankar et al.
1995, Hauer 1997, Abdel-Aty and Radwan 2000, Yan et al. 2005). With this methodology it is possible to
link the causes (infrastructural layouts) to effects (crashes) and apply countermeasures to increase road
safety.
In traffic safety (luckily) crashes are a very rare event and sometime new infrastructures black spots could
go undetected for years until some very unfortunate event happens. Moreover, a good knowledge of the
dynamics of the events that could potentially lead to the actual realization of a crash may provide a more
useful base to prevent crashes from happening in the first place, supporting the implementation of
appropriate preventive countermeasures.
Surrogate safety performance indicators that provide a causal or mechanistic basis for explaining complex
time-dependent vehicle interactions that can compromise safety have been proposed (Hayward 1971;
Minderhoud and Bovy 2001; Huguenin et al. 2005; Tarko et al. 2009).
The first instance of the concept of traffic conflicts was in Perkins and Harris in 1968 that considered the
analysis of the use of evasive actions by drivers as an effective method to assess road safety. The
observation of traffic conflicts as temporal and/or spatial proximity started in Sweden with the work of
Amundsen and Hyden (1977) and other researchers. Different situations that can arise in traffic streams
have been represented by Hyden (1987) in terms of a "safety performance pyramid" (Fig. 1) which
characterizes the Swedish traffic conflicts technique.
Figure 1: Hyden "safety pyramid".
Moreover, traffic conflict analysis originates from a richer data set than statistical analysis based only on
crash data since crash occurrences arise from a very small subset of the total set of traffic trajectories data
(Fig.2).
Hyden's pyramid represents all possible interactions, ranging from more frequent undisturbed events at the
base of the pyramid to less frequent higher risk events nearer the peak (i.e. traffic conflicts and crashes). It
is logical to assume that a comprehensive assessment of safety at a given location must reflect the full
spectrum of these vehicle interactions since in some "unlucky" cases crashes can generate near the base of
the pyramid where conditions are "potentially" safer. Also conventional crash prediction models focus on
reported crashes (the very top part of the pyramid), and do not consider unsafe interactions that have not
"yet" resulted in reportable crashes.
Filtering
All traffic data ( From camera view )
Too much
Filtering
Trajectories in time
Filtering
Severity of crashes
1
2
3
4
Time (one year )
Crash data
Time (one year ) Time (one year ) Time (one year )
Time (one year ) Time (one year ) Time (one year )
Surrogate safety performances
Figure 2: Both kinematic crash data and safety performances can be obtained from vehicle trajectories:
vehicle trajectories data, at a specific site for a given period of time, include also all the trajectories of
vehicles involved in a crash (Astarita et al. 2011).
Unfortunately it is not very straightforward how to make an estimate of the probability of crash events
given the frequency and severity of conflicts.
The Swedish traffic conflict observer's manual (Laureshyn and Varhelyi, 2018) says: "If the form of the
relation between the severity and frequency of the events is known, it is theoretically possible to calculate
the frequency of the very severe but infrequent events (accidents) based on known frequency of the less
severe, but more easily observable events (conflicts)". They though acknowledge the fact that the injury
risk cannot be easily estimated: "However, it is not obvious how the injury risk in situations where the
collision was actually avoided can be estimated."
Many recent works have been directed to establish a relationship between the two different parts of the
Hyden "safety pyramid": the white part (where only conflicts occur) and the dark part where crashes occur.
Practical problems, posed by the availability of crash data and the methodological challenges caused by the
extremely random nature of accidents, have led to the development of simpler approaches to improve road
safety assessment, such as the use of microscopic traffic simulation to evaluate traffic conflicts in planned
traffic networks.
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
Traffic computer simulation was introduced in the 50's by Gerlough (1955) and Webster (1958) in 1958
validated his traffic signal delay formula with computer microsimulation. It has been used since then in
research to assess the performance of traffic networks and also the introduction of new technologies such as
connected vehicles (Astarita et al., 2017).
Current microsimulation models, however sophisticated, do not simulate crashes, the higher dark part of the
Hyden "safety pyramid" in Fig. 1 can only be inferred from simulated traffic conflicts (the white part).
Microscopic simulation, applied to establish road traffic safety levels, with the use of traffic conflicts
and/or other surrogate safety measures that can be calculated on vehicle trajectories, has been a growing
topic of research initially investigated by Darzentas et al. (1980) with many following contributions (Cunto
and Saccomanno, 2007; Cunto and Saccomanno, 2008; Saccomanno et al, 2008; Yang et al., 2010; Cheol
and Taejin, 2010; Wang and Stamatiadis,2014). According to the Federal Highway Administration
(Gettman et al., 2008), when properly simulated surrogate safety performance measures show the potential
to provide a useful platform from which to identify high risk situations in the traffic stream and guide cost-
effective intervention strategies. The concept is that the actual risk of crashes can be investigated using
traffic simulation sampling of safety performance indicators instead of real traffic data.
Real data of crashes and measured and simulated conflicts have been compared obtaining acceptable results
in many papers (Dijkstra et al.,2010; Caliendo and Guida,2012; El-Basyouny et al. 2013; Huang et al.2013;
Zhou et al. 2013; Ambros et al. 2014; Shahdah et al.,2014,2015). Microsimulation and surrogate safety
performances have also been used to assess the impact on safety of the introduction of connected and
autonomous vehicles (Zha et al., 2014; Morando et al. 2018, Astarita et al. 2018 )
The analysis of conflicts and the use of traffic simulation for the evaluation of road traffic safety levels has
accelerated research efforts into establishing when two vehicles trajectories constitute a "traffic conflict".
Many "surrogate safety measures" have been proposed such as: time to collision (TTC), post encroachment
time (PET), initial deceleration rate (DR), maximum of the speeds of the two vehicles involved in the
conflict event (MaxS), maximum relative speed of the two vehicles involved in the conflict event (DeltaS),
deceleration rate to avoid the crash (DRAC), and proportion of stopping distance (PSD).
Almost all of the proposed "surrogate safety measures" works on trajectories of vehicles (that will not crash
into each other) to establish a number of potential conflicts arising from temporal or spatial proximity under
the assumption that the closer vehicles are to each other, the nearer they are to a collision (Mahmud et al.,
2017). The proximity is established (mainly with thresholds) on the basis of quantitative measurements that
are obtained from vehicle trajectories.
The interested reader on this subject can refer to three thoroughly redacted (and relatively recent) papers
that give a state of the art respectively on traffic conflicts, road safety simulation modeling and on the use
of proximity surrogate safety measures (Mahmud et al., 2017; Young et al. 2014; Zheng et al. 2014)
All the three above-cited "state of the art" papers evidence advantages and also some limitations of using
microsimulation and surrogate safety measures.
Zheng et al.(2014) raise two conceptual issues: process model validity and severity inconsistency. Process
model validity originates from the fact that some researchers believe that traffic conflicts and crashes are
two mutually exclusive events while others believe that traffic conflicts could lead to traffic crashes where
no evasive driving countermeasure is taken. Severity inconsistency is an issue that originates from the fact
that the severity of traffic conflicts is identified either by the intensity of evasive actions to avoid a crash or
by the proximity in time (or space) between vehicles while severities of crash events cannot be measured in
the same way. In fact, severity of crash events is usually expressed in terms of severity of consequences.
Zheng et al.(2014) say about crashes that: "proximity measure can only reflect the risk of collision but not
the severity of crashes, which is typically differentiated based on consequences of the crash not proximity."
Young et al.(2014) conclude their work by recognizing that simulation will become a useful tool for road
traffic analysis, yet they write that there are a number of areas where further research is needed:
- "The crash as the measure of performance": They recognize that models needs "theoretical and numerical
improvements" to specify the factors that originate them. The relationship between traffic conflicts and the
real crash dynamic has not been adequately investigated.
-"The theory behind driver behavior in crashes": Driver behaviors that results in a crash have not been
taken into account holistically in simulated environments.
-"A more detailed representation of the vehicle and conflict situations": Surrogate safety measures are
based on trajectories of a point that represents the barycenter of a vehicle, real vehicle dimensions and
physical interactions at crashes are not commonly considered.
-"A generalization of the models to look at more crash and vehicle types": Different type of vehicles such
as heavy vehicles have not been specifically considered.
Laureshyn et al. (2017) clarify that commonly used conflict indicators are able to express "proximity" to a
crash and neglects the potential severity of the consequences of a crash. The consequences need to be taken
into account in some way (Laureshyn et al., 2010).
Moreover, the mechanism that generates a crash has not been clarified. In traditional approaches there is no
clear explanation of how a near-crash situation can become a real crash. It is often assumed that
"proximity" of vehicles that are in a near-crash event means also a higher probability of crash.
What are the causes of a real crash? What needs to happen to make a near-crash event turn into a crash?
What are the causes of random deviations from a safe trajectory that make vehicles crash into other nearby
vehicles? What is the mechanism that creates a jump from one region to another region of the Hyden
"safety pyramid" (see figure 3)?
Figure 3: Unexplained discontinuity between near-crashes and real crashes.
Davis et al. (2011) outline a general causal model of traffic conflicts and crashes based on a probabilistic
approach, we believe that it is important to take into account the human factor and this has been seldom
taken into account in preceding works.
Bevrani and Chung (2012) recognize the importance of human error since according to Stutts et al. (2003)
30 % of police reported crashes in the USA are due to human distractions. Stutts et al. (2003) found that
some types of distracting behavior that people undertake while driving include talking on a cell phone,
shaving, putting on eye makeup, eating or drinking, changing a radio station or compact disc and looking at
the back seat to talk to an infant in a car seat.
We conclude this brief state of the art with the reflection that, possibly, the two main factors that have not
been thoroughly investigated in traffic conflict simulation are the potential consequences of crashes and the
human factor.
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
This paper is a first attempt to evaluate traffic safety with microsimulation introducing possible driver
errors. The paper shows that introducing driver error is a feasible task by using common microsimulation
packages and some of the above-indicated issues could possibly be addressed given a breakthrough in
research that could properly introduce driver error in the simulation and shift the focus from traffic conflict
simulation directly to traffic crash simulation (raising awareness of potential consequences).
1.2. Specific problems in the simulation of conflict indicators
Microsimulation of conflict indicators (instead of measuring them on the field) is more controversial since
microsimulation, instead of direct observation, could exacerbate some of the issues indicated above.
Specific problems are listed in the following:
- Process model validity. Commonly used safety indicators in microsimulation are numerically based on
variables which, in most cases, have nothing to do with the real dynamics of real accidents. As an example,
at the present state of the art, there is no way to simulate or take into account accidents that are originated
by specific careless driver behaviours such as vehicles speeding at the red light of a traffic signal or in the
general case of vehicles which are travelling on non-conflicting trajectories. Many real crashes are
generated by obvious driver mistakes and current microsimulation models have no way to simulate this.
-Traffic simulation packages do not explicitly simulate safety indicators. SSAM software was
developed to be applied as an add-on on to main traffic simulation packages (Pu et al., 2008). Some of the
problems with the use of SSAM software that are evidenced in Souleyrette and Hochstein (2012) are the
lack of severity classification of conflicts and the lack of ability to map risk and selected conflicts.
Souleyrette and Hochstein (2012) suggest many possible modification to SSAM software.
-Traffic safety indicators have been developed to be used with real trajectories and traffic
microsimulation is specifically designed to avoid crashes. Surrogate safety measures have been
developed to be used with real trajectories. The use of microsimulation to evaluate surrogate safety
measures is questionable since traffic microscopic models tend to move vehicles around the network
avoiding any interaction that could lead to a crash. Crashes detected by SSAM software are, in fact, caused
by graphical inaccuracies of microscopic simulation packages. Gettman et al., (2008): "All of the
simulation systems exhibit modelling inaccuracies that lead SSAM to identify conflict events with TTC = 0
("crashes")".
-Traffic microsimulators need calibration. The use of traffic microsimulation to obtain trajectories on
which surrogate safety measures are calculated is subject to a correct determination of input parameters.
Microsimulation calibration is a delicate matter and it is not guaranteed that even after performing a perfect
rigorous calibration of a microsimulation model (on traffic dynamic parameters) the trajectories will
produce estimates of safety performance that can be matched with real world observations. For this reason
calibration based on safety performance measures has been proposed (Cunto and Saccomanno, 2008)
though, there is no guarantee that it will lead to a calibration which is consistent with traffic dynamics.
-Traffic Safety Indicators based on conflicts (TSI) are numerous and there is no consensus on which
one to use. Some of them are specifically designed for some specific manoeuvres, moreover, the
commonly used TSI do not consider crash severities. It is not easy to choose among safety indicators since,
as stated above, the complexity involved in the relationship between potential conflicts and real crashes is
not straightforward. In Tarko et al. 2009 it is said: "Consider excessive braking maneuvers. One might
presume that observing these - may serve as a reliable predictor of crashes. However, some drivers who
apply brakes aggressively are avoiding crashes, while others who fail to apply brakes are involved in
crashes. These two simple examples illustrate in a simple and perhaps naïve way the potential complexities
involved in selecting reliable safety surrogates."
Most Traffic Safety Indicators (TSI) do not consider real crash dynamics and potential consequences.
Most surrogate safety measures commonly used are able to establish conflicts and potential crash yet they
are not able to make a differentiation between different severity of crashes. Crash severity is an extremely
important measure (Ivan et al., 2018) yet the commonly used conflict safety indicators consider all possible
collisions incidents as having the same severity and this does not allow accounting for the fact that
accidents occurring at a higher relative speed between vehicles have more severe consequences. Only
recent research efforts have been directed to addressing this issue (Laureshyn et al.,2017).
Friction and shear forces effects on safety are not considered in traffic flow theory or in any conflict
indicator.
Conflicts between vehicles travelling on trajectories that are not intersecting are never considered in
common conflict indicators. Drivers drive all the time very close to roadside obstacles or barriers and also
very close and often to vehicles coming from the opposite direction. In all these very common situations a
very temporary and small deviation from the right trajectory would cause a crash. These types of conflict
are not at all considered in common conflict indicators and this is a serious inadequacy that has not been
explored in science. This point is addressed in the following presented microsimulation case study (second
case).
The proposed methodology can take into account isolated vehicle crashes with lateral barriers or objects
(these events cannot be taken into account with commonly used TSI) and also give a solution to some of
the above-listed problems.
Especially crash dynamics can be reproduced accurately with microsimulation and this potential has not
been explored. Inelastic and elastic collision hypothesis could be applied to obtain a better estimate of the
consequences of a crash. For this reason, in the next section, simple crash dynamics (dating back to Newton
laws) in vector form is presented. It also serves as a base for the proposed methodology.
1.3. Crash severity in simulated surrogate safety measures and inelastic collision hypothesis
It is possible to correct or extend commonly used safety indicators to take into account the amount of
energy involved in near-crashes events. In fact, the severity problem in simulated surrogate safety measures
was addressed in Shelby (2011,with the introduction of Delta-V as a measure of traffic conflict severity),
Sobhani et al. (2011,2013, with the use of kinetic energy) and in Laureshyn et al. (2017, with the
introduction of the use of extended Delta-V). The values that are involved in estimating crash severity are
the speeds and the masses of colliding vehicles.
The dynamic of a crash involving two vehicles can be studied with a fundamental law of physics. The laws
of physics that are applied are conservation of energy and momentum.
For a monodimensional impact, the relative velocity of the bodies after the impact is proportional to that
preceding the impact through a restitution coefficient linked to the elasticity of the two bodies (Newton):
with:
where v1a and v2a are the speeds of objects 1 and 2 before the collision, if ε = 0 the impact is called totally
inelastic; if ε = 1 the impact is called elastic.
The difference between a perfectly elastic or perfectly inelastic collision is in terms of how much kinetic
energy is adsorbed in the collision by the two body colliding. A perfect conservation of energy (almost
impossible) corresponds to an elastic collision while the maximum adsorption of energy corresponds to a
collision where the maximum possible energy is absorbed and where both objects will stick together and
move at the same speed after collision. Real car crash collisions as noted in Shelby (2011) are somewhere
𝑣1𝑎−𝑣2𝑎=−𝜀(𝑣1𝑏−𝑣2𝑏)
0≤𝜀≤1
(1)
(2)
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
between elastic collisions and inelastic collisions. A purely elastic collision would be when two cars after
touching each other bounce back without deformation (and without kinetic energy loss) while a perfectly
inelastic collision would be when there would be no bouncing and the car would form, after the collision, a
single body where a part of kinetic energy has been absorbed into the crash and the rest would be still
present in the motion after collision. Shelby (2011) citing Nordhoff (2005) affirms that car collisions tend
to have a coefficient ε of restitution of about 0.4 at low-speed for bumper-to-bumper collisions, reducing to
around 0.1 for higher speed collisions where the vehicle bodies would deform substantially. It is very
convenient for approximate calculations such as those used in surrogate safety measures to consider car
crashes as inelastic. Shelby (2011) notes how the original CRASH program commissioned by the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration NHTSA to estimate initial impact speeds assumed an inelastic
collision and that this his was later identified as a reason for underestimating speed values by 10% to 30%
(McHenry and McHenry,1997). A subsequent version of the CRASH software was updated taking into
account elastic behavior and initial impact speeds were estimated as close as about 1% of their true value.
We will shortly synthesize two vehicles crash dynamic laws in vector notation under the assumption of
inelastic collision since, in the remaining part of the paper, we will develop crash severity indexes that are
based on this assumption. It must be noted that the proposed methodology in future developments could
take into account partially elastic collisions as we believe that elastic conditions can play an important role
in crash dynamic situations where multiple impacts are involved and where the first low energy impact
could cause more severe secondary collisions (for example: a car which hits laterally another car running in
the same direction could cause the second car to hit a lateral obstacle or invade opposite traffic lanes or in
crashes that involve more than two vehicles).
principle (both elastic and inelastic collisions).
Figure 41: Calculation of the resulting speeds: 𝑽 ,��� 𝜟𝒗1����� and 𝜟𝒗2����� based on momentum conservation
The law of conservation of momentum states that the momentum 𝑷� (a two dimensional vector in our case)
since the momentum 𝑷� before the collisions is: 𝑷�=𝑚1∙𝒗1���+𝑚2∙𝒗2���
where m1 and m2 represent the masses of the two vehicles and 𝒗1��� and 𝒗2��� are the velocities (vectors) before
the impact, the velocity 𝑽 � of the entire system after the collision can then be calculated as :
expressed as the product of mass and velocity keeps constant after a collision (both elastic and inelastic),
(3)
1 This image corrects some minor typographical inaccuracies in the images presented in Shelby (2011), Jurewicz et al.(2016) and
in Laureshyn et al. (2017).
𝑽�=𝑚1∙𝒗1����+𝑚2∙𝒗2����
𝑚1+𝑚2
(4)
(5)
(6)
Delta-V is a notation often used to denote a vehicle change of velocity experienced during a crash. Delta-V
has been statistically connected with the level of injuries passengers can suffer (Gabauer and Gabler 2006;
Tolouei et al. 2013) and in our two dimensional example is given by:
𝚫𝒗1�����=𝐕�−𝒗1��� and 𝚫𝒗2�����=𝐕�−𝒗2���
for the two vehicles involved in a crash.
By definition we have that:
ΔV����12=𝒗2���−𝒗1���=𝐕�−𝚫𝒗2�����−𝐕�+𝚫𝒗1�����=𝚫𝒗1�����−𝚫𝒗2�����
(7)
The Kinetic energy of the two vehicles before the impact is:
the impact under the hypothesis of inelastic collision is (vehicles stick together and keep same speed):
𝐾a=12𝑚1𝑣12+12𝑚2𝑣22
𝐾𝑏=12(𝑚1+𝑚2)𝑉2
Moreover as shown in figure 4 𝚫𝒗1����� and 𝚫𝒗2����� are always parallel and opposite vectors, 𝑽 � being a linear
combination of 𝒗1��� and 𝒗2��� .
where 𝑣1 and 𝑣2 are the modules of the two velocity vectors. The Kinetic energy of the two vehicles after
where 𝑉 is the module of the common speed vector after the crash. By developing the difference in Kinetic
where ΔV12 is the module of the difference vector between the two impact velocities 𝒗1���−𝒗2��� , 𝐾𝑎 and
𝐾𝑏 are the kinetic energies before and after the crash and :
𝑚𝑟= 𝑚1𝑚2𝑚1+𝑚2
is used is the total energy of a scenario which is evaluated as the sum of ΔK for all simulated crashes.
Δ𝐾=𝐾𝑎−𝐾𝑏=12𝑚1𝑣12+12𝑚2𝑣22−12(𝑚1+𝑚2)𝑉2=12𝑚𝑟(ΔV12)2
is called the reduced mass of the system.
In all calculations that are presented in the following, one of the simpler and synthetic safety indicators that
energy before the crash and after the crash, it is possible to calculate the energy that is absorbed by the two
vehicles in the impact that can be expressed as:
Since the proposed methodology is applied as an add on over traffic simulation a more detailed analysis
can also be performed in which the energy absorbed by every vehicle and the exact vehicle type is
considered.
In that case, it would be useful to use the formula proposed by Joksch (1993), as already done in Evans
(1994), that directly establishes a probability of death or injury as a function of Delta-V:
(10)
(9)
(8)
𝑃=�∆𝑉𝛼��𝑘
(11)
In the general case, we have:
(13)
(14)
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
For this more detailed calculation involving the probability of death or injury the quantity of energy
absorbed by each vehicle can be calculated as:
It must be noted that it is easy to demonstrate that the total energy absorbed by the vehicles Δ𝐾 can be
assigned in equal parts to the two vehicles when they have equal masses:
(12)
Δ𝐾1=12𝑚1𝚫𝒗1�����2 ,Δ𝐾2=12𝑚2𝚫𝒗2�����2
Δ𝐾1= Δ𝐾2= Δ𝐾2
𝚫𝒗2������=m2m1
𝚫𝒗1������
This latter equation explains why when the vehicles have different masses the lighter vehicle will suffer
greater damage and its occupants face a higher probability of death or injuries according to (11).
1.4. Contribution of the paper as a breakthrough in traffic simulation: introducing driver error and
"potential crashes" instead of looking for "potential conflicts" in existing simulations
In this paper, a completely new approach to microscopic evaluation of surrogate safety measures is
proposed. The proposed safety indicator is based on the explicit simulation of possible driver errors. The
idea originates from the consideration that, in the real world, most accidents involving human drivers occur
because one (or more than one) driver has a temporarily distraction.
A driver for example can be distracted by being occupied in some other tasks (for example a mobile call) or
because he has a momentary breakdown in attention and/or awareness of external changes due to a
psychological or physical failure. There are many driver distractions that could cause human failure as
revealed by Stutts et al. (2003). In Ueyama (1997) on the base of police records it is shown that in many
right-angle collisions at an intersection in Tokyo drivers did not attempt to avoid the crash.
Bevrani and Chung (2012) propose a framework for car-following microsimulation models (Figure 5) to
include human errors. They identify three stages in which a human error can take place: perception and
recognition, decision making, dynamic formulas.
Figure 5: Bevrani and Chung (2012) framework to introduce human errors in microsimulation models.
The simulation and study of crashes and consequences has been carried out in many works (Mak et al.
1998; Archer and Kosonen,2000;Erbsmehl,2009) although it has never been carried out in a complete
simulated traffic scenario such as one that is produced by microsimulation.
In this paper, a first methodology to shift from "potential conflicts" simulation to "potential crashes"
simulation is proposed, by introducing human failure in terms of potential driver errors, and described in
the next section.
A complete microsimulation application has been developed that is able to explicitly simulate potential
driver errors. The microsimulation model that has been developed in this work has been implemented as an
add-on to the existing Tritone microsimulation model (Astarita et al., 2011; Astarita et al. 2012) and can
be applied also to other existing microsimulation models such as Vissim (PTV,2005) or Aimsun (Barcelo
et al., 1994).
In the following case studies, driver failures are simulated by assuming that a driver stops reacting to
external stimulus and keeps driving at the current speed for a given time (we have called this driver a
"Zombie" driver and the vehicle which is driven by a "Zombie" driver a "bullet" vehicle). No decision
making and dynamic formulas that would account for an evasive maneuver (such as an emergency braking)
are taken into consideration in the case studies presented in this paper. Moreover, in our simple approach
also other drivers are not able to perceive and react to the conflict that a "Zombie" driver could be
generating.
2. The proposed methodology
One of the criticisms that is often raised to the application of microsimulation for the simulation of crashes
is the fact that crashes are very random and rare events and thus it is not possible to reproduce them. In our
methodology, we assume that crashes are originated by human errors. Driver errors happen more often than
crashes and not all driver errors have as an outcome a crash.
The first problem to deal with is the rate of distraction and how a specific distraction turns into a specific
driving error. Let us assume that a distraction turns out into a specific erroneous driving pattern. The rate of
distraction (or erroneous driving patterns) λ can be assumed as a variable which measures the number of
distractions that a driver can have while driving for a given amount of time. The rate λ is not enough to
characterize the distraction phenomenon. A distribution ψ of the typology of erroneous driving pattern (or
severity of the distraction) must also be assumed. In theory, knowing the rate λ and the distribution of ψ a
Monte Carlo method could be applied to generate randomly the instant of distraction and the consequent
erroneous driving pattern.
An underlying assumption for this rate-of-distraction-based model could be that crash frequency is
connected to the distraction frequency, which can be assumed to occur randomly and uniformly along any
travelled distance. In other words, a driver has an equal probability of making an error at any point of his
trip. However, crash data have shown that crash frequencies are higher at certain locations and in certain
traffic flow conditions. How to deal with these complications?
A very similar methodology, to what is proposed in the following, has been applied into the Roadside
Safety Analysis Program (RSAP) developed in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program
(NCHRP) and presented in report 492 that is the Engineer's manual for RSAP (Mak and Sicking 2003).
The NCHRP report 492 is more than a software manual and describes the basis of a research project to
develop an improved cost effective analysis procedure for assessing roadside safety improvements. The
project objective has been accomplished with the development of a software that can help roadside safety
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
engineers to evaluate impacts of roadside safety improvements. The RSAP software consists of four basic
modules: the Encroachment Module, the Crash Prediction Module, the Severity Prediction Module, and the
Benefit/Cost Analysis Module. Using the Monte Carlo technique, RSAP generates the following
conditions: encroachment location, encroachment speed and angle, vehicle type and vehicle orientation on
impact. RSAP assumes a straight encroachment vehicle path justified by "the lack of quantitative
information on vehicle and driver behavior after encroaching into the roadside" and also due to the
difficulty of simulating a curvilinear vehicle path. In other words, RSAP generates randomly (in a random
location) a vehicle and its roadside encroachment trajectory (starting from a random location on the road)
and assesses the consequent damage of a "potential" crash by evaluating the consequences of simulated
impacts.
The proposed methodology differs from the RSAP software approach since RSAP considers only isolated
driver crashes against roadside obstacles and barriers without considering complete traffic scenarios and
interactions among vehicles. Moreover, RSAP is not built upon traffic microsimulation software.
The proposed methodology is instead built upon classical microsimulation packages. Knowing the vehicle
involved in a distraction and the consequent severity of the distraction that leads to an erroneous driving
pattern it is possible to create an "add-on" simulation inside a classic simulation scenario. The "bullet"
vehicle kinematics can then be studied along with that of other surrounding vehicles. A similar procedure
has been applied in the paper of Wang et al. (2017) where three anomalous driving patterns are considered:
vehicles which are moving at an excessive low or high speed and vehicles that operate an emergency
braking maneuver that makes them abruptly stop. In that work, an "add-on" simulation is performed only
on the chosen anomalous vehicle and on neighboring vehicles.
Our methodology is different from the method proposed in Wang et al. (2017) since we introduce explicitly
driver distractions as a possible anomalous behavior that turns into an anomalous driving pattern.
Moreover, we propose a detailed analysis of crash dynamics that considers also isolated crashes with
roadside obstacles and barriers. Apart from that, the general approach is very similar. And the third case of
sudden stops analyzed in the paper of Wang et al. (2017) can be seen as a subcase of road failure in our
general methodology.
In our methodology, we assume that the outcome of a given specific erroneous driving pattern can be easily
studied by applying vehicle kinematic in a microsimulation program and that this "add-on" simulation can
be performed with a post-processing procedure that is performed on the trajectories that are the output of a
classical microsimulation.
This "add-on" simulation in general could be as simple as projecting the "bullet" vehicle along a straight
trajectory line as in RSAP or as complicated as a full microsimulation model. The general framework, that
we believe is applicable to every kind of traffic anomaly, is such as depicted in Figure 6. In Fig. 6 we
introduce also the term "road anomaly" since a vehicle which operates an abrupt stop most of the time is
forced to do so because of some kind of road anomaly (an obstacle on the roadway).
Driving behaviors (or road) anomalies can be simulated by using a random Monte Carlo approach or a
deterministic approach. In the first case, parameters affecting perception, decision making and vehicle
dynamics (in the case of failing vehicle) are randomly generated. In the deterministic approach instead sets
of parameters are fixed and the calculation must be repeated for every set of parameters. It must be noted
that road failures such as a dog crossing the road or exceptionally slippery road pavement (due for example
to an oil spill) can also be simulated with this approach. The start of the procedure in Fig.6 is the choice of
a vehicle (driver) who performs an anomalous driving pattern. This pattern is simulated together with the
potential evasive movements of other surroundings vehicles. The output of this simulation, if a crash
occurs, is considered in terms of severity. We propose to use general simple energy-based indicators for
severity of a crash, although every detailed analysis of the crash dynamics can be performed.
In this paper, we apply a simple methodology that can be considered a first simple implementation of the
general framework of Fig. 6 based on a deterministic technique. A Monte Carlo or mixed deterministic-
Monte Carlo approach could also be used, though, since this is the first implementation of this
methodology, we have kept this first implementation simple and reproducible by applying a deterministic
approach instead of a stochastic approach.
Classic traffic Microsimulation
Post-processing
evaluation framework
Trajectories of all vehicles xi(t),vi(t),ai(t)
Choice of a bullet or failing vehicle z:
xz(t),vz(t),az(t)
or
Choice of a road failure
Random Monte Carlo
or deterministic
If vehicle (driver) failure:
random Monte Carlo
or deterministic
alteration
of normal behaviour
Perception
Decision making
Vehicle dynamics
Traffic dynamics for the next Δt
including potential evasive manoeuvres
of other vehicles
Crash severity evaluation (if any)
Figure 6: General proposed framework for the simulation of driver, vehicle and/or road failures.
In general terms, the proposed first implementation of our methodology develops in a very similar way to
RSAP, applying the same procedure of projecting the trajectory of a vehicle in a straight line. Yet we
propose to apply this over the simulated trajectories of other vehicles in a microsimulation environment
scenario. In other words, the trajectory of the distracted driver vehicle is evaluated and projected, for the
given time steps, for the established distraction time, over the actual trajectories of other vehicles. Every
occurring crash is then evaluated in terms of energy involved in the crash. The simulation of a driver
distraction is performed every time step on every vehicle. With this methodology a great number of
"potential" crashes are then generated. The total crash energy (sum of all energy involved in all potential
crashes) or other relevant variables can then be used as safety indicators.
In detail, the framework we applied in our case studies is depicted in Figure 7. There are just three main
parameters of our first implementations: the simulation time step, the distraction time and the angle of the
possible "Zombie" vehicle trajectory. Each single vehicle that is moved on the network is considered as
candidate for a driver distraction each time step of the microsimulation. The time step, so, is the first
parameter of the proposed methodology and in this first implementation was set equal to one second. In the
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
following case studies, microsimulation of traffic scenarios is used as a basis for calculations, and in each
microsimulation, each vehicle on the road is considered every second for a "potential crash" production. A
"potential crash" is generated by moving the vehicle (starting at time t0 ) for a given distraction time ΔT
(until the time t0 + ΔT) at a constant speed equal to the simulated speed of the vehicle at time t0. This
second parameter, ΔT in this paper, has been set as an integer value from one to seven seconds. In this
preliminary work, to make our work reproducible we have used fixed values instead of a random
distribution with a Monte Carlo technique.
Classic traffic Microsimulation
Post-processing
evaluation framework
Trajectories of all vehicles xi(t),vi(t),ai(t)
First parameter: Time step
Choice of a bullet or failing vehicle z:
xz(t),vz(t),az(t)
Deterministic
(all vehicles
every time step)
Deterministic
alteration
of normal behaviour
("Zombie" drivers that
keep driving
at constant speed)
Perception
Decision making
Vehicle dynamics
-Second parameter: Δt=duration time of distraction
-Third parameter: fixed altered trajectory angle (at
constant speed)
Traffic dynamics for the next Δt of the
"Zombie" driven "bullet" vehicle.
(potential evasive manoeuvres
of other vehicles are not simulated)
Crash severity evaluation (if any)
Figure 7: Proposed specific framework for the simulation of driver errors following the "zombie" driver
("bullet" vehicle) approach. This framework has been used in the following microsimulated case studies
and is a subset of the general framework in Figure 6.
Also the trajectory of the vehicle could be simulated at a random angle generated with a Monte Carlo
technique according to a given distribution. In this first implementation instead we used 3 different angles:
a straight line, according to the given direction of the vehicle at time t0, and a 15 degrees deviation on the
left and on the right.
In other words, as an example, for a parameter ΔT of 5 seconds for each vehicle we calculate 15 vehicle
positions as depicted in Figure 8.
Figure 8: Possible positions of vehicle trajectories (as they are investigated in the following case studies)
with a time distraction of 5 seconds.
In the following simulation case studies, collisions between vehicles and roadside objects or barriers have
not been considered so the crash depicted in Figure 9 is possible (with DT=7 sec., it must be noted that a
lower DT would not have caused a collision).
Figure 9: A rare but possible collision at a 15 degrees angle trajectory after 7 seconds of distractions.
The detail algorithm of the microsimulation add-on examines all vehicle trajectories every second of the
simulation, performing a "distraction" simulation inside the main simulation. Each vehicle, which is
moving at the considered time, is advanced at a constant speed, for an imposed period of time on a
deviation angle that is imposed for the direction. During this subsimulation it is possible to have two
results: the vehicle does not impact with any other vehicle (barrier or side obstacle) or the vehicle is
involved in a crash. The collision between two vehicles is detected by evaluating the points of intersection
between two vehicles as in Figure 10. The algorithm evaluates whether the sides of a vehicle intersect with
the sides of another vehicle (or barrier).
Figure 10: Collision detection.
If there is a collision the subsimulation is interrupted and the extent of the collision is evaluated as a
function of the energy produced. In the end, the algorithm returns detailed information on individual events
and aggregate statistics, which allow a rapid evaluation of the analyzed network. Aggregated information
(averages, variances, sums, minimums and maximums) can be calculated on the basis of the number of
collisions, the effective duration of the distraction, the overall energy developed during the collision, and
the amount of energy for each of the two vehicles involved.
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
An accurate analysis of road side barriers safety performances is beyond the scope of this paper so only an
analytical example is presented in the following section. All the presented simulation-based case studies
(similarly as in all preceding papers based on the evaluation or microsimulation of surrogate safety
measures) do not consider isolated vehicle crashes or road side crashes. It must be noted though that the
proposed methodology allows researchers also to assess easily the real impacts of roadside safety
improvements basing analysis on the real prevalent time varying o/d matrix in every traffic scenario that
can be reproduced by microsimulation.
3. How the three parameters affect results, under the proposed specific framework, in the case of
isolated vehicles: two simple examples analytically evaluated
In the following, a special notation will be used to indicate parameters of a surrogate safety indicator such
as that proposed in the previous section. The parameters are the distraction time duration, the angle of the
deviated trajectory and the percentage of energy considered for a straight deviation. As an example, for a
distraction time of 3 seconds, a trajectory deviated on the left and on the right at an angle of 15° and an
energy calculated by summing up 80% of the energy due to crashes that are originated by a straight
trajectory (10 % for the energy of the left and right deviated trajectories) would be indicated by the
indicator: Z3-15-0.80. This means that Z3-15-0.80 of a given traffic scenario would be the sum of 80% of all the
energy relative to all crashes that are generated by straight trajectories (of 3 seconds) and 10% of the sum
of all energy of crashes that are generated by trajectories that deviate left and right at an angle of 15°.
3.1 Example 1 isolated vehicle and linear road side barrier.
The first proposed example (see Fig.11) is a single vehicle travelling along a road segment of one km at a
constant speed of 90 km/h, the road side barrier is a concrete linear wall.
If we make the case that diver failures are generated every second (first parameter time step = 1 sec.), that
the driver distraction time is 5 seconds and we consider equally the energy coming from the three possible
angular trajectories above indicated (deviation angle +-15° which means that the energy calculated is : Z5-
15-1/3). Then two crashes are generated by each one of the 40 considered positions of the vehicle. The two
crashes at a speed of 90 km/h against the vertical walls on both sides of the road happen as a consequence
of the 15 degrees deviation to the left and to the right. For the crash severity evaluation, we can consider the
component of kinetic energy in the direction perpendicular to the wall:
Δ𝐾=12𝑚(𝑣𝑥)2
(15)
where vx is equal to 90*sin(15°)=23.3 (km/h)=6.47 (m/s) which, if we make the case of a vehicle of 1000
kg, brings a result of ΔK= 20 933 (Joule) for the lateral crash. Considering the 40 positions of the vehicle
in one km of road and two crashes for every position this brings a total crash energy of 1 674 682 (Joule)
(which must be divided by three according to the above-described indicator). This example clearly shows
that the total crash energy would be inversely proportional to the chosen time step.
Changing the trajectory angle by increments would also increase the energy value. The general formula for
the total crash energy, in example one, as a function of lateral angle deviation and time step is :
Total crash Energy= Z5-θ-1/3 = 𝐿𝑣∙𝛿𝑡∙2∙ 12𝑚(𝑣∙sinθ)2 *1/3
where 𝛿𝑡 is the time step (s), v is the vehicle speed (m/s), m the vehicle mass (kg), θ the deviation angle
and L the road segment length. An increase in the distraction interval ΔT would not affect results of road
side crashes, since in this example only one vehicle is on the road, while instead it would obviously affect
total crash energy in all scenarios where different vehicles are simulated in a microsimulation scenario. A
(16)
decrease in ΔT could affect results, since a small ΔT would generate crashes only against barriers or objects
that can be reached by the "bullet" trajectory.
Figure 11: Example 1.
3.3 Example 2 isolated vehicle with trees at the road side and no safety barrier.
The second proposed example (see Fig.12) is a single vehicle traveling along a road segment of one km at a
constant speed of 90 km/h, there is no roadside barrier and there are trees spaced every 5 meters on both
sides of the road. For comparison, we can make the same assumptions as in example 1: diver failures are
generated every second, driver distraction time is 5 seconds and 15 degrees deviations. Two crashes against
trees, on both sides of the road, are generated by each one of the 40 considered positions of the vehicle. For
the crashes at a speed of 90 km/h against the trees we have to consider the total kinetic energy of the
vehicle (not only the 𝑣𝑥 component perpendicular to road direction):
(17)
The total crash energy is: 25 000 000 (Joule), this energy value which is around 15 times that of example 1
and clearly shows how the proposed methodology would allow researchers to take into account also
roadside barrier effects. The formula for total crash energy for example 2 is:
Total crash Energy= Z5-θ-1/3 = 𝐿𝑣∙𝛿𝑡∙2∙ 12𝑚(𝑣)2∗1/3
(18)
The deviation angle here again has practically no role (except for when the trajectory becomes so angulated
that the vehicle could move through two trees without crashing).
Δ𝐾=12𝑚(𝑣)2 = 312 500 (Joule)
Figure 12: Example 2.
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
4. Microsimulation case studies
A general analysis of how the parameters affect results, in more complicated traffic scenarios, can only be
done in microsimulation, given the practical difficulties of performing analytical calculation when more
than one moving vehicle is present on a network. Three scenarios are presented in the following:
4.1 Friction effects on safety in traffic flow theory. Is it true that significant speed differences do not affect
traffic safety when a white (or yellow) line is drawn on the road pavement?
The ancient Greeks were aware of causes and mitigation of friction. Fluid friction occurs
between fluid layers that are moving relative to each other. This can cause viscosity and other friction
forces in fluids. Friction can cause fluids to become unstable and can cause a transition to a turbulent
flow regime. Traffic flow is the only case where it is possible to draw a white (or yellow) continuous line
on the road pavement between two different flow speed regimes and supposedly avoid any friction and
unwanted interactions. According to current surrogate safety indicators based on traffic conflicts a road
design such as in Figure 13 is as safe as a road design with a central barrier since trajectories of opposing
directions do not intersect. This is against common knowledge. Knapp et al.(2014) in the Road diet FHWA
guide state that: "Four-lane undivided highways have a history of relatively high crash rates as traffic
volumes increase".
Figure: 13 undivided four-lane highway.
Many papers have been presented on the evaluation of surrogate safety measures based on microscopic or
macroscopic traffic flow modeling that consider speed differential as a factor or as an indicator for crash
risk (Kachroo and Sharma,2018). There is no published paper on surrogate safety indicators that can be
applied to the speed differential between opposing traffic in undivided two (or four)-lane highways. In the
seminal paper by Gettman and Head (2003) there is no mention of potential conflicts arising from this kind
of traffic scenarios. In Laureshyn et al.(2010) it is introduced a classification of encounter states and the
state where road users' paths do not overlap is considered to be safe unless the situation turns into a
"collision course" possibly via a "crossing course" state. It is a fact that this transition from one state to
another is not reproducible in current microsimulation unless driver error is introduced such as in the
proposed approach. Moreover, it is debatable whether this weakness deserves a better investigation for all
(numerous) applications that are based on real trajectories.
The conclusion is that the evaluation of undivided highway safety it is not possible in simulation with
current surrogate safety measures based on conflicts and at the moment it has been explored only with
inferential statistics based on crash data. Some examples are in: Council and Stewart (1999), Hauer at al.
(2004); Dinu and Veeraragavan (2011), Park and Abdel-Aty (2015).
The following example will show how the proposed methodology can asses safety in these kinds of
scenario. A simulation case study was created based on the situation depicted in Figure 14 relative to the
road that runs alongside the sea in the city of Paola in south Italy.
Figure 14: Sea-side road in Paola, Italy 2018.
A simulation was performed using VISSIM microsimulation package coupled with the SSAM package on
the two networks depicted in Figures 15 and 16.
Figure 15: Linear road.
Figure 16: Deviated Road.
Simulated traffic conditions were the same in both scenarios: total length of the road 200 meters and traffic
flow 500 veh./h. per direction. For both scenarios 20 simulation repetitions were carried out. Results of
SSAM package with a TTC threshold of 1,5 sec. were equal for both scenarios: zero conflicts as can be
seen in Figure 17.
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
Total collision energy [J]
Deviated
Trajectory
road
angle
Front
378141
Left 1948400
Right
715
Total
Straight
road
16336
1770168
48
Difference
361805
178231
668
%
Difference
2214,8
10,1
1394,9
540704 1.1.1. 30,3
Table 1: Total collision energy in VISSIM simulation.
1786552
2327256
Figure 17: SSAM Analysis on VISSIM simulation for first case study.
The underling hypothesis in all current conflict techniques is that for a conflict between two vehicles to
exist the trajectories must intersect. The case of Figures 14 and 16 is instead obviously dangerous since
vehicles can potentially get involved in a high energy head on collision with traffic coming from the
opposite direction. The proposed methodology instead, introducing driving errors in vehicles trajectories is
able to evaluate the increased risk. Results, in fact, leads to a 30% worsening of safety, in terms of overall
impact energy (Table T1), when the deviation is considered.
From the numerical results we can see how the incidents due to front and right trajectories have an
important role in this proposed scenario since a distraction trajectory on the left of the travelling direction
would bring vehicles away from a potential head on collision. In Figure 18 the collision points, in which the
collisions start, are plotted and it is clearly possible to see an increase in point density near the deviated
road section.
Figure 18: Collision points.
4.2 Toll plaza layouts.
The second simulated scenario concerns the analysis of two different toll plaza layouts. This scenario is
based on the crash analysis carried out by Abuzwidaha and Abdel-Aty (2018) on different designs of
hybrid toll plazas (HTP). In HTP express automated Open Road Tolling (ORT) lanes coexist with
traditional toll collection lanes. The paper of Abuzwidah and Abdel-Aty (2018) compares the two different
implemented solutions in Florida expressways: ORT deployed on the mainline and separate traditional toll
collection to the side or traditional toll collection deployed on the mainline and separate ORT lanes to the
side. The two main reported results are: that the first design (where ORT are deployed on the mainline) is
safer and that the crash risk is approximately 23% higher in diverge areas than in merge areas.
An attempt to perform a risk estimation with our methodology has been carried on, replicating a similar
scenario with the Tritone microsimulation package. Different total traffic flows values have been simulated
on the networks depicted in Figure 19 and 20 considering 19% of the traffic on the traditional manual
collection lanes.
Figure 19: First design (D1) of hybrid toll plaza layout (manual lanes on the mainline).
Figure 20: Second design (D2) of hybrid toll plaza layout (automatic lanes on the mainline).
Results in terms of total energy resulting from the application of our methodology, with a Z3-15-1/3 indicator,
are depicted in table 2 and, in accordance with traffic crash data of Abuzwidah and Abdel-Aty (2018),
show an increased risk when the manual toll collection is deployed on the mainline.
Traffic flow [v/h]
Automatic
toll collection
486
972
1458
1782
1944
Total
600
1200
1800
2200
2400
Manual
toll collection
114
228
342
418
456
Safety
%
9,55
15,40
11,93
12,73
19,53
Manual
collection on the
mainline (D1)
Total energy [J]
Automatic
collection on the
mainline (D2)
61304576
218669984
1021998016
1162934272
1941774336
Difference
67775472 6470896
258487232 39817248
1160492288 138494272
1332596992 169662720
2412963072 471188736
Table 2: Total collision energies in different flow scenarios.
In Figures 21 and 22 it is possible to see the points in which the collisions take place and a visual
(qualitative) confirmation of the second main finding of Abuzwidah and Abdel-Aty (2018) that the diverge
areas are more critical as opposed to the merge areas.
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
Figure 21. Collision points in D1 design.
Figure 22. Collision points in D2 design
With the proposed methodology a map of the transportation network can be drawn by dividing the network
into areas and by coloring each area according to the total energy of potential crashes that happen inside a
given area. This visualization allows engineers to spot dangerous locations easily. In Figure 23 this
diagram is presented for the two designs D1 and D2.
Figure 23: Map of danger for D1 and D2 designs.
Saad et al. (2018) present a study on the analysis of driving behavior at expressway toll plazas and it
confirms previous results that the main problem at hybrid toll plazas is that drivers have to take the right
lane and may perform sudden lane changing before the toll. The simulated scenario in our methodology,
introducing driver errors, seems to be able to reveal these kinds of traffic flow turbulence and the connected
risk.
Another example of the application of our methodology and the resulting danger map is in Figure 24 where
an intersection is immediately spotted as a dangerous point on the traffic network.
Figure 24: Map of danger as potential crashes energy level.
The small road network in Figure 24 has been simulated with 720 veh./h. on the main road and 360 veh./h.
on the secondary road. It was modeled using the TRITONE software and elaborated using the methodology
proposed in this article with a Z3-15-1/3 indicator.
4.3 three different intersection layouts
Many papers have been presented for the evaluation of traffic safety at intersections with surrogate safety
measures, among them: Stevanovic et al.,2013;Killi and Vedagiri,2014; Shahdah et al. 2015; Zhang et al.,
2017. Some papers have been also presented to establish the safest design for given traffic volumes
(Astarita et al. 2019) using simulation.
Following a similar approach, we introduce a three intersection layouts scenario, depicted in the following
Figure 25. The simulations have been calibrated by sampling data from a single real intersection. The
sampled intersection is located in an urban area and is an unsignalized intersection (case A). The
intersection has also been studied altering the layout into a signalized intersection (case B) and a
roundabout (case C) (keeping the same traffic flows).
O/D
1
2
3
4
1
0
465
76
121
Cars
2
1073
0
75
215
3
183
74
0
148
4
124
133
95
0
Heavy Vehicles
O/D
1
2
3
4
1
0
13
5
8
2
48
0
8
8
3
14
3
0
7
4
13
0
3
0
Table 3: O/D Matrices.
Figure 25: Case studies
The general expectation is that from case A to C, safety would increase in average conditions. The flows
that were detected by manual counting and simulated are from 8.30 to 9.30 such as depicted in table I.
From table I it is clear that in simulations also heavy vehicles were taken into account, in order to obtain a
simulation closer to reality. The networks were modeled through the car-following models Wiedemann 99
(Wiedemann, 1991) and Gipps (1981) in both VISSIM and Tritone simulators. While the resulting
trajectories were analyzed through a specific microsimulation add on software created ad hoc and based on
the algorithm described in the previous sections.
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
4.3.1 Results of simulations
Simulations were carried out with different distraction time parameter: 3, 5, and 7 seconds and with a time
step parameter of one second. This means that a simulated crash can happen at any instant between 1
second and the established distraction time.
The following two figures show results for Vissim and Tritone Microsimulation packages in terms of total
energy of simulated crashes.
A higher energy can be associated with a greater risk of injuries or deaths. Absolute values of energy in the
two different simulators are different (this reflects slightly different vehicle to vehicle interactions between
different simulators), yet results in terms of relative values between different scenarios are very similar for
the two simulators. Also results are not very sensible to a change in distraction time parameter (max
distraction time in Figures 26 and 27). For all the selected distraction time parameters and for both
simulators the intersections rank in this order of safety from the safest to the least safe: traffic light
regulated, roundabout and unregulated intersection. In all scenarios, the unregulated intersection is the least
safe while the traffic light is the safest. It must be noted that results are also a function of the given traffic
flows. As can be seen in Figures 28 and 29, conditions of flow are very congested, in the traffic light
scenario, and this increases safety since vehicles are always travelling at a very low speed.
Figure 26: Total collision energy in VISSIM for three scenarios and for different distraction times.
Figure 27: Total collision energy in Tritone for three scenarios and for different distraction times.
Figure 28: The three simulated scenarios in VISSIM
Figure 29: The three simulated scenarios in TRITONE
Results on the average time at which a crash occurs in the simulations are also similar between Tritone and
VISSIM as can be seen in Figures 30 and 31:
Figure 30:Average distraction time before a crash occurs in VISSIM.
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
Figure 31:Average distraction time before a crash occurs in Tritone.
The total energy of simulated crash has been calculated, with a distraction time of 3 seconds, also by
applying a threshold on the severity of crashes. In other words, only the crashes that have an energy value
over threshold are considered and summed to calculate total energy. In Figure 32 and 33 are the total
collision energies for VISSIM and Tritone:
Figure 32:Total collision energy in VISSIM removing all crashes below a given threshold.
Figure 33:Total collision energy in TRITONE removing all crashes below a given threshold.
The graphs of Figures 32 and 33 show clearly how the ranking of the three scenarios are always the same in
any case with both microsimulation packages.
When considering instead the average collision energy VISSIM and Tritone show different results as can
be seen in the following Figures 34 and 35 depicting the average collision energy applying a threshold on
the severity of crashes.
Figure 34:Average collision energy in VISSIM removing all crashes below a given threshold.
Figure 35:Average collision energy in Tritone removing all crashes below a given threshold.
4.3.2 Confrontation between the number of simulated crashes and SSAM conflicts
A confrontation was also performed between the proposed methodology and classic methodologies of
estimation based on SSAM safety analysis. SSAM was applied to both Tritone and VISSIM in the three
scenarios obtaining similar results in terms of number of conflicts. Conflicts were calculated on the basis of
TTC indicator with a threshold of 1,5 sec.
The following Figure 36 shows again the same ranking in terms of safety levels for the three scenarios. In
Figure 36 the percentage of the total number of conflicts (with classical methodology according to SSAM)
and the total number of simulated crashes (among different scenarios) are shown for each scenario.
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
Percentage of conflicts (crashes)
60,0
50,0
40,0
30,0
20,0
10,0
0,0
Tritone (SSAM Conflicts)
Tritone (Crashes)
Vissim (SSAM Conflicts)
Vissim (Crashes)
Unregulated
intersection
Traffic light
regulated
intersection
Roundabout
Figure 36: Percentage of total conflicts(or crashes) for each intersection and for both microsimulation
models.
5 Discussion and conclusions
In this paper, a general methodology for introducing the driver error in simulation and for evaluating
resulting potential crashes is presented. The proposed methodology is quite primitive in both the simulation
of driver errors and in crash dynamics simulation, yet it presents very innovative features introducing the
possibility of simulating driving errors in a microscopic environment.
The simplicity of the proposed approach makes it easily reproducible and applicable on top of any
microsimulation package that can produce trajectories of vehicles.
Moreover, the proposed approach generates surrogate safety indicators that can be applied legitimately on
both simulated and real trajectories as alternative surrogate safety measures and compared with existing
indicators that are not able to consider conflicts between vehicles moving on nonconflicting trajectories and
with roadside obstacles and barriers.
The results of this paper indicate that the safety level of very common traffic scenarios, which cannot be
assessed with traditional surrogate safety measures, based on conflict indicators, can instead be easily
captured with the proposed methodology.
The proposed indicators are, in fact, more comprehensive than traditionally used conflict indicators since
they are able to capture a wider range of conflicts that those commonly evaluated in traditional indicators.
The assessment of roadside barriers safety becomes possible in the proposed framework with common
microsimulation packages.
A more detailed analysis of potential crash consequences is also possible by exploiting the richness of crash
dynamics simulation.
A different and new insight into an important issue such as traffic safety evaluation with microscopic
simulation becomes possible when the introduction of driver errors (or sudden road anomalies) allows road
crashes in a microscopic setting to be simulated.
Common simulation techniques do not allow representation of a wide range of erroneous driver behaviors
that can lead to a crash. Even common shunting crashes that are caused by any internal or external cause
that can force a leading driver to stop the car, with an abrupt extreme braking maneuver, are not properly
represented with common simulation techniques.
More common erroneous driver behaviors that can be simulated by the proposed approach are:
-Drivers speeding at a red light or in general approaching an intersection without taking into proper
consideration other incoming vehicles.
-Drivers taking the wrong lane, driving on the wrong side of the road or (worst) in one way streets against
the correct traffic direction.
-Drivers driving off road in isolated accidents against external obstacles or traffic barriers.
-Accidents where a vehicle hits first a barrier or an obstacle and then bouncing back on the road hitting or
getting hit by another car.
-Accidents that involve more than one vehicle and the connected real crash dynamic.
-Accidents caused by overtaking maneuvers where there is not enough time leeway.
The proposed first implementations of the methodology in the presented case studies show accordance with
empirical expectations, with crash data and with commonly used conflicts indicators techniques (in the
situations where conflict indicators can be applied).
Crash severity is finally taken into account explicitly shedding some light on the real consequences and on
the safety of traffic scenarios that it was not possible to simulate properly.
The total impact energy proposed in the case studies is only one of the possible surrogate measures of risk
that it is possible to calculate once driver errors are introduced. By simulating (or knowing) the vehicle
mass distribution it would be an easy step to calculate the exact Delta-V of every potential crash bringing
an estimate of the casualties or injuries using (11).
Moreover, the methodology presented can be easily applied to evaluate the safety impact of autonomous
vehicles in a mixed environment. Autonomous vehicles of the future will be able to drive without
committing human errors yet they will have to face the possibility of human errors. A safety assessment
using microsimulation of different mixed road scenarios would be realistic only properly introducing
human error as the main differentiating factor between human driven and autonomous vehicles.
The presented methodology will allow important safety and economic evaluations of new mixed traffic
interventions and policies such as: new traffic rules in a mixed traffic reality, roadside barriers design, new
connected traffic signals and many other innovative systems that will have to deal with a mixed circulation
of old vehicles and connected and autonomous vehicles.
This evaluation, of course, would have to be scaled relative to the simulated scenario as a function of the
traffic flow distribution over a period of time. The indicators proposed in the case studies examine a driving
error rate of one error per second for each driver. In a real scenario, the driving error rate for second is a
very low number though the number of seconds travelled by all drivers are very high. A scaling of the
proposed procedure on experimental data and a calibration of the indicators parameters its outside the scope
of this first methodological paper.
The implementations of the proposed methodology in the proposed case studies should be only considered
as illustrative examples of the potentiality of introducing driver errors into a microsimulation environment
so that the concepts presented in this seminal paper may stimulate new questions and give new insights that
hopefully will lead to further investigations and better infrastructure designs.
6 Acknowledgements
We wish to thank Giuseppe Guido and Alessandro Vitale for the useful discussions, and Giovanna
Imbrogno for suggesting the Paola sea-side road case.
on road safety. 1997.
M. A. Abdel-Aty, A.E. Radwan, "Modeling
Prevention,Volume 32, Issue 5, 2000,Pages 633-642,
traffic accident occurrence and
involvement",Accident Analysis &
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
7 References
Hauer, Ezra. "On the estimation of the expected number of accidents." Accident Analysis & Prevention 18.1 (1986): 1-12.
Jovanis, P., Chang, H., 1986. "Modeling the relationship of accidents to miles traveled." Transportation Research Record 1068.
S. Miaou, H. Lum (1993) "Modeling vehicle, accidents and highway geometric design relationships"
Accident Analysis and Prevention, 25 (6) (1993), pp. 689-709
Miaou, S., (1994). "The relationship between truck accidents and geometric design of road section: Poisson versus Negative
Binomial regression." Accident Analysis and Prevention 26(4).
Shankar, V., Mannering, F., Barfield, W. 1995. Effect of roadway geometric and environment factors on rural freeway accident
frequencies. Accident Analysis and Prevention 27(30).
Hauer, Ezra. Observational before/after studies in road safety. Estimating the effect of highway and traffic engineering measures
Yan, Xuedong, Essam Radwan, and Mohamed Abdel-Aty. "Characteristics of rear-end accidents at signalized intersections using
multiple logistic regression model." Accident Analysis & Prevention 37.6 (2005): 983-995.
Hayward, J. (1971) Near misses as a measure of safety at urban intersections, PhD Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, The
Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania.
Minderhoud, M. and Bovy, P. (2001) "Extended time to collision measures for road traffic safety assessment", Accident
Analysis and Prevention 33: 89 -- 97.
Huguenin, F., Torday, A. and Dumont, A. (2005) "Evaluation of traffic safety using microsimulation", Proceedings of the 5th
Swiss Transport Research Conference -- STRC, Ascona, Switzerland.
Tarko, A., Davis, G., Saunier, N., Sayed, T., and Washington, S. (2009). "Surrogate measures of safety".
Perkins, Stuart R., and Joseph L. Harris. (1967) "Traffic conflict characteristics: accident potential at intersections". Highway
Research Record, Vol. 225. pp. 35-43.
Amundsen, F.H., and Hyden, C. 1977. Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Traffic Conflicts, Oslo, Norway.
Hydén, C. (1987) The development of a method for traffic safety evaluation: the Swedish traffic conflicts technique, Lund
Institute of Technology, Lund, Sweden.
Astarita, V., Giofré, V., Guido, G. and Vitale, A. (2011). Investigating road safety issues through a microsimulation model.
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 20, 226-235.
Laureshyn, A. and Varhelyi A. (2018). The Swedish traffic conflict technique: Observer's manual. Department of Technology
and Society Traffic Engineering, Lund University.
Gerlough, D. L. (1955). Simulation of freeway traffic on a general-purpose discrete variable computer (Doctoral dissertation,
University of California, Los Angeles).
Webster, F. V. (1958). Traffic signal settings (No. 39).
Astarita, V., Giofrè, V. P., Guido, G., and Vitale, A. (2017). The use of adaptive traffic signal systems based on floating car
data. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing, 2017.
Darzentas, J., Cooper, D., Storr, P. and McDowell M. (1980) "Simulation of road traffic conflicts at t-junctions", Simulation 34:
155 -- 164.
Cunto, F. and Saccomanno, F.F. (2007) "Microlevel traffic simulation method for assessing crash potential at intersections",
Proceedings of the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C..
Cunto, F. and Saccomanno, F. F. (2008) "Calibration and validation of simulated vehicle safety performance at signalized
intersections", Accident Analysis and Prevention 40: 1171 -- 1179.
Saccomanno F., Cunto F., Guido G. and Vitale A. (2008) "Comparing safety at signalized intersections and roundabouts using
simulated rear-end conflicts", Transportation Research Record 2078: 90 -- 95.
Yang, H., Ozbay, K. and Bartin, B. (2010) "Application of simulation-based traffic conflict analysis for highway safety
evaluation", Proceedings of the 12th WCTR, Lisbon, Portugal.
Cheol, O. and Taejin, K. (2010) "Estimation of rear-end crash potential using vehicle trajectory data", Accident Analysis and
Wang, C., and Stamatiadis, N. (2014). Evaluation of a simulation-based surrogate safety metric. Accident Analysis &
Prevention 42: 1888 -- 1893.
Prevention, 71, 82-92.
Gettman, D., Pu, L., Sayed, T. and Shelby, S. G., 2008. Surrogate safety assessment model and validation (No. FHWA-HRT-08-
051), Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, USA. FHWA, 2008.
Dijkstra, A., Marchesini, P., Bijleveld, F., Kars, V., Drolenga, H., and van Maarseveen, M. (2010). Do calculated conflicts in
microsimulation model predict number of crashes?. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research
Board, (2147), 105-112.
Caliendo, C., and Guida, M. (2012). Microsimulation approach for predicting crashes at unsignalized intersections using traffic
conflicts. Journal of transportation engineering, 138(12), 1453-1467.
El-Basyouny, K., and Sayed, T. (2013). Safety performance functions using traffic conflicts. Safety Science, 51(1), 160-164.
Huang, F., Liu, P., Yu, H., and Wang, W. (2013). Identifying if VISSIM simulation model and SSAM provide reasonable
estimates for field measured traffic conflicts at signalized intersections. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 50, 1014-1024.
Zhou, H., and Huang, F. (2013). Development of traffic safety evaluation method based on simulated conflicts at signalized
intersections. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 96, 881-885.
Ambros, J., Turek, R., and Paukrt, J. (2014, November). Road safety evaluation using traffic conflicts: pilot comparison of
micro-simulation and observation. In International Conference on Traffic and Transport Engineering-Belgrade.
Shahdah, U., Saccomanno, F., and Persaud, B. (2014). Integrated traffic conflict model for estimating crash modification
factors. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 71, 228-235.
Shahdah, U., Saccomanno, F., and Persaud, B. (2015). Application of traffic microsimulation for evaluating safety performance
of urban signalized intersections. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 60, 96-104.
Zha, L. (2014). Next Generation Safety Performance Monitoring at Signalized Intersections Using Connected Vehicle
Technology(Doctoral dissertation).
Morando, M. M., Tian, Q., Truong, L. T., & Vu, H. L. (2018). Studying the Safety Impact of Autonomous Vehicles Using
Simulation-Based Surrogate Safety Measures. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2018.
Astarita V., Festa D.C., Giofrè V.P., Guido G. and Vitale A. (2018) "The use of Smartphones to assess the Feasibility of a
Cooperative Intelligent Transportation Safety System based on Surrogate Measures of Safety" Procedia of Computer Science.
Elsevier.
Mahmud, S. S., Ferreira, L., Hoque, M. S., and Tavassoli, A. (2017). Application of proximal surrogate indicators for safety
evaluation: A review of recent developments and research needs. IATSS research.
Young, W., Sobhani, A., Lenné, M. G., and Sarvi, M. (2014). Simulation of safety: A review of the state of the art in road safety
simulation modelling. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 66, 89-103.
Zheng, L., Ismail, K., & Meng, X. (2014). Traffic conflict techniques for road safety analysis: open questions and some
insights. Canadian journal of civil engineering, 41(7), 633-641.
Laureshyn, A., De Ceunynck, T., Karlsson, C., Svensson, Å., & Daniels, S. (2017). In search of the severity dimension of traffic
events: Extended Delta-V as a traffic conflict indicator. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 98, 46-56.
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
Laureshyn, A., Svensson, Å., Hydén, C., 2010. Evaluation of traffic safety, based on micro-level behavioural data: theoretical
framework and first implementation.Accid. Anal. Prevent. 42, 1637 -- 1646, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2010.03.021.
Davis, G. A., Hourdos, J., Xiong, H., and Chatterjee, I. (2011). Outline for a causal model of traffic conflicts and
crashes. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 43(6), 1907-1919.
Bevrani, K., and Chung, E. (2012). An examination of the microscopic simulation models to identify traffic safety
indicators. International Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems Research, 10(2), 66-81.
Stutts, J., Feaganes, J., Rodgman, E., Hamlett, C., Meadows, T., Reinfurt, D., ...& Staplin, L. (2003). Distractions in everyday
driving (No. HS-043 573).
Pu, Lili, Rahul Joshi, and Siemens Energy. Surrogate Safety Assessment Model (SSAM)--software user manual. No. FHWA-
HRT-08-050. Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, 2008.
Souleyrette, Reginald, and Josh Hochstein. Development of a conflict analysis methodology using SSAM. No. InTrans Project
10-376. 2012.
Cunto, F. and Saccomanno, F. F. (2008) "Calibration and validation of simulated vehicle safety performance at signalized
intersections", Accident Analysis and Prevention 40: 1171 -- 1179.
Ivan, J. N. and Konduri, K. C. (2018). Crash Severity Methods. In Safe Mobility: Challenges, Methodology and Solutions (pp.
325-350). Emerald Publishing Limited.
Shelby, S. G. (2011, January). Delta-V as a measure of traffic conflict severity. In 90th Annual Meeting of the Transportation
Research Board, Washington, DC (pp. 1-19).
Sobhani, A., Young, W., Logan, D., and Bahrololoom, S. (2011). A kinetic energy model of two-vehicle crash injury
severity. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 43(3), 741-754.
Sobhani, A., Young, W., & Sarvi, M. (2013). A simulation based approach to assess the safety performance of road
locations. Transportation research part C: emerging technologies, 32, 144-158.
Nordoff, L.S., Motor vehicle collision injuries: biomechanics, diagnosis, and management. Jones and Bartless Publishers, Inc.,
McHenry, R. R., and McHenry, B. G. (1997). Effects of restitution in the application of crush coefficients (No. 970960). SAE
2005.
Technical Paper.
Gabauer, D. J., and Gabler, H. C. (2006). Comparison of delta-v and occupant impact velocity crash severity metrics using event
data recorders. In Annual Proceedings/Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine (Vol. 50, p. 57). Association
for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine.
Tolouei, R., Maher, M., and Titheridge, H. (2013). Vehicle mass and injury risk in two-car crashes: a novel methodology.
Accident Analysis & Prevention, 50, 155-166.
Joksch, H. C. (1993). Velocity change and fatality risk in a crash--a rule of thumb. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 25(HS-042
059).
Evans, L. (1994). Driver injury and fatality risk in two-car crashes versus mass ratio inferred using Newtonian
mechanics. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 26(5), 609-616.
Jurewicz, C., Sobhani, A., Woolley, J., Dutschke, J., and Corben, B. (2016). Exploration of vehicle impact speed -- injury severity
relationships for application in safer road design. Transportation research procedia, 14, 4247-4256.
Ueyama, M. (1997). Effects of vehicular behavior at the pre-accident stage on decision-making at intersections without signals.
In Proceedings of the third international symposium on intersections without traffic signals, Portland, OR, July 21 -- 23, 303 --
309.
Mak, K., Sicking, D., and Zimmerman, K. (1998). Roadside safety analysis program: A cost-effectiveness analysis
procedure. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (1647), 67-74.
Archer, J., and Kosonen, I. (2000, September). The potential of micro-simulation modelling in relation to traffic safety
assessment. In Proceedings of the ESS Conference (pp. 427-443).
Erbsmehl, C. (2009). Simulation of real crashes as a method for estimating the potential benefits of advanced safety technologies.
In 21st International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV) National Highway Traffic Safety
AdministrationBundesministerium fuer Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung-BMVBS-(Federal Ministry of Transport, Building
and Urban Affairs) Bundesanstalt fuer Strassenwesen (BASt) (No. 09-0162).
Astarita, V., Guido, G., Vitale, A. and Giofré, V. (2012). A new microsimulation model for the evaluation of traffic safety
performances.
J. Barceló, J.L. Ferrer, and R. Grau, (1994) "AIMSUN2 and the GETRAM Simulation Environment", Internal Report,
Departamento de Estadistica e Investigacion Operativa. Universitad Politecnica de Catalunya.
PTV Planung Transport Verkehr AG, (2005) "VISSIM User Manual Version 4.10", PTV AG, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Mak, K. K., and Sicking, D. (2003). Roadside safety analysis program (RSAP): engineer's manual (Vol. 492). Transportation
Research Board.
Wang, J., Kong, Y., Fu, T., and Stipancic, J. (2017). The impact of vehicle moving violations and freeway traffic flow on crash
risk: An application of plugin development for microsimulation. PLoS one, 12(9), e0184564.
Knapp, K., Chandler, B., Atkinson, J., Welch, T., Rigdon, H., Retting, R., and Porter, R. J. (2014). Road Diet Informational
Guide (No. FHWA-SA-14-028).
Kachroo, P., and Sharma, A. (2018). Theory of safety surrogates using vehicle trajectories in macroscopic and microscopic
settings: application to dynamic message signs controlled traffic at work zones. Transportation research part C: emerging
technologies, 91, 62-76.
Gettman, D., and Head, L. (2003). Surrogate safety measures from traffic simulation models. Transportation Research Record:
Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (1840), 104-115.
Council, F., & Stewart, J. (1999). Safety effects of the conversion of rural two-lane to four-lane roadways based on cross-
sectional models. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (1665), 35-43.
Hauer, E., Council, F., & Mohammedshah, Y.
segments. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (1897), 96-105.
Dinu, R. R., & Veeraragavan, A. (2011). Random parameter models for accident prediction on two-lane undivided highways in
(2004). Safety models
for urban
four-lane undivided
road
India. Journal of safety research, 42(1), 39-42.
Park, J., & Abdel-Aty, M. (2015). Development of adjustment functions to assess combined safety effects of multiple treatments
on rural two-lane roadways. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 75, 310-319.
Abuzwidah, M., & Abdel-Aty, M. (2018). Crash risk analysis of different designs of toll plazas. Safety science, 107, 77-84.
Saad, M., Abdel-Aty, M., & Lee, J. (2018). Analysis of driving behavior at expressway toll plazas. Transportation Research Part
F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour.
Stevanovic, A., Stevanovic, J., and Kergaye, C. (2013). Optimization of traffic signal timings based on surrogate measures of
safety. Transportation research part C: emerging technologies, 32, 159-178.
Killi, D. V. and Vedagiri, P. (2014). Proactive evaluation of traffic safety at an unsignalized intersection using micro-simulation.
Journal of Traffic and Logistics Engineering Vol, 2(2).
Shahdah, U., Saccomanno, F. and Persaud, B. (2015). Application of traffic microsimulation for evaluating safety performance
of urban signalized intersections. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 60, 96-104.
Zhang, G., Chen, J. and Zhao, J. (2017). Safety Performance Evaluation of a Three-Leg Unsignalized Intersection Using Traffic
Conflict Analysis. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2017.
Astarita et al. (2019). Surrogate Safety Measures from Traffic Simulation Models: a Comparison of different Models for
Intersection Safety Evaluation. Transportation Research Procedia.
Vittorio Astarita and Vincenzo Pasquale. Giofré
Wiedemann, R., (1991). Modelling of RTI-Elements on multi-lane roads. In Drive Conference (1991: Brussels, Belgium) (Vol.
Gipps, P. G., (1981). A behavioural car-following model for computer simulation. Transportation Research Part B:
Methodological, 15(2), 105-111.
2).
|
cs/9905005 | 1 | 9905 | 1999-05-10T22:20:40 | General Principles of Learning-Based Multi-Agent Systems | [
"cs.MA",
"nlin.AO",
"cond-mat.stat-mech",
"cs.DC",
"cs.LG",
"nlin.AO"
] | We consider the problem of how to design large decentralized multi-agent systems (MAS's) in an automated fashion, with little or no hand-tuning. Our approach has each agent run a reinforcement learning algorithm. This converts the problem into one of how to automatically set/update the reward functions for each of the agents so that the global goal is achieved. In particular we do not want the agents to ``work at cross-purposes'' as far as the global goal is concerned. We use the term artificial COllective INtelligence (COIN) to refer to systems that embody solutions to this problem. In this paper we present a summary of a mathematical framework for COINs. We then investigate the real-world applicability of the core concepts of that framework via two computer experiments: we show that our COINs perform near optimally in a difficult variant of Arthur's bar problem (and in particular avoid the tragedy of the commons for that problem), and we also illustrate optimal performance for our COINs in the leader-follower problem. | cs.MA | cs | GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LEARNING-BASED MULTI-AGENT
SYSTEMS
David H. Wolpert
NASA Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, CA 94035
[email protected]
Kevin R. Wheeler
NASA Ames Research Center
Caelum Research
Moffett Field, CA 94035
[email protected]
Kagan Tumer
NASA Ames Research Center
Caelum Research
Moffett Field, CA 94035
[email protected]
August 13, 2011
ABSTRACT
4. Control of a large, distributed chemical plant.
We consider the problem of how to design large decentralized
multi-agent systems (MAS’s) in an automated fashion, with
little or no hand-tuning. Our approach has each agent run
a reinforcement learning algorithm. This converts the prob-
lem into one of how to automatically set/update the reward
functions for each of the agents so that the global goal is
achieved. In particular we do not want the agents to “work
at cross-purposes” as far as the global goal is concerned. We
use the term artificial COllective INtelligence (COIN) to re-
fer to systems that embody solutions to this problem. In this
paper we present a summary of a mathematical framework
for COINs. We then investigate the real-world applicability
of the core concepts of that framework via two computer ex-
periments: we show that our COINs perform near optimally
in a difficult variant of Arthur’s bar problem [1] (and in par-
ticular avoid the tragedy of the commons for that problem),
and we also illustrate optimal performance for our COINs in
the leader-follower problem.
1 INTRODUCTION
In this paper we are interested in computational problems
having the following characteristics:
• the agents each run reinforcement learning (RL) algo-
rithms;
• there is little to no centralized communication or control;
• there is a provided world utility function that rates the
possible histories of the full system.
There are many examples of such problems, some of the
more prominent being:
1. Designing a control system for constellations of com-
munication satellites or of constellations of planetary
exploration vehicles (world utility in the latter case
being some measure of quality of scientific data col-
lected);
2. Designing a control system for routing over a commu-
nication network (world utility being some aggregate
quality of service measure);
3. Construction of parallel algorithms for solving numer-
ical optimization problems (the optimization problem
itself constituting the world utility);
These kinds of problems may well be most readily ad-
dressed by using a large Multi-Agent System (MAS) [19],
where each agent is restricted to communicate with only a
few neighbors, and where each agent runs a Reinforcement
Learning (RL) algorithm. In such systems, a crucial problem
is ensuring that the agents’ RL algorithms do not “work at
cross-purposes”, so that their collective behavior maximizes
a provided global utility function. The difficulty in achiev-
ing this is that these systems have no centralized control, so
the dynamics is governed by the collective effects of the indi-
vidual agents each modifying their behavior via their (local)
RL algorithms.
We are interested in such systems where the agents are
“greedy” (i.e., there is no external structure forcing cooper-
ation). However, both the agents reward functions and the
overall system structure are automatically set and then up-
dated in a machine learning-like fashion, so as to facilitate
the achievement of the global ob jective.
As opposed to hand-tailored MAS design, these alter-
native approaches potentially have the following benefits:
one does not have to laboriously model the entire system;
global performance is “robust”; one can scale up to very
large systems; and one can maximally exploit the power of
machine learning. We use the term COllective INtelligence
(COIN) [21, 22, 23] to refer to either MAS’s designed in this
way, or (in the case of naturally occurring MAS’s) to MAS’s
investigated from this perspective.
The COIN framework is related to many other fields.
(See [21] for a detailed discussion of these relations, involv-
ing several hundred references.) Some of them are:
• multi-agent systems;
• computational economics;
• reinforcement learning for adaptive control;
• statistical mechanics;
• computational ecologies;
• game theory , in particular, evolutionary game theory.
Previous MAS’s most similar to a COIN include those where
agents use reinforcement learning [8, 13], and/or where
agents actively attempt to model the behavior of other
agents [14].
In this paper we introduce some of the concepts from
the COIN framework, and then present experiments test-
ing those concepts. The restricted version of the framework
presented here is not sufficient to formally guarantee opti-
mal global performance for all multi-agent systems. Rather
the experiments recounted below are designed to empirically
investigate the usefulness of these concepts in some illustra-
tive domains. In Section 2 we present general background
on COINs and the experiments we conducted. In Section 3,
we present the portion of the COIN framework investigated
in this paper. In Sections 4 and 5, we describe the bar and
leader-follower experiments, respectively, and how our ap-
proach deals with the many pitfalls encountered in each.
2 MOTIVATION AND BACKGROUND
A naturally occurring example of a system that can be
viewed as COIN is a human economy. For example, one
can take the agents to be the individuals trying to maximize
their personal rewards. One might then declare that the
world utility is a time average of the gross domestic prod-
uct. (“World utility” per se is not a construction internal
to a human economy, but rather something defined from
the outside.) To achieve high global utility it is necessary to
avoid having the agents work at cross-purposes lest phenom-
ena like the Tragedy of the Commons (TOC) occur, in which
individual avarice works to lower global utility [12]. One way
to avoid such phenomena is by modifying the agents’ util-
ity functions via punitive legislation. A real world example
of an attempt to make such a modification was the cration
of anti-trust regulations designed to prevent monopolistic
practices.
In designing a COIN we have more freedom than anti-
trust regulators though, in that there is no base-line “or-
ganic” local utility function over which we must superimpose
legislation-like incentives. Rather, the entire “psychology”
of the individual agents is at our disposal when designing a
COIN. This freedom is a ma jor strength of the COIN ap-
proach, in that it obviates the need for honesty-elicitation
mechanisms, like auctions, which form a central component
of conventional economics.
We recently investigated the use of the COIN approach
for distributed control of network packet routing [22]. Con-
ventional approaches to packet routing have each router run
a shortest path algorithm (SPA), i.e., each router routes its
packets in the way that it expects will get those packets to
their destinations most quickly. Unlike with a COIN, with
SPA-based routing the routers have no concern for the pos-
sible deleterious side-effects of their routing decisions on the
global goal (e.g., they have no concern for whether they in-
duce bottlenecks). We ran simulations that demonstrated
that a COIN-based routing system has better throughputs
than does an SPA-based system [22].
In this paper we present a more fine-grained investiga-
tion of our COIN methodology, in which we disentangle two
of the ma jor components of that methodology and exam-
ine the real-world usefulness of them separately. In the first
set of experiments we investigate how one might initialize
a COIN (i.e., initialize each agents’ local reward function)
to ensure that the agents do not work at cross purposes.
The problem we chose for this purpose is a more challenging
variant of Arthur’s bar attendance problem [1, 7, 17].
In
this problem, agents have to determine which night in the
week to attend a bar. The problem is set up so that if either
too few people attend (boring evening) or too many people
attend (crowded evening), the total enjoyment of the atten-
dees drops. Our goal is to design the reward functions of
the attendees so that the total enjoyment across all nights
is maximized. (This problem is similar to a number of prob-
lems arising in electronic commerce, where agents need to
select the “best” markets to trade their wares.)
In the second set of experiments we investigate how run-
time modification of agent utility functions and/or inter-
agent interactions can improve performance beyond that of
the initialized COIN. For this set of experiments we chose a
problem where certain “follower” agents mimic the activities
of other “leader” agents. The idea is to investigate a scenario
where actions that are beneficial to a particular agent have
deleterious global effects when copied by other agents.
3 COIN FRAMEWORK
As applied here, the COIN framework has three main com-
ponents:
1. The first component investigates various formaliza-
tions of the desideratum that whenever the local utility
functions increase, then so must the value of the world
utility. It implicitly defines equivalence classes of lo-
cal utility functions that meet those formalizations, for
allowed agent interactions of various types.
2. There is little explicit concern for the dynamical nature
of the COIN in this first component of the framework;
that dynamics is subsumed under the assumption that
the agents can achieve large values of their local utility
functions, via their RL learning. However due to that
dynamics it may be that the agents are all inadver-
tently “frustrating” each other, so that none of them
can achieve large values of their local utility functions.
The second component of the COIN framework ad-
dresses this problem by means of further restrictions
(beyond those of the first component) on the allowed
set of local utility functions. We call the design of a
system’s local utility functions using the two compo-
nents of the COIN framework the COIN initialization
of that system.
3. Successful COIN initialization ensures that if the
agents in the system achieve large values of their local
utility functions, then the world utility is also large.
However due to uncertainties in the type of the agent
interactions, in the real world the local utility func-
tions set in the COIN initialization are usually only a
good first guess. The third component of the COIN
framework addresses this issue by modifying the local
utility functions at run-time based on localized sta-
tistical information. We call this modifying process
macrolearning. In contrast, we call the reinforcement
learning that agents perform to optimize their local
reward microlearning.
In this paper we consider the state of the system across
a set of discrete, consecutive time steps, t ∈ {0, 1, ...}. With-
out loss of generality, we let all relevant characteristics of an
agent at time t — including its internal parameters at that
time as well as its externally visible actions — be encapsu-
. We call this the “state” of
lated by a Euclidean vector ζ
η ,t
agent η at time t, and let ζ be the state of all agents across
all time. World utility, G(ζ ), is a function of the state of
all agents across all time. Our goal as COIN designers is to
maximize world utility.
The following concepts and definitions form the core of
the COIN framework:
Subworlds: Subworlds are the sets making up an exhaus-
tive partition of all agents. For each subworld, ω , all agents
in that subworld have the same subworld utility function
gω (ζ ) as their local utility functions. Accordingly, consider
having each subworld be a set of agents that collectively have
the most effect on each other. In this situation, by and large,
agents cannot work at cross-purposes, since all agents that
affect each other substantially share the same local utility.
Constraint-alignment: Associated with subworlds is the
concept of a (perfectly) constraint-aligned system. That is a
system in which any change to the state of the agents in sub-
world ω at time 0 will have no effect on the states of agents
outside of ω at times later than 0.
Intuitively, a system
is constraint-aligned if no two agents in separate subworlds
affect each other, so that the rationale behind the use of
subworlds holds. (In the real world of course, systems are
rarely exactly constraint-aligned.)
Subworld-factored: A subworld-factored system is one
where for each subworld ω considered by itself, a change
at time 0 to the states of the agents in that subworld results
in an increased value for gω (ζ ) if and only if it results in an
increased value for G(ζ ). For a subworld-factored system,
the side effects on the rest of the system of ω ’s increasing its
own utility do not end up decreasing world utility. For these
systems, the separate agents successfully pursuing their sep-
arate goals do not frustrate each other as far as world utility
is concerned.
The definition of subworld-factored is carefully crafted.
In particular, it does not concern changes in the value of the
utility of subworlds other than the one changing its state.
It also does not concern changes to the states of agents in
more than one subworld at once. Indeed consider the fol-
lowing property: any change at time 0 to the entire system
that improves all subworld utilities simultaneously also im-
proves world utility. This might seem an appealing alter-
native desideratum to subworld-factoredness. However one
can construct examples of systems that obey this property
and yet quickly evolve to a minimum of world utility (for
example this is the case in the TOC).
It can be proven that for a subworld-factored system,
when each of the agents’ reinforcement learning algorithms
are performing as well as they can, given each others’ be-
havior, world utility is at a critical point. Correct global
behavior corresponds to learners reaching a Nash equilib-
rium [21]. There can be no tragedy of the commons for a
subworld-factored system.
Wonderful life utility: Let CLω (ζ ) be defined as the vec-
tor ζ modified by clamping the states of all agents in sub-
world ω , across all time, to an arbitrary fixed value, here
taken to be 0. The wonderful life subworld utility (WL) is:
gω (ζ ) ≡ G(ζ ) − G(CLω (ζ )) .
(1)
When the system is constraint-aligned, so that, loosely
speaking, subworld ω ’s “absence” would not affect the rest of
the system, we can view the WL utility as analogous to the
change in world utility that would have arisen if subworld
ω “had never existed”.
(Hence the name of this utility -
cf. the Frank Capra movie.) Note however, that CL is a
purely mathematical operation.
Indeed, no assumption is
even being made that CLω (ζ ) is consistent with the dynam-
ics of the system. The succession of states the agents in ω
are clamped to in the definition of the WL utility need not
obey the dynamical laws of the system.
This dynamics-independence is a crucial strength of the
WL utility. It means that to evaluate the WL utility we do
not try to infer how the system would have evolved if all
agents in ω were set to 0 at time 0 and the system evolved
from there. So long as we know ζ extending over all time,
and so long as we know G, we know the value of WL utility.
This is true even if we know nothing of the dynamics of the
system.
Another crucial advantage of the WL utility arises from
the fact that in a COIN, each agent, by itself, is operating
in a large system of other agents, and therefore may expe-
rience difficulty discerning the effects of its actions on its
utility. Very often this problem is obviated by using the WL
utility; the subtraction of the clamped term in the WL util-
ity removes some of the “noise” of the activity of agents in
other subworlds, leaving only the underlying “signal” of how
the agents in the subworld at hand affect the utility. This
makes it easier for the microlearning to improve the utility
of the agents in that subworld. When the system is subworld
factored, this property facilitates the improvement of world
utility. In many circumstances, this cancelling characteris-
tic of WL also ensures that the utility functions obey the
applicable a priori locality restrictions on communications
among agents.
The experiments in this paper revolve around the follow-
ing fact: a constraint-aligned system with wonderful life sub-
world utilities is subworld-factored. Combining this with our
previous result that subworld-factored systems are at equi-
librium at critical points of world utility, this result leads us
to expect that a constraint-aligned system using WL utili-
ties in the microlearning will approach near-optimal values
of the world utility.
No such assurances accrue to WL utilities if the system is
not constraint-aligned however. Accordingly our first set of
experiments investigates how well a particular system per-
forms when WL utilities are used but little attention is paid
to ensuring that the system is constraint-aligned. Our sec-
ond set of experiments then focus on a macrolearning algo-
rithm that modifies subworld memberships dynamically, so
as to increase the degree of constraint-alignment, all while
using WL local utility functions.
4 BAR PROBLEM
4.1 EXPERIMENTAL METHOD
We conducted two sets of experiments to investigate the
COIN framework. The first set is a variant of Brian Arthur’s
bar-attendance model [1]. Since we are not interested here
in directly comparing our results to those in [1, 13], we use a
more conventional (and arguably “dumber”) reinforcement
learning algorithm than the ones investigated in [1, 13].
There are N agents, each of whom picks one of seven
nights to attend a bar the following week, a process that
is then repeated.
In each week, each agent uses its own
reinforcement learning (RL) algorithm to decide which night
to attend to maximize its utility.
The world utility is of the form:
G(ζ ) = X
t
7
X
k=1
γk (xk (ζ , t))
where “xj (ζ , t)” means the j ’th component of x(ζ , t)
which is
the
attendance
on night
j
at week t;
γk (y ) ≡ αk y exp (−y/c); c and each of the {αk } are real-
valued parameters. Intuitively, this world utility is the sum
of the world “rewards” for each night in each week.
This G is chosen to reflect the effects in the bar as the
attendance profile of agents changes. In the case when there
are too few agents, the bar suffers from lack of activity and
therefore the world utility should be low. Conversely, when
there are too many agents the bar becomes overcrowded and
the rewards should also be low. Note that γk (·) reaches its
maximum when its argument equals c.
The α’s are used to weight the importance of differ-
ent nights. Two different choices of the {αk } are investi-
gated. One treated attendance on all of the nights equally,
e
c
n
a
m
r
o
f
r
e
P
e
g
a
r
e
v
A
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
250
500
Weeks
750
1000
e
c
n
a
m
r
o
f
r
e
P
e
g
a
r
e
v
A
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
250
500
Weeks
750
1000
Figure 1: Average performance when α = [0 0 0 7 0 0 0] (left) and when α = [1 1 1 1 1 1 1] (right). In both the top curve
is WL, middle is GR, and bottom is UD.
α = [1 1 1 1 1 1 1]. The other is only concerned with the
attendance on one night of the week, α = [0 0 0 7 0 0 0]. In
our experiments, c was 6 and N is chosen to be significantly
larger (4 times) than the number of agents necessary to have
c agents attend the bar on each of the seven nights, resulting
in 168 agents.
As explicated below, our microlearning algorithms
worked by providing a real-valued “reward” signal to each
agent at each week t. Each agent’s reward function is a sur-
rogate for an associated utility function for that agent. The
difference between the two functions is that the reward func-
tion only reflects the state of the system at one moment in
time (and therefore is potentially observable), whereas the
utility function reflects the agent’s ultimate goal, and there-
fore can depend on the full history of that agent across time.
We investigated the following functions specifying the re-
wards at time t for each of the agents:
• Uniform Division Reward:
U D(dω (t), ζ , t) ≡ γdω (xdω (ζ , t))/xdω (ζ , t)
• Global Reward:
GR(dω (t), ζ , t) ≡
7
X
k=1
γk (xk (ζ , t))
• Wonderful Life Reward:
W L( dω (t), ζ , t) ≡
γk (xk (ζ , t)) −
7
7
X
X
k=1
k=1
γdω (xdω (ζ , t)) − γdω (xdω (CLω (ζ ), t))
γk (xk (CLω (ζ ), t)) =
where dω is the night selected by subworld ω . Note the dis-
tinction between utilities and rewards. For example, world
utility is the sum over all time of global reward.
The UD reward is considered a natural “naive” choice
of an agent’s reward function; the total reward on each
night gets uniformly divided among the agents attending
that night.
Providing the GR reward at time t to each agent is con-
sidered a reasonable way to provide that agent an approx-
imation to the value of world utility that would ensue if
the current policies of all the agents were henceforth frozen
to their current polices. This reward function results in all
agents receiving the same feedback information. For this re-
ward, the system is automatically subworld-factored. How-
ever, evaluation of this function requires centralized commu-
nication.
Similarly, the WL reward at time t is considered a reason-
able approximation to the WL utility. However, in contrast
to the GR reward, to evaluate its WL reward each agent only
needs to know the total attendance on the night it attended.
In addition, as indicated above, one would expect that with
the WL reward the microlearners can readily discern the
effects of their rewards on their utilities — something not
necessarily true if they use the GR reward.
Each agent is its own subworld. Each agent’s microlearn-
ing algorithm uses a seven dimensional Euclidean vector to
represent the expected reward for each night of the week.
At the end of each week, the component of this vector cor-
responding to the night attended is proportionally adjusted
towards the actual subworld reward just received. At the
beginning of each week, the agent picks the night to attend
using a Boltzmann distribution with energies given by the
components of the vector of expected rewards. A decaying
temperature is used to aid exploration in the early stage of
the process. The microlearning algorithms are set to use
the same parameters (i.e.
learning rate, Boltzmann tem-
perature, decay rates) for all three reward functions. This
learning algorithm is equivalent to Claus and Boutilier’s [8]
independent learner algorithm for multi-agent reinforcement
learning.
4.2 RESULTS
Figure 1 presents world reward values as a function of time
for the bar problem, averaged over 50 separate runs. Note
that world utility is the sum over time of world reward. We
present the performance for all three subworld reward func-
tions for both α = [1 1 1 1 1 1 1] and α = [0 0 0 7 0 0 0].
Systems using the WL reward converged to optimal per-
formance. This indicates that the bar problem is sufficiently
constraint-aligned so that interactions between subworlds
does not diminish performance. Presumably this is true
because the only interactions between subworlds occurred
indirectly, via the microlearning.
Moreover, since the WL reward is easier for the mi-
crolearners to exploit (see above), one would expect the con-
vergence using the WL reward to be far quicker than that
using the GR reward. The GR reward does eventually con-
verge to the global optimum. This is in agreement with the
results obtained by Crites [9] for the bank of elevators control
problem. However, when α = [0 0 0 7 0 0 0] the GR reward
converged in 1250 weeks. This is more than 4 times the con-
vergence time for the WL reward. When α = [1 1 1 1 1 1 1]
the GR reward took 6500 weeks to converge, which was more
than 30 times the time WL reward took to converge. This
slow convergence is a result of the reward signal being di-
luted by the large number of agents in the system.
In contrast to the behavior for reward functions based
on the COIN framework, use of the UD subworld reward
function results in very poor world reward values that dete-
riorated as the microlearning progressed. For the case where
world reward only depends on a single night, this is essen-
tially an instance of the tragedy of the commons; it is in
every agent’s interest to attend the same night, and their
doing this shrinks the world reward “pie” that must be di-
vided among all agents.
Taken together, these experiments demonstrate that the
initialization prescriptions of the COIN framework can result
in excellent global performance.
5 LEADER-FOLLOWER PROBLEM
5.1 EXPERIMENTAL METHOD
In the experiments recounted in the previous section the sys-
tem was sufficiently constraint-aligned for the WL reward
to result in optimal performance. The second set of ex-
periments involving leaders and followers also used WL re-
ward. These experiments investigated the use of macrolearn-
ing to make an initially non-aligned system more constraint-
aligned, and thereby improve the world utility. In this ex-
periment, macrolearning consists of changing the subworld
memberships of the agents.
In these experiments the bar problem is modified to in-
corporate constraints designed to frustrate WL subworld re-
ward. This is done by forcing the nights picked by some
agents (followers) to agree with those picked by other agents
(leaders). Each leader has two followers. The world utility is
the sum, over all leaders, of the values of a triply-indexed re-
ward matrix whose indices are the the nights that the leader
and his two followers attend:
G(ζ ) = X
X
i
t
Rli (t),f 1i (t),f 2i (t)
where li (t) is the night the ith leader attends, and f 1i (t)
and f 2i (t) are the nights attended by the followers of leader
i, in week t. The system’s dynamics is what restricts all
the members of each triple (li (t), f 1i (t), f 2i (t)) to equal the
night picked by leader i for week t. However, G and R are
defined for all possible triples, li (t), f 1i (t) and f 2i (t).
So in particular, R is defined for dynamically unrealiz-
able triples that arise in the clamping operation. Because
of this, for certain R’s there exists subworld memberships
such that the dynamics assures poor world utility when WL
rewards are used. This is precisely the type of problem that
macrolearning is designed to correct.
To investigate the efficacy of the macrolearning, two sets
of separate experiments were conducted. In the first one the
reward matrix R is chosen so that when leader and follower
agents are placed in separate subworlds, leaders maximiz-
ing their WL reward results in minimal world reward.
In
contrast to the bar problem experiments, in these experi-
ments, due to the coupling between leaders and followers,
having each agent be its own subworld would mean badly
violating constraint-alignment. (The idea is that by chang-
ing subworld memberships macrolearning can correct this
and thereby induce constraint-alignment.) In the second set
of experiments, rather than hand-crafting the worst-case re-
ward matrix, we investigate the efficacy of macrolearning for
a broader spectrum of reward matrices generated randomly.
For the worst-case reward matrix, the subworld mem-
bership that results in the most constraint-aligned system is
when a leader and associated followers belong to the same
subworld. The least constraint-alignment occurs when the
leader and associated followers are all in separate subworlds.
In addition to these two cases we also investigate random
subworld membership. We investigate all these cases both
with and without macrolearning, and with both worst case
and a full spectrum of random reward matrices. The mi-
crolearning in these experiments is the same as in the bar
problem. All leader-follower experiments use the WL sub-
world reward.
When macrolearning is used, it is implemented after the
microlearning has run for a specified number of weeks. The
macrolearning works by estimating the correlations between
the nights picked by the agents. This is done by examining
the attendances of the agents over the preceding weeks. The
agents estimated to be the most correlated with one another
are grouped into the same subworld, with the restriction that
the number of agents per subworld is always three.
5.2 RESULTS
Figure 2 presents performance averaged over 50 runs for
world reward as a function of weeks using the worst case re-
ward matrix. For comparison purposes, the top curve repre-
sents the case where the leaders and their followers are placed
in the same subworld so that there is perfect constraint-
alignment. The bottom curve represents the other extreme
where the leaders and their followers are placed in differ-
ent subworlds resulting in minimal constraint-alignment. In
both plots, the middle curve shows the performance of ran-
domly initialized subworlds with (right) and without (left)
macrolearning.
The performance for randomly assigned subworlds dif-
fers only slightly from that of having each agent be its own
subworld; both start with poor values of world reward that
deteriorates with time. However, when macrolearning is
performed on systems with initially random subworld as-
signments, the system quickly rectifies itself and converges
to optimal performance. This is reflected by the sudden
vertical jump through the middle of the right plot at 500
weeks, the point at which macrolearning changes the sub-
world memberships. This demonstrates that by changing
the subworld memberships macrolearning results in perfect
constraint-alignment, so that the WL subworld reward func-
tion quickly induces the maximal value of the world reward.
Figure 3 presents performance averaged over 50 runs for
world reward as a function of weeks using a spectrum of re-
ward matrices selected at random. The ordering of the plots
is exactly as in Figure 2. Macrolearning is applied at 2000
weeks, in the right plot. The simulations in Figure 3 were
lengthened from those in Figure 2 because the convergence
time are longer.
The macrolearning algorithm results in a transient degra-
dation in performance at 2000 weeks followed by convergence
to the optimal. Without macrolearning the system’s perfor-
mance no longer varies after 2000 weeks. Combined with
the results presented in Figure 2, these experiments demon-
strate that the COIN construction of macrolearning works
quite well.
e
c
n
a
m
r
o
f
r
e
P
e
g
a
r
e
v
A
0
-5
-10
-15
-20
-25
0
e
c
n
a
m
r
o
f
r
e
P
e
g
a
r
e
v
A
0
-5
-10
-15
-20
-25
0
250
500
Weeks
750
1000
250
500
Weeks
750
1000
Figure 2: Leader-follower problem with worst case reward matrix. In both plots the top curve represents perfect constraint-
alignment, the bottom curve represents minimal constraint-alignment, and the middle curves represent random subworlds
without (left) and with (right) macrolearning at 500 weeks.
e
c
n
a
m
r
o
f
r
e
P
e
g
a
r
e
v
A
0
-5
-10
-15
-20
-25
0
e
c
n
a
m
r
o
f
r
e
P
e
g
a
r
e
v
A
0
-5
-10
-15
-20
-25
0
1000
2000
Weeks
3000
4000
1000
2000
Weeks
3000
4000
Figure 3: Leader-follower problem for full spectrum reward matrices. The ordering of the plots is exactly as in Figure 3.
Macrolearning is applied at 2000 weeks, in the right plot.
6 CONCLUSION
For MAS’s to fulfill their full potential, even when used in
large systems having strong limitations on inter-agent inter-
actions and communication, a way is needed to automati-
cally configure/update the system to achieve the provided
global goal. One approach to this problem is to have each
agent run a reinforcement learning algorithm and then con-
figure/update the associated reward functions (and other
characteristics) of the agents so as to facilitate achievement
of the global goal. This is the central concept embodied in
COINs.
In this paper we presented a summary of (a portion of )
the mathematical framework of COINs. We then presented
two sets of experiments empirically validating the predic-
tions of that framework. The first set of experiments con-
sidered difficult variants of Arthur’s famous El Farol Bar
problem. These experiments showed that even when the
conditions required by the theorems of how to initialize a
COIN do not hold exactly, they often hold well enough so
that they can be applied with confidence. In those exper-
iments, the COINs quickly achieved optimal performance
despite the local nature of the information available to each
agent, and in particular the COINs automatically avoided
the tragedy of the commons that was designed into those
experiments. This was not true when the reward functions
were either set in a “naive” manner or were all set to equal
the global reward.
The second set of experiments considered leader-follower
problems that were hand-designed to cause maximal diffi-
culty for those COIN initialization theorems. These experi-
ments explicitly tested the run-time updating procedures of
the COIN framework for overcoming such initialization prob-
lems. Here, as expected, the initial performance of the COIN
was quite poor. However once the updating procedures were
brought online, performance quickly rose to optimal. Again,
this was in contrast to the case where the reward functions
were either set in a “naive” manner or were all set to equal
the global reward.
The conclusion of these experiments is that the prescrip-
tions of the COIN framework for how to configure a large
MAS often apply even when the exact conditions required
by the associated theorems do not hold. Moreover, in those
relatively unusual circumstances when the initialization pre-
scriptions of the COIN theorems do not result in optimal
global performance, the run-time updating component of the
framework can rectify the situation, so that optimal perfor-
mance is achieved.
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank Ann
Bell, Hal Duncan and Jeremy Frank for helpful discussions.
[19] S. Sen. Multi-Agent Learning: Papers from the 1997
AAAI Workshop (Technical Report WS-97-03. AAAI
Press, Menlo Park, CA, 1997.
[20] K. Sycara. Multiagent systems. AI Magazine, 19(2):79–
92, 1998.
[21] D. Wolpert and K. Tumer. An overview of collective
intelligence.
In J. M. Bradshaw, editor, Handbook of
Agent Technology. AAAI Press/MIT Press, 1999.
[22] D. Wolpert, K. Tumer, and J. Frank. Using collective in-
telligence to route internet traffic. In Advances in Neu-
ral Information Processing Systems - 11. MIT Press,
1999.
[23] D. Wolpert, K. Wheeler, and K. Tumer. Collective in-
telligence for distributed control. 1999. (pre-print).
REFERENCES
[1] W. B. Arthur. Complexity in economic theory: Induc-
tive reasoning and bounded rationality. The American
Economic Review, 84(2):406–411, May 1994.
[2] E. Baum. Manifesto for an evolutionary economics of
intelligence. In C. M. Bishop, editor, Neural Networks
and Machine Learning. Springer-Verlag, 1998.
[3] J. Berg and A. Engel. Matrix games, mixed strategies,
and statistical mechanics. preprint cond-mat/9809265,
1998.
[4] C. Boutilier, Y. Shoham, and M. P. Wellman. Editorial:
Economic principles of multi-agent systems. Artificial
Intel ligence Journal, 94:1–6, 1997.
[5] J. M. Bradshaw, editor. Software Agents. MIT Press,
1997.
[6] G. Caldarelli, M. Marsili, and Y. C. Zhang. A prototype
model of stock exchange. Europhys. Letters, 40:479–484,
1997.
[7] D. Challet and Y. C. Zhang. Emergence of cooperation
and organization in an evolutionary game. Physica A,
246(3-4):407, 1997.
[8] C. Claus and C. Boutilier. The dynamics of reinforce-
ment learning cooperative multiagent systems. In Pro-
ceedings of the Fifteenth National Conference on Arti-
ficial Intel ligence, pages 746–752, June 1998.
[9] R. H. Crites and A. G. Barto. Improving elevator per-
formance using reinforcement learning. In D. S. Touret-
zky, M. C. Mozer, and M. E. Hasselmo, editors, Ad-
vances in Neural Information Processing Systems - 8,
pages 1017–1023. MIT Press, 1996.
[10] D. Fudenberg and D. K. Levine. The Theory of Learning
in Games. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1998.
[11] D. Fudenberg and J. Tirole. Game Theory. MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA, 1991.
[12] G. Hardin. The tragedy of the commons. Science,
162:1243–1248, 1968.
[13] J. Hu and M. P. Wellman. Multiagent reinforcement
learning: Theoretical framework and an algorithm. In
Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference
on Machine Learning, pages 242–250, June 1998.
[14] J. Hu and M. P. Wellman. Online learning about other
agents in a dynamic multiagent system. In Proceedings
of the Second International Conference on Autonomous
Agents, pages 239–246, May 1998.
[15] B. A. Hubermann and T. Hogg. The behavior of com-
putational ecologies.
In The Ecology of Computation,
pages 77–115. North-Holland, 1988.
[16] N. R. Jennigs, K. Sycara, and M. Wooldridge. A
roadmap of agent research and development. Au-
tonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 1:7–38,
1998.
[17] N. F. Johnson, S. Jarvis, R. Jonson, P. Cheung, Y. R.
Kwong, and P. M. Hui. Volatility and agent adaptability
in a self-organizing market. preprint cond-mat/9802177,
February 1998.
[18] T. Sandholm, K. Larson, M. Anderson, O. Shehory,
and F. Tohme. Anytime coalition structure genera-
tion with worst case guarantees. In Proceedings of the
Fifteenth National Conference on Artificial Intel ligence,
pages 46–53, 1998.
|
1902.07860 | 1 | 1902 | 2019-02-21T03:51:54 | Survivable Networks via UAV Swarms Guided by Decentralized Real-Time Evolutionary Computation | [
"cs.MA"
] | The survivable network concept refers to contexts where the wireless communication between ground agents needs to be maintained as much as possible at all times, regardless of any adverse conditions that may arise. In this paper we propose a nature-inspired approach to survivable networks, in which we bring together swarm intelligence and evolutionary computation. We use an on-line real-time Genetic Algorithm to optimize the movements of an UAV swarm towards maintaining communication between the ground agents. The proposed approach models the ground agents and the UAVs as boids-based swarms, and optimizes the movement of the UAVs using different instances of the GA running independently on each UAV. The UAV coordination mechanism is an implicit one, embedded in the fitness function of the Genetic Algorithm instances. The behaviors of the individual UAVs emerge into an aggregated optimization of the overall network survivability. The results show that the proposed approach is able to maintain satisfactory network survivability levels regardless of the ground agents' movements, including for cases as complex as random walks. | cs.MA | cs | Survivable Networks via UAV Swarms Guided by Decentralized
Real-Time Evolutionary Computation
School of Engineering and Information Technology
School of Engineering and Information Technology
George Leu
Jiangjun Tang
UNSW Canberra
Canberra, Australia
[email protected]
UNSW Canberra
Canberra, Australia
[email protected]
9
1
0
2
b
e
F
1
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
0
6
8
7
0
.
2
0
9
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract -- The survivable network concept refers to contexts
where the wireless communication between ground agents needs
to be maintained as much as possible at all times, regardless
of any adverse conditions that may arise. In this paper we
propose a nature-inspired approach to survivable networks, in
which we bring together swarm intelligence and evolutionary
computation. We use an on-line real-time Genetic Algorithm to
optimize the movements of an UAV swarm towards maintain-
ing communication between the ground agents. The proposed
approach models the ground agents and the UAVs as boids-
based swarms, and optimizes the movement of the UAVs using
different instances of the GA running independently on each UAV.
The UAV coordination mechanism is an implicit one, embedded
in the fitness function of the Genetic Algorithm instances. The
behaviors of the individual UAVs emerge into an aggregated
optimization of the overall network survivability. The results
show that the proposed approach is able to maintain satisfactory
network survivability levels regardless of the ground agents'
movements, including for cases as complex as random walks.
I. INTRODUCTION
In survivable networks domain there is currently a growing
interest to employ swarms of UAVs that act as relays for
maintaining wireless communication between the agents of
a ground swarm. Network survivability refers to the extent
to which the group of ground agents remains connected or
recovers from connectivity loss, when obstructions for the
wireless communication occur [1], [2]. These obstructions can
be actual physical obstacles (i.e. mountains, forests, buildings),
or, simply, the distance between the ground agents, which
naturally attenuates the radio signals. The use of UAVs,
especially rotary wing UAVs, as relays for the ground agents is
gaining great popularity at both theoretical and practical levels,
in application fields like search and rescue in disaster areas,
large scale farming operations, military operations, internet of
things, autonomous cars and transportation, and many others.
In such contexts, the UAVs continuously adjust their positions
to the movement pattern of the ground agents, so that the
ground communication is maintained as much as possible at
all times. The main challenges associated to the above are
related to the mobility models employed for implementing the
movement of the individual UAVs, and to the coordination
mechanisms available for the individual UAVs to perform well
collectively as a relay swarm [3].
In this paper, we use a nature-inspired approach that
combines swarm intelligence and evolutionary computation
to provide ground network survivability regardless of the
ground agents' movements. To address the challenges men-
tioned above, we propose an implementation of the UAVs'
mobility which is inspired from the classic boids model of
Reynolds [4]. The proposed model uses modified versions
of the two key concepts of the classic boids: the interaction
based on the concept of neighborhood, and the position update
rule based on the weighted sum of a set of primitive forces.
The modifications we propose are that the neighborhood is
network-based [5] instead of the classic vision-based [4], and
the update rule includes forces from outside the swarm, not
only from within. The influence from outside comes from
the ground agents, whose movements have to be tracked by
the UAVs. Further, to couple the proposed mobility model
to the survivable networks problem, we propose an on-line
real-time genetic algorithm that optimizes the weights in the
update rule towards maximizing the network survivability. The
genetic algorithm runs in multiple independent instances in
parallel (i.e. one instance on each UAV), and embeds in its
fitness function a network coverage metric. The way the fitness
function is defined contributes to addressing the coordination
challenge too. By attempting to maximize their individual
coverages,
the UAVs take individual quasi-greedy actions
which aggregate to form an implicit coordination mechanism
that maximizes the ground network connectivity (which is the
metric we use to evaluate the network survivability).
In addition to the main contributions mentioned above, we
also contribute to the mobility model of the ground agents,
which we implement using Reynold's classic boids, with no
modification of the key concepts. This leads to a dual boids-
based swarm with evolution view on survivable networks,
where the ground swarm operates independently to simulate a
certain mission in the field, and the airborne swarm operates
as a networked boids-based swarm with inputs from both air
and ground agents. This view offers two other benefits, which
are typically not found in the evolutionary swarm applications
related to survivable networks. The first benefit of considering
the dual swarm is that the number of parameters used to
model the system is overall very low, facilitating evolutionary
optimization approaches in general, and our proposed GA
in particular, to run in real-time. Thus, very complex non-
deterministic behaviors can be obtained by optimizing only a
very small number of weights, associated with the boids forces
that implement the swarm behavior. The second benefit, which
flows from the first one, is the scalability of the system. Due
to the small number of primitive forces typically involved by
boids-based swarms, the number of agents used in experiments
(both airborne and ground) is virtually irrelevant. Thus, very
large systems, with very complex behaviors can be investigated
with fairly low computational power required.
With the proposed approach, we perform experiments using
the swarm of ground agents in two contexts. First, the ground
agents operate as pure classic boids, and then as random
walkers. The former case implements a very general movement
pattern, while the latter implements no movement pattern
at all. Arguably, the less pattern exists in the movement of
the ground agents, the more difficult it is for the UAVs to
track them and provide network survivability. Thus, ideally,
it would be desired that the UAVs provide ground network
survivability regardless of the ground agents' movements (i.e.
with or without a coherent pattern). While that is not the
case in practice, we demonstrate in our experiments that the
proposed real-time GA, in conjunction with the boids-based
UAV mobility model, is able to provide very good results
for the boids-based ground movement and also satisfactory
results for the random walks. In summary, the results we obtain
offer convincing evidence that the methods employed ensure
network survivability for complex ground activity, including
good responsiveness to activities that have no pattern at all,
such as random walks.
II. BACKGROUND
Historically, the network survivability problems have been
first approached using ground relays, either fixed or mobile.
Later, high-altitude airborne relays like satellites and fixed-
wing aircraft have been used. However, both the ground and
the high-altitude approaches have substantial limitations in nu-
merous respects. The very first issue is their limited ability to
reach (or follow) the ground agents in difficult locations, such
as densely forested areas, densely built urban areas, indoors,
or underground; that is, a significant mobility issue. Other
limitations, which are equally important, are the difficulties in
scaling the systems, and also the technological complexity of
the hardware and communication technologies employed. This
has led to studies that involved very low number of agents,
where the very concept of swarms is not really applicable.
Typical scenarios in these studies implement very low scale
systems with 1 relay agent and 2 ground agents [6], [2],
few relay agents to support communication between a single
mobile ground agent and a fixed base station [7], or few relay
agents and few ground agents [8], [9], [10], [1].
More recently, the advances in drone technology allowed
the use in these contexts of miniaturized rotary-wing UAVs
(i.e. multicopter drones), which provide high mobility and
versatility at relatively low cost. This allowed for a wider
range of mobility models to be employed for the UAVs, which
in turn facilitated the investigation of a wider range of air-
ground systems. The mobility models employed by the UAVs
refer to the individual control and the group-level cooperation
mechanisms that allow the UAVs to find, either individually
or collectively, the optimal air trajectories/positions for maxi-
mizing the communication capabilities of the ground agents.
Early studies on mobility discussed models as simple as
random mobility [11], which later generated the more complex
concept of chaos enhanced mobility [12], [13], [14]. Other
studies proposed analytic and/or parametric approaches with
fixed pre-tuned parameters
[15], [8], [9], [16], [17], [10],
[18]. However, both these directions of research suffered from
limitations related to scalability.
More recently, various nature-inspired algorithms have been
used in the mobility models, such as ant colony pheromone-
based mobility [11], bat algorithms [19], or boids-based finite
state machines [8]. Evolutionary computation, which is of
particular interest for this paper, has been also employed in
various forms in UAV path planning and coordination. One
class of studies used evolution as standalone method for the
mobility, where evolutionary algorithms evolve parameters
of the controllers used in the individual UAVs [7]. These
studies do not account for the collective behavior of the
UAVs, that is, they apply only to individual agents, with no
coordination mechanisms in place. Another class of studies
employs evolutionary algorithms that contribute to both the
individual and group mobility of the UAVs [20], [21], [22].
One important issue of the evolutionary algorithms in these
contexts is their limited ability to operate on-line, in real-
time, due to the relatively slow convergence [23]. Thus, most
of the studies report off-line and/or centralised algorithms in
relation to the survivable networks domain. In [20] the authors
use a centralised Genetic Algorithm to evolve parameters
for the behavior of UAVs, where the behavior of the UAVs
is based on a small set of primitive individual actions and
transitions (5 possible actions and 11 transitions), however,
the coordination mechanism requires global knowledge, or
at least a persistent trace left in the environment by each
UAV. Lamont et. al [21] use a multi-objective evolutionary
algorithm that operates quasi locally, based on the pinning
concept from control theory. The objectives are related to the
cost of operation (distance distance traveled and amount of
climbing), and to the risk resulting from flying through difficult
areas. The solution set offers paths that provide the lowest cost
associated with a particular level of risk.
To alleviate the real-time operation issue, Particle Swarm
Optimization (PSO) methods have been proposed, or hybrid
methods that combine GAs and PSO. In [22], a comparison
between the two directions is discussed, where the authors
show that the speed of PSOs and GAs can vary greatly de-
pending on the type scenario they are employed for, however,
in most of the scenarios the PSO is faster, and therefore more
appropriate for real-time use. PSO's speed gain over GAs is
also reported by Tang et. al [23], who use a PSO method for
UAV coordination, and also by Duan et. al [24], who use a
hybrid PSO-GA for multi-UAV formation control.
In spite of the issue discussed above, the GA we propose
in this paper is fast enough to operate in real-time for the
scenarios considered, which include 4 UAVs and 100 ground
agents. While the GA itself is designed to operate in real-
time, and therefore is fast,
there is also the boids-based
mobility model we propose, which contributes to its speed
via the low number of parameters to be optimized. Another
contribution to the speed of the GA, and also to the scalability
of the system, is the level of integration we adopt for the
UAVs' and ground agents' behaviors. As far as we know,
there is no attempt in the current research to implement both
the ground agents and the UAVs using the same conceptual
model. The existing studies consider the airborne and ground
agents as separate groups, and as a result, their operation and
mobility are implemented using different conceptual models.
By considering the ground agents as a boids-based swarm
too, we integrate seamlessly the air-ground operation (i.e.
two boids-based swarms with slightly different settings of the
parameters). Thus, the parameters in the GA that come as
inputs from the ground swarm are only a few (i.e. 2), and
of exactly the same type as those corresponding to the UAV
swarm. The details of the proposed methodology are provided
below, in Section III.
connected network; there are two sub-networks where each
UAV acts as a relay for its own current local ground network.
The coverage is defined very straightforward, as the number
of ground agents covered by all UAVs.
(cid:90)
(cid:90)
III. METHDOLOGY
(a) A full coverage network
In this paper, we consider that the UAVs fly at a constant
low altitude that does not affect their communication with the
ground. Thus, the vertical distance between the UAVs and
ground level can be neglected from a networking perspective,
as there is no variation in communication conditions due to
altitude changes. For the ground agents, we consider that they
operate on a flat field with no obstacles. This means they can
move freely across the field, with the only restriction being
to avoid collisions with each-other. This type of environment
has been successfully used as a test-bed in other studies on
survivable networks [8], [20].
We model the swarming behaviours of the two types of
agents, airborne and ground, based on the classic boids model
of Reynolds [25], which means, all agents, airborne and
ground, are flocking boids. We use the two key concepts of
the original boids model, i.e. the neighborhood-based inter-
action and the three boids forces: cohesion, alignment, and
separation. However, we propose an enhanced version of these
concepts, and we enrich these concepts to suit our approach
to the survivable networks context.
In the following sections, we describe in detail the method-
ology used for implementing the ground and UAVs, with the
subsequent optimization algorithm, and the metrics used for
evaluating the network survivability.
A. Measuring Survivability
The ground network survivability can be measured using
to major concepts: coverage and connectivity. The coverage
refers to the number of ground agents situated within the
aggregated area that contains the communication range of
all UAVs, as shown in Figure 1a. In this case, the ground
agents covered by one of the UAVs can communicate between
them, but cannot communicate with those covered by the other
UAV. As a result, the ground agents do not form a complete
(cid:90)
(b) A full connected network
Fig. 1: Full coverage v.s. full connectivity, via two UAVs with
communication range R.
The connectivity refers to the situation when the agents are
able to communicate regardless of which UAVs' coverage they
belong to. Figure 1b illustrates a full connectivity case, where
a fully connected network is established when all UAVs are
close enough to be able to communicate between them, and
thus relay the communication between any ground agent. If the
ground swarm is fully connected, then it is also fully covered,
but not the vice-versa. The connectivity is typically modeled
based on the graph theoretical concept of connected network
component [26]. A connected component is a sub-graph where
any two nodes are connected to each other. Therefore, we
define the connectivity metric as the number of connected
components that exist at a moment in time within the swarm
of ground agents. Ideally, the connectivity should have the
value 1, which means there is only one sub-graph which is
equal to the entire network. In this case, the ground swarm is
fully connected via the UAVs (i.e it operates as an equivalent
full connected graph from a graph theory perspective). In
practice, less perfect cases are still acceptable, where there
are more than one connected components, but among them
one or several giant connected components [27] exist.
In this paper we use the connectivity as the main metric for
evaluating the ground network survivability, and we use the
coverage in the fitness function of the optimization algorithm.
While this may appear as an inconsistency, we demonstrate
that it is possible to use the coverage as the objective for
the optimization engine of each individual UAV, and obtain
a maximization of the connectivity at the swarm level. This
process actually implements an implicit coordination mecha-
nism embedded in the individual goals of the UAVs (this is
explained in detail in Section III-D).
B. Modelling the Ground Agents
The ground agents implement entirely the classic boids
model. They follow the three boids rules, which are applied as
a result of the influence received from their ground neighbors,
where the neighborhood is defined by agents' vision distance
vd and a vision angle vα. We recall that in survivable networks
contexts the ground agents operate in the field to accomplish
a certain task, and are not aware or concerned about the
existence of the airborne support. Thus, the movement of the
ground agents is not influenced by the UAVs. The three boids
forces (i.e vectors with magnitude and heading) applied to the
ground agents are described below.
a) Cohesion Force (C): describes the tendency of an
agent to move towards its neighbors' location, and is calculated
based on the centre of mass (average position) of all agents
in its neighborhood.
b) Alignment Force (A): shows the tendency of the agent
to align with the direction of movement of its neighbors, and is
calculated based on the average heading of all the neighbors.
c) Separation Force (S): expresses the tendency of
agents to steer away from their neighbours in order to avoid
crowding them or colliding with them. The agents need to keep
a minimum ground safe distance (SDG) from their neighbors.
Once the forces are calculated based on the neighbours
influence, the velocity V of a ground agent at time step t
is updated using the following equation:
V (t) = V (t − 1) + WC · C(t) + WA · A(t) + WS · S(t) (1)
where WC , WA, and WS are weights corresponding to the
cohesion, alignment, and separation forces. The weights are
constant for the ground agents, since their behavior is fixed
(i.e. they perform a certain task). Based on the velocity update,
the position P of a ground agent at time step t can be updated
as follows:
approach in the most general case, when the ground agents
have no movement pattern at all. In the context of boids-
based swarming, a random walk movement equates with a
swarm in which the cohesion and alignment forces do not
exist. However, the agents still need to keep the safe distance
from neighbours; hence, the separation force is still applied.
C. Modelling the UAVs
The UAVs form another boid-based swarm, which embeds
the three classic boids forces showing the influence from
the neighboring UAVs, and two other additional forces that
represent the influence from the neighboring ground agents.
Unlike the classic boids model, for the UAVs the neighborhood
is not defined by vision, instead we use an omnidirectional
communication range R. We recall that the purpose in surviv-
able networks is for the UAVs to move according to the ground
agents' movement, so that they facilitate communication. This
means, they tend to follow/track the ground agents in order
to provide the network relay service. Thus, we consider
that an UAV is influenced by the movement of the ground
agents situated in its neighborhood (i.e. communication range)
through the cohesion and alignment forces. The separation
force is not applied, since there is never a risk of collision
between a ground and an UAV.
The three classic forces applied between UAVs are defined
just like the ones for the ground agents, that is, according to
the original study of Reynolds [4]. The other two forces, cor-
responding to the influence from ground agents, are described
below.
a) Air-Ground Cohesion Force(CAG): All ground agents
situated within the communication range R of an UAV Ai form
the set of ground neighbors NG of that UAV. Each ground
neighbor gj ∈ NG satisfies dist(Ai, Gj) < R. Then, the air-
ground cohesion force CAGi applied to UAV Ai at time t can
be derived from the position of its ground neighbours as in
Equation 3.
CAGi = PNG
j=0 PGj
NG
− PAi for each Gi ∈ NG
(3)
where, NG is the cardinality of NG, P is the position of an
agent.
b) Air-Ground Alignment Force (AAG): The air
to
ground alignment force (AAGi ) of an UAV Ai at time t is
derived from the velocities of all its ground neighbors NG as
in Equation 4.
AGAi = PNG
j=0 VGj
NG
− VAi with i 6= j
(4)
where NG is the cardinality of NG, and V is the velocity of
an agent.
Once all five forces are calculated, the velocity VAi (t) of
P (t) = P (t − 1) + V (t)
(2)
each UAV Ai is updated as follows:
In addition to the boids-based swarming behaviour, we also
consider the case when the ground agents move at random.
This allows us to investigate the performance of our proposed
VAi (t) =VAi (t − 1)+
+ WCA CAi (t) + WAA AAi(t) + WSA SAi(t)
+ WCAG CAGi (t) + WAAG AAGi(t)
(5)
where W s denote the weights of the forces in the update rule.
Then, the position PAi at time t of each UAV Ai can be
updated as in Equation 6.
PAi(t) = PAi(t − 1) + VAi (t)
(6)
The rules considered above for the UAVs allow them to
move according to a boids-based swarming behavior, where
the behavior is guided by the interaction with both airborne
and ground agents. However, the swarm behavior alone does
not guarantee optimal connectivity services for the ground
agents. Unlike the ground agents, the force weights of the
UAVs are not constant, since their movement need to adapt
comtinuously to the ground activity. Therefore, an optimiza-
tion of the force weights at each time step is needed in order
to achieve the best connectivity for the ground agents. The
optimization algorithm is described in detail in Section III-D.
D. A Decentralized Real-Time Genetic Algorithm
In this paper, we propose an decentralized real-time genetic
algorithm as optimization method for the UAVs' movement.
We mentioned above that
the force weights need to be
optimized. This can be done in two ways. One way is to
optimize the weights in the same way for all UAVs. This
means that at each time step, the current optimal set of weights
is used by all agents. This is similar to employing a centralized
optimization for the whole swarm. We are interested to make
the UAVs individually adaptive, therefore each UAV runs its
own optimization engine to obtain its own set of optimal
weights at each time step. Thus, each UAV attempts to
optimize independently its own five force weights plus the
speed, with the purpose of providing better connectivity to
the ground agents. In this case, a coordination mechanism is
also required. Our approach is that an explicit coordination
mechanism is not needed, instead, the way we define the
fitness function of each individual agent leads to an implicit
coordination capability.
Figure 2 illustrates how each UAV has its own optimization
engine, which relies on a population of chromosomes. At each
time step, only one chromosome is active, representing a valid
decision in the simulation; all other chromosomes represent
shadow agents, which are evolved in the GA but do not take
effect in simulation. The structure of the chromosomes is
the same for all UAVs, i.e. they are vectors with 6 compo-
nents s, WGA, WGC , WAA, WAC , WAS, where W s are force
weights and s is the speed. The value ranges for the genes in
the chromososes are as follows. The speed of an UAV can vary
from 0 (hovering) to 5. The separation weight needs to be high
in order to maintain safety. Hence, it can take values between
0.5 and 2. All other weights (i.e. WGA, WGC , WAA, WAC )
can take values from 0 to 0.5.
Ideally, each UAV would run the GA at each time step;
however, a certain time is needed for the evolution to reach
meaningful results. For this reason the agents run the GA
every t′ time steps instead of every time step. This means
that the GAs run in time windows of duration t′, where the
duration is the stopping condition. This affects the quality
of the optimal solution at each run, but ensures that overall
throughout the swarm simulation, the aggregated optimization
process runs virtually real-time. The use of GAs in time
windows also allows a past/historical period of duration t′,
as well as a future/prediction period of duration t′ to be used
for optimization as part of the fitness function. This will be
explained below.
Consider an arbitrary agent and an arbitrary time window
within the swarm simulation timeline. The agent starts running
a GA. In the beginning of the GA, a population of chro-
mosomes is randomly generated within the ranges discussed
earlier. One chromosome is selected randomly (illustrated in
Figure 2 as coloured rows) to be an active chromosome.
The active chromosome will be used in the actual swarm
simulation, and the speed and force weights will be applied
in simulation to produce actual position updates. All other
chromosomes represent shadow agents, which update their
virtual positions accordingly, but
these positions will not
reflect in the actual simulation. The shadow chromosomes have
their fitness evaluated, a tournament selection with elitism is
performed, and one point crossover and mutation are applied
for producing the next generation. Then, the best solution
among the current population is chosen to become the active
agent, and its updates take effect in simulation, while the rest
of the chromosomes continue to operate as shadows. The pro-
cess ends when the time window ends, and the current active
chromosome takes effect in the simulation; i.e. it represents
the decision of the agent.
The fitness function used in our GA is built upon the
number of ground agents covered by an aerial agent and
its neighbouring aerial agents (i.e. one hop airborne network
links), with the consideration of both historic and predicted
states.
F =
t
X
k=t−t′
NG(k) + NG(t + t′)
(7)
where NG is the total number of ground agents covered by an
UAV and its neighbouring UAVs, calculated as below:
NG(t) = N (t) +
NA
X
i=1
Ni(t)
(8)
This fitness function considers the local coverage and the
intermediate connected UAVs' coverage. It does not consider
any indirectly connected UAVs' coverage, in order to save
network bandwidth and computation cost. The GA aims to
maximize the fitness; this means, to increase the local cov-
erage as well as the number of neighbouring connections for
establishing better connectivity.
IV. EXPERIMENTS AND RESULTS
A. Experimental Setup
The size of the environment is 1000 × 1000 units. In the
environment operate 100 ground agents and 4 UAVs for a
duration of 22000 time steps. The ground agents are initialized
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:857)(cid:857)
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:857)(cid:857)
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:857)(cid:857)
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:1845) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2163)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2157) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2159) (cid:1849)(cid:2157)(cid:2175)
(cid:857)(cid:857)
Fig. 2: Chromosomes of each UAV in the Decentralized GA. Triangles are UAVs; squares are ground agents
with random positions. The UAVs are initialized to form a
300 × 300 units square situated in the center of the environ-
ment, which means, a fully connected airborne network. There
are a total of 30 random number generator seeds for initialing
the ground agents in our experiments. Along with each ground
agents initialization, each UAV initializes 50 chromosomes
randomly (the size of the population in the GA) and then runs
the GA repeatedly in t′ time windows. Therefore, there are
total 30 runs for each scenario, to ensure statistical validity of
the algorithm.
As mentioned earlier in the paper, two scenarios are used
for the ground agents behavior to evaluate the proposed
decentralized approach: classic boids and random walk. The
parameter setting for each of the scenarios is listed in Table I.
TABLE I: Two ground movement patterns, implemented via
various force weights applied to ground agents.
Scenarios
Classic Boids (CB)
Random Walk (RW)
Cohesion
0.01
N/A
Alignment
0.125
N/A
Separation
1
1
The neighborhood for the ground agents is defined by vd =
30 units, and vα = 360 degrees. The neigborhood for the
UAVs is defined by the radius of coverage, which has the
constant value R = 300.
B. Discussion of Results
The first set of results, illustrated in Figure 3, shows the
connectivity of the ground agents over time in the best cases,
from both scenarios. It can be seen that, by using the proposed
optimization algorithm, the swarm of UAVs is able to maintain
high connectivity, i.e. there are very few disconnected network
components. This results in very good survivability, with the
number of connected components equal or close to equal to
1 most of the time in the boids case, and lower than 20 for
the random walks case. Another aspect that can be observed
in the boids case, is that from time to time there are spikes
that show lower survivability. This is due to a bounce-back
boundary condition, where agents reflect from the boundary
Boids
Boids Avg.
Random Walk
Random Walk Avg.
50
40
30
20
10
s
t
n
e
n
o
p
m
o
c
d
e
t
c
e
n
n
o
c
0
0
0.5
1
time step
1.5
2
104
Fig. 3: Connectivity comparison between boids and random
walk
of the environment. The bounce-back movement breaks the
swarm behavior for a short period of time until the ground
agents regroup in a new swarm formation. This shows that the
proposed algorithm is able to recover from a large connectivity
loss, and quickly provide high survivability for the newly
formed swarm. The bounce-back movement has no visible
effect in the case of random walks, since there is no movement
pattern anyway.
Further, we are interested to see what is the amount of time
a certain level of survivability is ensured, since the previous
set of results did not show this very clearly. For the same sim-
ulation, i.e. the one with the best survivability results, we show
in Figure 4 the percentage of time a certain connectivity was
achieved. This is a remapping of the information presented in
Figure 3, to show a time summary of the connectivity measure.
It can be seen that in the boids scenario the connectivity value
is 1 for more than 50% of the time, which means the ground
network is fully connected. For the random walk scenario, the
graph shows lower, but still acceptable level of performance.
The previous results showed the connectivity, which is
measured as the number of connected components. However,
Sub net 1
Sub net 2
Sub net 3
Individual Agents
100
80
60
40
20
s
t
n
e
g
a
f
o
m
u
n
(a) Boids
0
0
0.5
1
time step
1.5
2
104
(a) Boids
Sub net 1
Sub net 2
Sub net 3
Individual Agents
100
80
60
40
20
s
t
n
e
g
a
f
o
m
u
n
(b) Random walk
Fig. 4: The frequency of connect components from the best
runs of boids and random walk
0
0
0.5
1
time step
1.5
2
104
(b) Random walk
they do not show the size of the connected components. Thus,
for example, if a connectivity of 2 has been achieved, the two
connected components may consist of 50-50 nodes, or they
may consist of 95-5 nodes. The two examples are significantly
different, with an obvious advantage of the latter case. Thus,
the strength of the proposed approach may be overshadowed
by this aspect, and the results shown in the previous figures
may lead to the conclusion that the results are not a substantial
achievement. We investigate this aspect by calculating the size
of the largest three connected components, for the best runs.
The results shown in Figure 5 are convincing. It can be seen
that the largest component contains over 70 nodes even in the
random walk scenario, while in the boids scenario it contains
most of the time over 90 nodes.
To further clarify what "most of the time" means, we show
in Figure 6a the amount of time (as percentage of the total
simulation time) certain numbers of nodes are part of the
largest connected component, in the best simulation run. This
is in essence the same information presented in Figure 6 for
the largest component, remapped as a time summary. It can
be seen, especially in the boids scenario, that over 40% of
the simulation time the largest component contains all the
nodes, i.e. all the ground agents. However, the results are
acceptable even in the random walk scenario, where the largest
component contains over 70 nodes for more than 50% of the
time.
Fig. 5: The number of agents in TOP 3 largest sub-networks
- from the best simulation run
V. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, we presented a nature-inspired approach to
network survivability, which combines swarm intelligence and
evolutionary computation. The proposed approach models the
ground agents and the UAVs as a dual air-ground swarm
that uses boids-like rules, and optimizes the movement of the
UAVs using a decentralized real-time genetic algorithm. The
proposed approach provides seamless integration of the ground
and air swarms of agents, while also facilitating scalability and
airborne responsivity to complex general ground behaviors.
The results obtained in simulations demonstrate that the
mobility model used for the UAVs, and the associated evolu-
tionary optimization algorithm are able to provide good levels
of network survivability for complex ground movements,
including the case of no movement pattern.
We believe that
the conceptual approach presented in
this work can be successfully extended to a large variety
of scenarios. In this paper we only used the three classic
forces (cohesion, alignment and separation) that govern the
emergence of swarming. However, numerous other behaviors
(with their subsequent forces) can be investigated, such as
leader following, flow field following, path following, obstacle
avoidance, and many others. To the proposed approach more
forces can be easily added, since the mobility model and the
[9] K. Hui, P. Pourbeik, P. George, D. Phillips, S. Magrath, and
M. Kwiatkowski, "Opal - a survivability-oriented approach to manage-
ment of tactical military networks," in 2011 - MILCOM 2011 Military
Communications Conference, Nov 2011, pp. 1127 -- 1132.
[10] Y. Zhou, N. Cheng, N. Lu, and X. S. Shen, "Multi-uav-aided networks:
Aerial-ground cooperative vehicular networking architecture," IEEE
Vehicular Technology Magazine, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 36 -- 44, Dec 2015.
[11] E. Kuiper and S. Nadjm-Tehrani, "Mobility models for uav group recon-
naissance applications," in 2006 International Conference on Wireless
and Mobile Communications (ICWMC'06), July 2006, pp. 33 -- 33.
[12] M. Rosalie, G. Danoy, S. Chaumette, and P. Bouvry, "From random
in swarms of uavs," in Proceedings
process to chaotic behavior
of
the 6th ACM Symposium on Development and Analysis of
Intelligent Vehicular Networks and Applications, ser. DIVANet '16.
New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2016, pp. 9 -- 15. [Online]. Available:
http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2989275.2989281
[13] M. Rosalie, M. Brust, G. Danoy, S. Chaumette, and P. Bouvry., "Cover-
age optimization with connectivity preservation for uav swarms applying
chaotic dynamics." in IEEE International Conference on Autonomic
Computing (ICAC2017), July 2017, pp. 113 -- 118.
[14] M. Rosalie, G. Danoy, S. Chaumette, and P. Bouvry, "Chaos-enhanced
mobility models for multilevel swarms of uavs," Swarm and Evolution-
ary Computation, vol. 41, pp. 36 -- 48, 2018.
[15] K. Kar and S. Banerjee, "Node Placement for Connected Coverage in
Sensor Networks," WiOpt'03: Modeling and Optimization in Mobile,
Ad Hoc and Wireless Networks, p. 2 pages, Mar. 2003, poster.
[Online]. Available: https://hal.inria.fr/inria-00466114
[16] O. Cetin and I. Zagli, "Continuous airborne communication relay
approach using unmanned aerial vehicles," Journal of Intelligent &
Robotic Systems, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 549 -- 562, Jan 2012.
[17] N. Goddemeier, K. Daniel, and C. Wietfeld, "Role-based connectivity
management with realistic air-to-ground channels for cooperative uavs,"
IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 30, no. 5, pp.
951 -- 963, June 2012.
[18] S. Zhang, H. Zhang, Q. He, K. Bian, and L. Song, "Joint trajectory
and power optimization for uav relay networks," IEEE Communications
Letters, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 161 -- 164, Jan 2018.
[19] P. Suarez, A. Iglesias, and A. Galvez, "Make robots be bats: special-
izing robotic swarms to the bat algorithm," Swarm and Evolutionary
Computation, 2018.
[20] P. Gaudiano, E. Bonabeau, and B. Shargel, "Evolving behaviors for a
swarm of unmanned air vehicles," in Proceedings 2005 IEEE Swarm
Intelligence Symposium, 2005. SIS 2005., June 2005, pp. 317 -- 324.
[21] G. B. Lamont, J. N. Slear, and K. Melendez, "Uav swarm mission
planning and routing using multi-objective evolutionary algorithms," in
2007 IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence in Multi-Criteria
Decision-Making, April 2007, pp. 10 -- 20.
[22] V. Roberge, M. Tarbouchi, and G. Labonte, "Comparison of parallel
genetic algorithm and particle swarm optimization for real-time uav path
planning," IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 9, no. 1,
pp. 132 -- 141, Feb 2013.
[23] Y. Tang, H. Gao, J. Kurths, and J. Fang, "Evolutionary pinning control
and its application in uav coordination," IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Informatics, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 828 -- 838, Nov 2012.
[24] H. Duan, Q. Luo, Y. Shi, and G. Ma, "?hybrid particle swarm opti-
mization and genetic algorithm for multi-uav formation reconfiguration,"
IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 16 -- 27,
Aug 2013.
[25] C. W. Reynolds, "Flocks, herds and schools: A distributed behavioral
model," SIGGRAPH Comput. Graph., vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 25 -- 34, Aug.
1987.
[26] R. Albert and A.-L. Barab´asi, "Statistical mechanics of complex net-
works," Rev. Mod. Phys., vol. 74, pp. 47 -- 97, Jan 2002.
[27] M. E. J. Newman, "Assortative mixing in networks," Phys. Rev. Lett.,
vol. 89, p. 208701, Oct 2002.
(a) Boids
(b) Random walk
Fig. 6: The number of agents over time (percentage) in the
largest sub-network - from the best simulation run
optimization algorithm depend mainly on the weights of these
forces. Therefore, the approach is both size-wise and context-
wise scalable.
REFERENCES
[1] R. Hunjet, T. Stevens, M. Elliot, B. Fraser, and P. George, "Survivable
communications and autonomous delivery service a generic swarming
framework enabling communications in contested environments," in
MILCOM 2017 - 2017 IEEE Military Communications Conference
(MILCOM), Oct 2017, pp. 788 -- 793.
[2] K. Hui, D. Phillips, and A. Kekirigoda, "Beyond line-of-sight range
extension with opal using autonomous unmanned aerial vehicles," in
MILCOM 2017 - 2017 IEEE Military Communications Conference
(MILCOM), Oct 2017, pp. 279 -- 284.
[3] Y. Zeng, R. Zhang, and T. J. Lim, "Wireless communications with
unmanned aerial vehicles: opportunities and challenges," IEEE Com-
munications Magazine, vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 36 -- 42, May 2016.
[4] C. W. Reynolds, "Flocks, herds and schools: A distributed behavioral
model," in ACM SIGGRAPH computer graphics, vol. 21, no. 4. ACM,
1987, pp. 25 -- 34.
[5] J. Tang, G. Leu, and H. A. Abbass, "Networking the boids is more robust
against adversarial learning," IEEE Transactions on Network Science and
Engineering, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 141 -- 155, April 2018.
[6] M. Elliot and T. Stevens, "Dynamic range extension using harlequin
and hail," in MILCOM 2016 - 2016 IEEE Military Communications
Conference, Nov 2016, pp. 835 -- 841.
[7] S. Hauert, J.-C. Zufferey, and D. Floreano, "Evolved swarming without
positioning information: an application in aerial communication relay,"
Autonomous Robots, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 21 -- 32, Jan 2009.
[8] P. Basu, J. Redi, and V. Shurbanov, "Coordinated flocking of uavs for
improved connectivity of mobile ground nodes," in IEEE MILCOM
2004. Military Communications Conference, 2004., vol. 3, Oct 2004,
pp. 1628 -- 1634 Vol. 3.
|
1903.09658 | 2 | 1903 | 2019-08-05T22:38:56 | A Hybrid Approach to Persistent Coverage in Stochastic Environments | [
"cs.MA"
] | This paper considers the persistent coverage of a 2-D manifold that has been embedded in 3-D space. The manifold is subject to continual impact by intruders which travel at constant velocities along arbitrarily oriented straight-line trajectories. The trajectories of intruders are estimated online with an extended Kalman filter and their predicted impact points contribute normally distributed decay terms to the coverage level. A formal hybrid control strategy is presented that allows for power-constrained 3-D free-flyer agents to persistently monitor the domain, track and intercept intruders, and periodically deploy from and return to a single charging station on the manifold. Guarantees on intruder interception with respect to agent power lifespans are formally proven. The efficacy of the algorithm is demonstrated through simulation. | cs.MA | cs |
A Hybrid Approach to Persistent Coverage in Stochastic
Environments (cid:63)
William Bentz a, Dimitra Panagou a
aDepartment of Aerospace Engineering, University of Michigan, 1320 Beal Ave, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA
Abstract
This paper considers the persistent coverage of a 2-D manifold that has been embedded in 3-D space. The manifold is subject
to continual impact by intruders which travel at constant velocities along arbitrarily oriented straight-line trajectories. The
trajectories of intruders are estimated online with an extended Kalman filter and their predicted impact points contribute
normally distributed decay terms to the coverage level. A formal hybrid control strategy is presented that allows for power-
constrained 3-D free-flyer agents to persistently monitor the domain, track and intercept intruders, and periodically deploy
from and return to a single charging station on the manifold. Guarantees on intruder interception with respect to agent power
lifespans are formally proven. The efficacy of the algorithm is demonstrated through simulation.
Key words: Coverage Control; Collision avoidance; Autonomous mobile robots; Cooperative control; Multi-agent systems .
1 Introduction
1.1 Background
The advent of inexpensive autonomous research plat-
forms has spurred recent interest in teams of mobile
sensors collaborating on complex surveillance and mon-
itoring tasks. Coverage control problems have been par-
ticularly popular due to their numerous applications:
e.g., environmental monitoring (Smith et al. 2011), bat-
tlefield surveillance (Bokareva et al. 2006), lawn mow-
ing and vacuuming, search and rescue (Murphy et al.
2008), and hull inspections (Choset & Kortenkamp 1999,
Hollinger et al. 2013). The latter application is actively
supported by NASA whose work on the Mini AER-
Cam paves the way for a future of extravehicular robotic
(EVR) free flyers performing independent visual inspec-
tions of spacecraft exterior areas of interest (Fredrickson
(cid:63) The authors would like to acknowledge the support of
the Automotive Research Center (ARC) in accordance
with Cooperative Agreement W56HZV-14-2-0001 U.S. Army
TARDEC in Warren, MI and the support by an Early Ca-
reer Faculty grant from NASAs Space Technology Research
Grants Program. The material in this paper was partially
presented at the 56th IEEE Conference on Decision and Con-
trol, December 12-15, 2017, Melbourne, Australia and the
2018 American Control Conference, June 27-29, 2018, Mil-
waukee, Wisconsin. See Section 1.2 for a comparison between
the present work and the conference versions.
Email addresses: [email protected] (William Bentz),
[email protected] (Dimitra Panagou).
et al. 2004). Free flyer visual inspection is the primary
motivating example for our work.
Coverage is often partitioned into three classes of prob-
lems: static, dynamic, and persistent. Static coverage
problems (e.g., area coverage, k-coverage and point cov-
erage) often explore the optimal arrangement of sensor
nodes in a network and the agents tend to immobilize
after this arrangement has been achieved (Cortes et al.
2004). Dynamic coverage problems involve the active
exploration of a domain. Agents typically must sweep
their sensors over all points of a domain until some de-
sired level of coverage has been achieved (Hussein & Sti-
panovi´c 2007, Liu et al. 2013, Stipanovi´c et al. 2013).
Persistent coverage is often similar to dynamic coverage
with the addition of information decay within the envi-
ronment: i.e., agents are required to continually return
to areas of interest in order to restore a deteriorating
coverage level.
The term "persistent coverage" appears as early as
Hokayem et al. (2007) where agents must cover all
points in a 2-D convex polygonal domain every T (cid:63) time
units. This was accomplished with the design of concen-
tric polygonal trajectories with agents following closed
paths in steady state. The work in Song et al. (2013)
is similar but also introduces a linear coverage decay
rate for specific points of interest. In this paper, as
well as Smith et al. (2012), controller design is akin to
regulating the velocity along paths generated offline to
increase observation time at select points of interest. As
Preprint submitted to Automatica
7 August 2019
the decay rates are known and time invariant, optimal
speed control is computed via linear programming.
Palacios-Gas´os et. al have published multiple works
recently on persistent coverage (Palacios-Gas´os et al.
2016a,b, 2017) which build specifically upon Smith
et al. (2012). While the earlier work assumed both the
existence and knowledge of an optimal path to cover
all points of interest, Palacios-Gas´os et al. (2016b) uses
techniques from discrete optimization and linear pro-
gramming to iteratively compute this path. The effect
is that if the coverage decay rate of a specific point of
interest is found to be insufficient to justify the transit
time required to service it, then the point may be re-
moved online from the path of the robot. Prior works,
i.e., Smith et al. (2012), Song et al. (2013), would have
instead driven the robot to quickly pass through the
point. Similar techniques are used in Mitchell et al.
(2015) which also considers that agents must periodi-
cally return to refueling depots.
In Hubel et al. (2008) and Song et al. (2011), the de-
sired coverage level of the domain is maintained with
density maps that yield additional observation time at
select areas of interest. In Song et al. (2011) the maps
are time-invariant while Hubel et al. (2008) considers
time-varying density maps that may be designed around
moving points of interest (e.g., aerial surveillance tar-
gets). However, the latter work only uses density maps
in the derivation of control laws and not in the differen-
tial equations governing coverage level evolution.
Common themes through all of these persistent cover-
age works are convex 2-D domains, predictable environ-
ments, and simplified sensing and dynamic models for
agents. Coverage surfaces embedded in R3 are consid-
ered in Cheng et al. (2008); however, this work is closer
to that of Hokayem et al. (2007) in that agents also follow
preplanned trajectories without considering spatially-
dependent coverage decay maps.
Monitoring of stochastic environments is presented in
Pasqualetti et al. (2014), Yu et al. (2015), outside of
the strict persistent coverage formulation. In Yu et al.
(2015), the authors consider that agents must observe
events at multiple points of interest and the precise ar-
rival times of events are unknown a priori. Arrival time
statistics are used to inform a multi-objective schedul-
ing protocol that results in fixed cyclic servicing policies.
In Pasqualetti et al. (2014), the environment contains
smart intruders which actively attempt to evade a cam-
era surveillance network. Camera motion is restricted to
a single pan axis and thus the the system model is es-
sentially that of a 1-D pursuit evasion problem.
1.2 Contribution
agent dynamic and sensing models, (ii) guarantees on
agent interception of stochastic intruders, and (iii) an
energy-aware agent deployment and scheduling proto-
col. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to
present a formal hybrid approach to persistent coverage.
Although many of the cited works use density functions
to encode points of interest, the difference in our ap-
proach is both subtle and powerful. The density function
in Hubel et al. (2008) evolves subject to the motion of
an intruder and informs the control laws; however, it has
no effect upon the dynamics of the coverage level. Thus,
only the intruder's current location has any influence on
the motion of the agents, and the time-history of the
intruder's trajectory is forgotten. This necessitates that
agents must travel faster than targets in order to cover
points associated with peaks in the density function be-
fore they vanish. Works that do include a density func-
tion in the coverage level evolution, e.g Palacios-Gas´os
et al. (2016a,b, 2017), tend to have fixed decay rates that
cannot respond or adapt to a changing environment. In
contrast, our algorithm utilizes a time-varying density
function, which is estimated online via extended Kalman
Filter, to directly encode coverage decay over the surface
around the predicted impact points of intruders. This
encodes a memory effect which drives some agents to
follow coverage gradients towards areas that have previ-
ously been or will soon be impacted by intruders.
Our agents operate with finite resources and are required
to periodically return to a refueling station while ob-
serving stochastic events at locations and times that are
not known a priori. This approach is different from re-
lated works, such as Yu et al. (2015) and Mitchell et al.
(2015), where the locations of events are fixed and the
authors are concerned with optimal servicing routes be-
tween these known stations.
This hybrid system is a successor to our previous works
in Bentz & Panagou (2017, 2018). In Bentz & Panagou
(2017), we derived the first of our hybrid modes (i.e.,
local coverage mode) and our intruder state estimator.
However, the agents had no power constraints and the
approach was unable to provide any formal guarantees
on intruder interception without additional operating
modes. In Bentz & Panagou (2018), we derived these
additional modes to present a hybrid approach to per-
sistent coverage. Agents were now scheduled to inter-
cept intruders and followed path-length optimal trajec-
tories. However, formal guarantees on intruder intercep-
tion were still limited to cases in which no collision-
avoidance deadlocks had occurred. Furthermore, agents
did not make effective use of local coverage mode as they
would often travel to the predicted impact points of in-
truders and then remain stationary until the moment of
impact thus contributing to a rising coverage error.
In this paper, we present (i) a formal hybrid control
strategy for multi-agent persistent coverage of non-
planar convex surfaces embedded in R3 that does not
make overly simplifying assumptions with respect to
This work extends the interception guarantee of Bentz
& Panagou (2018) to an arbitrary number of collision
avoidance maneuvers and presents an entirely new
method of collision avoidance over the prior works. It
2
also reformulates numerous guard conditions within the
automaton to allow agents to explore actively around
the predicted impact points of intruders. Furthermore,
this contribution revises our sensing function defini-
tion utilized in the prior works which suffered from a
singularity at the sensing cone vertex.
This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 describes
the agents sensing and kinematic models and provides
an overview of our hybrid control strategy, Section 2.2
presents the trajectory estimator for particle intruders
and defines our coverage decay rate map, Sections 3-6
describe each hybrid mode in detail, Section 7 verifies
the algorithm in simulation, Section 8 summarizes our
contributions and Section 9 is an appendix containing
the formal definition of our hybrid automaton.
2 Problem Formulation
2.1 Agent Modeling
Consider a network of spherical autonomous agents in-
dexed i ∈ {1, ..., N}, of radius ri, whose motion is sub-
ject to 3-D rigid body kinematics (Beard 2008):
Si. This model, though intended to be generic, is sim-
ilar to conical camera models presented in other works
on dynamic coverage (see Xie & Zhang (2013)). Our
model differs in terms of its heterogeneity, i.e. Si provides
anisotropic sensing data that degrade in quality towards
the periphery of the footprint and changes with respect
to distance from the sensor. Degradation over distance
is not monotonically decreasing but instead contains a
peak located near the vertex of Si as in Hexsel et al.
(2013). This is motivated by the fact that the probabil-
ity of event detection by a camera decreases when ei-
ther very far from or very close to the lens. Anisotropic
sensing is encoded through the definition of the sensing
constraint functions for each agent i:
(cid:16)
(3a)
(3b)
c1i = βiR2 − (x − xi)2 − (y − yi)2 − (z − zi)2,
c2i = αi − φi,
(x − xi)2 + (y − yi)2 − (z − zi)2(cid:17)}
in G: φi = arccos(cid:0)r pi/pi · xBiG(cid:1). Note that: r pi/pi =
for βi = min{1, ηi
with real constant ηi >> 1. R is the sensing range,
pi = [x y z]T is the position of a point within Si with
respect to G, αi is the angle between the periphery and
centerline of the spherical sector (the xBi axis), and
φi is the angle between r pi/pi = pi − pi (resolved in G
by construction) and the xBi axis given as the inverse
cosine of the dot product of r pi/pi and xBi resolved
√
[(x − xi) (y − yi) (z − zi)]T ,
and xBiG is determined by multiplying R1 by [1 0 0]T :
xBiG =
. Agent
i is thus capable of detecting objects that lie within
an angle of 2αi > 0 about the xBi axis and a range of
R > 0. The model for agent i is depicted in Fig. 1.
cos Ψi cos Θi sin Ψi cos Θi − sin Θi
(x−xi)2+(y−yi)2+(z−zi)2
(cid:105)T
(cid:104)
1
(1)
(2)
xi
yi
=
zi
Φi
Θi
Ψi
− sin Θi
cos Θi sin Ψi sin Φi sin Θi sin Ψi + cos Φi cos Ψi
cos Θi cos Ψi sin Φi sin Θi cos Ψi − cos Φi sin Ψi
,
ui
,
qi
1 sin Φi tan Θi cos Φi tan Θi
cos Φi sin Θi cos Ψi + sin Φi sin Ψi
cos Φi sin Θi sin Ψi − sin Φi cos Ψi
=
− sin Φi
cos Φi cos Θi
sin Φi cos Θi
cos Φi
wi
vi
ri
0
0 sin Φi sec Θi cos Φi sec Θi
si
i ΩT
where pi = [xi yi zi]T is the position vector and Ωi =
[Φi Θi Ψi]T is the vector of 3-2-1 Euler angles taken
with respect to a global Cartesian coordinate frame G
with origin O. The linear velocities [ui vi wi]T and an-
gular velocities [qi ri si]T are both presented in the
body fixed frame Bi with origin pi. The state vector of
agent i is defined as qi = [pT
i ]T . In the sequel, the ro-
tation matrices of (1) and (2) shall be denoted R1 and R2
respectively. The agents travel within a stationary do-
main, D ⊂ R3. Their task is to survey a two-dimensional
manifold, C ⊂ D, known as our surface of interest. For
the purpose of this work we assume that the surface is
an ellipsoid of revolution; however, it should be noted
that the coverage laws, as well as the collision avoidance
strategy, can be easily adapted for any convex surface.
The ellipsoid has semi-major axis xC,r and semi-minor
axis zC,r aligned with the global coordinate axes xG and
zG respectively with center at O. The circumflex (i.e.,
hat) symbols denote unit vectors.
Each agent, i, is equipped with a forward facing sensor
whose spherical sector footprint shall be referred to as
Fig. 1. Agent i is modeled as a sphere of radius ri and has a
forward facing sensor footprint, Si. Sensing constraint func-
tions cki, ∀k ∈ {1, 2}, encode a decay in sensing quality along
the depth and towards the periphery of Si.
Let us denote max{0, cki} = Cki. One can define the
sensing function that represents the quality of informa-
tion available at each point over the sensing domain as:
3
(cid:40) C1iC2i
C1i+C2i
,
if card(cid:0) ¯Ci
(cid:1) < 2 ∧ r pi/pi > 0;
0,
otherwise,
Si(qi, p) =
(4)
where ¯Ci is the set of zero elements in Cki. Si(qi, p) takes
a value of zero outside of Si. Note that Si(qi, p) is de-
fined over all of D and thus has static bounds. Si(qi, p)
is continuous in p while taking a value of zero along ∂Si.
In verifying this continuity, it is important to note that
Si(qi, p) approaches zero from within Si in the limit that
(cid:1) = 2 or r pi/pi = 0 are satisfied. The for-
either card(cid:0) ¯Ci
mer condition may be verified by taking a limit of the
first piecewise definition of (4) as C1i and C2i tend to
zero. The latter condition results from our definitions of
βi and ηi which encode that Si(qi, p) drops off rapidly
when in very close proximity to the vertex of Si. Increas-
ing ηi >> 1 has the effect of shifting the sensing drop
off point closer to pi. Define the coverage level provided
by agent i at time t as:
(cid:90) t
Qi(t, p) =
Si (qi(τ ), p) C (p) dτ,
0
where C is defined as: C (p) =
(cid:26)1,
∀p ∈ C;
0, ∀p /∈ C,
(5)
and en-
codes that the accumulation of sensing information only
occurs along our surface of interest, C.
As the agents cover C, a set of Np high-speed particle
intruders denoted k ∈ {1, ..., Np}, each of which trav-
els in an arbitrary direction at constant velocity, pass
through the domain. The particles are assumed to be
uncontrolled and cannot deviate from their initial tra-
jectories. No assumptions are made with respect to the
source of the particles or whether they are intelligently
generated. Each particle shall have an associated map
decay term, Λk (τ, p), which is defined later in Section
2.3. We may now define the global coverage level:
N(cid:88)
(cid:90) t
Np(cid:88)
Q(t, p) =
Qi(t, p) −
Λk (τ, p) C (p) dτ.
(6)
i=1
k=1
0
In this work, coverage refers to the accumulation of sens-
ing data over time. Points, p, are said to be sufficiently
covered when Q (t, p) ≥ C (cid:63). The goal is to derive a hy-
brid control strategy which persistently sweeps Si across
C while emphasizing surveillance within some bound of
the predicted impact points of particles k ∈ {1, ..., Np}
on C. More specifically, we establish theoretical guaran-
tees on the worst case path length from any agent to
any arbitrary impact point thus guaranteeing intercep-
tion for prescribed bounds on intruder speed, detection
range, and agent velocity. This must be done while avoid-
ing collisions. Let us define collision and interception.
Definition 1 Agent i is said to have intercepted particle
k if i is within a ε1 bound of the estimated impact point
of k for a finite interval of time leading up to the impact.
4
Agent i shall spend this duration of time sweeping the
area in local coverage thus gathering information.
Note that intruders are unaffected by agents and shall
always impact the surface and then disappear. This does
not damage the agent which is free to resume other tasks
upon conclusion of interception.
Definition 2 Agent i avoids collision so long as (cid:107)pi(t)−
pj(t)(cid:107) > ri +rj, ∀t ≥ 0, ∀j (cid:54)= i ∈ {1, ..., N} and (cid:107)ni(cid:107) >
ri where the vector ni has direction normal to C and
length equal to the Euclidean distance of its intersection
point on C to pi.
Agents operate with finite power resources and are
required to return every T (cid:63) time units to a fueling sta-
tion denoted F. Thus, a scheduling protocol is derived
whereby agents periodically deploy from F to cover
within assigned partitions of C. These partitions are
bounded by latitude lines and are sorted by geodesic
distance from F with agents deploying to the partition
furthest from F and then transferring between adjacent
partitions every T (cid:63)
N time units as their power resource
dwindles requiring a return to F within T (cid:63) time units
after deployment. This partitioning scheme also has the
benefit of ensuring that the network of agents is well
distributed across C with agents nominally assigned to
intercept intruders with predicted impact points within
their own partition.
Agent i is capable of localizing itself in G and detecting
whether there exists j such that (cid:107)pi(t) − pj(t)(cid:107) ≤ R.
Furthermore, agents i and j can communicate their de-
ployment times to one another. A centralized network is
required to publish the current coverage level Q(t, p) 1
to all agents and to estimate the trajectories of intruders
using an omnidirectional range sensor whose measure-
ments are fed through an extended Kalman filter. Com-
putation of Q(t, p) is contingent upon continuous trans-
mission of agent state qi to the centralized network. The
centralized network assigns each intruder to an unas-
signed agent at closest latitude to the predicted impact
point. It also transmits detection time as well as esti-
mated location and time of impact to the agent.
2.2 Intruder Modeling
We assume that the omnidirectional range sensor (e.g.,
LiDAR) is co-located with O and provides measure-
ments of each particle's position in spherical coordinates.
We also assume that particle detection and state esti-
mate initialization occur while the distance of the parti-
cle from O is greater than or equal to Rdet + xC,r where
Rdet is a lower bound on distance from detection to im-
pact. We define the model for the motion of particle k:
1 In practice, it is not necessary to publish Q(t, p),∀p ∈ D to
every agent. For agent i to compute its local coverage control
signal, it need only values for Q(t, p) within a closed ball of
radius R due to the fact that Si(qi, p) = 0,∀p /∈ ¯BRpi(t).
This substantially reduces the communication overhead.
(cid:34)
(cid:35)
qk (t) ,
03×3 I3×3
03×3 03×3
(cid:112)x2
(cid:18)
k + y2
k + z2
k
atan2 (yk, xk)
arccos
zk√
x2
k+y2
k+z2
k
qk (t) =
zk (t) =
+ ,
(cid:19)
(7)
(8)
the surface geometry. With this design, Q(t, p) decays
along the predicted trajectory of k with tapering omni-
directional decay rates spreading out from the predicted
path. This design lends itself naturally to our local cov-
erage formulation, which is gradient following in nature,
in that the agents may follow these tapered decay paths
towards the predicted impact points on our surface of
interest.
2.4 Algorithmic Overview
k + y2
k + z2
k ≤ U int
(cid:112) x2
where qk = [xk, yk, zk, xk, yk, zk]T and zk = [ρk, θk, ψk]T
are the Cartesian state and spherical coordinate mea-
surement vectors of particle k resolved in G. We as-
sume that particle speed is upper bounded such that
max. ρk, θk, and ψk are the range,
azimuthal angle, and polar angle of k respectively. In the
sequel, the matrix in (8) shall be denoted h (xk, yk, zk).
Assume that the measurement noise, , is zero-mean
Gaussian and has covariance R = diag
.
This system models high-speed particles incident upon
a surface with negligible drag (e.g., micrometeoroids
impacting a spacecraft hull); thus, it is reasonable to
omit the process noise. The state and covariance esti-
mates, q and Pk, are computed with a continuous-time
extended Kalman filter which is initialized upon particle
k's detection at time tdk.
σ2
ρ, σ2
θ , σ2
ψ
(cid:17)
(cid:16)
2.3 Information Decay
At any time t, we define our decay rate map for parti-
cle k in terms of its predicted position and covariance
evolution over a horizon TH,k(t). As the particles are as-
sumed to travel at fixed velocities 2 , the predicted values
for Cartesian position p(cid:48)
k (t + τ ) and associated covari-
ance Pk (t + τ ) are defined as p(cid:48)
k (t + τ ) = G (τ ) qk (t),
and P(cid:48)
k (t + τ ) = G (τ ) Pk (t) G (τ )T respectively where
G (τ ) = [I3×3 τI3×3] and qk (t) is our current estimate
for qk (t). We define the decay rate map associated with
particle k as the integral of our predicted normal distri-
bution N (p(cid:48)
k (t + τ )) through horizon TH,k:
k (t + τ )(cid:1) dτ,
(9)
(cid:48)
k (t + τ ) , P
(cid:48)
(cid:90) TH,k(t)
k (t + τ ) , P(cid:48)
λkN(cid:0)p
Λk (t, p) =
0
where λk > 0 is a tuning parameter for the decay rate.
We recommend choosing λk < 1 as this typically allows
for the rate of coverage to exceed the decay rate over
points intersecting Si. For t < tdk, define Λk (t, p) =
0, ∀p ∈ D. Our formulation for (9) essentially takes a
normal distribution for the position of particle k at time
t and cumulatively propagates it forward in time up to
our horizon TH,k(t). The horizon is lower-bounded by an
estimate of the remaining time until impact of particle
k on C. This may be computed using qk (t) along with
2 The guarantee of intruder interception presented in this
work can be extended to intruders with time-varying veloc-
ities that are bounded by U int
max. However, it is still required
that intruders follow straight line trajectories such that the
network may estimate fixed impact points.
Fig. 2. Agent i operates in accordance with this automaton.
For clarity, elements of the reset map and brief descriptions
of transitions are included.
The coverage strategy for agent i is represented by the
hybrid automaton in Fig. 2. Rigorous definitions of all
entities of the automaton, including the guard conditions
and reset maps, are included in the appendix. Note that
each agent operates in accordance with its own automa-
ton and thus an arbitrary number of agents may be in
any operating mode at any given time. Before proceed-
ing, we provide a brief overview of each mode.
• Local Coverage: This mode governs the active ex-
ploration of our surface of interest C. When active,
the agent continuously seeks to orient and trans-
late Si such that Si intersects portions of C with
5
a lower coverage level. This is conceptually similar
to following the gradient of the coverage error. An
agent currently assigned to an intruder may operate
in Local Coverage while within an ε1 bound of the
the intruder's predicted impact point. Any agent
not currently assigned to an intruder shall operate
in Local Coverage assuming that it is within its as-
signed latitude partition. Operation in Local Cov-
erage is always concurrent with agent assignment to
the lowest concentric surface (see Surface Transfer
below) and transition to Local Coverage can occur
from any mode aside from Return to Base Mode.
• Particle Intercept: In this mode, an intruder is as-
signed to agent i and i is guided along its assigned
surface to the predicted impact point of the in-
truder. After intruder assignment occurs, the agent
will nominally remain in Particle Intercept Mode
until after the intruder impacts C; however, the
agent may temporarily leave the mode before im-
pact to avoid collision through Surface Transfer
Mode or to explore in Local Coverage within a ε1
bound of the the intruder's predicted impact point.
• Partition Transfer: This mode is defined for agents
that are not currently assigned to an intruder and
its purpose is to ensure that the agents are spa-
tially distributed across the entire surface area of C.
Activation of this mode will guide agent i along a
longitudinally-oriented geodesic trajectory until its
position satisfies a set of latitude constraints, i.e.,
agents travel to the southernmost latitude partition
upon deployment and transition through progres-
sively northern partitions as their fuel is depleted.
Transition to this mode can occur from any other
mode. The partitioning scheme is shown in Fig. 6.
• Surface Transfer: This mode's primary purpose is to
ensure that agents avoid collision with two distinct
cases resulting in its activation. In the first case,
two or more agents have violated a safe-proximity
condition. The mode removes select agents from the
deadlock by guiding them along vectors normal to
C to a higher-altitude ellipsoidal surface concentric
with C. An agent trajectory is then temporarily con-
fined to this newly assigned surface until it reaches
the surface projection of its destination. The sec-
ond case occurs under the condition that the agent
has arrived at the projection of its destination on
a higher-altitude surface. The mode is activated to
return the agent to the innermost surface. Transi-
tion to this mode can occur from any other mode
aside from Return to Base as agents in the latter
mode always take priority in a deadlock. The sur-
face transfer geometry is illustrated in Fig. 4.
• Return to Base: The final mode is activated when
the time since an agent's deployment has surpassed
some threshold. It guides the power-critical agent
along the optimal trajectory to the refueling sta-
tion. After charging, the agent is redeployed. Agent
deployments occur one at a time with a fixed period.
A power critical agent in Particle Intercept Mode or
6
Surface Transfer Mode shall first complete its task
of intercepting the assigned intruder or transfer-
ring surfaces before transitioning to Return to Base
Mode. If an agent is designated as power-critical
while in Partition Transfer Mode it shall immedi-
ately abandon its task and transition to Local Cov-
erage which shall result in instantaneous transition
to Return to Base Mode. Theoretical guarantees
on successful return to base with respect to agent
power lifespan in accordance with our automaton
is presented in Theorem 2 of Section 5.
3 Local Coverage Mode
Local coverage constitutes the first of five hybrid modes
in our automaton. This mode is gradient following in
nature and commands agent i to always seek to orient
and translate Si such that the volume of uncovered space
intersecting Si is increased. In this way, it emphasizes
active exploration of the domain by agents that are not
currently assigned to either monitor intruders or relocate
within the domain. The control laws are designed such
that agent motion in local coverage shall tend to reduce
the rate of growth of the global coverage error. Define
the global coverage error with respect to C (cid:63) as:
h (C (cid:63)C (p) − Q(t, p)) dp,
E(t) =
(cid:90)
(10)
D
dh
where h(w) = (max{0, w})3 with first derivative h(cid:48) =
dw = 3(max{0, w})2 and second derivative h(cid:48)(cid:48) = d2h
dw2 =
6(max{0, w}). Our local coverage control laws are de-
rived via differentiation of (10). This is included in the
Appendix in the interest of space. The result is the se-
lection of the following control strategy:
uloc
i = ku
vloc
i = kv
(cid:112)a2
(cid:112)a2
(cid:112)a2
i1 + a2
ai1(t, Q(t, p))
i2 + a2
i3
ai2(t, Q(t, p))
i2 + a2
i1 + a2
i3
ai3(t, Q(t, p))
i2 + a2
i3
wloc
i1 + a2
i = kw
i = ¯risat(cid:0) krai4(t, Q(t, p))
i = ¯sisat(cid:0) ksai5(t, Q(t, p))
¯ri
sloc
rloc
¯si
where:
ρl,i = − ln
(cid:18)
+ xBi · ρl,i,
+ yBi · ρl,i,
+ zBi · ρl,i,
(cid:1) + yBi · ρa,i,
(cid:1) + zBi · ρa,i,
(cid:19)
R−1
1 ni,
(11a)
(11b)
(11c)
(11d)
(11e)
.
(12)
(13)
1
γR −ri
((cid:107)ni(cid:107) −ri)
ρa,i = ξR−1
2
0
arcsin (ni · zG) − Θi
atan2 (−ni · yG,−ni · xG) − Ψi
ρl,i is a collision avoidance term with respect to the sur-
face of interest. It takes a value of zero when agent i's
normalized distance from C is γR for γ ∈ (0, 1] and is
logarithmically repulsive and attractive from the surface
when the distance is decreased or increased respectively.
Small values for γ tend to direct the agent to travel closer
to the surface. This coincides with a smaller cross section
of Si intersecting the surface but is also typically associ-
ated with a higher quality of sensing. A larger choice for
γ will direct the agent to fly at a higher altitude with re-
spect to the surface and thus the area covered by Si will
tend to be broader with a decreased quality of sensing.
ρa,i, for ξ << 1, encodes that the agents should tend
to align xBi with −ni if the coverage terms associated
with ri and si have become sufficiently small. The phys-
ical meaning of ρa,i is to direct Si back onto C if it has
reached a configuration in which it no longer intersects
C. See Fig. 3 for further details.
k(tck) is the z component of ¯p(cid:48)
k(tck) and fi ∈ {0, 1}
that ¯z(cid:48)
is a particle assignment flag for agent i defined as 0
when the agent is free (i.e., not currently assigned a
particle). ip ∈ {1, ..., N}, the power index of agent i,
shall be fully described in Section 5; however, it should
be noted that the definition of ik implies that there are
at most N − 1 agents available for particle interception
at any given time.
As with our local coverage strategy, it is assumed that
agents shall maintain a distance γR normal to C in the
nominal case that they are not maneuvering to avoid
collision. We define an ellipsoid of revolution, C0, which
is concentric with C and has the property that each semi-
principal axis is γR longer than its associated counter-
part in C, i.e., xC0,r = xC,r + γR, and zC0,r = zC,r + γR.
The nominal trajectories of i are attractive to C0.
Agents maneuvering to avoid collision shall transfer
to additional concentric ellipsoidal surfaces each sepa-
rated by a distance of R. These surfaces are denoted
C1,C2, ...,CN−1 with associated semi-principal axes
xC1,r = xC,r + (γ + 1) R and zC1,r = zC,r + (γ + 1) R,
xC2,r = xC,r + (γ + 2) R and zC2,r = zC,r + (γ + 2) R,
etc. Surface assignment and transfer scheduling in colli-
sion avoidance mode is described in full detail in Section
6 and the geometry is illustrated in Fig. 4.
Fig. 3. As agent i explores C, ρl,i
for
(cid:107)ni(cid:107) < γR, antiparallel to ni for (cid:107)ni(cid:107) > γR, and the zero
vector otherwise. This term prevents collision of i with C and
prevents i from flying away from C. ρa,i tends to direct Si
onto C.
is parallel to ni
ing gains which are chosen to satisfy(cid:112)k2
¯ri and ¯si are saturation limits for the coverage angular
velocity inputs to the system. ku, kv and kw are tun-
w ≤
U agt
max. As ρ(cid:96),i is normal to the surface, it can be shown
that U agt
max is an upper bound to agent velocity tangen-
tial to C.
u + k2
v + k2
4 Particle Intercept Mode
+
+
(zk+ zkt)2
z2C,r
= 1
x2C,r
(cid:18)
(yk+ ykt)2
t ∈ R+ (xk+ xkt)2
Assuming that particle k is embedded within the surface
upon impact, its position shall intersect C at most one
(cid:19)
time. We define particle k's estimated impact time as
,
tck = min
k (tck) = G (tck − t) qk (t).
with estimated impact point p(cid:48)
Upon detection, particle k is assigned to a free agent
i with the minimum distance from the estimated
impact along the zG direction. We define
point of
a new index, ik, as the index of the agent assigned
to intercept particle k at destination pid = p(cid:48)
k (tck):
ik = argmini∈{1,...,N}ip(cid:54)=1,fi(cid:54)=1(cid:107)¯z(cid:48)
k(tck) − zi(tdk)(cid:107). Note
x2C,r
Fig. 4. Three agents enter a deadlock in (a). The green agent,
which has the greatest time since deployment, is prioritized
to continue on C0 and the red and blue agents are each trans-
ferred to C1 before entering a second deadlock in (b). The blue
agent, which has the second greatest time since deployment,
is prioritized to continue on C1 and the red agent is trans-
ferred to C2 before continuing along geodesic to projC2
p(cid:48)
k (tck )
in (c). Red agent transfers back to C0 directly above predicted
impact point of particle k in (d). Note that surface transfer
trajectories are always normal to Cµi , ∀µi ∈ {0, ..., N − 1}.
When agent i has been assigned to intercept particle k,
fi is set to 1 and it is said to have transitioned into par-
ticle intercept mode. In this mode, agent i shall nomi-
nally follow the optimal trajectory along C0 to within a
k(tck) onto C0 (de-
ε1 bound of the projection of point p(cid:48)
noted projC0 p(cid:48)
k (tck )). The agent shall then transition to
7
local coverage to actively explore within this ε1 bound
until t > tck at which time fi is set to 0. If local coverage
guides the agent out of the ε1 bound, particle intercept
mode will again guide the agent back inside the bound.
The optimal trajectory is referred to as a geodesic and
its computation may be executed in an iterative man-
ner. Specifically, we use Vincenty's formulae as presented
in Vincenty (1975a). For cases involving nearly antipo-
dal points in which the standard inverse method does
not converge, we use Vincenty's supplemental algorithm
presented in Vincenty (1975b).
As an input, Vincenty's algorithm requires an ellipsoid of
revolution along with two points, current and desired po-
sition, on that surface. The algorithm returns a heading
angle measured clockwise from North. This heading an-
gle shall be referred to as χi. We now define the heading
unit vector νi which lies in a plane tangent to the surface
at pi. It may be computed by rotating the North-pointing
vector at pi clockwise by an angle of χi within the tan-
gent plane. For our implementation of Vincenty's algo-
rithm, we input the following: Cµi for surface assignment
index µi ∈ {0, ..., N − 1}, pi, and projCµi
p(cid:48)
k (tck ). The po-
p(cid:48)
sition controller used to guide agent i to projCµi
k (tck )
is composed of two terms: one which commands veloc-
ity tangential to Cµi along νi and one logarithmic term
which commands velocity normal to Cµi in order to con-
strain the geodesic trajectory of i to Cµi. The particle
intercept mode position control law is:
= U agt
upim
i
vpim
i
wpim
i
(cid:16)
(cid:16)
maxR−1
1
νi − ln
(cid:107)νi − ln
1
(γ+µi)R−ri
(γ+µi)R−ri
1
((cid:107)ni(cid:107) −ri)
((cid:107)ni(cid:107) −ri)
As agent i travels along the geodesic, it is desirable that
it should point Si towards C. Therefore, the orientation
controller for particle intercept mode is similar to that
of Section 3:
= R−1
2
qpim
i
rpim
i
spim
i
0
arcsin (ni · zG) − Θi
atan2 (−ni · yG,−ni · xG) − Ψi
Lemma 1 Let us assume that agent i has been assigned
to particle k with fi
:= 1. Given an arbitrary agent
position pi(tdk) and an arbitrary predicted impact point
for the intruder p(cid:48)
k(tck), there exists an upper bound to
the maximum path length until interception: Pmax ≤
πxCN−1,r + π
2
(cid:1) gCN−1 + 2 (N − 1) R.
(cid:0)xCN−1,r + zCN−1,r
PROOF. At the moment that fi := 1 we have that
agent i transitions to Particle Intercept Mode. Un-
der the condition that the agent has not yet come
within proximity of the predicted impact point, i.e.,
k (tck )(cid:107) > ε1, we have that only G (ζi2, ζi4)
(cid:107)pi − projCµi
p(cid:48)
and G (ζi4, ζi2) are defined (see Appendix). These two
transitions occur sequentially for each deadlock event
p(cid:48)
that agent i encounters as it approaches projCµi
k (tck ).
In any given deadlock arrangement, one agent remains
on its current surface without ascending to a higher one.
This implies that µi = 1 for at most N − 1 agents as
the remaining agent would be unable to encounter a
deadlock on C0. Furthermore, this implies that µi = 2
for at most N − 2 agents etc. until we have µi = N
for at most zero agents. The worst cast surface assign-
ment that can be incurred during sequential cycles of
((ζi2, ζi4) , (ζi4, i2)) would be µi = N − 1.
As the geodesic path length between any two points
projected onto surface Cµi shall always be less than the
geodesic path length between the same two points pro-
jected onto surface Cµi+1, we may bound the geodesic
portion of the trajectory by one that is constrained en-
tirely to CN−1. We denote this term Pgeo. As any two
points on Cµi can be connected by a path of constant
latitude Plat followed by a path of constant longitude
Plong, we have that:
Pgeo ≤ Plat + Plong.
For two generic points on CN−1, we have that:
Plat ≤ πxCN−1,r,
Plong ≤ π
2
(cid:0)xCN−1,r + zCN−1,r
(cid:1) gCN−1 .
where the bound on Plat is half of the circumference
of the ellipsoid of revolution CN−1 about its equa-
tor and the bound on Plong is half of the perime-
ter of the revolved ellipse. The infinite series expres-
sion term, denoted gCN−1 in (19),
is first presented
in Ivory (1798). The remaining portion of the path
length is simply the straight line segments connecting
C0 to CN−1 and back again. This length is precisely
2 (N − 1) R. Thus, Pmax = Pgeo + 2 (N − 1) R as illus-
trated in Fig. 5. Invoking (18) and (19) gives us Pmax ≤
πxCN−1,r + π
2
This concludes the proof.
(cid:1) gCN−1 + 2 (N − 1) R.
(cid:0)xCN−1,r + zCN−1,r
(17)
(18)
(19)
(cid:17)
(cid:17)
ni
ni(cid:107) .
(14)
,
(15)
which is essentially a proportional controller that tends
to align xBi with −ni. As (14) commands the vehi-
length path along Cµi to
cle to follow the optimal
p(cid:48)
(cid:17)2n
projCµi
k (tck ), we can establish a few guarantees on
(cid:19)2
system performance. To simplify notation, define:
(cid:16) xCN−1,r−zCN−1,r
(cid:18) (2n − 1)!!
∞(cid:88)
1 +
xCN−1,r+zCN−1,r
(2n − 1)2
gCN−1 =
n=1
2nn!
,
(16)
and gC0 is defined similarly in terms of the semi-principal
axes of C0.
Theorem 1 Assuming that the bounds on intruder ve-
locity and range from detection to impact satisfy Rdet
>
U int
max
8
Fig. 5. The longest possible path from pi(tdk) to p(cid:48)
k(tck),
taken by agent i assigned to intercept particle k, is illustrated
above. We denote this path as Pmax and it may be upper
bounded as established in Lemma 1.
Pmax
U agt
i shall reach projC0 p(cid:48)
max
, where Pmax may be bounded via Lemma 1, agent
k (tck ) before tck.
k (tck ) must satisfy: tik ≤ Pmax
PROOF. Given the fact that agents in the particle in-
tercept and surface transfer modes travel at speed U agt
max,
we have that the time tik required to travel from pi (tdk)
to projC0 p(cid:48)
. Given that
tck − tdk ≥ Rdet
k (tck ) be-
fore tck implies that Rdet
> tik. This is guaranteed if
U int
max
Rdet
U int
max
, agent i reaching projC0 p(cid:48)
This concludes the proof.
> Pmax
U agt
max
U agt
max
U int
max
Remark 1 At any given time, there are at most N − 1
agents available to intercept particles. Thus, satisfaction
of Theorem 1 implies that the network is capable of in-
tercepting all particles so long as a maximum of N − 1
particle impacts occur in any moving time window of
πxCN−1,r+ π
2 (xCN−1,r+zCN−1,r)gCN−1 +2(N−1)R
.
U agt
max
5 Energy-aware Scheduling Protocol
5.1 Domain Partitioning
As this is a persistent coverage protocol, which operates
indefinitely, it is necessary to establish an agent deploy-
ment and scheduling protocol that realistically consid-
ers the agents' finite power and/or propulsive resources.
Our strategy is to periodically deploy agents from a fu-
eling station F which we assume to be located at the
North pole of C0, i.e., at the point [0 0 zC0,r]T . Define
T (cid:63) as the power lifespan of each agent in the network.
Given T (cid:63) and N , we define our deployment and schedul-
ing protocol such that one agent is deployed from F ev-
ery T (cid:63)
N seconds. The initial deployment is that of agent
i = 1 at t = 0 seconds with agent i = 2 following at
t = T (cid:63)
N . This continues indefinitely with the second de-
ployment of agent i = 1 occurring at t = T (cid:63) seconds.
In order to adequately distribute agents across C, it is
desirable to partition the domain and assign agents to
monitor separate regions. Specifically, partitioning the
domain by latitude, rather than longitude, ensures that
agents are poised to intercept particles without the need
T (cid:63)
for frequent crossings of the equator which tend to be as-
sociated with larger values of Pgeo on an oblate spheroid.
Define the power index of agent i as ip(t) = 1 +
(cid:5) , N(cid:1) where the first argument of
mod (cid:0)i − 2 −(cid:4) tN
our modulo operation is the dividend and the second
argument is the divisor. The lower-bracketed delimiters
represent the floored division operation. Upon deploy-
ment from F, agent i has power index ip = N and this
index is reduced by one every T (cid:63)
N seconds until ip = 1,
i.e., agent i is the power critical agent. Note that no two
agents may share the same power index as a result of
our periodic deployment and scheduling protocol.
Latitude partitions are characterized by a static upper
bound in zG denoted ¯zip−2 and a static lower bound
¯zip−1. Rather than dynamically sizing partitions relative
to agent power resources, we divide partitions such that
N − 1 agents are assigned equal surface areas of C to
explore. This choice maximizes the coverage of any indi-
vidual partition as the allocation of a larger partition to
a recently deployed agent would result in less effective
coverage of that partition. Agents are sorted by their re-
maining power and transfer between partitions that are
progressively closer to F as their power resource expires.
Define the surface area of our ellipsoid of revolution C as:
AC = 2πx2C,r
1 +
(cid:18)
(cid:18)(cid:114)
1 +
1 − z2C,r
x2C,r
1 − z2C,r
x2C,r
(cid:19)
(cid:19) artanh
(cid:32)(cid:115)
(cid:33) .
1 − z2C,r
x2C,r
(20)
The agent with ip = 2 is assigned to monitor the par-
tition characterized by upper bound at north pole of C,
i.e., ¯z0 = zC,r. The lower bound ¯z1 may be computed by
dividing (20) by (N − 1), equating with the integral of
ellipse cross sectional circumferences parametrized by z,
dz.
and then numerically solving for ¯z1:
x2C,r − x2C,r z2
1 +
(cid:90) ¯z1
(cid:118)(cid:117)(cid:117)(cid:117)(cid:116)
2π
(cid:16)
z2x4C,r
z4C,r − z2C,r z2(cid:17)
AC
N − 1
x2C,r
z2C,r
=
zC,r
(21)
One may then iteratively solve for the remaining bounds
for increasing values of ip up to ip = N − 1:
(cid:90) ¯zip−1
¯zip−2
(cid:118)(cid:117)(cid:117)(cid:117)(cid:116)
x2C,r − x2C,r z2
1 +
2π
z2C,r
AC
N − 1
=
z2x4C,r
(cid:16)
z4C,r − z2C,r z2(cid:17)
x2C,r
dz.
(22)
The final computation of (22) for ip = N is not neces-
sary as ¯zN−1 is the south pole of C, i.e., ¯zN−1 = −zC,r,
although this may be shown through numerical com-
putation as well. Our partitioning strategy for the case
where N = 4 is presented in Fig. 6.
Note that no partition has been assigned to the agent
for which ip = 1. This is the power critical agent and
it shall have flag fi := 1 at the instant ip := 1. The
power critical agent cannot be assigned a new particle to
intercept after ip := 1 as this opens the possibility that
9
surveillance system is to first ensure that the time from
detection to impact of any arbitrary particle, tck − tdk,
as governed by the omnidirectional range sensor sat-
isfies Theorem 1. One must subsequently ensure that
power lifespan T (cid:63), for all agents, satisfies Theorem 2.
5.2 Partition Transfer and Return to Base
If an agent with ip ∈ {2, ..., N} lies outside of its pre-
scribed partition, and we have if = 0, then the agent
shall enter partition transfer mode. This mode uses the
same geodesic position and orientation controllers (14)
and (15) with the destination position set to the point:
pid = [xid yid zid]T =
(cid:16)
(cid:16)
xC,r cos
arcsin
yC,r cos
arcsin
(cid:17)(cid:17)
(cid:17)(cid:17)
(cid:16) zid
(cid:16) zid
zC,r
zC,r
(cid:18)
atan2(cid:0)yi(t), xi(t)(cid:1)(cid:19)
(cid:18)
atan2(cid:0)yi(t), xi(t)(cid:1)(cid:19)
cos
sin
,
(cid:17)
(cid:17)
((cid:107)ni(cid:107) −ri)
((cid:107)ni(cid:107) −ri)
ni
ni(cid:107) .
(23)
¯zip−1, if zi < ¯zip−1; or ¯zip−2, if zi > ¯zip−2
i.e., the closest point along the agent's current longitude
which lies on the boundary of its assigned partition.
The return to base mode is similar to partition transfer
mode but is defined for the agent with ip = 1. This mode
is activated when the time since agent i's last deployment
from F, denoted tiF ≥ T (cid:63) − π
(xC0,r + zC0,r) gC0 as
established in Theorem 2. The control strategy is the
same as partition transfer mode with the desired position
set to F. Control laws for partition transfer mode and
return to base shall be denoted with superscripts ptm
and rtb respectively.
2U agt
max
6 Surface Transfer Mode
(cid:16)
(cid:17)
The primary purpose of surface transfer mode is to en-
code collision avoidance and it can be transitioned into
from any other mode aside from the return to base mode.
This mode is triggered for agent i, assigned to surface
Cµi, when we have the condition that (cid:107)pi − pj(cid:107) ≤ R
for i (cid:54)= j. Denote j = i ∪ j as the set of agents satisfy-
ing this condition. Agents in j are ranked by tjF . One
agent, denoted ipr, whose value for tjF is highest, i.e.,
is permitted to proceed. The re-
ipr = argmaxj
maining agents increment their surface assignment in-
dices, µi, by one and transition to surface transfer mode.
This mode controls the agents to follow ni until they
have transferred to their newly assigned concentric sur-
face at a height R above the previous. Note that in gen-
eral, convexity of surface C is required to ensure that
intersections of ni and nj, ∀i (cid:54)= j, lie within the interior
space that is bounded by the surface. The surface trans-
fer position control strategy is:
tjF
= U agt
ustm
i
vstm
i
wstm
i
(cid:16)
(cid:16)
maxR−1
1
ln
(cid:107)ln
1
(γ+µi)R−ri
(γ+µi)R−ri
1
Fig. 6. Our domain partitioning scheme for C is illustrated
above. Agents with ip ∈ {2, 3, 4} are indicated with blue,
green and black Si respectively. Their partitions are sepa-
rated by latitude lines upper bounded at ¯zip−2 and lower
bounded at ¯zip−1. The power critical has Si indicated in red.
particle assignment could occur near the end of the T (cid:63)
N
time window during which time the agent with ip = 1
should be transitioning back to F to exchange its power
source. The power critical agent will instead spend the
majority of this time window in local coverage mode
assisting the other agents in gathering information. It
can only be tasked with intercepting a particle if this
assignment had occurred previously when ip = 2. In
this scenario, the agent should be capable of intercepting
particle k and then transitioning back to F so long as
a bound is established on the length of our deployment
scheduling window T (cid:63)
N .
N ≥
Theorem 2 If agent power lifespan T (cid:63) satisfies T (cid:63)
tck − tdk + π
(xC0,r + zC0,r) gC0, ∀k then the agent
with ip = 1 shall always be capable of reaching F within
T (cid:63)
N of the time at which ip := 1.
2U agt
max
PROOF. Consider the worst-case scenario in which
the agent with ip = 2 is assigned to intercept par-
ticle k at the instant before ip := 1. It's remaining
flight time is currently T (cid:63)
N . The time required to in-
tercept the particle is tck − tdk, after which our con-
trol strategy dictates that the agent will
follow a
geodesic trajectory to F. As F lies at the north pole
of C0, this will be a trajectory of constant longitude
which may be upper bounded by a length half the
perimeter of our revolved ellipsoid: π
2 (xC0,r + zC0,r) gC0
by definition. As the agent is controlled by (14)
with a North-pointing νi, it will proceed along this
geodesic at speed U agt
max. Thus the time required to
(xC0,r + zC0,r) gC0
complete this trajectory is
N ≥
and we may bound our deployment window: T (cid:63)
(xC0,r + zC0,r) gC0, ∀k. This concludes
tck − tdk + π
the proof.
2U agt
max
2U agt
max
π
Remark 2 The appropriate design method for this
10
As the agents ascend to a point at which R does not in-
tersect C, sensing information is not gathered in avoid-
ance mode and thus the avoidance orientation control is
simply [qstm
]T = [0 0 0]T .
rstm
i
sstm
i
i
Agents are said to have converged upon their newly as-
signed surface when ln
< ε2. At this point,
each agent shall transition back to its prior mode as de-
scribed in the following two scenarios.
(cid:107)ni(cid:107)−ri
(γ+µi)R−ri
(1) If agent i had been in either particle intercept or
partition transfer mode before the deadlock, it shall
resume that mode and continue along a geodesic
trajectory on the newly assigned surface until it
reaches the projection of its destination. At this
pid(cid:107) ≤ ε1
point, the condition that (cid:107)pi − projCµi
triggers a reset µi := 0 concurrent with a transi-
tion back to surface transfer mode thus allowing
the agent to transfer back to C0. The agent then
resumes coverage of C0 in its prior mode. For addi-
tional details on flag conditions in these transitions,
see guards G (ζi2, ζi4) , G (ζi4, ζi2) , G (ζi3, ζi4), and
G (ζi4, ζi3) of our hybrid automaton as presented in
the appendix.
(2) If agent i had been in local coverage mode before
the deadlock, it shall then transition back to local
coverage mode concurrent with reset µi := 0. This
transition is dependent upon the conditions that
fi = 0 and that the agent is operating within its as-
signed partition. The agent shall oscillate between
local coverage and surface transfer at an altitude of
R above C0 until ipr has moved along C0 to resolve
the deadlock. At this point, the local coverage con-
troller shall attract agent i back to the surface.
While similar work on multi-agent systems often invoke
avoidance barrier functions to encode collision avoid-
ance, such as in Panagou et al. (2016), it may be impos-
sible to bound the time that agents spend avoiding one
another in these maneuvers -- especially when the algo-
rithm is scaled to many agents. In contrast, our tech-
nique results in an explicit bound on path length to an
intruder as was proven in Lemma 1. With an additional
assumption on the size of agents, we can establish a guar-
antee on collision avoidance for agents in surface transfer
mode.
Theorem 3 For agents {i, j} ∈ j, the condition that
min(Rj) > 2ri + 2rj implies that i does not collide with
j.
PROOF. Consider the case in which i (cid:54)= ipr and j (cid:54)=
ipr. Both agents operate in accordance with (23) and
follow trajectories along ni and nj respectively. Both
unit vectors are normal to surface Cµi, an ellipsoid of
revolution, and thus diverge from one another away from
Cµi. Agents i and j shall enter surface transfer mode at
an instant when (cid:107)pi−pj(cid:107) ≥ min
and their distance
(cid:16)
(cid:17)
Rj
Rj
(cid:17)
(cid:16)
shall tend to increase under (23). Thus min(Rj) > ri+rj
and subsequently min(Rj) > 2ri + 2rj imply that they
avoid collision.
Consider the case in which i = ipr and thus j (cid:54)= ipr. In
the instant that j transitions to surface transfer mode
we have that (cid:107)pi − pj(cid:107) ≥ min
. Thus the distance
for i to travel until collision is greater than or equal to
min
conservative estimate as the true path is curved. Colli-
sion will be avoided if agent j, whose path is normal to
(cid:17) − ri − rj. This straight line path for i is a
(cid:16)
(cid:17) − ri − rj. As j moves at speed U agt
(cid:16)
the surface, may cover a distance ri +rj before i covers
(cid:17) −ri −rj > ri +rj. This
(cid:17)
> 2ri + 2rj.
min
tangential speed is upper bounded by U agt
dition is satisfied if min
may equivalently be written as min
Rj
These arguments apply to the case in which j = ipr and
i (cid:54)= ipr as well. This concludes the proof.
7 Simulations
max and i's
max, this con-
(cid:16)
(cid:16)
Rj
Rj
Rj
4 , t = 2T (cid:63)
4 , and t = T (cid:63)
A simulation was performed in MATLAB to verify the
efficacy of the algorithm. Four agents are deployed to
monitor the surface of an ellipsoid of revolution, C, whose
plane is 20. For each agent, R = 10, ri = 1, αi = 30◦,
radius in the xy-plane is 80 and whose radius in the z-
ku = 1, kv = 5, kw = 1, kr = 0.1, ks = 0.1, ¯ri = 0.4,
¯si = 0.4, U agt
max = 6, and T (cid:63) = 792. Upon initialization
of the simulation, C was set to a fully covered level of
C (cid:63) = 20 which would begin decaying upon detection of
the first intruder k ∈ {1, ..., 4} at t = 600 seconds. The
four agents were deployed from F sequentially at times
t = 0, t = T (cid:63)
4 seconds respectively.
Upon deployment, each agent was initialized in local cov-
erage mode with Φi = 0, Θi = π
2 , and Ψi = 0. Intruders
traveled in random directions with U int
max = 0.7, though
were still constrained to always impact the surface, and
were generated every 35 seconds beginning at t = 3T (cid:63)
4
seconds. The detection system had a lower bound on
range Rdet = 80, decay rate parameter λk = 0.05, and
θ = 0.25 deg2,
measurement variances σ2
ψ = 0.25 deg2 respectively Agents were able to suc-
and σ2
cessfully intercept all particles along their geodesic tra-
jectories while actively avoiding collision over the entire
duration of the attack (see Fig. 7 and Fig. 8); however,
it should be noted that one avoidance anomaly occurred
before the initial intruder was generated during the in-
terval of t = 418 − 420. As our sensing range for agents
was R = 10 and our simulation time step size was 1, it
is clear that this anomaly occurred due to a selection
of U agt
max that was too large relative to the time step. In
a continuous time implementation, a transition to sur-
face transfer mode would have occurred between t = 418
and t = 419 thus preventing collision. Aside from this
anomaly, the simulation parameters adequately approx-
imated the continuous time agent kinematics.
ρ = 0.0625, σ2
11
Fig. 7. Agent i = 3, indicated with green Si, is on a collision course with agent i = 1, indicated with blue Si, during the
interval from t = 2125 to t = 2130. At t = 2135, agent i = 1 has transitioned to surface transfer mode and is following a
trajectory normal to the surface while agent i = 4, indicated with black Si, follows a collision course through t = 2160. Agent
i = 4 transitions to surface transfer mode as well leading to the conditions that µ1 = 2 and µ4 = 1, i.e., agent i = 1 is assigned
to the second tier of avoidance surfaces at a higher altitude than i = 4 as illustrated at t = 2180. Both agents proceed along
their respective Cµi towards their destination with i = 1 having arrived and transferred back to C0 before t = 2195. Note that
agent trajectories for t ≥ 2125 are plotted.
intersect C thus delaying an agent assignment. In both
cases, the estimated trajectory did eventually intersect
C with enough time to allow for agent interception. How-
ever, this delay in assignment significantly reduced the
time the agent spent exploring in the vicinity of the pre-
dicted impact point thus contributing to a noticeable
rise in the coverage error. One potential solution to this
problem would be to prescribe some boundary tolerance
to our surface C thus loosening our definition of an im-
pacting particle for the sake of measurement uncertainty.
Fig. 8. Agent i = 2 follows its geodesic trajectory to the
predicted impact point of particle k over time lapse (a)-(d).
The true trajectory of the particle is indicated in red and
the estimated trajectory in green.
The coverage error on C, normalized with respect to the
maximum error in which all of C takes a value of zero
for Q (t, p), as well as the minimum inter-agent distance
over time are presented in Fig. 9. The error tends to spike
upon particle detections with agents effectively curtail-
ing these spikes as they cover around the vicinity of pre-
dicted impact points in local coverage mode. Two par-
ticularly large spikes occur at t = 3225 and t = 5180
respectively. These anomalies are each associated with
particle impacts occurring close to the equator of the el-
lipsoid where even small values of σ2
ψ result in
an estimated particle trajectory that does not initially
θ and σ2
Fig. 9. The coverage error, normalized to the maximum pos-
sible value, is presented. Anomalies are observed at t = 3225
and t = 5180 respectively. The minimum distance between
any two agents at any given time is also presented with an
anomaly observed at t = 419.
12
(cid:82)
∂t dV + (cid:82)
∂f
f v(s) · n dA, where f is any scalar-,
S(s)
R(s)
vector-, or tensor-valued function of position and time,
S(s) is the boundary of the volume R(s) over which f is
integrated, n is the unit vector normal to the boundary,
and v(s) is the velocity of the boundary. V and A refer
to volume and area respectively. Invoking GTT allows
for differentiation of (10) with respect to time:
(cid:90)
D
+
h(cid:48)(C (cid:63)C (p) − Q(t, p))
(cid:18)−∂Q(t, p)
(cid:19)
(cid:0)h(C (cid:63)C (p) − Q(t, p))(cid:1)v(s) · n dA,
∂t
(cid:90)
E(t) =
dp
(24)
where ∂D is the boundary of D. D is time invariant and
h(cid:48)(C (cid:63)C (p) −
thus v(s) = 0. (24) reduces to E(t) = (cid:82)
(cid:18) N(cid:88)
D
dp, which expands to:
Q(t, p))
(cid:17)
h(cid:48)(C(cid:63)C (p) − Q(t, p))
E(t) = −
Si(qi(t), p)C (p)
(cid:19)
i=1
dp
Λk (t, p) C (p)
−h(cid:48)(C(cid:63)C (p) − Q(t, p))Si(qi(t), p)C (p) dp
(cid:125)
(cid:123)(cid:122)
=ei(t)
(25)
−h(cid:48)(C(cid:63)C (p) − Q(t, p))Λk (t, p) C (p) dp
(cid:125)
Np(cid:88)
(cid:123)(cid:122)
=ek(t)
ei(t) −
ek(t).
k=1
∂D
∂t
(cid:16)−∂Q(t, p)
(cid:90)
Np(cid:88)
N(cid:88)
k=1
D
−
=
−
=
D
(cid:90)
(cid:124)
(cid:90)
(cid:124)
D
i=1
Np(cid:88)
k=1
N(cid:88)
i=1
Fig. 10. A typical agent's hybrid modes are presented over
time. Abbreviations from top to bottom refer to surface
transfer mode, partition transfer mode, particle intercept
mode, return to base, and local coverage mode respectively.
Agent i = 1's operating modes with respect to time are
presented in Fig. 10. It should be noted that the most
frequent transition out of particle intercept mode is to
local coverage mode. This corresponds to an agent ar-
riving at the estimated impact point of a particle and
then surveying the local area up until the moment of im-
pact. As the agent surveys it tends to hit the ε1 proxim-
ity boundary to the impact point thus requiring a short
operation in particle intercept mode to direct the agent
back within the ε1 boundary.
To demonstrate scalability, we have made an additional
simulation with 100 agents available online at: https:
//1drv.ms/f/s!AsiVOlIEkwNEgX2o1eV2hJ_bbaQU.
8 Conclusions
In this paper, we presented a hybrid formulation for
the persistent coverage problem in an environment sub-
ject to stochastic intruders. This formulation was moti-
vated in part by extravehicular applications of the NASA
Mini AERCam. Agents operated with finite power re-
sources and were required to periodically return to a re-
fueling station while patrolling assigned latitude parti-
tions along the surface of an ellipsoid. Formal guaran-
tees were established on the ability of agents to inter-
cept all intruders and the efficacy of the algorithm was
demonstrated in simulation. This approach succeeds our
previous work in Bentz & Panagou (2017) and Bentz
& Panagou (2018) by extending the guarantees on in-
truder interception to an arbitrary number of collision
avoidance maneuvers. It also removes singularities in the
sensing function definition and redefines the guard con-
ditions in a manner that supports a more effective use
of local coverage around the vicinity of intruder impact
points.
9 Appendix
9.1 Additional Derivations for Local Coverage Strategy
Our local coverage control laws are derived via differ-
entiation of (10) of which we seek to reduce the rate
of growth. It is a volume integral, so a few mathemat-
ical preliminaries are required. Recall the generalized
transport theorem (GTT) (Slattery 1999): d
f dV =
dt
(cid:82)
R(s)
ei(t) is the rate of change of the coverage error due to
the motion of the agents while ek(t) is the rate of change
of the coverage error due to a contrived information de-
cay surrounding the predicted impact point of particle
k on C. Our strategy is to control the agents' kinemat-
ics, recovered in the derivative of ei(t), to decrease (25).
Note that we do not presume that our local coverage
strategy provides any additional bounds on (10). Nor do
we provide guarantees on the rate of growth of this con-
trived quantity. Curtailing the growth of the coverage
error simply imparts the desired effect of active explo-
ration in the vicinity of impact points into our system.
Using this strategy, the agents actively seek to increase
their rate of coverage by rotating and/or translating Si
to be encompass the most uncovered space in the local
vicinity.
Taking the derivative of ei(t) with respect to time yields:
13
Expand d
dt (Si(qi(t), p)):
(Si(qi(t), p)) =
∂Si
∂xi
xi(t) +
∂Si
∂yi
yi(t) +
(sin Φ sin Θ cos Ψ − cos Φ sin Ψ) +
zi(t) +
∂Si
∂Ψi
Ψi(t) +
∂Si
∂Θi
Θi(t) =
(cid:18) ∂Si
∂xi
∂Si
∂yi
cos Θ sin Ψ − ∂Si
∂zi
sin Θ
(cid:19)
ui(t)
(sin Φ sin Θ sin Ψ + cos Φ cos Ψ) +
sin Φ cos Θ
(cos Φ sin Θ cos Ψ + sin Φ sin Ψ) +
(cos Φ sin Θ sin Ψ − sin Φ cos Ψ) +
cos Φ cos Θ
sin Φ sec Θ +
∂Si
∂Θi
cos Φ
ri(t) +
cos Φ sec Θ − ∂Si
∂Θi
sin Φ
si(t).
(cid:19)
cos Θ cos Ψ +
(cid:19)
(cid:19)
vi(t)
wi(t)
∂Si
∂zi
∂Si
∂zi
(cid:19)
Now introduce the following definitions:
(cid:48)(cid:48)
h
(C(cid:63)C ( p) − Q(t, p))Si(qi(t), p)C ( p)
∂Q(t, p)
∂t
d p,
(cid:48)
h
(cid:48)
h
(cid:48)
h
(cid:48)
h
(cid:48)
h
(C(cid:63)C ( p) − Q(t, p))C ( p)
(C(cid:63)C ( p) − Q(t, p))C ( p)
(C(cid:63)C ( p) − Q(t, p))C ( p)
(C(cid:63)C ( p) − Q(t, p))C ( p)
(C(cid:63)C ( p) − Q(t, p))C ( p)
cos Θ cos Ψ +
∂Si
∂yi
cos Θ sin Ψ − ∂Si
∂zi
(sin Φ sin Θ cos Ψ − cos Φ sin Ψ) +
(cos Φ sin Θ cos Ψ + sin Φ sin Ψ) +
(cid:19)
(cid:19)
sin Φ sec Θ +
∂Si
∂Θi
cos Φ sec Θ − ∂Si
∂Θi
cos Φ
sin Φ
d p,
d p.
(cid:19)
sin Θ
d p,
∂Si
∂yi
∂Si
∂yi
(sin Φ sin Θ sin Ψ + cos Φ cos Ψ) +
∂Si
∂zi
(cos Φ sin Θ sin Ψ − sin Φ cos Ψ) +
∂Si
∂zi
d
dt
+
+
+
(cid:18) ∂Si
(cid:18) ∂Si
(cid:18) ∂Si
∂xi
∂xi
∂Ψi
(cid:90)
(cid:90)
(cid:90)
(cid:90)
(cid:90)
(cid:90)
Di
Di
Di
Di
Di
ai0(t, Q(t, p)) =
ai1(t, Q(t, p)) =
ai2(t, Q(t, p)) =
ai3(t, Q(t, p)) =
ai4(t, Q(t, p)) =
ai5(t, Q(t, p)) =
Di
One can then rewrite (26) as:
∂Si
∂zi
∂Si
∂yi
∂Si
∂yi
(cid:18) ∂Si
∂Ψi
∂xi
∂xi
(cid:18) ∂Si
(cid:18) ∂Si
(cid:18) ∂Si
(cid:18) ∂Si
(cid:18) ∂Si
∂xi
∂Ψi
∂Ψi
(27)
(28)
(29)
d p,
(30)
d p,
(31)
(32)
(33)
(cid:19)
(cid:19)
sin Φ cos Θ
cos Φ cos Θ
ei(t) = ai0(t, Q(t, p)) − ui(t)ai1(t, Q(t, p)) − vi(t)ai2(t, Q(t, p)) − wi(t)ai3(t, Q(t, p)) − ri(t)ai4(t, Q(t, p)) − si(t)ai5(t, Q(t, p)).
(34)
(cid:90)
(cid:18)
(cid:48)(cid:48)
h
Di
ei(t) =
(C (cid:63)C (p)−Q(t, p))Si(qi(t), p)C (p)
∂Q(t, p)
∂t
(cid:19)
− h
(cid:48)
(C (cid:63)C (p) − Q(t, p))
d
dt
(Si(qi(t), p))C (p)
dp.
(26)
The sensing footprint is independent of Φi assuming that
the centerline of the spherical sector is aligned with the
xBi axis. d
dt (Si(qi(t), p)) is expanded in (27) and through
the definitions in (28-33) one may restate (26) as (34). If
one were to command zero inputs to this system, it be-
comes clear that ai0(t, Q(t, p)) may be physically inter-
preted as the rate at which the coverage rate is reducing
due to information saturation at any particular position
and orientation of the sensing footprint, Si. As the foot-
print remains stationary, there are diminishing returns
on the value of newly acquired information. Thus, the
additional terms in (34) allow for the coverage rate to be
increased by mobilizing the sensor. One strategy is that
of (11).
9.2 Formal Hybrid Formulation
x2
i
To provide a compact notation in this section, define ´fi =
(zC,r+ri)2 . The coverage strategy
(xC,r+ri)2 +
for agent i is represented by the hybrid automaton in Fig.
2, described by the following entities (Lygeros 2004):
(yC,r+ri)2 +
y2
i
z2
i
14
i
i
,
,
i
i
i
i
i
(cid:35)
(cid:3)T
(cid:3)T
,
0 R2
i
upim
i
(cid:105)T
(cid:3)T
wptm
wstm
f (ζi4, qi) = R [ustm
0 rloc
i
qrtb
i
i
wpim
sloc
i
rrtb
i
qpim
i
qptm
,
i
0 0 0 ]T where R =
srtb
i
rpim
i
rptm
i
,
spim
i
sptm
i
• A set of discrete states: Zi = {ζi0, ζi1, ζi2, ζi3, ζi4},
• A set of continuous states: qi = {xi, yi, zi, Φi, Θi, Ψi},
• A vector field:
vloc
i wloc
vrtb
i wrtb
vpim
i
vptm
i
vstm
i
f (ζi0, qi) = R(cid:2)uloc
f (ζi1, qi) = R(cid:2)urtb
f (ζi2, qi) = R(cid:104)
f (ζi3, qi) = R(cid:2)uptm
(cid:34)R1 0
(cid:3) ∧ Ψi ∈
∧ Φi ∈ [−π, +π] ∧ Θi ∈ (cid:2)−π
(cid:1)},
(cid:0)ip ∈ {2, ..., N} =⇒ ¯zip−1 ≤ zi ≤ ¯zip−2
(cid:0)ip ∈ {2, ..., N} =⇒ zi < ¯zip−1 ∨ zi > ¯zip−2
Dom (ζi1) = {qi ∈ R6 ´fi ≥ 1},
Dom (ζi2) = {qi ∈ R6 ´fi ≥ 1},
Dom (ζi3) = {qi ∈ R6 ´fi ≥ 1 ∧
Dom (ζi4) = {qi ∈ R6 ´fi ≥ 1},
• A set of initial states: {ζi3} × {qi ∈ R6 pi = F
• A domain: Dom (ζi0) = {qi ∈ R6 ´fi ≥ 1 ∧
• A set of edges: E = {(ζi0, ζi1) , (ζi0, ζi2) , (ζi0, ζi3) ,
(ζi0, ζi4) , (ζi1, ζi3) , (ζi2, ζi0) , (ζi2, ζi1) , (ζi2, ζi3) ,
(ζi2, ζi4) , (ζi3, ζi0) , (ζi3, ζi2) , (ζi3, ζi4) , (ζi4, ζi0) ,
(ζi4, ζi2) , (ζi4, ζi3) ,},
• A set of guard conditions:
[−π, +π]},
(cid:1)},
2 , +π
2
tjF
pid(cid:107) > ε1
pid(cid:107) ≤ ε1 ∧ µi = 0 ∧ t ≥
G (ζi0, ζi1) = {ip = 1∧ tiF ≥ T (cid:63) − πgC0
2U agt
max
(cid:0)xC0,r + zC0,r
(cid:1)},
(cid:17)},
G (ζi0, ζi2) = {(∃k i = ik) ∧(cid:16)(cid:107)pi − projCµi
G (ζi0, ζi3) = {ip (cid:54)= 1 ∧(cid:0)zi < ¯zip−1 ∨ zi > ¯zip−2
(cid:1)},
(cid:16)
(cid:17)},
G (ζi0, ζi4) = {(cid:107)pi − pj(cid:107) ≤ R ∧ ipr (cid:54)= argmaxj
G (ζi2, ζi0) = {(cid:0)t ≥ tck ∧
G (ζi1, ζi3) = {(cid:107)pi − F(cid:107) ≤ ε1 ∧ tiF = T (cid:63)},
(cid:0)(cid:0)ip ∈ {2, ..., N} ∧ ¯zip−1 ≤ zi ≤ ¯zip−2
(cid:1) ∨
(cid:1)(cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:17) ∨
(cid:16)
(cid:0)xC0,r + zC0,r
(cid:17)},
(cid:16)
ip = 1 ∧ tiF < T (cid:63) − πgC0
2U agt
max
t < tck ∧ (cid:107)pi − projCµi
pid(cid:107) ≤ ε1 ∧ µi = 0
(cid:0)xC0,r + zC0,r
(cid:1)}
G (ζi2, ζi1) = {(cid:107)pi − projCµi
tck ∧ ip = 1 ∧ tiF ≥ T (cid:63) − πgC0
tck ∧ ip ∈ {2, ..., N} ∧(cid:0)zi < ¯zip−1 ∨ zi > ¯zip−2
(cid:1)},
2U agt
G (ζi2, ζi3) = {(cid:107)pi − projCµi
max
(cid:17)(cid:17) ∧ µi > 0},
(cid:16)
(cid:16)(cid:107)pi − pj(cid:107) > R, ∀j ∨ ipr = argmaxj
G (ζi2, ζi4) = G (ζi0, ζi4) ∨ {(cid:107)pi − projCµi
G (ζi3, ζi0) = {ip = 1 ∨(cid:0)ip (cid:54)= 1 ∧ ¯zip−1 ≤ zi ≤ ¯zip−2
(cid:1)},
(cid:17)(cid:17) ∧ µi > 0},
(cid:16)
(cid:16)(cid:107)pi − pj(cid:107) > R, ∀j ∨ ipr = argmaxj
G (ζi3, ζi4) = G (ζi0, ζi4) ∨ {(cid:107)pi − projCµi
(cid:17) < ε2 ∧
(cid:16) (cid:107)ni(cid:107)−ri
(cid:1)(cid:1)},
(cid:0)ip = 1 ∨ (cid:0)ip ∈ {2, ..., N} ∧ ¯zip−1 ≤ zi ≤ ¯zip−2
(cid:16) (cid:107)ni(cid:107)−ri
(cid:17) < ε2},
(cid:17) < ε2 ∧
(cid:16) (cid:107)ni(cid:107)−ri
(cid:1)(cid:1)}.
(cid:0)ip (cid:54)= 1 ∧(cid:0)zi < ¯zip−1 ∨ zi > ¯zip−2
pid(cid:107) ≤ ε1 ∧ µi = 0 ∧ t ≥
pid(cid:107) ≤ ε1 ∧
G (ζi4, ζi2) = {fi = 1 ∧ ln
G (ζi4, ζi3) = {fi = 0 ∧ ln
G (ζi4, ζi0) = {fi = 0 ∧ ln
G (ζi3, ζi2) = G (ζi0, ζi2) ,
pid(cid:107) ≤ ε1 ∧
(γ+µi)R−ri
(γ+µi)R−ri
(γ+µi)R−ri
tjF
tjF
• A reset map: R (ζi0, ζi2, fi) = {1}, R (ζi0, ζi4, µi) =
• Additional parameters include a clock set: C = {tiF}, a
flag: fi ∈ {0, 1}, an assignment index µi = {0, ..., N − 1}
and,
{µi + 1}, R (ζi1, ζi3, tiF ) = {0}, R (ζi2, ζi0, fi) =
{0 if t ≥ tck; 1 otherwise}, R (ζi2, ζi1, fi) = {0},
R (ζi2, ζi3, fi) = {0}, R (ζi2, ζi4, µi) = {0 if (cid:107)pi−projCµi
≤ ε1 ∧(cid:16)(cid:107)pi − pj(cid:107) > R, ∀j ∨ ipr = argmaxj
(cid:16)(cid:107)pi − pj(cid:107) > R, ∀j ∨ ipr = argmaxj
0; µi + 1 otherwise}, R (ζi3, ζi2, fi) = {1},
R (ζi3, ζi4, µi) = {0 if (cid:107)pi − projCµi
(cid:16)
(cid:17)(cid:17) ∧ µi > 0;
tjF
pid(cid:107) ≤ ε1 ∧
(cid:17)(cid:17) ∧ µi >
µi + 1 otherwise}, R (ζi4, ζi0, µi) = {0}, and continuous
states do not reset between transitions.
(cid:16)
tjF
pid(cid:107)
References
Beard, R. W. (2008), Quadrotor dynamics and control.
lecture notes. http://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/
cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2324&context=
facpub.
Bentz, W. & Panagou, D. (2017), Persistent coverage of
a two-dimensional manifold subject to time-varying
disturbances, in 'Proc. of the 56th IEEE Conference
on Decision and Control', Melbourne, Australia.
Bentz, W. & Panagou, D. (2018), Energy-aware persis-
tent coverage and intruder interception in 3D dynamic
environments, in 'Proc. of the 2018 American Control
Conference', Milwaukee, WI.
Bokareva, T., Hu, W., Kanhere, S., Ristic, B., Gordon,
N., Bessell, T., Rutten, M. & Jha, S. (2006), Wireless
sensor networks for battlefield surveillance, in 'Pro-
ceedings of the land warfare conference', pp. 1 -- 8.
Cheng, P., Keller, J. & Kumar, V. (2008), Time-optimal
UAV trajectory planning for 3D urban structure cov-
erage, in 'Proc. of the 2008 IEEE/RSJ International
Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems', Nice,
France, pp. 2750 -- 2757.
Choset, H. & Kortenkamp, D. (1999), 'Path planning
and control for free-flying inspection robot in space',
Journal of Aerospace Engineering 12(2), 74 -- 81.
Cortes, J., Mart´ınez, S., Karatas, T. & Bullo, F. (2004),
'Coverage control for mobile sensing networks', IEEE
Trans. on Robotics and Automation 20(2), 243 -- 255.
Fredrickson, S. E., Duran, S., Howard, N. & Wa-
genknecht, J. D. (2004), Application of the mini AER-
cam free flyer for orbital inspection, in 'Defense and
Security', International Society for Optics and Pho-
tonics, pp. 26 -- 35.
Hexsel, B., Chakraborty, N. & Sycara, K. (2013), Dis-
tributed coverage control for mobile anisotropic sen-
sor networks, Technical Report CMU-RI-TR-13-01,
Robotics Institute, Pittsburgh, PA.
Hokayem, P., Stipanov´ıc, D. & Spong, M. (2007), On
persistent coverage control, in 'Proc. of the 46th IEEE
Conference on Decision and Control', New Orleans,
LA, USA, pp. 6130 -- 6135.
Hollinger, G. A., Englot, B., Hover, F. S., Mitra, U. &
Sukhatme, G. S. (2013), 'Active planning for under-
water inspection and the benefit of adaptivity', The
International Journal of Robotics Research 32(1), 3 --
18.
Hubel, N., Hirche, S., Gusrialdi, A., Hatanaka, T., Fu-
jita, M. & Sawodny, O. (2008), Coverage control with
information decay in dynamic environments, in 'Proc.
of the 17th IFAC World Congress', Seoul, South Ko-
rea, pp. 4180 -- 4185.
Hussein, I. I. & Stipanovi´c, D. M. (2007), 'Effective cov-
erage control for mobile sensor networks with guar-
anteed collision avoidance', IEEE Trans. on Control
Systems Technology 15(4), 642 -- 657.
Ivory, J. (1798), 'VIII. A new series for the rectification
of the ellipsis; together with some observations on the
evolution of the formula (a2 + b2− 2ab cos θ)n', Trans-
actions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 4(2), 177190.
Liu, B., Dousse, O., Nain, P. & Towsley, D. (2013),
'Dynamic coverage of mobile sensor networks', IEEE
Transactions on Parallel and Distributed systems
24(2), 301 -- 311.
Lygeros, J. (2004), Lecture notes on hybrid sys-
https://robotics.eecs.berkeley.edu/
tems.
~sastry/ee291e/lygeros.pdf.
Mitchell, D., Corah, M., Chakraborty, N., Sycara, K. &
Michael, N. (2015), Multi-robot long-term persistent
coverage with fuel constrained robots, in 'Proc. of the
2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and
Automation', IEEE, pp. 1093 -- 1099.
Murphy, R. R., Tadokoro, S., Nardi, D., Jacoff, A., Fior-
ini, P., Choset, H. & Erkmen, A. M. (2008), Search and
rescue robotics, in 'Springer Handbook of Robotics',
15
stations', IEEE Transactions on Robotics 31(3), 521 --
535.
Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 1151 -- 1173.
Palacios-Gas´os, J. M., Montijano, E., Sagues, C. &
Llorente, S. (2016a), Multi-robot persistent coverage
using branch and bound, in 'Proc. of the 2016 Amer-
ican Control Conference', pp. 5697 -- 5702.
Palacios-Gas´os, J. M., Montijano, E., Sagu´es, C. &
Llorente, S. (2016b), Multi-robot persistent coverage
with optimal times, in 'Proc. of the 55th IEEE Confer-
ence on Decision and Control', IEEE, pp. 3511 -- 3517.
Palacios-Gas´os, J. M., Talebpour, Z., Montijano, E.,
Sagu´es, C. & Martinoli, A. (2017), Optimal path plan-
ning and coverage control for multi-robot persistent
coverage in environments with obstacles, in 'Proc. of
the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics
and Automation', pp. 1321 -- 1327.
Panagou, D., Stipanovi´c, D. M. & Voulgaris, P. G.
(2016), 'Distributed coordination control for multi-
robot networks using lyapunov-like barrier functions',
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, to appear
61(3), 617 -- 632.
Pasqualetti, F., Zanella, F., Peters, J. R., Spindler, M.,
Carli, R. & Bullo, F. (2014), 'Camera network coordi-
nation for intruder detection', IEEE Transactions on
Control Systems Technology 22(5), 1669 -- 1683.
Slattery, J. C. (1999), Advanced Transport Phenomena,
Cambridge UP.
Smith, R. N., Schwager, M., Smith, S. L., Jones, B. H.,
Rus, D. & Sukhatme, G. S. (2011), 'Persistent ocean
monitoring with underwater gliders: Adapting sam-
pling resolution', Journal of Field Robotics 28(5), 714 --
741.
Smith, S. L., Schwager, M. & Rus, D. (2012), 'Persis-
tent robotic tasks: Monitoring and sweeping in chang-
ing environments', IEEE Transactions on Robotics
28(2), 410 -- 426.
Song, C., Feng, G., Fan, Y. & Wang, Y. (2011), 'Decen-
tralized adaptive awareness coverage control for multi-
agent networks', Automatica 47(12), 2749 -- 2756.
Song, C., Liu, L., Feng, G., Wang, Y. & Gao, Q. (2013),
'Persistent awareness coverage control for mobile sen-
sor networks', Automatica 49(6), 1867 -- 1873.
Stipanovi´c, D. M., Valicka, C., Tomlin, C. J. & Bewley,
T. R. (2013), 'Safe and reliable coverage control', Nu-
merical Algebra, Control and Optimization 3, 31 -- 48.
Vincenty, T. (1975a), 'Direct and inverse solutions of
geodesics on the ellipsoid with application of nested
equations', Survey review 23(176), 88 -- 93.
Vincenty, T. (1975b), Geodetic inverse solution between
antipodal points. Scanned by Charles Karney from the
copy in R.H. Rapp's library at Ohio State University.
The report is a work of the U.S. Government and so
is in the public domain.
Xie, L. & Zhang, X. (2013), 3D clustering-based cam-
era wireless sensor networks for maximizing lifespan
with minimum coverage rate constraint, in 'Proc. of
the 2013 IEEE Global Communications Conference
(GLOBECOM)', pp. 298 -- 303.
Yu, J., Karaman, S. & Rus, D. (2015), 'Persistent mon-
itoring of events with stochastic arrivals at multiple
16
|
1806.10460 | 2 | 1806 | 2019-08-14T13:59:36 | On Coalitional Manipulation for Multiwinner Elections: Shortlisting | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.CC",
"cs.DS",
"cs.GT"
] | Shortlisting of candidates--selecting a group of "best" candidates--is a special case of multiwinner elections. We provide the first in-depth study of the computational complexity of strategic voting for shortlisting based on the perhaps most basic voting rule in this scenario, l-Bloc (every voter approves l candidates). In particular, we investigate the influence of several tie-breaking mechanisms (e.g., pessimistic versus optimistic) and group evaluation functions (e.g., egalitarian versus utilitarian). Among other things, conclude that in an egalitarian setting strategic voting may indeed be computationally intractable regardless of the tie-breaking rule. Altogether, we provide a fairly comprehensive picture of the computational complexity landscape so far in the literature of this neglected scenario. | cs.MA | cs |
On Coalitional Manipulation for Multiwinner
Elections: Shortlisting∗
Robert Bredereck, Andrzej Kaczmarczyk, and Rolf Niedermeier
TU Berlin, Faculty IV, Algorithmics and Computational Complexity,
Ernst-Reuter-Platz 7, D-10587 Berlin, Germany
August 15, 2019
Abstract
Shortlisting of candidates -- selecting a group of "best" candidates -- is a special case of
multiwinner elections. We provide the first in-depth study of the computational com-
plexity of strategic voting for shortlisting based on the perhaps most basic voting rule in
this scenario, ℓ-Bloc (every voter approves ℓ candidates). In particular, we investigate
the influence of several tie-breaking mechanisms (e.g., pessimistic versus optimistic)
and group evaluation functions (e.g., egalitarian versus utilitarian). Among other things,
conclude that in an egalitarian setting strategic voting may indeed be computationally
intractable regardless of the tie-breaking rule. Altogether, we provide a fairly compre-
hensive picture of the computational complexity landscape of this scenario.
Keywords: computational social choice; utility aggregation; strategic voting;
parameterized computational complexity; tie-breaking; SNTV; Bloc
1
Introduction
A university wants to select the two favorite pieces in classical style to be played
during the next graduation ceremony. The students were asked to submit their fa-
vorite pieces. Then a jury consisting of seven members (three juniors and four
seniors) from the university staff selects from the six most frequently submitted
pieces as follows: Each jury member approves two pieces and the two winners are
those obtaining most of the approvals. The six options provided by the students
∗A preliminary version of this article appeared in the Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Interna-
tional Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI '17) (Bredereck et al., 2017).
1
are "Beethoven: Piano Concerto No. 5 (b1)", "Beethoven: Symphony No. 6 (b2)",
"Mozart: Clarinet Concerto (m1)", "Mozart: Jeunehomme Piano Concerto (m2)",
"Uematsu: Final Fantasy (o1)", and "Badelt: Pirates of the Caribbean (o2)." The
three junior jury members are excited about recent audio-visual presentation arts
(both interactive and passive) and approve o1 and o2. Two of the senior jury mem-
bers are Mozart enthusiasts, and the other two senior jury members are Beethoven
enthusiasts. Hence, when voting truthfully, two of them would approve the two
Mozart pieces and the other two would approve the two Beethoven pieces. The
winners of the selection process would be o1 and o2, both receiving three approvals
whereas every other piece receives only two approvals.
The senior jury members meet every Friday evening and discuss important
academic issues including the graduation ceremony music selection processes, why
"movie background noise" recently counts as classical music,1 and the influence of
video games on the ability of making important decisions. During such a meeting
they agreed that a graduation ceremony should always be accompanied by pieces
of traditional, first-class composers. Thus, finally all four senior jury members
decide to approve b1 and m1 so these two pieces are played during the graduation
ceremony.
Already this toy example above (which will be the basis of our running ex-
ample throughout the paper) illustrates important aspects of strategic voting in
multiwinner elections. In case of coalitional manipulation for single-winner elec-
tions (where a coalition of voters casts untruthful votes in order to influence the
outcome of an election; a topic which has been intensively studied in the liter-
ature (Brandt et al., 2016; Rothe, 2015)) one can always assume that a coalition
of manipulators agrees on trying to make a distinguished alternative win the elec-
tion. In case of multiwinner elections, however, already determining concrete pos-
sible goals of a coalition seems to be a non-trivial task: There may be exponen-
tially many different outcomes which can be reached through strategic votes of the
coalition members and each member could have its individual evaluation of these
outcomes.
Multiwinner voting rules come up very naturally whenever one has to select
from a large set of candidates a smaller set of "the best" candidates. Surpris-
ingly, although at least as practically relevant as single-winner voting rules, the
multiwinner literature is much less developed than the single-winner literature. In
recent years (see a survey of Faliszewski et al. (2017a)), however, research into
multiwinner voting rules, their properties, and algorithmic complexity grew signif-
icantly (Aziz et al., 2015, 2017a,b; Barber`a and Coelho, 2008, 2010; Barrot et al.,
2013; Betzler et al., 2013; Elkind et al., 2017; Faliszewski et al., 2016, 2017b;
1http://www.classicfm.com/radio/hall-of-fame/
2
Lackner and Skowron, 2018; Meir et al., 2008; Obraztsova et al., 2013; Skowron,
2015; Skowron et al., 2015). When selecting a group of winning candidates, var-
ious criteria can be interesting; namely, proportional representation, diversity, or
excellence (see Elkind et al. (2017)). We focus on the last scenario. Here the goal
is to select the best (say highest-scoring) group of candidates obtaining a so-called
short list.
Shortlisting comes very naturally in the context of selection committees; for
instance, for human resources departments that need to select, for a fixed number
of positions, the best qualified applicants. A standard way of candidate selection
in the context of shortlisting is to use scoring-based voting rules. We focus on the
two most natural ones: SNTV (single non-transferable vote -- each voter gives one
point to one candidate) and ℓ-Bloc (each voter gives one point to each of ℓ different
candidates, so SNTV is the same as 1-Bloc).2 Obviously, for such voting rules it
is trivial to determine the score of each individual candidate. The main goal of
our work is to model and understand coalitional manipulation in a computational
sense -- that is, to introduce a formal description of how a group of manipulators
can influence the election outcome by casting strategic votes and whether it is pos-
sible to find an effective strategy for the manipulators to change the outcome in
some desired way. In this fashion, we complement well-known work: manipu-
lation for single-winner rules initiated by Bartholdi III et al.
(1989), coalitional
manipulation for single-winner rules initiated by Conitzer et al. (2007), and (non-
coalitional) manipulation for multiwinner rules initiated by Meir et al. (2008). In
coalitional manipulation scenarios, given full knowledge about other voters' pref-
erences, one has a set of manipulative voters who want to influence the election
outcome in a favorable way by casting their votes strategically.
To come up with a useful framework for coalitional manipulation for multiwin-
ner elections, we first have to identify the exact mathematical model and questions
to be asked. A couple of straightforward extensions of coalitional manipulation
for single-winner elections or (non-coalitional) manipulation for multiwinner elec-
tions do not fit. Extending the single-winner variant directly, one would probably
assume that the coalition agrees on making a distinguished candidate part of the
winners or that the coalition agrees on making a distinguished candidate group
part of the winners. The former is unrealistic because in multiwinner settings one
typically cares about more than just one candidate -- especially in shortlisting it is
natural that one wants rather some group of "similarly good" candidates to be win-
ning instead of only one representative of such a group. The latter, that is, agreeing
2Although, in general, ℓ-Bloc does not satisfy committee monotonicity which is considered as
a necessary condition for shortlisting (Faliszewski et al., 2017a), this rule seems quite frequent in
practice -- for example The Board of Research Excellence in Poland was elected using a variant
of ℓ-Bloc (Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Poland, 2019).
3
on a distinguished candidate group to be part of the winners is also problematic
since there may be exponentially many "equally good" candidate groups for the
coalition. Notably, this was not a problem in the single-winner case; there, one
can test for a successful manipulation towards each possible candidate avoiding an
exponential increase of the running time (compared to the running time of such a
test for a single candidate).
(2008).
We address the aforementioned issue of modeling coalitional manipulation for
multiwinner election by extending a single-manipulator model for multiwinner
rules of Meir et al.
In their work, the manipulator specifies the utility
of each candidate and the utility for a candidate group is obtained by adding up the
utilities of each group member. We build on their idea and let each manipulator
report the utility of each candidate. However, aggregating utilities for a coalition
of manipulators (in other words, computing a collective utility of manipulators) be-
comes nontrivial -- especially for a coalition of manipulators who have diversified
utilities for single candidates but still have strong incentives to work together (e.g.,
as we have seen in our introductory example).
Our Contributions. We devise a formal description of coalitional manipula-
tion in multiwinner elections arriving at a new, nontrivial model capturing two types
of manipulators' attitudes and a few natural ways of utility aggregation. To this
end, in our model, we distinguish between optimistic and pessimistic manipulators
and we formalize aggregation of utilities in a utilitarian and an egalitarian way.
Using our model, we analyzed the computational complexity of finding a suc-
cessful manipulation for a coalition of voters, assuming elections under rules from
the family of ℓ-Bloc voting rules. We show that, even for these fairly simple rules,
the computational complexity of coalitional manipulation is diverse. In particu-
lar, we observed that finding a manipulation maximizing the utility of a worst-off
manipulator (egalitarian aggregation) is NP-hard (regardless of the manipulators'
attitude). This result stands in sharp contrast to the polynomial-time algorithms
that we give for finding a manipulation maximizing the sum of manipulators' util-
ities (utilitarian aggregation). Additionally, we show how to circumvent the cum-
bersome NP-hardness for the egalitarian aggregation providing an (FPT) algorithm
that is efficient for scenarios with few manipulators and few different values of util-
ity that manipulators assign to agents. We survey all our computational complexity
results in Table 1 (Section 6).
Related Work. To the best of our knowledge, there is no previous work on
coalitional manipulation in the context of multiwinner elections. We refer to re-
cent textbooks for an overview of the huge literature on single-winner (coalitional)
manipulation (Brandt et al., 2016; Rothe, 2015). Most relevant to our work, Lin
(2011) showed that coalitional manipulation in single-winner elections under ℓ-
4
Approval is solvable in linear time by a greedy algorithm. Meir et al. (2008) intro-
duced (non-coalitional) manipulation for multiwinner elections. While pinpointing
manipulation for several voting rules as NP-hard, they showed that manipulation
remains polynomial-time solvable for Bloc (which can be interpreted as a mul-
tiwinner equivalent of 1-Approval). Obraztsova et al. (2013) extended the latter
result for different tie-breaking strategies and identified further tractable special
cases of multiwinner scoring rules but conjectured manipulation to be hard in gen-
eral for (other) scoring rules. Summarizing, Bloc is simple but comparably well-
studied, and hence we selected it as a showcase for our study of the presumably
computationally harder coalitional manipulation.
Organization. Section 2 introduces basic notation and formal concepts. In
Section 3, we develop our model for coalitional manipulation in multiwinner elec-
tions. Its variants respect different ways of evaluating candidate groups (utilitarian
vs. egalitarian) and two kinds of manipulators behavior (optimistic vs. pessimistic).
In Section 4, we present algorithms and complexity results for computing the out-
put of several tie-breaking rules that allow to model optimistic and pessimistic ma-
nipulators. In Section 5, we formally define the coalitional manipulation problem
and explore its computational complexity using ℓ-Bloc as a showcase. We refer to
our conclusion and Table 1 (Section 6) for a detailed overview of our findings.
2 Preliminaries
For a positive integer n, let [n] := {1, 2, . . . , n}. We use the toolbox of parameter-
ized complexity (Cygan et al., 2015; Downey and Fellows, 2013; Flum and Grohe,
2006; Niedermeier, 2006) to analyze the computational complexity of our prob-
lems in a fine-grained way. To this end, we always identify a parameter ρ that is
typically a positive integer. We call a problem parameterized by ρ fixed-parameter
tractable (in FPT) if it is solvable in f (ρ) · IO(1) time, where I is the size of
a given instance encoding, ρ is the value of the parameter, and f is an arbitrary
computable (typically super-polynomial) function. To preclude fixed-parameter
tractability, we use an established complexity hierarchy of classes of parameterized
problems, FPT ⊆ W[1] ⊆ W[2] ⊆ · · · ⊆ XP. It is widely believed that all in-
clusions are proper. The notions of hardness for parameterized classes are defined
through parameterized reductions similar to classical polynomial-time many-one
reductions -- in this work, it suffices to ensure that the value of the parameter in the
problem we reduce to depends only on the value of the parameter of the problem
we reduce from. Occasionally, we use a combined parameter ρ′ + ρ′′ which is a
more explicit way of expressing a parameter ρ = ρ′ + ρ′′.
An election (C, V ) consists of a set C of m candidates and a multiset V of
5
n votes. Votes are linear orders over C -- for example, for C = {c1, c2, c3} we write
c1 ≻v c2 ≻v c3 to express that candidate c1 is the most preferred and candidate c3
is the least preferred according to vote v. We write ≻ if the corresponding vote is
clear from the context.
A multiwinner voting rule3 is a function that, given an election (C, V ) and an
integer k ∈ [C], outputs a family of co-winning size-k subsets of C representing
the co-winning k-excellence-groups. We use k-egroup as an abbreviation for k-
excellence-group; we also use egroup if the size of an excellence-group is either not
relevant or clear from the context. The reason we do not use the established term
"committee" is that in shortlisting applications "committee" traditionally rather
refers to voters and not to candidates.
We consider scoring rules -- multiwinner voting rules that assign points to can-
didates based on their positions in the votes. By score(c), we denote the total
number of points that candidate c obtains, and we use scoreV ′(c) when restricting
the election to a subset V ′ ⊂ V of voters. A (multiwinner) scoring rule selects a
family X of co-winning k-egroups with the maximum total sum of scores. It holds
that X ∈ X if and only if ∀c ∈ X, c′ ∈ C \ X : score(c) ≥ score(c′). We focus
on the family of ℓ-Bloc multiwinner voting rules, that is a family of scoring rules
that assign, for each vote, one point to each of the top ℓ < C candidates.4
Example 1. Referring back to our introductory example, we have a set C = {b1,
b2, m1, m2, o1, o2} of candidates and a set V = {vy1, vy2, vy3, vb1, vb2, vm1, vm2}
of voters. The voters vy1, vy2 , and vy3 represent the three junior jury members,
whereas vb1 , vb2 and vm1 , vm2 represent, respectively, the Beethoven and Mozart
enthusiasts among the senior jury members. In the example, we described a way
of manipulating the election by the senior jury members which leads to selecting
two music pieces. There are several ways to illustrate this manipulation using our
model. Below we present one of the possible sets of casted votes that represents
the manipulated election:
vy1, vy2, vy3 :
vb1, vb2, vm1, vm2 :
o1 ≻ o2 ≻ b1 ≻ b2 ≻ m1 ≻ m2,
b1 ≻ m1 ≻ b2 ≻ m2 ≻ o1 ≻ o2.
Following the introductory example, we are choosing an egroup of size k = 2.
Using the Bloc multiwinner voting rules (which coincides with our introductory
3Some literature use the name multiwinner voting correspondence for what we called multiwinner
voting rule. In that case, a multiwinner voting rule is required to return exactly one set of the desired
size. This is usually achieved by combining a multiwinner voting correspondence with a tie-breaking
rule.
4The case where ℓ coincides with the size k of the egroup is typically referred to as Bloc; 1-Bloc
corresponds to SNTV (Meir et al., 2008). The case where 1 < ℓ < k is also referred to as Limited
Vote (or Limited Voting).
6
example), the winning 2-egroup consist of candidates b1 and m1. However, under
the SNTV voting rule the situation would change, and the winners would be o1 and
b1. SNTV and Bloc alike output a single winning egroup in this example, and thus
tie-breaking is ineffective.
To select a single k-egroup from the set of co-winning k-egroups one has to
consider tie-breaking rules. A multiwinner tie-breaking rule is a mapping that,
given an election and a family of co-winning k-egroups, outputs a single k-egroup.
Among them, there is a set of natural rules that is of particular interest in order
to model the behavior of manipulative voters. Indeed, in case of a single manip-
ulator both pessimistic tie-breaking as well as optimistic tie-breaking have been
considered in addition to lexicographic and randomized tie-breaking (Meir et al.,
2008; Obraztsova et al., 2013). To model optimistic and pessimistic tie-breaking
in a meaningful manner5, we use the model introduced by Obraztsova et al. (2013)
in which a manipulative voter v is described not only by the preference order ≻v
of the candidates but also by a utility function u : C → N. To cover this in the tie-
breaking process, coalition-specific tie-breaking rules get -- in addition to the orig-
inal election, the manipulators' votes, and the co-winning excellence-groups -- the
manipulators' utility functions in the input. The formal implementations of these
rules and their properties are discussed in Subsection 3.2.
3 Model for Coalitional Manipulation
In this section, we formally define and explain our model and the respective vari-
ants. To this end, we discuss how we evaluate a k-egroup in terms of utility for a
coalition of manipulators and introduce tie-breaking rules that model optimistic or
pessimistic viewpoints of the manipulators.
3.1 Evaluating k-egroups
As already discussed in the introduction, one should not extend the model of coali-
tional manipulation for single-winner elections to multiwinner elections in the sim-
plest way (e.g., by assuming that the manipulators agree on some distinguished
5We cannot simply use ordinal preferences: Obraztsova et al. (2013) observed that already in
case of a single manipulator one cannot simply set the fixed lexicographic order of the manipu-
lators' preferences (resp. the reverse of it) over candidates to model optimistic (resp. pessimistic)
tie-breaking. For example, it is a strong restriction to assume that a manipulator would always prefer
its first choice together with its fourth choice towards its second choice together with its third choice.
It might be that only its first choice is really acceptable (in which case the assumption is reasonable)
or that the first three choices are comparably good but the fourth choice is absolutely unacceptable
(in which case the assumption is wrong).
7
candidate or on some distinguished egroup). Instead, we follow Meir et al. (2008)
and assume that we are given a utility function over the candidates for each manip-
ulator and a utility level which, if achieved, indicates a successful manipulation.
Meir et al. (2008) compute the utility of an egroup by summing up the utility val-
ues the manipulator assigns to each member of the egroup.
At first glance, summing up the utility values assigned by each manipulator
to each member of an egroup seems to be the most natural extension for a coali-
tion of manipulators. However, this utilitarian variant does not guarantee single
manipulators to gain non-zero utility. In extreme cases it could even happen that
some manipulator is worse off compared to voting sincerely, as demonstrated in
Example 2.
Example 2. Consider the election E = (C, V ) where C = {b1, b2, m1, m2, o1,
o2} is a set of candidates and V = {v1, v2, v3} is the following multiset of three
votes:
v1, v2 :
o1 ≻ o2 ≻ m1 ≻ m2 ≻ b1 ≻ b2,
v3 : m2 ≻ m1 ≻ b2 ≻ b1 ≻ o1 ≻ o2.
Additionally, consider two manipulators, u1 and u2, that report utilities to the can-
didates as depicted in the table below.
u(·)
u1
u2
b1
10
1
b2 m1 m2
5
0
7
2
4
5
o1
0
0
o2
0
0
Let us analyze the winning 2-egroup under the SNTV voting rule. Observe that
if the manipulators vote sincerely, then together they give one point to b1 and one
to m2 (one point from each manipulator). Combining the manipulators' votes with
the non-manipulative ones, the winning 2-egroup consists of candidates o1 and m2
that both have score two; no other candidate has greater or equal score, so tie-
breaking is unnecessary. The value of such a group is equal to seven according to
the utilitarian evaluation variant. Manipulator u2's utility is seven. However, both
manipulators can do better by giving their points to candidate b1. Then, the winners
are candidates o1 and b1, giving the total utility of 11 (according to the utilitarian
variant). Observe that in spite of growth of the total utility, the utility value gained
by u2, which is one, is lower than in the case of sincere voting.
In Example 2 manipulator u2 devotes its satisfaction to the utilitarian satisfac-
tion of the group of the manipulators; that is, u2 is worse off voting strategically
compared to voting sincerely. Despite this issue, however, the utilitarian viewpoint
can be justified if the manipulators are able to compensate such losses of utility
8
of some manipulators, for example, by paying money to each other. For cases
where manipulators cannot do that, we introduce two egalitarian evaluation vari-
ants. The (egroup-wise) egalitarian variant aims at maximizing the minimum sat-
isfaction of the manipulators with the whole k-egroup. Thus, intuitively, in the
egalitarian variant one is looking for an egroup that is maximizing satisfaction of
the least satisfied manipulator. The candidate-wise egalitarian variant aims at max-
imizing the manipulators' satisfaction resulting from the summation of the mini-
mum satisfactions every single candidate contributes. This variant is motivated,
for instance, by the following scenario. We associate candidates with investments,
manipulators with financial experts and utilities with a measure of a benefit the
experts predict for each investment. The candidate-wise egalitarian is then mod-
elling a "guaranteed" benefit of a selection of investments. The computed benefit is
"guaranteed" in a sense that, for each investment, one counts the benefit predicted
by the most pessimistic expertWe do not distinguish "candidate-wise utilitarian"
variant since this variant would be equivalent to the (regular) utilitarian variant.
We formalize the described variants of k-egroup evaluation (for r manipula-
tors) with Definition 1.
Definition 1. Given a set of candidates C, a k-egroup S ⊆ C, S = k, and a
family of manipulators' utility functions U = {u1, u2, . . . , ur} where ui : C → N,
we consider the following functions:
• utilU (S) := Pu∈U Pc∈S u(c),
• egalU (S) := minu∈U Pc∈S u(c),
• candegalU (S) := Pc∈S minu∈U u(c).
Intuitively, these functions determine the utility of a k-egroup S according to,
respectively, the utilitarian and the egalitarian variants of evaluating S by a group
of r manipulators (identifying manipulators with their utility functions). We omit
subscript U when U is clear from the context. To illustrate Definition 1 we apply
it in Example 3.
Example 3. Consider our example set of candidates C = {b1, b2, m1, m2, o1, o2}
and two manipulators u1, u2 whose utility functions over the candidates are de-
picted in the table below.
u(·)
u1
u2
b1
10
1
b2 m1 m2
0
5
2
7
4
5
o1
0
0
o2
0
0
Then, evaluating the utility of 2-egroup S = {b1, m1} applying the three different
evaluation variants gives:
9
• util(S) = (10 + 4) + (1 + 5) = 20,
• egal(S) = min{(10 + 4); (1 + 5)} = 6,
• candegal(S) = min{10, 1} + min{4, 5} = 5.
Analyzing Example 3, we observe that we can compute the utilitarian value
of egroup S by summing up the overall utilities that each candidate in S con-
tributes to all manipulators; for instance candidate b1 always contributes the utility
of 11 = 10+1 to the manipulators, independently of other candidates in the egroup.
Following this observation, instead of coping with a collection of utility function,
we can "contract" all manipulator's functions to a single function. The new func-
tion assigns each candidate a utility value equal to the sum of utilities that the
contracted functions assign to this candidate. Analogously, we can deal with the
candidate-wise egalitarian variant by taking the minimum utility associated to each
candidate as the the utility of this candidate in a new function. Thus, in both vari-
ants, we can consider a single utility function instead of a family of functions. The
conclusion from the above discussion is summarized in the following observation.
Observation 1. Without loss of generality, one can assume that there is a sin-
gle non-zero valued utility function over the candidates under the utilitarian or
candidate-wise egalitarian evaluation.
Proof. Consider a multiset of manipulators' utility functions U = {u1, u2, . . . , ur}
and a k-egroup S = {c1, c2, . . . , ck}. For the utilitarian variant, create a new utility
function u′ that assigns to each candidate the sum of utilities given to this candi-
date by all manipulators; that is, u′(c) := Pr
i=1 ur(c) for all c ∈ C. Technically,
we need also a special utility function u0 that assigns to each candidate the utility
of zero. We construct a new family U ′ consisting of function u′ and r − 1 copies
of function u0. Since function u′ is the only one which gives non-zero utility in
family U ′ and for each candidate this function returns the sum of utilities given to
a candidate by all functions from family U , it holds that utilU (S) = utilU ′(S).
We follow a similar strategy proving Observation 1 for the candidate-wise vari-
ant. We introduce a function u′ defined as u′(c) := minu∈U u(c) for each candi-
date c ∈ C. Then we create a new family of utility functions U ′ with function u′
and r − 1 zero-valued function u0. Naturally, egalU ′(S) = egalU (S) because
the values of function u′ for each candidate exactly follow the definition of the
candidate-wise egalitarian evaluation (see Definition 1) and u′ is the only non-zero
valued function in U ′.
10
3.2 Breaking Ties
Before formally defining our tie-breaking rules, we briefly discuss some necessary
notation and central concepts. Consider an election (C, V ), a size k for the egroup
to be chosen, and a scoring-based multiwinner voting rule R. We can partition the
set of candidates C into three sets C +, P , and C − as follows: The set C + contains
the confirmed candidates, that is, candidates that are in all co-winning k-egroups.
The set P contains the pending candidates, that is, candidates that are only in
some co-winning k-egroups. The set C − contains the rejected candidates, that is,
candidates that are in no co-winning k-egroup. Observe that C + ≤ k, C +∪P ≥
k, and that every candidate from P ∪C − receives fewer points than every candidate
from C +. Additionally, all candidates in P receive the same number of points.
We define the following families of tie-breaking rules which are considered in
this work. In order to define optimistic and pessimistic rules, we assume that in
addition to C +, P , and k, we are given a family of utility functions which are used
to evaluate the k-egroups as discussed in Subsection 3.1.
Lexicographic Flex. A tie-breaking F belongs to Flex if and only if ties are
broken lexicographically with respect to some predefined order >F of the candi-
dates from C. That is, F selects all candidates from C + and the top k − C +
candidates from P with respect to >F .
Optimistic F eval
opt , eval ∈ {util, egal, candegal}. A tie-breaking belongs to
if and only if it always selects some k-egroup S such that C + ⊆ S ⊆
F eval
opt
(C + ∪ P ) and there is no other k-egroup S′ with C + ⊆ S′ ⊆ (C + ∪ P ) and
eval(S′) > eval(S).
Pessimistic F eval
pess, eval ∈ {util, egal, candegal}. A tie-breaking belongs to
F eval
pess if and only if it always selects some k-egroup S such that C + ⊆ S ⊆
(C + ∪ P ) and there is no other k-egroup S′ with C + ⊆ S′ ⊆ (C + ∪ P ) and
eval(S′) < eval(S).
We remark that the definitions above come in two, substantially different vari-
ants. For each lexicographic tie-breaking rule, there is always exactly one egroup
that will be selected by the rule for a particular set of pending set candidates. How-
ever, it is not the case for the families of pessimistic and optimistic families of
rules. In fact, there might be many possible egroups whose value, computed in
terms of a respective evaluation variant, is exactly the same. Such a feature seems
to contradict the idea of a tie-breaking rule that should not, by itself, introduce ties
again. However, we argue that choosing arbitrary equally-valued ("tied") egroup is
a proper way to circumvent this problem. Indeed, according to a particular evalua-
tion all egroups with the same value are indistinguishable from each other.
11
3.3 Limits of Lexicographic Tie-Breaking
From the above discussion, we can conclude that lexicographic tie-breaking is
straightforward in the case of scoring-based multiwinner voting rules. Basically
any subset of the desired cardinality from the set of pending candidates can be
chosen. In particular, the best pending candidates with respect to the given order
can be chosen. We remark that applying lexicographic tie-breaking may be more
complicated for general multiwinner voting rules.
It remains to be clarified whether one can find a reasonable order of the pending
candidates in order to model optimistic or pessimistic tie-breaking rules in a sim-
ple way. We show that this is possible for every F eval
bhav, eval ∈ {util, candegal},
bhav ∈ {opt, pess}, using the fact that in these cases we can safely assume that
there is only one non-zero valued utility function (see Observation 1). On the con-
trary, there is a counterexample for eval = egal and bhav ∈ {opt, pess}. On the
way to prove these claims we need to formally define what it means that one family
of tie-breaking rules can be used to simulate another family of tie-breaking rules.
Definition 2. We call a triplet consisting of an election with candidate set C, a size
of an egroup, and a family of utility functions a tie-breaking perspective over C.
Let EC(C +), EC(P ), EC(U ), and EC(k) be all possible tie-breaking perspectives
over C admitting, respectively, a set C + of confirmed candidates, a set P of pend-
ing candidates, a family U of utility functions, and a size k of an egroup. For some
non-empty subset P of the set {C +, P , U, k}, let EC(P) := Tx∈P
Then, for two families F and F ′ of tie-breaking rules we say that F can P-
simulate F ′ if there exists a rule F ∈ F such that for each tie-breaking perspective
in EC(P) there exists a rule F ′ ∈ F ′ such that F and F ′ yield the same output for
this perspective. We call rule F a P-simulator.
EC(x).
At first glance, Definition 2 might seem overcomplicated. However, it is tai-
lored to grasp different degrees of simulation possibilities. On the one hand, one
can always find a lexicographic order and use it for breaking ties if all: confirmed
candidates, pending candidates, utility functions, and the size of an egroup are
known. Thus, one needs some flexibility in the definition of simulation for it to
be non-trivial. On the other hand, it is somewhat obvious that without fixing the
utility functions, one cannot simulate optimistic or pessimistic tie-breaking rules.
In other words, we have:
Observation 2. Let C be a fixed set of candidates, C + be a set of confirmed can-
didates, P be a set of pending candidates, and k be a size of an egroup. Let
bhav ∈ {opt, pess} and eval ∈ {util, candegal, egal}. The family of lexico-
graphic tie-breaking rules does not {C +, P, k}-simulate F eval
bhav.
12
Proof. Suppose k = 1, C + = ∅, and P = {b1, b2}; that is, we are going to select
either b1 or b2 who are tied. Let us fix a family U = {u1} of utility functions such
that u1(b1) = 1 and u1(b2) = 0. For the family U of utility functions clearly F eval
opt
selects candidate b1. Now, consider a family U ′ = {u′
1} of utility functions where
1 assigns utility one to candidate b2 and zero otherwise. For this family, F eval
u′
opt
selects candidate b2. This means that we cannot find a {C +, P, k}-simulator F
from family Flex of tie-breaking rules because in the first case F would have to
choose b1 and in the second case b2 would have to be chosen. This is impossible
using a single preference order over {b1, b2}. Similar families of functions (ob-
tained by exchanging each one with zero and vice versa) yield a proof for F eval
pess as
well.
Next, we show that for some cases it is sufficient to fix just the utility functions
in order to simulate optimistic or pessimistic tie-breaking rules (see Proposition 1).
For other cases, however, one has to fix all: confirmed candidates, pending candi-
dates, utility functions, and the size of an egroup (see Proposition 2).
Proposition 1. Let C be a set of candidates, U be a family of utility functions,
bhav ∈ {opt, pess}, and eval ∈ {util, candegal}. Let C = m and U = r.
Then the family of lexicographic tie-breaking rules Flex can {U }-simulate F eval
bhav,
and a {U }-simulator F ∈ Flex can be found in O(m · (r + log m)) time.
Proof. Recall from Observation 1 that if eval ∈ {util, candegal}, then there is
always a set of utility functions with just one non-zero valued utility function u′
that is equivalent to U . Hence, we compute such a function u′ in O(m · r) time
as follows: In the utilitarian case, function u′ assigns every candidate the sum of
utilities the manipulators give to the candidate. Considering the candidate-wise
egalitarian evaluation, function u′ assigns every candidate the minimum utility
value among utilities given to the candidate over all manipulators. We say an
order >F of the candidates is consistent with some utility function u if c >F c′
implies u(c) ≥ u(c′) for optimistic tie-breaking and c >F c′ implies u(c) ≤ u(c′)
for pessimistic tie-breaking. Any lexicographic tie-breaking rule defined by an
order >F that is consistent with the utility function u′ simulates F eval
bhav. We com-
pute a consistent order by sorting the candidates according to u′ in O(m · log m)
time.
Proposition 1 describes a strong feature of optimistic utilitarian and candidate-
wise egalitarian tie-breaking and their pessimistic variants. Intuitively, the propo-
sition says that for these tie-breaking mechanisms one can compute a respective
linear order of candidates. Then one can forget all the details of the initial tie-
breaking mechanism and use the order to determine winners. The order can be
13
computed even without knowing the details of an election. Unfortunately, the sim-
ulation of pessimistic and optimistic egalitarian tie-breaking turns out to be more
complicated.
Proposition 2. Let C be a set of candidates, U be a family of utility functions, C +
be a set of confirmed candidates, P be a set of pending candidates, and k be a size
of an egroup. For each P ⊆ {C +, P, U, k}, 0 < P < 4, the lexicographic tie-
breaking family of rules does not P-simulate F egal
bhav assuming bhav ∈ {opt, pess}.
Proof. From Observation 2 we already know that the family of lexicographic tie-
breaking rules cannot {C +, P, k}-simulate the family of egalitarian pessimistic
tie-breaking rules or the family of egalitarian optimistic tie-breaking rules.
Next, we build one counterexample for each of the remaining size-three sub-
sets of {C +, P, U, k} to show our theorem. To this end, let us fix a set of candi-
dates C = {b1, b2, m1, m2, o1, o2} (compatible with our running example) and a
family U = {u1, u2} of utility functions as depicted in the table below.
u(·)
u1
u2
b1
10
1
b2 m1 m2
0
5
2
7
4
5
o1
0
0
o2
0
0
First, we prove that the family Flex cannot {C +, P, U }-simulate F egal
bhav for
bhav ∈ {opt, pess}. Let us fix C + = ∅, P = C \ {o1, o2}. We consider the
optimistic variant of egalitarian tie-breaking for k = 1, so we are searching for
a 1-egroup. Looking at the values of U , we see that candidate m1 gives the best
possible egalitarian evaluation value which is four. This means that a {C +, P, U }-
simulator F ∈ Flex has to use an order where m1 precedes both b1 and m2. How-
ever, it turns out that if we set k = 2, then the best 2-egroup consists exactly of
candidates b1 and m2. This leads to a contradiction because now candidates b1
and m2 should precede m1 in F 's lexicographic order. Consequently, family Flex
does not {C +, P, U }-simulate F egal
opt . Using the same values of utility functions
and the same sequence of the values of k we get a proof for the pessimistic variant
of egalitarian evaluation.
Second, we prove that the family Flex cannot {P, k, U }-simulate F egal
bhav for
bhav ∈ {opt, pess}. This time, we fix P = C \ {o1, o2}, k = 2. We construct
the first case by setting C + = {o1}. Using the fact that in both functions can-
didate o1 has utility zero, we choose exactly the same candidate as in the proof
of {C +, P, U }-simulation for the case k = 1; that is, for the optimistic variant,
the winning 2-egroup is m1 and o1. Consequently, m1 precedes b1 and m2 in the
potential {P, k, U }-simulator's lexicographic order. Towards a contradiction, we
set C + = ∅. The situation is exactly the same as in the proof of the {C +, P, U }-
simulation case. Now, the winning 2-egroup consists of b1 and m2 which ends the
14
proof for the optimistic case. By almost the same argument, the result holds for the
pessimistic variant.
Finally, we prove that the family Flex cannot {C +, k, U }-simulate F egal
bhav for
bhav ∈ {opt, pess}. We fix C + = ∅, k = 2. For the first case we pick
P = {b2, m1, m2}. The best egalitarian evaluation happens for the 2-egroup con-
sisting of b2 and m1. This imposes that, in the potential {C +, k, U }-simulator's
order, b2 and m1 precede the remaining candidates (in particular, m1 precedes
m2). However, for P = C the best 2-egroup changes to that consisting of b1 and
m2 which gives a contradiction (m2 precedes m1). As in the previous cases, the
same argument provides a proof for the pessimistic variant.
Proposition 2 implies that pessimistic and optimistic egalitarian tie-breaking
cannot be simulated without having full knowledge about an election.
In terms
of computational complexity, however, finding winners for pessimistic egalitarian
tie-breaking remains tractable whereas the same task for optimistic egalitarian tie-
breaking is intractable. We devote the next section to show this dichotomy as
well as to establish computational hardness of computing winners for the other
introduced tie-breaking rules.
4 Complexity of Tie-Breaking
It is natural to ask whether the tie-breaking rules proposed in Subsection 3.2 are
practical in terms of their computational complexity. If not, then there is little hope
for coalitional manipulation because tie-breaking might be an inevitable subtask
to be solved by the manipulators. Indeed, manipulators might not be "powerful"
enough to secure victory of their desired egroup completely avoding tie-breaking.
Clearly, we can apply every lexicographic tie-breaking rule that is defined
through some predefined order of the candidates in linear time. Hence, we fo-
cus on the rules that model optimistic or pessimistic manipulators. To this end, we
analyze the following computational problem.
15
F eval
bhav-TIE-BREAKING (F eval
bhav -TB)
eval ∈ {util, egal, candegal}, bhav ∈ {opt, pess}
Input:
A set of candidates C partitioned into a set P of pending can-
didates and a set C + of confirmed candidates, the size k of the
excellence-group such that C + < k < C, a family of manipu-
lators' utility functions U = {u1, u2, . . . , ur} where ui : C → N,
and a non-negative, integral evaluation threshold q.
Question: Is there a size-k set S ⊆ C such that S is selected according to
F eval
bhav, C + ⊆ S, and eval(S) ≥ q?
Naturally, we may assume that the number of candidates and the number of
utility functions are polynomially bounded in the size of the input. However, both
the evaluation threshold and the utility function values are encoded in binary.
Note that an analogous problem has not been considered for single-winner
elections. The reason behind this is that, for single-winner elections, optimistic
and pessimistic tie-breaking rules can be easily simulated by lexicographic tie-
breaking rules. To obtain them, it is sufficient to order the candidates with respect
to their value to manipulators, computed separately for every candidate. However,
one cannot simply apply this approach for egroups, because there might be ex-
ponentially many different egroups to consider. Even if this exponential blow-up
were acceptable, it would be unclear how to derive an order of candidates from the
computed values of egroups. Yet, using a different technique, we can simulate tie-
breaking in multiwinner elections with a lexicographic tie-breaking rule for several
variants of evaluation.
4.1 Utilitarian and Candidate-Wise Egalitarian: Tie-Breaking Is Easy
As a warm-up, we observe that tie-breaking can be applied and evaluated efficiently
if the k-egroups are evaluated according to the utilitarian or candidate-wise egali-
tarian variant. The corresponding result follows almost directly from Proposition 1.
Corollary 1. Let m denote the number of candidates and r denote the number of
manipulators. Then one can solve F eval
bhav -TIE-BREAKING in O(m · (r + log m))
time for eval ∈ {util, candegal}, bhav ∈ {opt, pess}.
Proof. The algorithm works in two steps. First, compute a lexicographic tie-
breaking rule Flex that simulates F eval
bhav in O(m · (r + log m)) time as described in
Proposition 1. Second, apply tie-breaking rule Flex, and evaluate the resulting k-
egroup in O(k · r) time. The running time of applying a lexicographic tie-breaking
rule is linear with respect to the input length (see Subsection 3.3).
16
4.2 Egalitarian: Being Optimistic Is Hard
In this subsection, we consider the optimistic and pessimistic tie-breaking rules
when applied for searching a k-egroup evaluated according to the egalitarian vari-
ant. First, we show that applying and evaluating egalitarian tie-breaking is com-
putationally easy for pessimistic manipulators but computationally intractable for
optimistic manipulators even if the size of the egroup is small. Being pessimistic,
the main idea is to "guess" the manipulator that is least satisfied and select the
candidates appropriately. We show the computational worst-case hardness of the
optimistic case via a reduction from the W[2]-complete SET COVER problem pa-
rameterized by solution size (Downey and Fellows, 2013).
Theorem 1. Let m denote the number of candidates, r denote the number of ma-
nipulators, q denote the evaluation threshold, and k denote the size of an egroup.
Then one can solve F egal
opt -TIE-
BREAKING is NP-hard and W[2]-hard when parameterized by k even if q = 1 and
every manipulator only gives either utility one or zero to each candidate.
pess -TIE-BREAKING in O(r · m log m) time, but F egal
Proof. For the pessimistic case, it is sufficient to "guess" the least satisfied ma-
nipulator x by iterating through r possibilities. Then, select k − C + pending
candidates with the smallest total utility for this manipulator in O(m log m) time.
Finally, comparing the k-egroup with the worst minimum satisfaction over all ma-
nipulators to the lower bound q on satisfaction level given in the input solves the
problem.
We prove the hardness for the optimistic case reducing from the W[2]-hard
SET COVER problem which, given a collection S = {S1, S2, . . . , Sm} of subsets
of universe X = {x1, x2, . . . , xn} and an integer h, asks whether there exists a
family S ′ ⊆ S of size at most h such that SS∈S ′ S = X. Let us fix an instance
I = (X, S, h) of SET COVER. To construct an F egal
opt -TIE-BREAKING instance,
we introduce pending candidates P = {c1, c2, . . . , cm} representing subsets in S
and manipulators u1, u2, . . . , un representing elements of the universe. Note that
there are no confirmed and rejected candidates. Each manipulator ui gives utility
one to candidate cj if set Sj contains element xi and zero otherwise. We set the
excellence-group size k := h and the threshold q to be 1.
Observe that if there is a size-k subset S ⊆ P such that mini∈[n] Ps∈S ui(s) ≥ 1,
then there exists a family S ′ -- consisting of the sets represented by candidates
in S -- such that each element of the universe belongs to the set SS∈S ′ S. On the
contrary, if we cannot pick a group of candidates of size k for which every manip-
ulator's utility is at least one, then instance I is a 'no' instance. This follows from
the fact that for each size-k subset S ⊆ P there exists at least one manipulator u∗
17
for whom Ps∈S u∗(s) = 0. This translates to the claim that there exists no size-h
subset S ′ ⊆ S such that all elements in X belong to the union of the sets in S ′.
Since SET COVER is NP-hard and W[2]-hard with respect to parameter h, we
obtain that our problem is also NP-hard and W[2]-hard when parameterized by the
size k of an excellence-group.
Inspecting the W[2]-hardness proof of Theorem 1, we learn that a small egroup
size (alone) does not make F egal
opt -TIE-BREAKING computationally tractable even
for very simple utility functions. Next, using a parameterized reduction from
the W[1]-complete MULTICOLORED CLIQUE problem (Fellows et al., 2009), we
show that there is still no hope for fixed-parameter tractability (under standard as-
sumptions) even for the combined parameter "number of manipulators and egroup
size"; intuitively, this parameter covers situations where few manipulators are go-
ing to influence an election for a small egroup.
Theorem 2. Let k denote the size of an egroup and r denote the number of manip-
ulators. Then, parameterized by r + k, F egal
opt -TIE-BREAKING is W[1]-hard.
Proof. We describe a parameterized reduction from the W[1]-hard MULTICOL-
ORED CLIQUE problem (Fellows et al., 2009).
In this problem, given an undi-
rected graph G = (V, E), a non-negative integer h, and a vertex coloring φ : V →
{1, 2, . . . , h}, we ask whether graph G admits a colorful h-clique, that is, a size-h
vertex subset Q ⊆ V such that the vertices in Q are pairwise adjacent and have
pairwise distinct colors. Without loss of generality, we assume that the num-
ber of vertices of each color is the same; to be referred as y in the following.
Let (G, φ), G = (V, E), be a MULTICOLORED CLIQUE instance. Let V (i) =
{vi
y} denote the set of vertices of color i ∈ [h], and let E(i, j) =
{ei,j
E(i,j)}, defined for i, j ∈ [h], i < j, denote the set of edges that
connect a vertex of color i to a vertex of color j.
2, . . . , vi
2 , . . . , ei,j
1, vi
1 , ei,j
Candidates. We create one confirmed candidate c∗ and V + E pending
ℓ for
ℓ ∈ V (i), i ∈ [h] and for each i, j ∈ [h] such that i < j we create one
for each edge ei,j
t ∈ E(i, j), t ∈ [E(i, j)]. We set the size k
2(cid:1) + 1 and set the evaluation threshold q := y + 1. Next, we
candidates. More precisely: for each ℓ ∈ [y], we create one vertex candidate ai
each vertex vi
edge candidate bi,j
t
of the egroup to h + (cid:0)h
describe the manipulators and explain the high-level idea of the construction.
Manipulators and main idea. Our construction will ensure that there is a
k-egroup X with c∗ ∈ X and egal(X) ≥ q if and only if X contains h vertex
candidates and (cid:0)h
2(cid:1) edge candidates that encode a colorful h-clique. To this end,
we introduce the following manipulators.
18
1. For each color i ∈ [h], there is a color manipulator µi ensuring that the k-
egroup contains a vertex candidate ai
corresponding to a vertex of color i.
zi
Herein, variable zi denotes the id of the vertex candidate (resp. vertex) that
is selected for color i.
2. For each i, j ∈ [h] such that i < j, there is one color pair manipulator µi,j
ensuring that the k-egroup contains an edge candidate bi,j
zi,j corresponding to
an edge connecting vertices of colors i and j. Herein, variable zi,j denotes
the id of the edge candidate (resp. edge) that is selected for color pair {i, j},
i < j.
3. For each i, j ∈ [h] such that i 6= j, there are two verification manipula-
zi,j if i < j or
is incident to edge ei,j
i,j ensuring that vertex vi
zi
tors νi,j, ν′
incident to edge ej,i
zj,i otherwise.
If there exists a k-egroup in agreement with the description in the previous
three points, then this k-egroup must encode a colorful h-clique.
Utility functions. Let us now describe how we can guarantee correct roles of
the manipulators introduced in points 1 to 3 above using utility functions.
1. Color manipulator µi, i ∈ [h], has utility y for the confirmed candidate c∗,
utility one for each candidate corresponding to a vertex of color i, and utility
zero for the remaining candidates.
2. Color pair manipulator µi,j, i, j ∈ [h], i < j, has utility y for the con-
firmed candidate c∗, utility one for each candidate corresponding to an edge
connecting a vertices of colors i and j, and utility zero for the remaining
candidates.
3. Verification manipulator νi,j, i, j ∈ [h], i 6= j, has utility ℓ for candidate ai
ℓ,
ℓ ∈ [y], utility q−ℓ for each candidate corresponding to an edge that connects
vertex vi
ℓ to a vertex of color j, and utility zero for the remaining candidates.
4. Verification manipulator ν′
i,j, i, j ∈ [h], i 6= j, has utility q − ℓ for candi-
ℓ, ℓ ∈ [y], utility ℓ for each candidate corresponding to an edge that
ℓ, to a vertex of color j, and utility zero for the remaining
date ai
connects vertex vi
candidates.
Correctness. We argue that the graph G admits a colorful clique of size h if
and only if there is a k-egroup X with c∗ ∈ X and egal(X) ≥ q.
Suppose that there exists a colorful clique H of size h. Create the k-egroup X
as follows. Start with {c∗} and add every vertex candidate that corresponds to some
19
vertex of H and every edge candidate that corresponds to some edge of H. Each
color manipulator and color pair manipulator receives total utility y + 1, because
H contains, by definition, one vertex of each color and one edge connecting two
vertices for each color pair. It is easy to verify that the verification manipulator νi,j
must receive utility ℓ from a vertex candidate and utility q − ℓ from an edge can-
didate and that the verification manipulator ν′
i,j must receive utility q − ℓ from a
vertex candidate and utility ℓ from an edge candidate. Thus, egal(X) = q = y + 1.
Suppose that there exists a k-egroup X ⊆ C such that egal(X) ≥ q. Since
each color manipulator cannot achieve utility y+1 unless c∗ belongs to the winning
k-egroup, it follows that c∗ ∈ X. Because each color manipulator µi receives total
utility at least y + 1, X must contain some vertex candidate ai
corresponding to
zi
a vertex of color i for some zi ∈ [y]. We say that X selects vertex vi
. Since each
zi
color pair manipulator µi,j receives total utility at least y + 1, X must contain some
edge candidate bi,j
zi,j corresponding to an edge connecting a vertex of color i and
a vertex of color j for some zi,j . We say that X selects edge ei,j
zi,j . We implicitly
assumed that each color manipulator and color pair manipulator contributes exactly
one selected candidate to X. This assumption is true because there are exactly
k − 1 such manipulators and each needs to select at least one candidate; hence,
X is exactly of the desired size. In order to show that the corresponding vertices
and edges encode a colorful h-clique, it remains to show that no selected edge
is incident to a vertex that is not selected. Assume towards a contradiction that
X selects an edge ei,j
zi,j . However, either verification
manipulator νi,j or verification manipulator ν′
i,j receives the total utility at most q −
1; a contradiction.
zi,j and some vertex vi
zi /∈ ei,j
Finally, devising an ILP formulation, we show that F egal
opt -TIE-BREAKING be-
comes fixed-parameter tractable when parameterized by the combined parameter
"number of manipulators and number of different utility values." This parame-
ter covers situations with few manipulators that have simple utility functions; in
particular, when few voters have 0/1 utility functions. Together with Theorem 1
and Theorem 2, following Theorem 3 shows that neither few manipulators nor few
utility functions make F egal
opt -TB fixed-parameter tractable, but only combining
these two parameters allows us to deal with the problem in FPT time.
Theorem 3. Let udiff denote the number of different utility values and r denote the
number of manipulators. Then, parameterized by r + udiff , F egal
opt -TIE-BREAKING
is fixed-parameter tractable.
Proof. We define the type of any candidate ci to be the size-r vector t = (u1(ci),
u2(ci), . . . , ur(ci)). Let T = {t1, t2, . . . , tT } be the set of all possible types. Nat-
urally, the size of T is upper-bounded by ur
diff . We denote the set of candidates of
20
type ti ∈ T by Ti. Now, the ILP formulation of the problem using exactly T + 1
variables reads as follows. For each type ti ∈ T , we introduce variable xi indi-
cating the number of candidates of type ti in an optimal k-egroup. We use variable
s to represent the minimal value of the total utility achieved by manipulators. We
define the following ILP with the goal to maximize s (indicating the utility gained
by the least satisfied manipulator) subject to:
∀ti ∈ T : xi ≤ Ti,
xi = k,
X
ti∈T
∀ℓ ∈ [r] : X
ti∈T
xi · ti[ℓ] ≥ s.
(1)
(2)
(3)
Constraint set (1) ensures that the solution is achievable with given candidates.
Constraint (2) guarantees a choice of an egroup of size k. The last set of constraints
imposes that s holds at most the minimal value of the total utility gained by manip-
ulators. By a famous result of Lenstra (1983), this ILP formulation with the num-
ber of variables bounded by ur
opt -TIE-BREAKING is fixed-
parameter tractable when parameterized by the combined parameter r + udiff .
diff + 1 yields that F egal
5 Complexity of Coalitional Manipulation
In the previous section, we have seen that breaking ties optimistically or pessimisti-
cally -- an essential subtask to be solved by the manipulators in general -- can be
computationally challenging; in most cases, however, this problem turned out to
be computationally easy. In this section, we move on to our full framework and
analyze the computational difficulty of voting strategically for a coalition of ma-
nipulators. To this end, we formalize our central computational problem. Let R be
a multiwinner voting rule and let F be a multiwinner tie-breaking rule.
21
R-F -eval-COALITIONAL MANIPULATION (R-F -eval-CM)
eval ∈ {util, egal, candegal}
Input:
An election (C, V ), a searched egroup size k < C, r manipu-
lators represented by their utility functions U = {u1, u2, . . . , ur}
such that ∀i∈[r] ui : C → N, and a non-negative, integral evalua-
tion threshold q.
Question: Is there a size-r multiset W of manipulative votes over C such
that k-egroup S ⊂ C wins the election (C, V ∪ W ) under R and
F , and eval(S) ≥ q?
The R-F -eval-CM problem is defined very generally; namely, one can con-
sider any multiwinner voting rule R (in particular, any single-winner voting rule
is a multiwinner voting rule with k = 1). In our paper, however, we focus on
ℓ-Bloc; hence, from now on, we narrow down our analysis of R-F -eval-CM to the
ℓ-Bloc-F -eval-CM problem.
In line with our intention to model optimistic and pessimistic attitudes of ma-
nipulators, we require that the evaluation of an optimistic/pessimistic tie-breaking
rule F matches the manipulator's evaluation. More formally, for every eval ∈
{util, egal, candegal}, we focus on variants of ℓ-Bloc−F−eval−CM where F ∈
{Flex, F eval
pess}.6 We always allow lexicographic tie-breaking because it mod-
els cases where a tie-breaking rule is fixed, known to all voters and, more impor-
tantly, irrelevant of manipulators' utility functions.
opt , F eval
On the way to show our results, we also use a restricted version of ℓ-Bloc-F -
eval-COALITIONAL MANIPULATION that we call ℓ-Bloc-F -eval-COALITIONAL
MANIPULATION with consistent manipulators. In this variant, the input stays the
same, but all manipulators cast exactly the same vote to achieve the objective.
To increase readability, we decided to represent manipulators by their utility
functions. As a consequence, we frequently use, for example, u1 referring to the
manipulator itself, even if we do not care about the values of utility function u1 at
the moment of usage. In the paper, we also stick to the term "voters" meaning the
set V of voters of an input election. We never call manipulators "voters"; however,
we speak about the manipulative votes they cast.
As for the encoding of the input of R-F -eval-CM, we use a standard assump-
6The excluded problem variants might indeed be relevant for situations where a tie-breaking
goal is different to manipulators' goal while utility values represent a somehow "objective" measure
(e.g., utility values represent monetary costs and, although manipulators evaluate egroups in the egal-
itarian way, tie-breaking goal is to minimize the total cost); however such cases are beyond the scope
of this work.
22
tion; namely, that the number of candidates, the number of voters, and the number
of manipulators are polynomially upper-bounded in the size of the input. Anal-
ogously to F eval
bhav-TIE-BREAKING, both the evaluation threshold and the utility
function values are encoded in binary.
5.1 Utilitarian & Candidate-Wise Egalitarian: Manipulation is Tractable
We show that ℓ-Bloc-F -eval-COALITIONAL MANIPULATION can be solved in
polynomial time for any constant ℓ ∈ N, any eval ∈ {util, candegal}, and any
F ∈ {Flex, F eval
pess}. Whereas in general, for n being the input size, our
algorithm requires O(n5) steps, for Bloc (i.e., ℓ = k), we give a better, quadratic-
time algorithm (with respect to n).
opt , F eval
In several proofs in Subsection 5.1 we use the value of a candidate for ma-
nipulators (coalition) and say that a candidate is more valuable or less valuable
than another candidate. Although we cannot directly measure the value of a candi-
date for the whole manipulators' coalition in general, thanks to Observation 1, we
can assume a single non-zero utility function when discussing the utilitarian and
candidate-wise egalitarian variants. Thus, assigning a single value to each candi-
date is justified.
We start with an algorithm solving the general case of ℓ-Bloc-F -eval-COA-
LITIONAL MANIPULATION, eval ∈ {util, candegal}, F ∈ {Flex, F eval
pess}.
The basic idea is to "guess" the lowest final score of a member of a k-egroup
and (assuming some lexicographic order over the candidates) the least preferred
candidate of the k-egroup that obtains the lowest final score. Then, the algorithm
finds an optimal manipulation leading to a k-egroup represented by the guessed
pair. Since there are at most polynomially-many (with respect to the input size)
pairs to be guessed, the described recipe gives a polynomial-time algorithm.
opt , F eval
Theorem 4. Let m denote the number of candidates, n the number of voters, k
the size of a searched egroup, and r the number of manipulators. One can solve
ℓ-Bloc-F -eval-COALITIONAL MANIPULATION in O(k2m2(n + r)) time for any
eval ∈ {util, candegal} and F ∈ {Flex, F eval
opt , F eval
pess}.
Proof. We prove the theorem for the lexicographic tie-breaking rule Flex. This is
sufficient since, using Proposition 1, one can generalize the proof for the cases of
utilitarian and candidate-wise egalitarian variants. The basic idea of our algorithm
is to fix certain parameters of a solution and then to reduce the resulting subprob-
lem to a variant of the KNAPSACK problem with polynomial-sized weights. The
algorithm iterates through all possible value combinations of the following two
parameters:
• the lowest final score z < V ∪ W of any member of the k-egroup and
23
• the candidate c that is the least preferred member of the k-egroup with final
score z with respect to tie-breaking rule Flex.
Having fixed z and c, let C + denote the set of candidates who get at least z + 1
approvals from the non-manipulative voters or who are preferred to c according
to Flex and get exactly z approvals from the non-manipulative voters. Assuming
that the combination of parameter values is correct, all candidates from C + ∪ {c}
must belong to the k-egroup. Let k+ := C +. For sanity, we check whether k+ <
k, that is, whether candidate c can belong to the k-egroup if the candidate obtains
final score z. We discard the corresponding combination of solution parameter
values if the check fails. Next, we ensure that c obtains the final score exactly z. If
c receives less than z − r or more than z approvals from non-manipulative voters,
then we discard this combination of solution parameter values. Otherwise, let s :=
z − scoreV (c) denote number of additional approvals candidate c needs in order to
get final score z. Let k∗ := k − k+ − 1 be the number of remaining (not yet fixed)
members of the k-egroup. Let s∗ := r · ℓ − s be the number of approvals to be
distributed to candidates in C \ {c}.
Now, the manipulators have to influence further k∗ candidates to join the k-
egroup (so far only consisting of C + ∪ {c}) and distribute exactly s∗ approvals in
total to candidates in C \ {c} but at most r approvals per candidate. To this end,
let C ∗ denote the set of candidates which can possibly join the k-egroup. For each
candidate c ∈ C \ (C + ∪ {c}) it holds that c ∈ C ∗ if and only if
1. z − r ≤ scoreV (c) ≤ z − 1 if c is preferred to c with respect to Flex, or
2. z − r + 1 ≤ scoreV (c) ≤ z if c is preferred to c with respect to Flex.
A straightforward idea is to select the k∗ elements from C ∗ which have the highest
values (that is, utility) for the coalition. However, there can be two issues: First, s∗
might be too small; that is, there are too few approvals to ensure that each of the
k∗ best-valued candidates gets the final score at least z (resp. at least z+1). Second,
s∗ might be too large; that is, there are too many approvals to be distributed so that
there is no way to do this without causing unwanted candidates to get a final score
of at least z (resp. at least z + 1).
Fortunately, we can easily detect these cases and deal with them efficiently. In
the former scenario we reduce the remaining problem to an instance of EXACT k-
ITEM KNAPSACK -- the problem in which, for a given set of items, their values and
weights, and a knapsack capacity, we search for k items that maximize the overall
value and do not exceed the knapsack capacity. In the latter case, we show that we
can discard the corresponding combination of solution parameters.
First, if s∗ ≤ r · k∗, then one can certainly distribute all s∗ approvals (e.g., to
the k∗ candidates that will finally join the k-egroup). Of course, it could still be the
24
case that there are too few approvals available to push the desired candidates into
the k-egroup in a greedy manner. To solve this problem, we build an EXACT k-
ITEM KNAPSACK instance where each candidate in C ∗ is mapped to an item. We
set the weight of each c∗ ∈ C ∗ to z − scoreV (c∗) if c∗ is preferred to c with respect
to Flex and otherwise to (z + 1) − scoreV (c∗). We set the value of each c∗ ∈ C ∗
to be equal to the utility that candidate c∗ contributes to the manipulators. Now,
an optimal solution (given the combinations of parameter values is correct) must
select exactly k∗ elements from C ∗ such that the total weight is at most s∗. This
corresponds to EXACT k-ITEM KNAPSACK if we set our knapsack capacity to s∗.
Furthermore, finding any such set with maximum total value leads to an optimal
solution. Even if the final total weight s′ of the chosen elements is smaller than s∗,
we can transfer the EXACT k-ITEM KNAPSACK solution to the correct solution of
our problem. The total weight corresponds to the number of approvals used. Thus,
with the EXACT k-ITEM KNAPSACK solution we spend s′ approvals and, because
of the monotonicity of ℓ-Bloc together with the assumption that s∗ ≤ r · k∗, we use
s∗ − s′ approvals to approve the chosen candidates even more.
Second, if s∗ > r·k∗, then one can certainly ensure for any set of k∗ candidates
from C ∗ the final score at least z (resp. at least z + 1). In many cases, it will not
be a problem to distribute the approvals; for example, one can safely spend up
to r approvals for each candidate from C \ C ∗, that is, to candidates that have no
chance to get enough points to join the k-egroup or to candidates which are already
fixed to be in the k-egroup. Furthermore, each candidate from C ∗ can be safely
approved z − scoreV (c∗) − 1 times (resp. z − scoreV (c∗) times) without reaching
final score z (resp. z+1). We denote by s+ the total number of approvals which can
be safely distributed to candidates in C \ {c} without causing one of the candidates
from C ∗ to reach score at least z (resp. at least z+1). If s∗ ≤ s++r·k∗ (note that we
also assume s∗ > r · k∗), then we can greedily push the k∗ most-valued candidates
from C ∗ into the k-egroup (spending r · k∗ approvals) and then safely distribute the
remaining approvals within C \ {c} as discussed. If s∗ > s+ + r · k∗, then there
is no possibility of distributing approvals in a way that c is part of the k-egroup.
Towards a contradiction let us assume that c is part of the k-egroup obtained after
distributing s+ + r · k∗ + 1 approvals. This means that we spend all possible
s+ approvals so that c is not beaten and r · k∗ approvals to push k∗ candidates to
the winning k-egroup. Giving one more approval to some candidate c′ from C ∗
that is not yet in the k-egroup, by definition of C ∗ and s+, means that the score
of c′ is enough to push c out of the final k-egroup; a contradiction. Consequently,
for the case of s∗ > s+ + r · k∗, we discard the corresponding combination of
solution parameters.
As for the running time, the first step is sorting the candidates according to their
values in O(m(r + log(m))) time. Then let us consider the running time of two
25
cases s∗ ≤ r · k∗ and s∗ > r · k∗ separately. In the former case, we solve EXACT
k-ITEM KNAPSACK in O(k2mr) time by using dynamic programming based on
analyzing all possible total weights of the selected items until the final value is
reached (Kellerer et al., 2004, Chapter 9.7.3)7 (note that the maximum possible
total weight is upper-bounded by kr). If s∗ > r · k∗, then we approve at most
m candidates which gives the running time O(m). Thus, we can conclude that the
running time of the discussed cases is O(k2mr). Additionally, there are at most
n + r values of z and at most m values of c. Summarizing, we get the running time
O(k2m2(n + r)).
Next, we show that, actually, Bloc-F -eval-CM (i.e., a special case of ℓ-Bloc-
F -eval-CM where ℓ = k) can be solved in quadratic-time, that is, in practice, much
faster than the general variant of the problem. On our way to present this results,
we first give an algorithm for ℓ-Bloc-F -eval-CM with consistent manipulators.
Then, we argue that it also solves Bloc-F -eval-CM. The algorithm "guesses" the
minimum score among all members of the winning egroup and then carefully (with
respect to the tie-breaking method) selects the best candidates that can reach this
score.
Proposition 3. Let m denote the number of candidates, n denote the number of
voters, and r denote the number of manipulators. Then one can solve ℓ-Bloc-F -
eval-COALITIONAL MANIPULATION with consistent manipulators in O(m(m +
r + n)) time for any eval ∈ {util, candegal} and F ∈ {Flex, F eval
opt , F eval
pess}.
Proof. Consider an instance of ℓ-Bloc-Flex-eval-CM with consistent manipulators
with an election E = (C, V ) where C is a candidate set and V is a multiset of non-
manipulative votes, r manipulators, an egroup size k, and a lexicographic order >F
used by Flex to break ties. In essence, we introduce a constrained solution form
called a canonical solution and argue that it is sufficient to analyze only this type
of solutions. Then we provide an algorithm that efficiently seeks for an optimal
canonical solution.
At the beginning, we observe that when manipulators vote consistently, then
we can arrange the top ℓ candidates of a manipulative vote in any order. Hence, the
solution to our problem is a size-ℓ subset (instead of an order) of candidates which
we call a set of supported candidates; we call each member of this set a supported
candidate.
Strength order of the candidates. Additionally, we introduce a new order >S
of the candidates. It sorts them descendingly with respect to the score they receive
7In fact, Kellerer et al.
(2004) use dynamic programming based on all possible total values
of items. However, one can exchange all possible total values of items with all possible total weights
of items and thus obtain an algorithm with running time polynomial in the maximum weight of items.
26
from voters and, as a second criterion, according to the position in >F . Intuitively,
the easier it is for some candidate to be a part of a winning k-egroup, the higher is
the candidate's position in >S . As a consequence, we state Claim 1.
Claim 1. Let us fix an instance of ℓ-Bloc-Flex-eval-CM with consistent manipu-
lators and a solution X which leads to a winning k-egroup S. For every supported
(resp. unsupported) candidate c, the following holds:
1. If c is part of the winning k-egroup, then every supported (resp. unsupported)
predecessor of c, according to >S , belongs to S.
2. If c is not part of the winning k-egroup, then every supported (resp. unsup-
ported) successor of c, according to >S , does not belong to S.
Proof. Fix an instance of ℓ-Bloc-Flex-eval-CM with consistent manipulators, a
solution X, and a winning k-egroup S. Let us consider the respective order >S
over the candidates in the instance.
We first show that statement 1 regarding supported candidates holds. Accord-
ing to the statement, fix some supported candidate c ∈ S and let p be a predecessor
of c (according to >S ). Towards a contradiction, let us assume that p /∈ S. This
implies that either (i) the score of p is smaller than the score of c or (ii) their scores
are the same but c >F p. Let us focus on case (i). Both considered candidates
are supported by all manipulators (note that manipulators vote consistently). Thus,
as a consequence of p >S c, we have that the score of p is at least as high as the
score of c; a contradiction. Next, consider case (ii), where p and c have the same
scores. Consequently, the mutual order of c and p in >S is the same as their order
in >F (in other words, the order of c and p in >S does not depend on scores of c
and p because those must be the same prior to any manipulation). Since c >F p, it
follows that, by definition of >S , it must hold that c >S p; a contradiction again.
Eventually, we obtain that p has to be part of S which completes the argument.
An analogous approach leads to proofs for the remaining three cases stated in
the theorem.
Claim 1 justifies thinking about >S as a "strength order"; hence, in the proof
we use the terms stronger and weaker candidate. Using Claim 1, we can fix some
candidate c as the weakest in the winning k-egroup and then infer candidates that
have to be and that cannot be part of this k-egroup. To formalize this idea, we
introduce the concept of a canonical solution.
Canonical solutions. Assuming the case where k ≤ ℓ, we call a solution X
leading to a winning k-egroup S canonical if all candidates of the winning egroup
are supported; that is, S ⊆ X. In the opposite case, k > ℓ, solution X is canonical
27
if X ⊂ S and X is a set of the ℓ weakest candidates in S. For the latter case, the
formulation describes the solution which favors supporting weaker candidates first
and ensures that no approval is given to a candidate outside the winning k-egroup.
Canonical solutions are achievable from every solution without changing the
outcome. Observe that one cannot prevent a candidate from winning by support-
ing the candidate more because this only increases the candidate's score. Con-
sequently, we can always transfer approvals to all candidates from the winning
k-egroup. For the case of k > ℓ, we then have to rearrange the approvals in such a
way that only the weakest members of the k-egroup are supported. However, such
a rearrangement cannot change the outcome because, according to Claim 1, we can
transfer an approval from some stronger candidate c to weaker c′ keeping both of
them in the winning k-egroup.
Dropped and kept candidates. Observe that for every solution (including
canonical solutions), we can always find the strongest candidate who is not part of
the winning egroup. We call this candidate the dropped candidate. Note that we
use the strength order in the definition of the dropped candidate; this order does not
take manipulative votes into account. Moreover, without loss of generality, we can
assume that the dropped candidate is not a supported candidate. This is because if
the dropped candidate is not in the winning k-egroup even if supported, then we
can support any other candidate outside of the winning k-egroup without changing
the winning k-egroup (see Claim 1). There always exists some candidate to whom
we can transfer our support because ℓ < m. Naturally, by definition of the dropped
candidate, all candidates stronger than the dropped candidate are members of the
winning k-egroup. We call these candidates kept candidates.
High-level description of the algorithm. The algorithm solving ℓ-Bloc-Flex-
eval-CM with consistent manipulators iteratively looks for an optimal canonical
solution for every possible (non-negative) number t of kept candidates (alterna-
tively the algorithm checks all feasible possibilities of choosing the dropped can-
didate). Then, the algorithm compares all solutions and picks one that is resulting
in an egroup liked the most by the manipulators. Observe that k − ℓ ≤ t ≤ k.
The upper bound k is the consequence of the fact that each kept candidate is (by
definition) in the winning k-egroup. Since all candidates except for kept candidates
have to be supported to be part of the winning egroup, we need at least k − ℓ kept
candidates, in order to be able to complete the k-egroup.
Running time. To analyze the running time of the algorithm described in the
previous paragraph, several steps need to be considered. At the beginning we have
to compute values of candidates and then sort the candidates with respect to their
value. This step runs in O(rm + m log m) time. Similarly, computing >S takes
O(ℓn + m log m) time. Having both orders, Procedure 1 (described in detail later
28
in this proof) needs O(m) to find an optimal canonical solution for some fixed
number t of kept candidates. Finally, we have at most ℓ + 1 possible values of t.
Summing the times up, together with the fact that ℓ < m, we obtain a running time
O(m(m + r + n)).
What remains to be done. Procedure 1 describes how to look for an optimal
canonical solution for a fixed number t of kept candidates. First, partition the
candidate set in the following way. By C* we denote the kept candidates (which
are the top t candidates according to >S ). Consequently, the (t + 1)-st strongest
candidate is the dropped candidate; say c∗. For every value of t, the corresponding
dropped candidate, by definition, is not allowed to be part of the winning egroup.
Let
D = {C* ∪{c∗} 6∋ c (scoreV (c) + r > scoreV (c∗))∨
(scoreV (c) + r = scoreV (c∗) ∧ c >F c∗)}
be the set of distinguished candidates. Each distinguished candidate, if supported,
is preferred over c∗ to be selected into the winning k-egroup. Consequently, the
distinguished candidates are all candidates who can potentially be part of the win-
ning k-egroup. We remark that to fulfill our assumption that the dropped candidate
is not part of a winning egroup, it is obligatory to support at least k − t distin-
guished candidates. Note that C* ∪ {c∗} ∪ D is not necessarily equal to C. The
remaining candidates cannot be part of the winning k-egroup under any circum-
stances assuming t kept candidates. Also, set D might consist of less than k − t
required candidates (which is the case when there are too few candidates that, af-
ter supported, would outperform c∗).
If such a situation emerges, we skip the
respective value of t. Making use of the described division into c∗, D, and C*,
Procedure 1 incrementally builds set X of supported candidates associated with an
optimal solution until all possible approvals are used. Observe, that since k < C
and ℓ < C, it is guaranteed that for t = k Procedure 1 will return a feasible solu-
tion for t; in fact, this solution will always result in a winning egroup consisting of
all t kept candidates (irrespective of D).
Detailed description of the algorithm. Before studying Procedure 1 in detail,
consider Figure 1 illustrating the procedure on example data. In line 1, the proce-
dure builds set X of supported candidates using the k − t best valued distinguished
candidates. Since only the distinguished candidates might be a part of the winning
k-egroup besides the kept candidates, there is no better outcome achievable. Then,
in line 2, the remaining approvals, if they exist, are used to support kept candidates.
This operation does not change the resulting k-egroup. Then Procedure 1 checks
whether all ℓ approvals were used; that is, whether ℓ = X. If not, then there are
29
Procedure 1: A procedure of finding an optimal set of supported candidates.
Input: Election E = (C, V ); number ℓ of approvals in ℓ-Bloc rule; size k of
the winning k-egroup; a partition of C into kept candidates C* (such
that C* = t and k − ℓ ≤ t ≤ k), a dropped candidate c∗, and
distinguished candidates D (such that D ≥ k − t).
Output: Optimal supported candidates set X
1 X ←− {the k − t most valuable candidates from D}
2 X ←− X∪ {min{t, ℓ − X} arbitrary candidates from C*}
3 if ℓ 6= X then
4
A ←− {the ℓ − X weakest candidates from C \ X}
B ←− {top k strongest candidates from X ∪ A}
p ←− B \ X
X ←− X ∪ {the ℓ − X − p weakest candidates from C \ X}
X ←− X ∪ {the p most valuable candidates from D \ X}
5
6
7
8
9 end
10 return X
exactly ℓ − X remaining approvals to use. Note that at this stage set X contains
k supported candidates who correspond to the best possible k-egroup, however,
without spending all approvals. Let us call this k-egroup S. It is possible that there
is no way to spend the remaining ℓ − X approvals without changing the winning
k-egroup S. Then substitutions of candidates occur. The new candidates in the
k-egroup can be only those that are distinguished and so far unsupported whereas
the exchanged ones can be only so far supported distinguished candidates. This
means that each substitution lowers the overall value of the winning k-egroup. So,
the best what can be achieved is to find the minimal number of substitutions and
then pick the most valuable remaining candidates from D to be substituted. The
minimal number of substitutions can be found by analyzing how many candidates
would be exchanged in the winning k-egroup if the weakest ℓ − X previously
unsupported candidates were supported. The procedure makes such a simulation
and computes the number p of necessary substitutions, in lines 4-6. Supporting the
ℓ − X − p weakest unsupported candidates and then the p most valuable so far
unsupported distinguished candidates gives the optimal k-egroup for t kept candi-
dates (when all approvals are spent). Note that the number ℓ of approvals is strictly
lower than the number of candidates, so one always avoids supporting c∗.
The algorithm we presented can be applied also for pessimistic and optimistic
evaluation because of the possibility of simulating these evaluations by a lexico-
30
e
u
l
a
v
⋆
⋆
e
u
l
a
v
⋆
⋆
strength
strength
(a) The division of the candidates into the
kept candidates (dotted), the dropped can-
didate (filled), the distinguished candidates
(vertical lines), and the others who cannot
be a part of the winning egroup.
(b) An illustration of lines 1-2 of Proce-
dure 1. The double-edged candidates form
set X. The starred candidates would form
the winning k-egroup if the double-edged
candidates were supported.
⋆
⋆
⋆
e
u
l
a
v
⋆
⋆
⋆
⋆
e
u
l
a
v
⋆
⋆
strength
strength
(c) Supporting the weakest possible candi-
dates to use all approvals. The winning
egroup changes. The winners are marked
with stars while the candidate who is no
more in the winning egroup is crossed out.
Such a simulation is done in lines 4-6. As
a result, the minimum number of substitu-
tions in the k-egroup is computed.
(d) An illustration of the solution of the
considered case computed by Procedure 1
in lines 7 to 8. One candidate from the
k-egroup presented in Figure 1b has to be
substituted; naturally, it is optimal to pick
the most valuable possible candidate as a
replacement for the substituted one. Sup-
ported candidates are double-edged and the
winning k-egroup is starred.
Figure 1: An illustrative example of a run of Procedure 1 for t = 2, nine candi-
dates, 7-Bloc, and 4-egroup. The horizontal position indicates the strength of a
candidate and the vertical position indicates the value of a candidate. Since the
number r of manipulators determines only the set of distinguished candidates, we
do not specify r explicitly. We indicate the set of distinguished candidates instead.
Subfigures 1a to 1d step by step present the execution of Procedure 1 on the way
to find an optimal 4-egroup.
31
graphic order in time O(m(r + log(m))) (see Proposition 1).
For Bloc, we will show that manipulators can always vote identically to achieve
an optimal k-egroup. In a nutshell, for every egroup the manipulators can only
increase the scores of its members by voting exactly for them. This fact leads to
the next corollary.
Corollary 2. Let m denote the number of candidates, n denote the number of vot-
ers, and r denote the number of manipulators. One can solve Bloc-F -eval-COALI-
TIONAL MANIPULATION in O(m(m+r+n)) time for any eval ∈ {util, candegal}
and F ∈ {Flex, F eval
opt , F eval
pess}.
Proof. We show that for Bloc-F -eval-COALITIONAL MANIPULATION the ma-
nipulators have no incentive to deviate from one optimal profile (i.e., they vote in
the same manner). Let us fix an optimal k-egroup S. If there exists a candidate
c ∈ S which is not approved by some manipulator u∗, then there exists also some
candidate c′ /∈ S which is approved by u∗ (u∗ approves at most k − 1 candidates
from S). Observe that in the Bloc voting rule by shifting a candidate up in a pref-
erence order we only increase the candidate's score; as a result, we cannot prevent
the candidate from winning by doing such a shift. Using this observation, we can
exchange candidate c with candidate c′ in the preference order of u∗ without pre-
venting c from winning. We repeat exchanging candidates until all manipulators
approve only candidates from S. Then we obtain an optimal vote by fixing a prefer-
ence order over those candidates arbitrarily (there might be more than one optimal
vote but all of them place only candidates from set S at the first k places). Con-
cluding, we can use the algorithm from Proposition 3 which works in the given
time.
5.2 Egalitarian: Hard Even for Simple Tie-Breaking
In Subsection 4.2, we showed that already breaking ties might be computationally
intractable. These intractability results only hold with respect to the egalitarian
evaluation and optimistic manipulators. We now show that this intractability trans-
fers to coalitional manipulation for any tie-breaking rule and the egalitarian evalua-
tion. This includes the pessimistic egalitarian case which we consider to be highly
relevant as it naturally models searching for a "safe" voting strategy.
Proposition 4. For any tie-breaking rule F , there is a polynomial-time many-one
reduction from F egal
opt -TIE-BREAKING to ℓ-Bloc-F -egal-COALITIONAL MANIPU-
LATION.
32
Proof. We reduce an instance of F egal
opt -TIE-BREAKING to ℓ-Bloc-F -egal-COALI-
TIONAL MANIPULATION; however, before we describe the actual reduction, we
present a useful observation concerning F egal
opt -TIE-BREAKING in the next para-
graph.
Let us fix an instance I of F egal
opt -TIE-BREAKING with a confirmed set C +,
a pending set P , a size k of an egroup, a threshold q, and a set of manipulators
represented by a family U of utility functions. We can construct a new equivalent
instance I ′ of F egal
opt -TIE-BREAKING with a larger set of manipulators' utility func-
tions U ′ ⊇ U . The construction is a polynomial-time many-one reduction which
proves that we can "pump" the number of manipulators arbitrarily for instance I.
To add a manipulator, it is enough to set to q the utility that the manipulator gives to
every candidate. Naturally, such a manipulator cannot have the total utility smaller
than q, so the correct solution for I is also correct for I ′. Contrarily, when there
is no solution for I, it means that for every possible k-egroup S′ there is some
manipulator ¯u such that egal¯u(S′) < q. Consequently, one cannot find a solution
for I ′ as well, because the set of possible k-egroups and their values of egalitarian
utility do not change.
Now we can phrase our reduction from F egal
opt -TIE-BREAKING to ℓ-Bloc-F -
egal-COALITIONAL MANIPULATION. Let us fix an instance I of F egal
opt -TIE-
BREAKING with a confirmed set C +, a pending set P , a size k of an egroup, a
threshold q, and a set U of r utility functions. Because of the observation about
"pumping" instances of F egal
opt -TIE-BREAKING, we can assume, without loss of
generality, that ℓ · r ≥ k − C + holds. In the constructed instance of ℓ-Bloc-F -
egal-CM equivalent to I, we build an election that yields sets P and C + and aim
at an egroup of size k. However, it is likely that we need to add a set of dummy
candidates that we denote by D. It is important to ensure that the dummy candi-
dates cannot be the winners of the constructed election. To do so, we keep the score
of each dummy candidate to be at most 1, the score of each pending candidate to
be r + 2, and the score of each confirmed candidate to be at least 2r + 3. The
construction starts from ensuring the scores of the confirmed candidates. Observe,
that in this step we add at most (2r + 3) · C + voters (in case ℓ = 1). If ℓ > C +,
then we have to add some dummy candidates in this step. We can upper-bound the
number of the added dummy candidates by ((2r + 3) · C +)(ℓ − 1) (this bound
is not tight). Analogously, we add new voters such that each pending candidate
has score exactly r + 2. At this step we have the election where we are able to
spend ℓ · r ≥ k − C + approvals. We can select every possible subset of pending
candidates to form the winning k-egroup by approving candidates in this subset
exactly once. However, to be sure that we are able to distribute all approvals such
that there is no tie, we ensure that the remaining (ℓ · r) − (k − C +) approvals can
33
be distributed to some candidates without changing the outcome. To achieve this
goal we add exactly (ℓ · r) − (k − C +) dummy candidates with score 0. We set
the evaluation threshold of the newly constructed instance to q.
By our construction, we are always able to approve enough pending candidates
to form a k-egroup without considering ties, and we cannot make a dummy can-
didate a winner under any circumstances. Thus, if F egal
opt -TIE-BREAKING has a
solution S, then we approve every candidate c ∈ S such that c was in the pend-
ing set P before, and we obtain a solution to the reduced instance. In the oppo-
site case, if there is no such a k-egroup whose egalitarian utility value is at least
q, then the corresponding instance of ℓ-Bloc-F -egal-COALITIONAL MANIPULA-
TION also has no solution since the possible k-egroups are exactly the same. The
reduction runs in polynomial time.
Observe that the reduction proving Proposition 4 does not change the egroup
size k. Additionally, the increase of the number of manipulators in resulting in-
stances is polynomially bounded in the egroup size k of input instances. This is
due to the fact that even if we need to "pump" an initial instance to achieve ℓ · r ≥
m ≤ k manipulators. Thus, together with
k − C +, then we add at most l k−C +
Theorem 1 and Theorem 2, Proposition 4 leads to the following corollary.
ℓ
Corollary 3. Let F be an arbitrary tie-breaking rule. Then, ℓ-Bloc-F -egal-CO-
ALITIONAL MANIPULATION is NP-hard. Let r denote the number of manipula-
tors, q denote the evaluation threshold and k denote the size of an egroup. Then,
parameterized by r + k, ℓ-Bloc-F -egal-CM is W[1]-hard. Parameterized by k,
ℓ-Bloc-F -egal-CM is W[2]-hard even if q = 1 and every manipulator only gives
either utility one or zero to each candidate.
Finally, by using ideas from Theorem 4 and an adaptation of the ILP from
Theorem 3 as a subroutine, we show that, for the combined parameter "the num-
ber of manipulators and the number of different utility values", fixed-parameter
tractability of F egal
opt -TIE-BREAKING transfers to coalitional manipulation for both
optimistic and pessimistic tie-breaking.
Theorem 5. Let r denote the number of manipulators and udiff denote the number
of different utility values. Parameterized by r + udiff , ℓ-Bloc-F -egal-COALITIO-
NAL MANIPULATION with F ∈ {F egal
opt } is fixed-parameter tractable.
pess, F egal
Proof. In a nutshell, we divide ℓ-Bloc-F egal
opt -egal-CM
into subproblems solvable in FPT time with respect to the combined parameter
"number of manipulators and number of different utility values." We show that
solving polynomially many subproblems is enough to solve the problems.
pess-egal-CM and ℓ-Bloc-F egal
34
The main idea. We split the proof into two parts. In the first part, we define
subproblems and show how to find a solution assuming that the subproblems are
solvable in FPT time with respect to the parameter. In the second part, we show
that, indeed, the subproblems are fixed-parameter tractable using their ILP formu-
lations. The inputs for ℓ-Bloc-F egal
opt -egal-CM are the
same, so let us consider an arbitrary input with an election E = (C, V ) where
V = n, C = m, a size k of an excellence-group, and r manipulators repre-
sented by a set U = {u1, u2, . . . , ur} of their utility functions. Let udiff be the
number of different utility values.
pess-egal-CM and ℓ-Bloc-F egal
An election resulting from a manipulation and a corresponding k-egroup emerg-
ing from the manipulation can be described by three non-negative integer parame-
ters:
1. the lowest final score z of any member of the k-egroup;
2. the number p of promoted candidates from the k-egroup with a score higher
than z that, at the same time, have score at most z without taking manipula-
tive votes into consideration;
3. the number b of border candidates with score z.
Observe that if as a result of a manipulation the lowest final score of members
in a final k-egroup is z, then the promoted candidates are part of the k-egroup
regardless of the tie-breaking method used. For border candidates, however, it
might be necessary to run the tie-breaking rule to determine the k-egroup. In other
words, border candidates become pending candidates unless all of them are part of
the k-egroup. By definition, no candidate scoring lower than the border candidates
is a member of the k-egroup; thus, the term border candidates. From now on, we
refer to the election situation characterized by parameters z, p, b as a (input) state.
Additionally, we call a set of manipulators' votes a manipulation.
Part 1: High-level description of the algorithm. For now, we assume that
there is a procedure P which runs in FPT time with respect to the combined pa-
rameter "number of manipulators and number of different utility values." Proce-
dure P, takes values z, p, b and an instance of the problem, and finds a manip-
ulation which leads to a k-egroup maximizing the egalitarian utility under either
egalitarian optimistic or egalitarian pessimistic tie-breaking with respect to the in-
put state. If such a manipulation does not exist, then procedure P returns "no."
The algorithm solving ℓ-Bloc-F egal
opt -egal-CM runs P
for all possible combinations of values z, p, and b. Eventually, it chooses the best
manipulation returned by P or returns "no" if P always returned so. Since the
value of z is at most V + W and b together with p are both upper-bounded by the
pess-egal-CM and ℓ-Bloc-F egal
35
number of candidates, we run P at most (n + r)m2 times. Because the input size
grows polynomially with respect to the growth of values r, m, and n, the overall
algorithm runs in FPT time with respect to the combined parameter "number of
manipulators and number of different utility values."
Part 2: Basics and preprocessing for the ILP. To complete the proof we
describe procedure P used by the above algorithm. In short, the procedure builds
and solves an ILP program that finds a manipulation leading to the state described
by the input values. Before we describe the procedure in details, we start with
some notation. Fix some values of z, b, p and some election E = (C, V ) that
altogether form the input of P. For each candidate c ∈ C, let a size-r vector t =
(u1(c), u2(c), . . . , ur(c)), referred to as a type vector, define the type of c. We
denote the set of all possible type vectors by T = {t1, t2, . . . , tT }. Observe that
T ≤ ur
diff . With each type vector ti, i ∈ [T ], we associate a set Ti containing
only candidates of type ti. We also distinguish the candidates with respect to their
initial score compared to z. A candidate of type ti ∈ T , i ∈ T , with score
z − j, j ∈ [r] ∪ {0}, belongs to group Gj
i . We denote all candidates with a score
(excluding manipulative votes) higher than z by C +, whereas by C − we denote the
candidates with a score (excluding manipulative votes) strictly lower than z − r.
For each type ti ∈ T of a candidate, we define function obl(ti) = C + ∩ Ti, which
gives the number of candidates of type ti that are obligatory part of the winning
k-egroup.
At the beginning, procedure P tests whether the input values z, b, and p repre-
sent a correct state. From the fact that there has to be at least one candidate with
score z, we get the upper bound k − C + − 1 for value p. To have enough can-
didates to complete the k-egroup, we need at least k − C + − p candidates with
score z after the manipulation which gives b ≥ k − C + − p. Finally, the state is
incorrect if the corresponding set C + contains k or more candidates. If the input
values are incorrect, then P returns "no." Otherwise, P continues with building
a corresponding ILP program. We give two separate ILP programs -- one for the
optimistic egalitarian tie-breaking and the other one for the pessimistic egalitarian
tie-breaking. Both programs consist of two parts. The first part models all possible
manipulations leading to the state described by values z, p, and b. The second one
is responsible for selecting the best k-egroup assuming the particular tie-breaking
and considering all possible manipulations according to the first part. Although the
whole programs are different from each other, the first parts stay the same. Thus,
we postpone distinguishing between the programs until we describe the second
parts. For the sake of readability, we present the ILP programs step by step.
ILP: Common part. For each group Gj
i , i ∈ [T ], j ∈ [r] ∪ {0}, we in-
indicating the numbers of, respectively, border and
troduce variables xj
i and xj+
i
36
promoted candidates from group Gj
i . Additionally, we introduce variables o and ¯o.
The former represents the number of approvals used to get the obligatory numbers
of border and promoted candidates. The latter indicates the number of approvals
which are to be spent without changing the final k-egroup (thus, in some sense
a complement of the obligatory approvals) resulting from the manipulation (e.g.,
approving candidates in C +, who are part of the winning k-egroup anyway, cannot
change the outcome). We begin our ILP program with ensuring that the values of
i and xj+
xj
are feasible:
i
∀ti ∈ T , j ∈ [r] ∪ {0} : xj+
i + xj
xj+
i = p,
X
i ≤ Gj
i ,
ti∈T ,j∈[r]∪{0}
X
ti∈T ,j∈[r]∪{0}
xj
i = b,
∀ti ∈ T : x0+
∀ti ∈ T : xr+
i + x0
i = 0.
i = G0
i ,
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
The expressions ensure that exactly p candidates are selected to be promoted (5),
exactly b candidates are selected to be border ones (6), and that, for every group,
the sum of border and promoted candidates is not greater that the cardinality of
the group (4). The last two formulae ensure that candidates who have score z are
either promoted or border candidates (7) and that candidates with initial score z − r
cannot be promoted (i.e., get a score higher than z) (8). Next, we add the constraints
concerning the number of approvals we need to use to perform the manipulation
described by all variables xj
. We start with ensuring that the manipulation
does not exceed the number of possible approvals. As mentioned earlier, we store
the number of required approvals using variable o.
i and xj+
i
(cid:16)xj
i · j + xj+
i
· (j + 1)(cid:17) ,
o = X
ti∈T , j∈[r]∪{0}
o ≤ ℓr.
Then, we model spending the ¯o remaining votes (if any) to use all approvals.
¯o ≤ r(C − ∪ C +) + X
ti∈T
X
j∈[r]
(cid:16)Gj
i − xj
i − xj+
i (cid:17) (j − 1)
(cid:16)xj+
i
· (r − j − 1)(cid:17) ,
+ X
ti∈T ,j∈[r]
¯o + o = ℓr.
37
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
The upper bound on the number of votes one can spend without changing the out-
come presented in equation (11) consists of three summands. The first one indi-
cates the number of approvals which can be spent for candidates whose initial score
was either too high or too low to make a difference in the outcome of the election
resulting from the manipulation. The second summand counts the approvals we
can spend for potential promoted and border candidates that eventually are not part
of the winning k-egroup; we can give them less approvals than are needed to make
them border candidates. The last summand represents the number of additional ap-
provals that we can spend on the promoted candidates to reach the maximum of r
approvals per candidate. This completes the first part of the ILP program in which
we modeled the possible variants of promoted and border candidates for the fixed
state (z, b, p).
ILP extension for optimistic egalitarian tie-breaking. In the second part, we
find the final k-egroup by completing it with the border candidates according to the
particular tie-breaking mechanism. Let us first focus on the case of the optimistic
egalitarian tie-breaking. We introduce constraints allowing us to maximize the total
egalitarian utility value of the final egroup; namely, for each group Gj
i , i ∈ [T ],
j ∈ [r] ∪ {0}, we add a non-negative, integral variable xj•
indicating the number
i
of border candidates of the given group chosen to be in the final k-egroup. The
following constraints ensure that we select exactly k − C + − p border candidates
to complete the winning egroup and that, for each group Gj
i , we do not select more
candidates than available.
X
ti∈T , j∈[r]∪{0}
xj•
i = k − C + − p,
∀ti ∈ T , j ∈ [r] ∪ {0} : xj•
i ≤ xj
i .
(13)
(14)
To complete the description of the ILP, we add the final expression defining the
egalitarian utility s of the final k-excellence-group. The goal of the ILP program is
to maximize s.
∀q ∈ [r] : X
ti∈T , j∈[r]∪{0}
ti[q] · (xj+
i + xj•
i ) + X
ti∈T
ti[q] · obl(ti) ≥ s.
(15)
Since the goal is to maximize s, our program simulates the egalitarian optimistic
tie-breaking.
ILP extension for pessimistic egalitarian tie-breaking.
To solve a sub-
problem for the case of pessimistic egalitarian tie-breaking, we need a different ap-
proach. We start with an additional notation. For each type of candidate ti ∈ T , let
bi = Pj∈[r]∪{0} xj
i denote the number of border candidates of this type. For each
38
i , we define a binary variable used[dq
type ti ∈ T and manipulator uq, q ∈ [r], we introduce a new integer variable dq
i .
Its value corresponds to the number of border candidates of type ti who are part
of the worst possible winning k-egroup according to manipulator's uq preferences;
we call these candidates the designated candidates of type ti of manipulator uq.
For each variable dq
i ] which has value one
if at least one candidate of type ti is a designated candidate of manipulator uq.
Similarly, we define fullyused[dq
i ] to indicate that all candidates of type ti are des-
ignated by manipulator uq. To give a program which solves the case of pessimistic
egalitarian tie-breaking, we copy the first part of the previous ILP program (ex-
pressions from (4) to (12)) and add new constraints. First of all, we ensure that
each manipulator designates not more than the number of available border candi-
dates from each type and that every manipulator designates exactly k − p − C +
candidates.
∀ti ∈ T , q ∈ [r] : 0 ≤ dq
i ≤ bi,
dq
i = k − p − C +.
∀q ∈ [r] : X
ti∈T
(16)
(17)
The following forces the semantics of the variables used; that is, a variable used[dq
i ],
i ∈ [T ], q ∈ [r], has value one if and only if variable dq
i is at least one.
∀ti ∈ T , q ∈ [r] : used[dq
∀ti ∈ T , q ∈ [r] : used[dq
i ] ≤ dq
i ,
i ]n ≥ dq
i .
(18)
(19)
Similarly, for the variables fullyused, we ensure that fullyused[dq
i ], i ∈ [T ],
q ∈ [r], is one if and only if manipulator uq designates all available candidates of
type ti.
∀ti ∈ T , q ∈ [r] : fullyused[dq
∀ti ∈ T , q ∈ [r] : bi − dq
i ] ≥ 1 − (bi − dq
i ),
i ≤ n(1 − fullyused[dq
i ]).
(20)
(21)
Since our task is to perform pessimistic tie-breaking, we have to ensure that the des-
ignated candidates for each manipulator are the candidates whom the manipulator
gives the least utility. We impose it by forcing that the more valuable candidates
(for a particular manipulator) are used only when all candidates of all less valuable
types (for the manipulator) are used (i.e., they are fully used). To achieve this we
make use of the used and fullyused variables in the following constraint.
∀q ∈ [r] ∪ {0}∀ti, ti′ ∈ T : ti[q] > ti′[q] : used[dq
i ] ≤ fullyused[dq
i′].
(22)
Finally, we give the last expression where s represents the pessimistic egalitarian
k-egroup's utility which our ILP program wants to maximize:
39
∀q ∈ [r] : X
ti∈T
(dq
i + obl(ti)) · ti[q] ≥ s.
(23)
The ILP programs, for both tie-breaking variants, use at most O(rt) variables
so, according to Lenstra (1983), are in FPT with respect to the combined param-
eter r + udiff . Consequently, procedure P is in FPT with respect to the same
parameter.
After presenting the FPT result for egalitarian coalitional manipulation with
optimistic or pessimistic egalitarian tie-breaking in Theorem 5, we proceed with
an analogous result for egalitarian coalitional manipulation with one of the four
remaining tie-breaking rules (that is, {optimistic, pessimistic} × {utilitiarian, can-
didate-wise utilitarian}) in Theorem 6.
Theorem 6. Let r denote the number of manipulators and udiff denote the number
of different utility values. Parameterized by r + udiff , ℓ-Bloc-Flex-egal-COALITIO-
NAL MANIPULATION is fixed-parameter tractable.
Proof. The general proof idea is to show an algorithm which solves problem ℓ-Bloc-
Flex-egal-COALITIONAL MANIPULATION.
To solve ℓ-Bloc-Flex-egal-COALITIONAL MANIPULATION we create an ILP
program for all possible value combinations of the following parameters:
• the lowest final score z < V ∪ W of any member of the k-egroup and
• the candidate c which is the least preferred member of the k-egroup with
final score z with respect to the tie-breaking rule Flex.
Having z fixed, let C + denote the set of candidates which get at least z + 1 ap-
provals from the non-manipulative voters or which are preferred to c with respect
to F and get exactly z approvals from the non-manipulative voters. Assuming that
the combination of parameter values is correct, all candidates from C + ∪ {c} must
belong to the k-egroup. We check whether C + < k, that is, whether there is
space for candidate c in the k-egroup. If the check fails, then we skip the corre-
sponding combination of solution parameter values. Next, we ensure that c obtains
final score exactly z. If c receives less than z − r or more than z approvals from
non-manipulative voters, then we discard this combination of solution parameter
values. Otherwise, let s := z − scoreV (c) denote number of additional approvals
candidate c needs in order to get final score z.
40
We define the type of some candidate ci to be the size-r vector tj = (u1(ci),
u2(ci), . . . , ur(ci)). We denote by T = {t1, t2, . . . , tT } the set of all possible
types. Observe that T ≤ ur
diff . With each type vector ti, i ∈ [T ], we associate
a set Ti containing only the candidates of type ti. Having c (and z) fixed, we
distinguish candidates according to types further. For j ∈ [r] ∪ {0}, all candidates
with score z − j that are preferred (resp. not preferred) to candidate c according to
F , fall into group Gj+
). For each type ti ∈ T of a candidate, we define
function obl(ti) = C + ∩ Ti which gives the number of candidates of type ti who
are obligatory part of the winning k-egroup. We denote by Cr candidates which do
not fall to any of such groups.
(resp. Gj−
i
i
i
i
and xj−
and Gj−
We give the following ILP formulation of the problem using 2rT + 2 vari-
ables. For all groups Gj+
, i ∈ T , j ∈ [r] ∪ {0}, we introduce variables
xj+
respectively. The variables indicate, respectively, the number of can-
i
didates from groups Gj+
i whom we push to the winning k-egroup. Also,
we introduce two additional variables s and u. The former one represents the mini-
mal value of the total utility achieved by manipulators. The latter one indicates the
number of votes which were spent without changing the outcome. To shorten the
ILP we define
and Gj−
i
i
Mfulc
z := X
ti∈T ,j∈[r]
xj+
i
· j + X
ti∈T ,j∈[r−1]∪{0}
xj−
i
· (j + 1).
Intuitively, Mfulc
winners. Also, we define
z is the number of approvals used to make potential winners the
Fbidc
z := X
ti∈T ,j∈[r]∪{0}
h(r − j + 1)(Gj+
i
− xj+
i ) + (r − j)(Gj−
i
− xj−
i )i .
Fbidc
z represents the number of approvals which cannot be used if one wants to
avoid pushing candidates outside of the solution (given by values of the variables
x) to the winning k-egroup; for example, if some candidate c needs j approvals
to be part of the winning committee, then we subtract r − j + 1 approvals from
the whole pool of r approvals for this candidate because we can use only j − 1
approvals not to push c into the k-egroup. We define the following constraints to
41
construct our program the goal of which is to maximize s:
∀ti ∈ T , j ∈ [r] ∪ {0}, • ∈ {+, −} : xj•
∀ti ∈ T : xz−
∀ti ∈ T : x0+
(24)
(25)
(26)
(27)
(28)
i ≤ Gj•
i ,
i = 0,
i = G0+
Mfulc
u ≤ (C − 1)r − Mfulc
u + Mfulc
z ≤ r · ℓ − s,
,
i
z − Fbidc
z,
z = r · ℓ − s,
X
(29)
xj•
i = k − C + − 1,
ti∈T ,j∈[r]∪{0},•∈{+,−}
∀q ∈ [r] :
X
ti∈T ,j∈[r]∪{0},•∈{+,−}
xj•
i
· ti[q]+
ti[q] · obl(ti) ≥ s.
X
ti∈T
(30)
(31)
i
i
Constraint (24) ensures that the candidates picked into a solution are available
and can be part of the solution. Observe that candidates in G0+
have to be part of
the solution and candidates in Gz−
cannot be part of the solution. These two facts
are ensured by Constraints (25) and (26). Constraint (27) forbids spending more
votes than possible to push some candidates to the k-egroup. The same role for
"wasted" approvals plays Constraint (28). The upper bound of wasted approvals
is counted in the following way: From the number of all "places" of putting ap-
provals (we subtract one from the number of candidates because we cannot put any
approvals except for s to candidate c), we first subtract the approvals already given
to candidates in the k-egroup (i.e., Mfulc
z). Next, we subtract all "places" of ap-
provals that will cause the unchosen potential candidates to be chosen (i.e., Fbidc
z).
Constraint (29) ensures that, altogether, we spend exactly as many approvals as re-
quired, and Constraint (30) holds only when a proper number of candidates are
pushed to be part of k-egroup. The last equation forces maximization of the egali-
tarian utility of the winning k-egroup when s is maximized.
Using our technique we can obtain a solution by making O(nm) ILPs with at
most 2rur
diff + 2 variables. According to Lenstra's famous result (Lenstra, 1983),
the constructed ILPs yield fixed-parameter tractability with respect to the combined
parameter r + udiff .
42
Table 1: Computational complexity of tie-breaking and coalitional manipulation.
Our results for ℓ-Bloc hold for any ℓ ≥ 1, and thus cover SNTV. The parameters
are the size k of the egroup, the number r of manipulators, and the number udiff
of different utility values. Furthermore, m is the number of candidates and n is
the number of voters. The result marked with † holds for all possible combinations
of the respective evaluation and behavior variants. The results marked with ⋄ hold
also for F = Flex.
F eval
bhav-TIE-BREAKING, easy cases:
settings (evaluation, behavior)
complexity
reference
utilitarian or cand.wise egalitarian,
optimistic or pessimistic
O(m · (r + log m)) Cor. 1 †
egalitarian, pessimistic
O(r · m log m)
Thm. 1
F egal
opt -TIE-BREAKING (egalitarian, optimistic):
parameters, restrictions
complexity
reference
NP-hard
general
k, 0/1 utilities and q = 1 W[2]-hard
r + k
W[1]-hard
r + udiff
FPT
Thm. 1
Thm. 1
Thm. 2
Thm. 3
ℓ-Bloc-F -eval-COALITIONAL MANIPULATION
utilitarian/cand.wise egalitarian, optimistic/pessimistic:
restrictions
complexity
reference
Thm. 4 ⋄
general
consistent manipulators O(m(m + r + n)) Prop. 3 ⋄
O(m(m + r + n)) Cor. 2 ⋄
ℓ = k
O(k2m2(n + r))
ℓ-Bloc-F -eval-COALITIONAL MANIPULATION
egalitarian, optimistic/pessimistic:
parameters, restrictions
complexity
reference
NP-hard
Cor. 3 ⋄
general
k, 0/1 utilities and q = 1 W[2]-hard Cor. 3 ⋄
W[1]-hard Cor. 3 ⋄
r + k
r + udiff
FPT
Thm. 5 and Thm. 6 ⋄
43
6 Conclusion
We developed a new model for and started the first systematic study of coali-
tional manipulation for multiwinner elections. Our analysis revealed that mul-
tiwinner coalitional manipulation requires models which are significantly more
complex than those for single-winner coalitional manipulation or multiwinner non-
coalitional manipulation. Our model assumes a given, fixed coalition of manipu-
lators can compensate their (potential) utility loss after a manipulation in some
way. Thus, in particular, our model does not account for questions like whether
a particular coalition can be stable, how coalitions are forming, or what to do to
avoid a coalition's split. Yet, we think that there are two important reasons why
the model is, in fact, useful. First, there are situation where manipulators will not
leave the coalition despite of being worse off after some manipulation. Such a sit-
uation might naturally occur if manipulators share a common goal and they agree
either on losing their individual utility for the good of the whole group or on com-
pensating their utility losses internally among themselves. Second, assessing the
quality of possible manipulations for a given coalition is essential to answer more
general questions about coalitions (e.g., what is the most profitable coalition) that
lead to a new research direction (see the last paragraph of this section for a broader
discussion on this direction).
In our work, on the one hand, we generalized tractability results for coali-
tional manipulation of ℓ-Approval by Conitzer et al. (2007) and Lin (2011) and for
non-coalitional manipulation of Bloc by Meir et al. (2008) and Obraztsova et al.
(2013) to tractability of coalitional manipulation of ℓ-Bloc in case of utilitarian or
candidate-wise egalitarian evaluation of egroups. On the other hand, we showed
that coalitional manipulation becomes intractable in case of egalitarian evaluation
of egroups.
Let us discuss a few findings in more detail (Table 1 surveys all our results).
We studied lexicographic, optimistic, and pessimistic tie-breaking and showed that,
with the exception of egalitarian group evaluation, winner groups can be deter-
mined very efficiently. The intractability (NP-hardness, parameterized hardness in
form of W[1]- and W[2]-hardness) for the egalitarian case, however, turns out to
hold even for quite restricted scenarios. We also demonstrated that numerous tie-
breaking rules can be "simulated" by (carefully chosen) lexicographic tie-breaking,
again except for the egalitarian case. Interestingly, the hardness of egalitarian tie-
breaking holds only for the optimistic case while for the pessimistic case it is effi-
ciently solvable. Hardness for the egalitarian optimistic scenario, however, trans-
lates into hardness results for coalitional manipulation regardless of the specific
tie-breaking rule. On the contrary, coalitional manipulation becomes tractable for
the other two evaluation strategies -- "candidate-wise" egalitarian and utilitarian.
44
Additionally, for few candidates and few different utility values the voters assign
to the candidates, manipulation becomes tractable also for the egalitarian optimistic
scenario.
In our study, we entirely focused on shortlisting as one of the simplest tasks
for multiwinner elections to analyze our evaluation functions. It is interesting and
non-trivial to develop models for multiwinner rules that aim for proportional repre-
sentation or diversity. For shortlisting, extending our studies to non-approval-like
scoring-based voting correspondences would be a natural next step. In this context,
already seeing what happens if one extends the set of individual scores from being
only 0 or 1 to more (but few) numbers is of interest. Moreover, we focused on de-
terministic tie-breaking mechanisms, ignoring randomized tie-breaking -- another
issue for future research.
An analysis of the manipulators' behavior, briefly mentioned at the beginning
of this section, directing towards game theory seems promising as well.
(Even
more so since we identified polynomial-time algorithms for a few variants of coali-
tional manipulation.) One very interesting question about coalitions is, for exam-
ple, whether a particular coalition is stable. Intuitively, the utility for every voter
that is a part of the manipulating coalition should not be below the utility the voter
receives when voting sincerely. This is of course only a necessary condition to en-
sure the stability of a coalition. A more sophisticated analysis of stability needs to
consider game-theoretic aspects such as Nash or core stability (Nisan et al., 2007).
Acknowledgments
We thank the anonymous IJCAI '17 reviewers for their constructive and valuable
feedback. Robert Bredereck was from mid-September 2016 to mid-September
2017 on postdoctoral leave at the University of Oxford, supported by the DFG
fellowship BR 5207/2. Andrzej Kaczmarczyk was supported by the DFG project
AFFA (BR 5207/1 and NI 369/15).
References
Haris Aziz, Serge Gaspers, Joachim Gudmundsson, Simon Mackenzie, Nicholas
Mattei, and Toby Walsh. Computational aspects of multi-winner approval vot-
ing. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Autonomous Agents
and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS '15, pages 107 -- 115, 2015. 2
Haris Aziz, Markus Brill, Vincent Conitzer, Edith Elkind, Rupert Freeman, and
Toby Walsh. Justified representation in approval-based committee voting. Social
Choice and Welfare, 48(2):461 -- 485, 2017a. 2
45
Haris Aziz, Edith Elkind, Piotr Faliszewski, Martin Lackner, and Piotr Skowron.
The Condorcet Principle for Multiwinner Elections: From Shortlisting to Pro-
portionality. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Artificial
Intelligence, IJCAI '17, pages 84 -- 90, 2017b. 2
Salvador Barber`a and Danilo Coelho. How to choose a non-controversial list with
k names. Social Choice and Welfare, 31(1):79 -- 96, 2008. 2
Salvador Barber`a and Danilo Coelho. On the rule of k names. Games and Eco-
nomic Behavior, 70(1):44 -- 61, 2010. 2
Nathanael Barrot, Laurent Gourv`es, J´erome Lang, J´erome Monnot, and Bernard
Ries. Possible winners in approval voting.
In Proceedings of the 3rd Inter-
national Conference on Algorithmic Decision Theory, ADT '13, pages 57 -- 70,
2013. 2
John J. Bartholdi III, Craig A. Tovey, and Michael A. Trick. The computational
difficulty of manipulating an election. Social Choice and Welfare, 6(3):227 -- 241,
1989. 3
Nadja Betzler, Arkadii Slinko, and Johannes Uhlmann. On the computation of
fully proportional representation. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research,
47:475 -- 519, 2013. 2
Felix Brandt, Vincent Conitzer, Ulle Endriss, J´erome Lang, and Ariel D. Procac-
cia, editors. Handbook of Computational Social Choice. Cambridge University
Press, 2016. 2, 4
Robert Bredereck, Andrzej Kaczmarczyk, and Rolf Niedermeier. On coalitional
manipulation for multiwinner elections: Shortlisting. In Proceedings of the 26th
International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI '17, pages 887 --
893, 2017. 1
Vincent Conitzer, Tuomas Sandholm, and J´erome Lang. When are elections with
few candidates hard to manipulate? Journal of the ACM, 54(3):1 -- 33, 2007. 3,
44
Marek Cygan, Fedor V. Fomin, Lukasz Kowalik, Daniel Lokshtanov, D´aniel Marx,
Marcin Pilipczuk, Michal Pilipczuk, and Saket Saurabh. Parameterized Algo-
rithms. Springer, 2015. 5
Rodney G. Downey and Michael R. Fellows. Fundamentals of Parameterized
Complexity. Springer, 2013. 5, 17
46
Edith Elkind, Piotr Faliszewski, Piotr Skowron, and Arkadii M. Slinko. Properties
of multiwinner voting rules. Social Choice and Welfare, 48(3):599 -- 632, 2017.
2, 3
Piotr Faliszewski, Piotr Skowron, Arkadii M. Slinko, and Nimrod Talmon. Multi-
winner analogues of the plurality rule: Axiomatic and algorithmic perspectives.
In Proceedings of the 30th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI
'16, pages 482 -- 488, 2016. 2
Piotr Faliszewski, Piotr Skowron, Arkadii M. Slinko, and Nimrod Talmon. Multi-
winner voting: A new challenge for social choice theory. In U. Endriss, editor,
Trends in Computational Social Choice, chapter 2, pages 27 -- 47. AI Access,
2017a. 2, 3
Piotr Faliszewski, Piotr Skowron, and Nimrod Talmon. Bribery as a measure of
candidate success: Complexity results for approval-based multiwinner rules. In
Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Sys-
tems, AAMAS '17, pages 6 -- 14, 2017b. 2
Michael R. Fellows, Danny Hermelin, Frances Rosamond, and Stphane Vialette.
On the parameterized complexity of multiple-interval graph problems. Theoret-
ical Computer Science, 410(1):53 -- 61, 2009. 18
Jorg Flum and Martin Grohe. Parameterized Complexity Theory. Springer, 2006.
5
Hans Kellerer, Ulrich Pferschy, and David Pisinger. Knapsack Problems. Springer,
2004. 26
Martin Lackner and Piotr Skowron. Approval-based multi-winner rules and strate-
gic voting. In Proceedings of the 27th International Joint Conference on Artifi-
cial Intelligence, IJCAI '18, pages 340 -- 346, 2018. 3
Hendrik W. Lenstra. Integer programming with a fixed number of variables. Math-
ematics of Operations Research, 8(4):538 -- 548, 1983. 21, 40, 42
Andrew Lin. The complexity of manipulating k-approval elections. In Proceed-
ings of the 3rd International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence,
ICAART '11, pages 212 -- 218, 2011. 4, 44
Reshef Meir, Ariel D. Procaccia, Jeffrey S. Rosenschein, and Aviv Zohar. Com-
plexity of strategic behavior in multi-winner elections. Journal of Artificial In-
telligence Research, 33(1):149 -- 178, 2008. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 44
47
Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Poland.
In-
formations on the election of The Board of Research Excellence (in Pol-
ish).
http://www.bip.nauka.gov.pl/g2/oryginal/2019_03/
c435c5061f0aab7158eba2716553f240.pdf, 2019. Online; accessed
July 30, 2019. 3
Rolf Niedermeier. Invitation to Fixed-Parameter Algorithms. Oxford University
Press, 2006. 5
Noam Nisan, Tim Roughgarden, ´Eva Tardos, and Vijay V. Vazirani. Algorithmic
Game Theory. Cambridge University Press, 2007. 45
Svetlana Obraztsova, Yair Zick, and Edith Elkind. On manipulation in multi-
winner elections based on scoring rules.
In Proceedings of the 12th Interna-
tional Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems, AAMAS
'13, pages 359 -- 366, 2013. 3, 5, 7, 44
Jorg Rothe, editor. Economics and Computation. Springer, 2015. 2, 4
Piotr Skowron. What do we elect committees for? A voting committee model
for multi-winner rules. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on
Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI '15, pages 1141 -- 1147, 2015. 3
Piotr Skowron, Piotr Faliszewski, and Arkadii M. Slinko. Achieving fully pro-
portional representation: Approximability results. Artificial Intelligence, 222:
67 -- 103, 2015. 3
48
|
1703.09087 | 2 | 1703 | 2017-04-03T11:46:45 | Automating decision making to help establish norm-based regulations | [
"cs.MA"
] | Norms have been extensively proposed as coordination mechanisms for both agent and human societies. Nevertheless, choosing the norms to regulate a society is by no means straightforward. The reasons are twofold. First, the norms to choose from may not be independent (i.e, they can be related to each other). Second, different preference criteria may be applied when choosing the norms to enact. This paper advances the state of the art by modeling a series of decision-making problems that regulation authorities confront when choosing the policies to establish. In order to do so, we first identify three different norm relationships -namely, generalisation, exclusivity, and substitutability- and we then consider norm representation power, cost, and associated moral values as alternative preference criteria. Thereafter, we show that the decision-making problems faced by policy makers can be encoded as linear programs, and hence solved with the aid of state-of-the-art solvers. | cs.MA | cs | Automating decision making to help establish norm-based
regulations
Maite Lopez-Sanchez
Marc Serramia
Math & Comp Science dept.
Universitat de Barcelona
[email protected]
Juan A. Rodriguez-Aguilar
Artificial Intelligence
Research Institute (IIIA-CSIC)
Campus UAB. Bellaterra, Spain
[email protected]
Javier Morales and
Michael Wooldridge
Dept. of Computer Science
University of Oxford, UK
[email protected]
[email protected]
7
1
0
2
r
p
A
3
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
2
v
7
8
0
9
0
.
3
0
7
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
ABSTRACT
Norms have been extensively proposed as coordination mechanisms
for both agent and human societies. Nevertheless, choosing the
norms to regulate a society is by no means straightforward. The
reasons are twofold. First, the norms to choose from may not be
independent (i.e, they can be related to each other). Second, dif-
ferent preference criteria may be applied when choosing the norms
to enact. This paper advances the state of the art by modeling a
series of decision-making problems that regulation authorities con-
front when choosing the policies to establish. In order to do so,
we first identify three different norm relationships -- namely, gen-
eralisation, exclusivity, and substitutability -- and we then consider
norm representation power, cost, and associated moral values as al-
ternative preference criteria. Thereafter, we show that the decision-
making problems faced by policy makers can be encoded as linear
programs, and hence solved with the aid of state-of-the-art solvers.
CCS Concepts
•Computing methodologies → Multi-agent systems; Coopera-
tion and coordination;
Keywords
Normative systems, value-based reasoning, norm decision making,
policy making, optimisation.
1.
INTRODUCTION
Norms have been extensively studied as coordination mecha-
nisms within both agent and human societies[10, 26]. Within agent
societies, problems such as norm synthesis [27, 7], norm emer-
gence [14, 29], or norm learning [25, 11, 24] have been widely
studied. As for human societies, e-participation and e-governance
ICT systems are currently attracting a lot of attention [30, 12, 2].
Thus, for example, some regulatory authorities in European cities
-- such as Reykjavik[6] or Barcelona[4] municipalities -- are open-
ing their policy making to citizens. This is also the case for some
countries: New Zealand authorities are opening consultations about
legislations related to different topics such as family violence[1] or
pensions[3]. However, the number of regulations to discuss and
enact could be large -- consider, for example, Madrid's participation
portal [5], which is currently hosting more than two thousand lo-
cal proposals open to citizens -- so that managing them becomes a
complex task.
Beyond the intrinsic complexity due to the number of norms to
manage -- either if they are proposed by humans or automatically
generated -- , by no means we can state that choosing the norms to
regulate a society constitutes a straightforward process. The rea-
sons are twofold.
On the one hand, norms can be related. Norm relationships have
been previously studied in the literature. Thus, for example, Grossi
and Dignum [15] study the relation between abstract and concrete
norms, whereas Kollingbaum, Vasconcelos et al.
[19, 28] focus
on norm conflicts -- and solve them based on first-order unification
and constraint solving techniques. In this paper we borrow some
of the relationships identified in Morales et al. [23]1 and charac-
terise three different binary norm relationships, namely, generali-
sation, exclusivity, and substitutability. Thus, we can consider a set
of norms and the fact that some norms in this set generalise some
specific norms; that some other norms are pair-wise incompatible
(i.e., mutually exclusive); or interchangeable (that is, substitutable).
When this is the case, a regulatory authority should not select these
norms to be simultaneously established in the society. This paper
proposes to encode these relationships in terms of restrictions in
linear programs that allows to find those norm subsets (subsets of
the given set of norms) that are compliant with the constraints im-
posed by the associated norm relations.
On the other hand, this paper also characterises the problems that
regulation authorities confront when considering different prefer-
ence criteria over the norms to impose. In this manner, we specify
the optimisation problem of finding the subset of norms that, in
addition to comply with the relation constraints, maximizes rep-
resented norms. This problem can be specified as a single objec-
tive function in a binary linear program. Moreover, since norms
have associated costs, it may also be of convenience to specify a
multi-objective decision function that maximizes norm representa-
tion while minimizing associated norm costs. Our final contribu-
tion is the consideration of moral values associated to norms as an
additional criterion. Values have been studied in argumentation --
some representative examples being Bench-Capon et al.[9] or Mod-
gil [20] -- and they have also been introduced by Kohler et al. [18]
in multi-agent institutions. However, to the best of our knowledge,
no one has considered the values that norms support. Instead, the
normative multi-agent systems research area has focused in differ-
ent normative concepts such as minimality and simplicity [13, 22],
liberality [23], compactness [21], or stability [26].
1Morales et al.
complementarity relations.
[23] identify substitutability, generalisation and
In this paper we assume that a regulatory authority has available
a collection of norms to impose together with an specification of
the particular relationships that hold for these norms and that pre-
vents all norms to be simultaneously deployed. Then, we model
alternative problems that pursue to maximize the set of norms to
establish under (a combination of) those previously mentioned cri-
teria, namely, norm representation, associated costs, and supported
moral values. Subsequently, despite the computation complexity
of these problems, state-of-the-art linear programming solvers are
used to automatically compute their solution.
The paper is structured as follows. First, next section provides
some basic definitions and an illustrative example. Then, subse-
quent sections characterise our different optimisation problems. Ini-
tially, Section 3 considers optimisation problems with a single ob-
jective: maximising norm representation. Then, Section 4 consid-
ers a multi-objective decision function that combines norm repre-
sentation and cost criteria. Finally, Section 5 introduces moral val-
ues into this multi-objective optimisation problem. The paper con-
cludes with additional discussion about dealing with norms in force
in Section 6, and conclusions and future work in Section 7.
2. BASIC DEFINITIONS
Before introducing the decision problems involving norms that
we face in this paper, next we introduce the fundamental building
blocks to build such problems. Thus, we formally introduce the
notion of norm, the relationships that we consider between norms,
and the characteristic of the norm systems that we will aim at to
establish norm-based regulations.
Our notion of norm is based on a simplification of the one in
[31]. Thus, here we formally consider a norm ni as a pair θ(ρ, ac),
where: θ is a deontic operator (prohibition, permission, or obliga-
tion) ; ρ is a description of the addressee entity, namely, the agent
required to comply with the norm; and ac is an action -- from a set
of actions -- that entities can perform in a specific domain.
Now we consider the relations that may hold between norms be-
cause they will determine the way norms are selected as a part of
a norm system. With this aim, we borrow two of the relations em-
pirically identified in [23] during on-line norm synthesis and define
three norm relations (namely generalisation, exclusivity, and sub-
stitutability). Informally, it is considered that: (i) a norm is more
general than another one when it subsumes its regulation (its regu-
lation scope is wider); (ii) two norms are mutually exclusive when
they are incompatible; and (iii) two norms are substitutable if they
are interchangeable.
Let N be a non-empty set of norms for a specific domain. For-
mally, we will capture the above norm relations as follows:
i) The direct generalisation relation is a binary relation Rg ⊆
N × N.
If (ni, nj) ∈ Rg, we say that ni is more gen-
eral than nj, or directly, it generalises nj. Notice also that
if (ni, nj) ∈ Rg, (cid:64)nk ∈ N s.t (ni, nk), (nk, nj) ∈ Rg.
The notion of direct generalisation allows us to capture the no-
tion of indirect generalisation through the so-called ancestors.
Given two norms, nk,ni ∈ N, we say that nk is an ancestor
of ni if there is a subset of norms {n1, . . . , np} ⊆ N such
that (n1, n2), . . . , (np−1, np) ∈ Rg, n1 = nk, and np = ni.
Henceforth, given a norm ni ∈ N, we will note its ancestors
as A(ni). Notice that Rg is irreflexive, anti-symmetric, and
intransitive.
iii) The substitutability relation is a binary relation Rs ⊆ N × N.
If (ni, nj) ∈ Rs, we say that norms ni, nj are interchange-
able or substitutable. Based on substitutability relationships,
we introduce the notion of substitution chain as follows. Given
two norms, ni,nk ∈ N, we say that nk is connected by sub-
stitutabilities to ni if there is a non-empty subset of norms
{n1, . . . , np} ⊆ N such that (n1, n2), . . . , (np−1, np)∈ Rs,
n1 = ni, and np = nk. Henceforth, a new relationship
S ⊆ N × N will contain the pairs of norms that are connected
by substitutabilities. In particular, notice that if (ni, nj) ∈ Rs,
then (ni, nj) ∈ S. Rs is an irreflexive, symmetric, and transi-
tive relation.
Next, we put together norms and their relationships in a structure
on which reasoning about norms will take place, the so-called norm
net.
DEF. 1. A norm net is a pair NN= (cid:104)N, R(cid:105), where N stands
for a set of norms and R = {Rg, Rx, Rs} contains generalisation,
exclusivity and substitutability relationships over the norms in N.
The relationships in R are mutually exclusive, namely Rg ∩ Rx =
∅, Rg ∩ Rs = ∅, and Rx ∩ Rs = ∅.
As observed in [23], generalisation and substitutability are mu-
tually exclusive relationships. Furthermore, here we also assume
that the exclusivity relationship is mutually exclusive with the gen-
eralisation and substitutability relationships.
Given a norm net NN= (cid:104)N, R(cid:105), we will refer to any subset of
the norms in N as a norm system. The challenge for a decision
maker is to select a norm system out of a norm net. In general, she
will be interested in norm systems that: (i) do not contain conflict-
ing norms; (ii) do not contain overlapping regulations; and (iii) do
incorporate as many norms as possible. In what follows, we shall
characterise these types of norm systems.
First, if we consider that exclusivity relationships capture con-
flicts between norms, the following characterisation of conflict-free
norm systems naturally follows.
DEF. 2. Given a norm net NN= (cid:104)N, R(cid:105), we say that a norm
system Ω ⊆ N is conflict-free iff for each ni, nj ∈ Ω, (ni, nj) /∈
Rx.
Second, notice that both generalisation and substitutability rela-
tionships capture redundancy. Indeed, selecting two substitutable
norms in a norm system would involve including overlapping reg-
ulations. The same applies to two norms such that one generalises
the other, namely the regulation of the more general one subsumes
that of the more specific. Hence, we characterise non-redundant
norm systems as follows.
DEF. 3. Given a norm net NN= (cid:104)N, R(cid:105), we say that a norm
system Ω ⊆ N is non-redundant iff for each ni, nj ∈ Ω: (i)
(ni, nj) /∈ Rg and nj /∈ A(ni); and (ii) (ni, nj) /∈ S
From the concepts above, we are ready to characterise the type
of norm systems a decision maker will be interested in.
DEF. 4. Given a norm net NN= (cid:104)N, R(cid:105), we say that a norm
system Ω ⊆ N is sound iff it is both conflict-free and non-redundant.
ii) The exclusivity relation is a binary relation Rx ⊆ N × N. If
(ni, nj) ∈ Rx we say that ni, nj are incompatible or mutually
exclusive. Rx is an irreflexive, symmetric, and intransitive
relation.
EXAMPLE 1. Figure 1 illustrates an example of a Norm Net
that includes some norms (rules) of border control at an interna-
tional airport. Norms are depicted as circles labeled as n1, . . . , n5
respectively. In particular, they are defined as follows:
programming solvers. Finally, in section 3.2 we discuss on several
ways of computing the representativeness of a norm system.
3.1 The maximum norm system problem
We first focus on defining how to obtain the representation power
of a normative system. This is based on the representation power
of each of its norms. Since we can think of several ways of com-
puting a norm's representation power (e.g. a norm can represent
itself, or all the norms it generalises), as discussed in section 3.2,
for now we just consider that we will count on a linear function,
the so-called representation power function, r : N → R that yields
such value. Besides linearity, the only condition that we will im-
pose on r is that r(ni) ≤ r(nj) for each nj ∈ A(ni). Hence,
the representation power of a normative system Ω can be readily
obtained by adding the representation power of its norms, namely
ρ(Ω) =(cid:80)
Now we are ready to formalise our optimisation problem.
PROBLEM 1. Given a norm net NN= (cid:104)N, R(cid:105) and a representa-
tion power function r, the maximum norm system problem (MNSP)
is that of finding a sound norm system Ω with the maximum rep-
resentation power, namely such that there is no other norm system
Ω(cid:48) ⊆ N such that ρ(Ω(cid:48)) > ρ(Ω).
n∈Ω r(n).
LEMMA 1. The complexity of the maximum norm system prob-
lem is at least NP-Hard.
PROOF. 1. The proof goes trivially by reduction of the maxi-
mum independent set problem, which is known to be an NP-Hard
optimisation problem [17], to the maximum norm system problem.
Consider that we want to find the maximum independent set of a
graph G = (V, E). Now say that each vertex in V stands for a
norm and each edge in E stands for an exclusivity relationship in
Rx. From this follows, that finding the maximum independent set of
G amounts to solving the maximum norm set problem on the norm
net (cid:104)V,{Rx}(cid:105), where the representation power function is defined
as r(v) = 1 for each v ∈ V .
Next we show how to solve the MNSP by encoding the optimisa-
tion problem as a linear program. Thus, consider a norm net NN=
(cid:104)N, R(cid:105), and a set of binary decision variables {x1, . . . , xN}, where
each xi encodes the decision of whether norm ni is selected (taking
value 1) for a norm system or not (taking value 0). Thus, solving
the MNSP amounts to solving the following linear program:
max
r(ni) · xi
(1)
N(cid:88)
i=1
subject to the constraints that capture the generalisation, exclusiv-
ity, and substitutatibility relationships in the norm net, which we
specify as follows:
• A family of generalisation constraints to avoid redundancy.
Such constraints impose that:
-- A norm cannot be selected together with any of the
norms that it directly generalises. Given a norm ni, the
norms generalised by ni is defined as Children(ni) =
{nj(ni, nj) ∈ Rg}. Then, formally the following
constraints must hold:
xi + xj ≤ 1 nj ∈ Children(ni) 1 ≤ i ≤ N (2)
-- All the children of a norm cannot be simultaneously
xj < Children(ni) 1 ≤ i ≤ N
(3)
selected. Formally:
(cid:88)
nj∈Children(ni)
Figure 1: Norm Net example: rules of border control at an interna-
tional airport.
n1 : P ermission(all_passengers, cross_border)
n2 : Obligation(all_passengers, register_passport)
n3 : Obligation(all_passengers, fulfil_form)
n4 : Obligation(locals, fulfil_form)
n5 : Obligation(visitors, fulfil_form)
Norm n1 rules free movement of passengers, allowing all pas-
sengers to cross the border without any additional action. On the
other hand, norm n2 requires all passengers to register their pass-
port, and there is still a third rule n3 that requires them to fulfil
a form asking for passport information such as passport number,
holder's name or address.
Regarding exclusivity relationships, first and second norms are
exclusive ((n1, n2) ∈ Rx) because it is not possible to ask pas-
sengers to perform an action (in this case, register their passport)
and allow them to go ahead and simply cross the border. The same
reasoning applies for first and third norms, and thus, n1 and n3 are
also exclusive ((n1, n3) ∈ Rx). Figure 1 depicts such exclusivity
relationships with an "x dotted" line.
Additionally, there is a substitutability relationship between sec-
ond and third norms ((n2, n3) ∈ Rx), since it is possible to "mon-
itor" which passengers are actually crossing the border by register-
ing their password or by asking them to fulfil a form. Passengers
may even have to abide by both norms, since they could actually do
both things despite of its redundancy. Figure 1 shows this substi-
tutability relationship with an "o dotted" line.
Having a closer look to norm n3, we can see that asking all pas-
sengers to fulfill a form is a generalisation of two other norms: n4,
which requires local passengers to fulfill a form; and n5, which
requires foreign passengers (visitors) to fulfill a form. Formally,
we have ((n3, n4) ∈ Rg) and ((n3, n5) ∈ Rg). Figure 1 draws
this generalisation relationship with an arrow line. Since gener-
alisation is an anti-symmetric relationship, the arrowhead points
towards the general norm.
3. FINDING A MAXIMUM NORM SYSTEM
The purpose of this section is to design the optimisation machin-
ery required to help a regulation authority find a particular type of
sound norm system. Since the regulation authority's purpose is to
incorporate as many norms as possible out of those proposed in a
norm net, informally we will aim at the norm system that repre-
sents the largest number of norms in the norm net. With this goal
in mind, we first start in section 3.1 by formally casting our prob-
lem as an optimisation problem, and by characterising its hardness.
Thereafter, we show how to encode our problem as a linear pro-
gram so that it can be solved with the aid of state-of-the-art linear
n2=Obl(all, register-passport)n3=Obl(all, fulfil-form)n5=Obl(visitors, fulfil_form)n4=Obl(locals, fulfil_form)n1=Perm(all, cross_border) xx x xxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxGeneralisationx xxxExclusivityo oooSubstitutability -- A norm cannot be simultaneously selected together with
any of its ancestors, namely:
xi + xk ≤ 1 nk ∈ A(ni) 1 ≤ i ≤ N
(4)
• Exclusivity constraints preventing that two mutually exclu-
sive (incompatible) norms are jointly selected to be part of a
norm system. Thus, the following constraints must hold:
xi + xj ≤ 1 for each (ni, nj) ∈ Rx
(5)
• Substitutability constraints avoiding that interchangeable norms
are simultaneously selected. This amounts to enforcing that
any pair of norms that are connected by substitutabilities can-
not be simultaneously selected, namely:
xi + xj ≤ 1 for each (ni, nj) ∈ S
(6)
Notice that this constraint ensures that two norms in Rs are
not jointly selected.
In this paper we propose two different variations of the represen-
tation power function. First, the inclusion power function considers
as representation power the number of norms directly generalised
or indirectly generalised (by being an ancestor) of a norm. Thus,
it provides a local measure of representation power. Second, the
generalisation power function measures the representation power
of a norm based on its position in a generalisation hierarchy: the
deeper a norm is in the generalisation hierarchy (the farther from
the most general norm), the lower its representation power. The
next subsections detail both functions.
3.2.1
The inclusion power representation function is a function rI :
N → N that maps each norm to the number of norms it generalises.
Given a norm, its generalisation power is obtained by combining
the norms that it directly generalises together with the norms that its
children generalise. If a norm does not generalise any other norm,
we will set its inclusion power to 1. This leads to the following
recursive definition of inclusion power:
Inclusion power
Furthermore, we must also consider the binary constraints corre-
sponding to the norm decision variables, namely:
xi ∈ {0, 1} 1 ≤ i ≤ N
(7)
rI (ni) =
Notice also that the cost of encoding the MNSP as a linear pro-
), where m = Rg + Rx,
) is the cost of encoding the substitutability con-
N N(N N−2)
2
gram is O(m · N +
and N N(N N−2)
straints.
2
The specification above corresponds to a maximization problem
whose constraints are all inequalities. Hence, it is in standard form
and it can be solved with state-of-the-art linear program solvers
such as CPLEX or Gurobi.
EXAMPLE 2. Following our previous example in Figure 1, we
need five binary variables (x1, . . . , x5) to decide which norms to
select to solve the MSNP. If we consider r(ni) = 1 for 1 ≤ i ≤
5, then there are four norm systems that maximise the objective
function in equation 1 and satisfy constraints 2 to 7, namely: Ω1 =
{n1, n4}, Ω2 = {n1, n5}, Ω3 = {n2, n4}, and Ω4 = {n2, n5}.
These alternative norm systems are listed along the first column of
Table 1.
Finally, it may be worth mentioning that prior to determining the
maximum sound norm system, one may wonder if there always is
a sound norm system. This leads us to pose next problem that, de-
spite its simplicity, provides us with further insights into the prob-
lem under study.
PROBLEM 2. Given a Norm Net NN= (cid:104)N, R(cid:105) composed by set
of norms N and their relationships R, we aim at assessing if there
is some sound (non-empty) Ω ⊆ N.
Given the binary nature of the norm relationships, norm systems
composed by any single norm from N will always comply with
constraints, and thus, there will always exist at least N alternative
sound norm systems.
3.2 Computing representation power
As previously mentioned, we aim at computing the norm sys-
tem that represents the largest number of norms in the norm net,
which may not be the same as taking the largest number of norms
because we must consider generalisation relations. Hence, we in-
troduce alternative definitions of the representation power function
r to compute the representation power of norms.
1
(cid:88)
if (cid:54) ∃rj ∈ N, (ri, rj) ∈ Rg
rI (nj) otherwise
1 +
nj∈Children(ni)
In our example in figure 1, the inclusion power of n3 is 3, whereas
it is 1 for the rest of norms because none generalises other norms.
3.2.2 Generalisation power
The generalisation power representation function is a function
rg : N → (0, 1] that maps each norm to its generalisation power.
Informally, the less ancestors a norm has, the higher its generalisa-
tion power. Thus, a norm that has no ancestors takes on the max-
imum generalisation power (1). The generalisation power lowers
as norms are deeper in the generalisation hierarchy (i.e., are more
and more specific, and hence have more ancestors). If the gener-
alisation power of norm ni is larger than that of norm nj, we will
prefer to include ni in our norm system. This is because their gen-
eralisation powers tell us that ni is further up in the generalisation
hierarchy than nj, and hence closer to more general norms.
Algoritm 1 describes how generalisation power is computed for
a Norm Net NN= (cid:104)N, R(cid:105). Initially, lines 2-3 create two initial data
structures: g[], a unidimensional array storing the representation
powers for the norms in N; and P, a set of the norms for which the
generalisation power needs to be computed (initially N). Next, line
4 computes, by invoking function getNonGeneralised(), the subset
G ⊆ N of norms not being generalised by any other norm (i.e.,
G ← {ni ∈ S (cid:64)nj s.t. (nj, ni) ∈ Rg}). Lines 5-7 assign a
value of 1 for all the norms in G and remove them from P. The
rest of the algorithm is devoted to repeat, while there are still norms
in S, the computation of the generalisation powers for subsequent
levels in the generalisation hierarchy. Method SiblingGroups(P,
NN) in line 9 selects those norms that are generalised by norms
that do not belong to P (i.e., ni s.t. (nj, ni) ∈ Rg and nj ∈
N \ P) and groups them by siblings so that it returns SibList[],
a list of sets of siblings Ps = {ns1, . . . , nsk} s.t. (nj, ns1) ∈
Rg, . . . , (nj, nsk) ∈ Rg for each common parent nj. Then, line
12 assigns, for each sibling norm ni ∈ Ps, a generalisation value
g[i] = g[j]
Ps , which corresponds to the generalisation power of its
2 over the number of siblings. Once it is computed for
parent nj
all norms in Ps, the entire subset is subtracted from P (see line
2Notice that by construction, all norms in N \ P do have a com-
puted generalisation power.
13). Finally, the algorithm returns the g[] array that is used for
the implementation of function gi(ni) =g[i]. Thus for example,
if we have a norm ng generalising two other norms ns1 and ns2,
and ns1 in turn generalises two additional norms ns11 and ns12,
we would have the following generalisation powers: rg(n1) = 1;
rg(ns1) = rg(ns2) = 1/2; and rg(ns11) = ng(ns12) = 1/4.
Notice that this algorithm assigns a value to all norms in N and
traverses in subsequent generalisation levels all the norms in a gen-
eralisation tree hierarchy, and thus, its complexity is O(l · Rg +
N) being l the maximum generalisation level (i.e., the depth of
the deeper generalisation hierarchy).
(cid:46) generalisation power array
(cid:46) set of pending norms
(cid:46) general norms
g[1..N]
P ← N
G ← getNonGeneralised(P, NN)
for each norm ni ∈ G do
Algorithm 1 Generalisation power computation
1: procedure GENERALISATIONCOMP(NN)
2:
3:
4:
5:
6:
7:
8:
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
15:
g[i] ← 1
P ← P \ {ni}
SibList[] ← getSiblingGroups(P, NN)
for each Ps in SibList[] do
end while
return g[1..N]
for each sibling ni ∈ Ps do
P ← P \ Ps
g[i] ← g[j]/Ps
while P (cid:54)= ∅ do
EXAMPLE 3. Following our example in Figure 1, we can com-
pare the two alternative representation power functions described
above. On the one hand, if we employ inclusion power as repre-
sentation function, the maximum norm system is Ω = {n3}. Natu-
rally, Ω = {n3} (see second column in Table 1) has been preferred
over the rest of sound norm systems, since its representation power
is 3, whereas the representation power for norm systems with two
norms (e.g., Ω = {n1, n4}) is 2. On the other hand, if we con-
sider generalisation power instead, there are four equally-valued
maximum norm systems, namely Ω1 = {n1, n4}, Ω2 = {n1, n5},
Ω3 = {n2, n4}, and Ω4 = {n2, n5}, as shown along the third
column of Table 1.
Overall, using alternative representation power functions results
in different maximum norm systems. The one to use is a deci-
sion left to the decision maker. In any event, representing as many
norms as possible may not always be the only criterion to enact a
norm system. This is the case if the decision maker considers fur-
ther criteria -- such as, for instance, the costs associated to norms.
Next section tackles this issue.
4. MULTI-OBJECTIVE OPTIMISATION FOR
NORM DECISION MAKING
max
In addition to pursuing norm representation maximisation when
choosing the norms to enact in a society, most often, regulation au-
thorities cannot ignore the fact hat norm deployment has associated
costs. This section deals with the combination of both criteria -- i.e.,
representation power and associated costs -- to decide the norm sys-
tem to enact.
Norm costs may represent monetary expenses derived from regu-
latory processes -- such as norm establishment or norm enforcement --
as well as non-monetary aspects -- such as social implications or
(cid:46) all values being defined
subject to constraints 2 to 7, namely the constraints that guarantee
the soundness of the norm system, and a further constraint:
cost(Ω) =(cid:80)
political correctness -- that can be somehow quantified. Given a
norm system, here we will consider that the cost of a norm sys-
tem can be obtained by adding the value of its norms, namely
ni∈Ω c(ni), where c(ni) stands for the cost of norm
ni. Furthermore, we make the (reasonable) assumption that costs
are bounded by a maximum budget b (i.e., the price regulatory au-
thorities are willing to pay) that is available to cover the expenses
of imposing those norms in the resulting Norm System. Then, we
can cast the decision problem faced by the decision maker as the
following multi-objective optimisation problem.
PROBLEM 3. Given a Norm Net NN= (cid:104)N, R(cid:105), a representa-
tion power function r, and a fixed budget b, the maximum norm
system problem with limited budget (MNSPLB) is the problem of
finding a sound norm system Ω ⊆ N with maximum representation
power and minimum cost limited by some non-negative budget b.
In order to solve the MNSPLB, we will try to cast it as a linear
program, likewise we did for the MNSP in section 3.1. Notice
though that solving the MNSPLB amounts to solving the following
optimisation problem:
(8)
N(cid:88)
N(cid:88)
i=1
i=1
max
r(ni) · xi
min
c(ni) · xi
N(cid:88)
i=1
c(ni) · xi ≤ b,
(9)
where b ≥ 0, to ensure that the cost of the norm system does
to go beyond the limited budget. The multi-objetive optimisation
problem represented by expression 8 above can be formulated as
a single-objective problem by aggregating the two objectives by
means of scalarisation [16]. This is achieved by: (i) normalising
the representation and cost values; and (ii) prioritising representa-
tion and cost values by means of weight values. On the one hand,
we can readily normalise representation values by considering a
maximum representation power. We can safely set this value to
r(nj), where recall that GN stands for the
set of norms that are not directly generalised by any other norm.
On the other hand, cost values can be normalied by means of the
maximum budget. As to how to prioritise representation costs and
values, we can simply employ a weight wr to weigh the importance
of maximising norm representation power, and another weight wc
to weigh the importance of minimising norm costs.
be Rmax =(cid:80)
nj∈GN
Putting all this together, the MNSPLB can be cast as a single-
objective optimisation problem that can be solved by the following
linear program:
(cid:104) wrRmax
N(cid:88)
i=1
·
xi · r(ni) + wc · (y − 1
b
xi · c(ni)
(10)
(cid:105)
N(cid:88)
i=1
subject to the constraints in equations 2-7, the budget constraint in
equation 9, plus the following additional constraints:
• The auxiliary indicator variable y must be assigned as fol-
lows:
1 if
N(cid:88)
i=1
0 Otherwise
y =
xi > 0
the following non-linear constraint:(cid:80)N
Notice that the assignment above captures the satisfaction of
i=1 xi > 0 =⇒ y =
1. Thus, the indicator variable will take on value 1 the deci-
sion variables indicate that at least one norm is selected as
part of the norm system, and value 0 when the selected norm
system is empty (namely xi = 0 for all 1 ≤ i ≤ N).
In other words, the indicator variable y is binary, and hence
must satisfy that:
y ∈ {0, 1}
(11)
Thus, the indicator variable guarantees that nothing is added
to the objective function if no norm is chosen. Furthermore,
(cid:80)N
this indicator variable allows us to turn the minimisation prob-
(cid:80)N
lem in equation 8 into a maximisation problem, since finding
i=1 xi·
the norm system with minimum (normalised) cost ( 1
b
c(ni)) amounts to maximising expression y − 1
i=1 xi ·
c(ni).
However, notice that the addition of indicator variable y re-
quires the satisfaction of a non-linear constraint (i.e., an im-
plication). Hence, in order to keep the problem linear, we
will linearise such constraint as follows:
b
N(cid:88)
y ≤
xi ≤ M · y
(12)
where M is a very large number. 3
i=1
• The weights to measure the importance of maximising rep-
resentation power and minimising cost must satisfy:
wr + wc = 1
wr, wc ∈ [0, 1]
(13)
The next example helps us illustrate how different elements in
our multi-objective decision function influence the norms that are
finally chosen to establish in a society. Specifically, we focus on the
influence of: using our different representation power functions;
changing norm costs; and variations in the total budget limit.
EXAMPLE 4. In our example, we could initially assume a max-
imum budget of 5 and consider the following costs: n1 has no as-
sociated cost because it requires no additional actions; n2 has an
associated cost of 2 since it requires passengers to interact with
passport registration machines and a few staff members; the cost of
n3 is 5 due to the fact that it requires form fulfilling, gathering, and
post-processing; and n4 and n5, which are more specific than n3,
just cost 2. Hence: b=5, c1=0, c2=c4=c5=2, c3=5. Moreover, in
this example we will equally value the importance of norm repre-
sentation and deployment cost, and thus, we set wr = wc = 0.5,
and, finally, the maximum representation power is computed as
Rmax = 5 when considering rI whereas Rmax = 3 if rg is used
instead.
Now, considering rg -- the generalization power function -- in equa-
tion 10, with restrictions from equations 2-7, 9, and 11-13, the lin-
ear program solver returns Ω = {n1} as the optimally sound norm
system (see first Ω in fifth column in Table 1). Nevertheless, if cost
of norm n1 is increased up to c1 = 6, since not checking passports
at the border may cause political problems with the neighbouring
countries, the solver will then choose Ω = {n2} to be the optimally
sound norm system (see second Ω in fifth column in Table 1).
Alternatively, if we consider the inclusion power function rI in-
stead, but keep initial costs assumptions (i.e.,c1 = 0) Ω = {n1}
remains as the optimally sound norm system (as shown in first Ω
3In our problem M can be defined to be strictly larger than N.
Table 1: Proposed problems formulation and results for the exam-
ple in Figure 1.
MNSP MNSP
Max.
Max.
max.
max.
gen.
incl.
1
1
inclus.
rI
2-7
generl.
rg
2-7
Criteria
Objective
function
Represent.
power r
Constraints
Example
solutions
Ω ={n3}
Ω ={n1, n4},
{n1, n5},
{n2, n4},
{n2, n5}
MNSPLB
Multi-objt.
max. incl.
min. cost
10
inclusion
rI
2-7,9,11-13
Ω = {n1}
Ω = {n1, n4},
{n1, n5}
Ω = {n2},
{n4},{n5}
Ω = {n4},{n5}
Ω = {n3}
MNSPLB
Multi-objt.
max. gen.
min. cost
10
generalisat.
rg
2-7,9,11-13
Ω = {n1}
Ω = {n2}
in fourth column in Table 1). In fact, this result does not change
if we decrease the maximum budget to b = 4. However, if we fur-
ther increase it to b = 10, this optimally sound norm system is
enlarged to include one of the specific norms so that Ω = {n1, n4}
or Ω = {n1, n5} in second Ω in Table 1's fourth column. Fur-
thermore, the solver also computes different results for c1 = 6 and
maximum budgets: b = 4 produces three possible optimally sound
norm systems: Ω = {n2}, Ω = {n4}, and Ω = {n5} (see third
Ω in fourth column); b = 5 implies two possible optimally sound
norm systems Ω = {n4} and Ω = {n5}; and finally, b = 10 re-
sults in Ω = {n3}, since the inclusion power of n3 can compensate
its high cost (c3 = 5) when normalised by 10.
Previous example has briefly illustrated how several factors in our
multi-objective decision function influence the computed result.
Nevertheless, as previously mentioned, we assume the regulatory
authorities' particular needs will naturally determine these factors.
It is important to have in mind that our aim here is limited to model
alternative problems, and thus, we summarise them in subsequent
columns in Table 1. Specifically, first raw describes in plain (ab-
breviated) language the criteria that has been applied for the for-
malisation of each problem. Then, second row references the equa-
tion that describes the objective function. Third row specifies the
actual representation power function in use. Fourth row lists the
constraints to which the objective function is subject to. And fi-
nally, last row compiles the different norm systems that have been
computed for our running example.
5. MORAL VALUES IN NORM DECISION
MAKING
So far we have considered quantitative criteria that regulation
authorities can take into account when choosing the norms to enact
in a society. However, decision makers may also require to assess
the moral values promoted by the norms in a given norm network
under analysis. Here we understand that a norm supports a given
moral value when the norm is meant to accomplish a goal that is
aligned with (or promotes) the moral value. In this case, we will
assume that the society has moral/social preferences over values.
Thus, bringing in values into the norm decision making of regula-
tory authorities can be regarded as a qualitative criterion.
Based on the moral/social preferences over values, to reason
about norm systems we must be able to compare them in terms
of the values that they support. The principle that we adhere to
the more preferred the values supported by a norm system,
is:
the more preferred that norm system. Thus, ideally, the decision
maker would like to opt for the norm system that supports the most
preferred values out of all the sound norm systems. Nonetheless,
we cannot forget that further criteria such as representation power
and cost, as dicussed in sections 3 and 4, must be part of the deci-
sion making. This section is devoted to extend the multi-objective
decision-making problem introduced in section 4 to account for the
moral values supported by norms.
Our first goal is to be able to quantitatively reason about norm
systems based on the qualitative preferences over the moral values
that they support. First, in order to connect moral values and norms,
we adapt some value-related definitions by Bench-Capon et al.[9].
Thus, we shall consider V as a non-empty set of moral values in
a society. We will assume that values are not connected objects,
namely there are no relationships between them, like e.g. comple-
mentarity. Moreover, we will assume that there is a total order (no
ties) (cid:31) over the moral values in V that reflects the moral/social
preferences over them. Without loss of generality, we can assume
that v1 (cid:31) v2 (cid:31) . . . (cid:31) vV . Now, we can obtain the value(s) sup-
ported by each norm by means of a function val : N → 2V \ ∅.
Thus, val(ni) stands for the set of values promoted by norm ni.
Now we introduce a utility function that will allow us to cap-
ture the total ordering over values. The utility of a value can be
calculated as:
u(vi) = 1 +
u(vk)
(14)
where 1 ≤ i ≤ V . From this definition, it is clear that u(vi) >
u(vj) ⇔ vi (cid:31) vj From this, we can readily calculate the value
support of a norm ni by adding the utility of the values supported
by the norm as follows:
un(ni) =
u(v)
(15)
And from this, we can compute the value support for a given
norm system Ω ⊆ N by adding the utility of the values supported
by each one of its norms as:
V (cid:88)
k=i+1
(cid:88)
v∈val(ni)
(cid:88)
n∈Ω
uN (Ω) =
un(n)
(16)
Notice that utility function uN allows us to lift the preferences
defined as a linear order over single moral/social values to a pref-
erence relation over bundles of norms. Thus, we will say that
Ω (cid:31) Ω(cid:48) ⇔ uN (Ω) > uN (Ω(cid:48)). Interestingly, the lifting of pref-
erences provided by the uN utility function satisfies two interest-
ing properties: (i) responsiveness [8]; and (ii) monotonicity. Infor-
mally, responsiveness (also called pairwise-dominance), states that
if in a norm system {n2, n3}, n3 is replaced by a better (supporting
more preferred values) norm, e.g. n1, then {n2, n1} makes a better
norm system. Monotonicity states that if Ω ⊃ Ω(cid:48), then Ω (cid:31) Ω(cid:48).
These observations are fomally captured in the folllowing lemma.
LEMMA 2. The utility function uN guarantees responsiveness
and monotonicity.
PROOF. 2. To prove responsiveness it suffices to show that given
a norm system Ω such that ni ∈ Ω, nj (cid:54)∈ Ω, and nj (cid:31) ni, then
Ω\{ni}∪{nj} (cid:31) Ω. Let us note Ω−i = Ω\{ni}. Since uN (Ω) =
uN (Ω−i) + un(ni) < uN (Ω−i) + un(nj) = uN (Ω−i ∪ {nj}),
Figure 2: Example of rules of border control (n1, . . . , n5) together
with the values they support (v1, v2).
then Ω\{ni}∪{nj} (cid:31) Ω holds. As for monotonicity, this immedi-
ately follows from the definition of utility of a value in 14. Given two
norm systems such that Ω ⊃ Ω(cid:48), it is clear that uN (Ω) > uN (Ω(cid:48))
since the value support for each norm in Ω \ Ω(cid:48) is greater or equal
than 1, and hence Ω (cid:31) Ω(cid:48).
At this point, we can quantitatively compare norm systems based
on the values that they support. Hence, we are ready to define a
new multi-objective optimisation problem involving values as an
extension of problem 3.
PROBLEM 4. Given a Norm Net NN= (cid:104)N, R(cid:105), a representa-
tion power function r, a fixed budget b, a set of values V and a lin-
ear order (cid:31) over its values, the value-based maximum norm system
problem with limited budget (VMNSPLB) is the problem of finding
a sound norm system Ω ⊆ N with maximum representation power,
minimum cost limited by some non-negative budget b, and maxi-
mum value support.
This problem can be encoded as a linear program by extend-
ing the one in section 4. In order to embed the maximisation of
the value support of normative systems in the objective function of
expression 8, we require: (i) a normalisation constant for the val-
ues of uN ; and (ii) some prioritisation weight wv that measures
the relative importance of maximising value support. Notice that
we can safely normalise moral values by considering Vmax =
i=1 un(ni) as the normalisation constant. Then, solving the
VMNSPLB amounts to solving the following linear program, which
combines the maximisation of representation power, the minimisa-
tion of cost, and the maximisation of value support:
(cid:80)N
(cid:104) wrRmax
·
N(cid:88)
i=1
max
xi · r(ni) + wc · (y − 1
b
xi · c(ni))+
(cid:105)
+
wvVmax
·
xi · un(ni)
N(cid:88)
N(cid:88)
i=1
i=1
(17)
subject to constraints from equations 2 to 7, 9, 11, and 12, together
with a reformulation of the weight constraints (in eq. 13) as:
wr + wc + wv = 1 wr, wc, wv ∈ [0, 1]
(18)
n2=Obl(all, register-passport)n3=Obl(all, fulfil-form)n5=Obl(visitors, fulfil_form)n4=Obl(locals, fulfil_form)n1=Perm(all, cross_border) xx x xxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxGeneralisationx xxxExclusivityo oooSubstitutability+ + + + valuesupportv1="free movement of persons" v2="safety" + ++++ ++++ ++++++++++++++++++ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++++ + + + + + + + EXAMPLE 5. In our example, as Figure 2 shows, we can con-
sider that n1 supports the "free movement of persons" value (v1),
whereas n2, . . . , n5 support the "safety" value (v2). Let us con-
sider that the society prefers "free movement" to "safety" (namely
"free movement" (cid:31) "safety"), then, u(v1) = 2 and u(v2) = 1
and that moral values are the only criterion to consider (i.e., wr =
wc = 0 and wv = 1). Therefore, our problem amounts to finding
the sound norm system that has maximum value support. Then, if
we encode the problem, a linear program solver results in two al-
ternative solutions Ω = {n1, n4}, Ω = {n1, n5}. In other words,
they constitute two different value-optimal sound norm systems.
6. DISCUSSION: DEALING WITH NORMS
IN FORCE
So far we have considered that a norm net does contain all the
norms and relationships a decision maker is to reason about. How-
ever, this many not be typically the case. Instead, she may already
count on a collection of norms currently in force. If this is the case,
the decision making process must consider such norms as part of
the norm reasoning together with the norm net containing a new
collection of candidate norms. Here we identify two main strategies
to tackle this type of reasoning: (1) to consider that norms in force
must be preserved; and (2) to consider that norms in force must
not be necessarily preserved. The first strategy will have to con-
sider that norms in force translate into hard constraints in the norm
decision making process, whereas the second strategy adds more
flexibility to the decision maker. In what follows, we discuss how
these strategies can be readily accommodated in our optimisation-
based framework.
Henceforth, we shall consider that N0 stands for a set of norms in
force and NN= (cid:104)N, R(cid:105) stands for a norm net containing candidate
norms to reason about together with their relationships. Whatever
the strategy we adopt, we must build an extended norm net that
merges the norms in force with the norm net. This will result in
a new norm net NN(cid:48) = (cid:104)N0 ∪ N, R ∪ R0(cid:105), where R(cid:48) stands for
generalisation, exclusivity and substitutability relationships hold-
ing between the norms in force in N0 and the norm candidates in
the norm net, namely in N.
EXAMPLE 6. Figure 3 shows an extension of the example in
figure 1. The norms in force in N0 are the following norms:
n6 : P rohibition(all_passengers, unattend_luggage)
n7 : Obligation(all_passengers, passport_control)
Norm n6 prohibits all passengers to leave their luggage unattended
and norm n7 forces all passengers to go through passport control.
Notice that there is a new exclusivity relation between n7 and n1,
so that (n7, n1) ∈ R0 will be added to the new norm net NN'.
Now we are ready to consider how to preserve the norms in force
within our optimisation framework. This can be readily achieved
by encoding the optimisation problem of choice for the extended
norm net. However, imposing that the norms in force (i.e., in N0)
are always selected as part of the norm system requires to add fur-
ther constraints to our optimisation problem. Thus, we add the fol-
lowing constraints:
xn = 1 for all n ∈ N0
(19)
EXAMPLE 7. Consider again our example in Figure 3. Obvi-
ously, the norms to append to N0 = {n6, n7} will depend on the
prioritising criteria. However, norm n1 in first Ω in Table 1's last
Figure 3: Example of N0, a Norm Net NN', and an exclusivity
relation between norms in N0 and N.
column cannot be part of the resulting norm system because of its
incompatibility with n7. Hence, n2, n3, n4, n5 would constitute the
norm candidates to be added to N0.
Finally, consider that not all norms in force must be preserved.
This adds more flexibility to the decision maker, who may discover
a norm system that is actually better (according to the decision cri-
teria of choice) than the norm system resulting of the preservation
of the norms in force. Notice that, in this case, we just need to en-
code our optimisation problem of choice for the extended norm net
NN' without adding any further constraints like 19.
EXAMPLE 8. Going back to our running example, if maximum
budget is b=5, norms n6 and n7 have cost 1, n1 has 0 cost, and
we use rg, then new norm net becomes NN'=(cid:104){n1, n6},∅(cid:105). As a
consequence, n7 would be replaced by n1 in N(cid:48). Alternatively, in
case we consider again c1=6, no actual changes would take place
in N0 so that NN'=(cid:104){n6, n7},∅(cid:105).
7. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
The contribution of this paper is the modelling of a variety of
norm decision-making problems faced by policy makers when choos-
ing the norms to enact in a society. Our modeling assumes that a
policy maker has knowledge about candidate norms to enact and
the relationships between such norms. In particular, our work char-
acterises generalisation, exclusivity, and substitutability as norm re-
lationships. Furthermore, we show that the decision-making prob-
lems faced by policy makers can be cast as optimisation problems
with multiple decision criteria (representation power, cost, and as-
sociated moral values). To the best of our knowledge, using moral
values as a norm selection criterion is a particularly relevant contri-
bution to the Normative Multi-Agent Systems research community.
Furthermore, the complexity of the resulting optimisation problems
makes their solving non trivial. And yet, we managed to encode
them as linear programs so that they can be solved with the aid of
state-of-the-art linear programming solvers.
However, our work opens many interesting paths to future re-
search. First, it is worth to conduct an empirical evaluation investi-
gating the empirical hardness of different norm decision scenarios
depending on the density of norm relationships. Second, reasoning
about norms and values could be taken a step further by consider-
ing that norms support positively or negatively values. Moreover,
from a pragmatic perspective: we could deal with a partial order
(instead of a total order) over values, perform automated discovery
of norm relationships, and embed our decision-making solvers into
a decision support tool for policy makers.
n2=Obl(all, register passport)n3=Obl(all, fulfil form)n5=Obl(visitors, fulfil form)n4=Obl(locals, fulfil form)n1=Perm(all, cross border) xx x xxx xxxxxxxxxGeneralisationx xxxExclusivityo oooSubstitutabilityn6=Proh(all, unatt.luggage)n7=Obl(all, passport ctrl) NNN0 D. Sleeman. Norm Conflicts and Inconsistencies in Virtual
Organisations, pages 245 -- 258. Springer Berlin Heidelberg,
Berlin, Heidelberg, 2007.
[20] S. Modgil. Value based argumentation in hierarchical
argumentation frameworks. In Proceedings of the 2006
Conference on Computational Models of Argument:
Proceedings of COMMA 2006, pages 297 -- 308, Amsterdam,
The Netherlands, The Netherlands, 2006. IOS Press.
[21] J. Morales, M. Lopez-Sanchez, J. A. Rodriguez-Aguilar,
W. Vasconcelos, and M. Wooldridge. On-line automated
synthesis of compact normative systems. ACM Transactions
on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems (TAAS),
10(1):2:1 -- 2:33, Mar. 2015.
[22] J. Morales, M. Lopez-Sanchez, J. A. Rodriguez-Aguilar,
M. Wooldridge, and W. Vasconcelos. Minimality and
simplicity in the on-line automated synthesis of normative
systems. In AAMAS 2014, pages 109 -- 116, Richland, SC,
2014. IFAAMAS.
[23] J. Morales, M. L'opez-S'anchez, J. A. Rodr'iguez-Aguilar,
M. Wooldridge, and W. Vasconcelos. Synthesising liberal
normative systems. In Proceedings of the 2015 International
Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems,
AAMAS '15, pages 433 -- 441, Richland, SC, 2015.
International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and
Multiagent Systems.
[24] R. Riveret, E. Nepomuceno, J. Pitt, and A. Artikis.
Self-governance by transfiguration: From learning to
prescription changes. pages 70 -- 79. IEEE, 2014.
[25] B. Savarimuthu, S. Cranefield, M. Purvis, and M. Purvis.
Identifying prohibition norms in agent societies. Artificial
Intelligence and Law, 21(1):1 -- 46, 2013.
[26] R. Sethi and E. Somanathan. The evolution of social norms
in common property resource use. The American Economic
Review, pages 766 -- 788, 1996.
[27] Y. Shoham and M. Tennenholtz. On social laws for artificial
agent societies: off-line design. Artificial Intelligence,
73(1-2):231 -- 252, February 1995.
[28] W. W. Vasconcelos, M. J. Kollingbaum, and T. J. Norman.
Normative conflict resolution in multi-agent systems.
Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems,
19(2):124 -- 152, 2009.
[29] D. Villatoro, J. Sabater-Mir, and S. Sen. Social instruments
for robust convention emergence. In IJCAI, pages 420 -- 425,
2011.
[30] V. Weerakkody and C. G. Reddick. Public sector
transformation through e-government: experiences from
Europe and North America. Routledge, 2012.
[31] F. L. y López, M. Luck, and M. d'Inverno. Constraining
autonomy through norms. In AAMAS, pages 674 -- 681. ACM,
2002.
REFERENCES
[1] Citizen space in new zealand's ministry of justice: Better
family violence law.
https://consultations.justice.govt.nz/policy/family-violence-
law/.
[2] Loomio: software to assist collaborative decision-making
processes. https://www.loomio.org/.
[3] Pensions policy institute in new zealand: Citizen's pension:
Lessons from new zealand and state pension reform: The
consultation response.
http://www.pensionspolicyinstitute.org.uk/press/press-
releases/citizens-pension-lessons-from-new-zealand-and-
state-pension-reform-the-consultation-response.
[4] City of Barcelona participation portal.
https://decidim.barcelona, 2016.
[5] City of Madrid participation portal. https://decide.madrid.es/,
2016.
[6] City of Reykjavík participation portal.
http://reykjavik.is/en/participation, 2016.
[7] T. Agotnes and M. Wooldridge. Optimal Social Laws. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous
Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS), pages 667 -- 674,
2010.
[8] S. Barbera, P. Hammond, and C. Seidl, editors. Handbook of
utility theory. Kluwer, Boston, Mass. [u.a.], 2004.
[9] T. J. M. Bench-Capon and K. Atkinson. Abstract
argumentation and values. In Argumentation in Artificial
Intelligence, pages 45 -- 64. 2009.
[10] G. Boella, L. van der Torre, and H. Verhagen. Introduction to
normative multiagent systems. Computational &
Mathematical Organization Theory, 12(2-3):71 -- 79, 2006.
[11] J. Campos, M. López-Sánchez, M. Salamó, P. Avila, and
J. A. Rodríguez-Aguilar. Robust regulation adaptation in
multi-agent systems. ACM Transactions on Autonomous and
Adaptive Systems, 8:1 -- 27, 2013. IF 1.286, Q1 Computer
Science, Theory & Methods cat.
[12] C. DeTar. InterTwinkles: Online Tools for Non-Hierarchical,
Consensus-Oriented Decision Making. PhD thesis, Media
Arts and Sciences at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, 2013.
[13] D. Fitoussi and M. Tennenholtz. Choosing social laws for
multi-agent systems: Minimality and simplicity. Artificial
Intelligence, 119(1-2):61 -- 101, 2000.
[14] N. Griffiths and M. Luck. Norm Emergence in Tag-Based
Cooperation. In Proceedings of COIN, 2010.
[15] D. Grossi and F. Dignum. From abstract to concrete norms in
agent institutions. In Proceedings of the Third international
conference on Formal Approaches to Agent-Based Systems,
FAABS'04, pages 12 -- 29, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2005.
Springer-Verlag.
[16] C.-L. Hwang and A. S. M. Masud. Multiple objective
decision making methods and applications: a state-of-the-art
survey, volume 164. Springer Science & Business Media,
2012.
[17] R. M. Karp. Reducibility among combinatorial problems. In
Complexity of computer computations, pages 85 -- 103.
Springer, 1972.
[18] T. Kohler, J.-P. Steghoefer, D. Busquets, and J. Pitt. The
value of fairness: Trade-offs in repeated dynamic resource
allocation. pages 1 -- 10. IEEE, 2014.
[19] M. J. Kollingbaum, T. J. Norman, A. Preece, and
|
1906.10124 | 1 | 1906 | 2019-06-25T15:18:10 | On Multi-Agent Learning in Team Sports Games | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI",
"cs.HC",
"cs.LG"
] | In recent years, reinforcement learning has been successful in solving video games from Atari to Star Craft II. However, the end-to-end model-free reinforcement learning (RL) is not sample efficient and requires a significant amount of computational resources to achieve superhuman level performance. Model-free RL is also unlikely to produce human-like agents for playtesting and gameplaying AI in the development cycle of complex video games. In this paper, we present a hierarchical approach to training agents with the goal of achieving human-like style and high skill level in team sports games. While this is still work in progress, our preliminary results show that the presented approach holds promise for solving the posed multi-agent learning problem. | cs.MA | cs | On Multi-Agent Learning in Team Sports Games
Yunqi Zhao 1 Igor Borovikov 1 Jason Rupert 2 Caedmon Somers 2 Ahmad Bierami 1
9
1
0
2
n
u
J
5
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
4
2
1
0
1
.
6
0
9
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract
In recent years, reinforcement learning has been
successful in solving video games from Atari to
Star Craft II. However, the end-to-end model-free
reinforcement learning (RL) is not sample effi-
cient and requires a significant amount of com-
putational resources to achieve superhuman level
performance. Model-free RL is also unlikely to
produce human-like agents for playtesting and
gameplaying AI in the development cycle of com-
plex video games. In this paper, we present a
hierarchical approach to training agents with the
goal of achieving human-like style and high skill
level in team sports games. While this is still work
in progress, our preliminary results show that the
presented approach holds promise for solving the
posed multi-agent learning problem.
1. Introduction
Computer simulated environments, and particularly games,
have played a central role in advancing artificial intelligence
(AI). From the early days of machines playing checkers
to Deep Blue, and to the most recent accomplishments of
Atari bots, AlphaGo, OpenAI Dota 2 bots, and AlphaStar,
artificial game agents have achieved superhuman level per-
formance even in the most complex games. This progress is
mainly due to a combination of advancements in deep learn-
ing, tree search, and reinforcement learning (RL) techniques
in the past decade.
(Samuel, 1959) used a form of heuristic search combined
with RL ideas to solve checkers. IBM Deep Blue followed
the tree search path and was the first artificial game agent
who beat the chess world champion, Gary Kasparov (Deep
Blue, 1997). A decade later, Monte Carlo Tree Search
1EA Digital Platform Data & AI, Electronic Arts, Red-
wood City, CA 94065 USA 2EA Sports, Electronic Arts, 4330
Sanderson Way, Burnaby, BC V5G 4X1, Canada. Correspon-
dence to: Yunqi Zhao <[email protected]>, Igor Borovikov
<[email protected]>, Ahmad Beirami <[email protected]>.
Proceedings of the 36 th International Conference on Machine
Learning, Long Beach, California, PMLR 97, 2019. Copyright
2019 by the author(s).
(MCTS) (Coulom, 2006; Kocsis & Szepesv´ari, 2006) was
a big leap in AI to train game agents. MCTS agents for
playing Settlers of Catan were reported in (Szita et al., 2009;
Chaslot et al., 2008) and shown to beat previous heuristics.
(Heyden, 2009) compares multiple approaches of agents
to one another in the game Carcassonne on the two-player
variant of the game and discusses variations of MCTS and
Minimax search for playing the game. MCTS has also been
applied to the game of 7 Wonders (Robilliard et al., 2014)
and Ticket to Ride (Huchler, 2015).
(Tesauro, 1995), on the other hand, used TD-Lambda which
is a temporal difference RL algorithm to train Backgam-
mon agents at a superhuman level. More recently, deep Q
networks (DQNs) have emerged as a general representa-
tion learning framework from the pixels in a frame buffer
combined with Q-Learning with function approximation
without need for task-specific feature engineering (Mnih
et al., 2015).1 The impressive recent progress on RL to
solve video games partly owes to the recent abundance of
processing power and AI computing technology.2
DeepMind researchers remarried the two approaches by
demonstrating that neural networks and their generalization
properties could significantly speed up and scale MCTS.
This led to AI agents that play Go at a superhuman level (Sil-
ver et al., 2016), and solely via self-play (Silver et al.,
2017b;a). Subsequently, OpenAI researchers showed that
a policy optimization approach with function approxima-
tion, called Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) (Schulman
et al., 2017), would lead to training agents at a superhu-
man level in Dota 2 (OpenAI Five, 2018). The most recent
progress was reported by DeepMind on StarCraft II, where
AlphaStar was unveiled to play the game at a superhuman
level by combining a variety of techniques including the use
of attention networks (AlphaStar, 2019).
Despite the tremendous success stories of deep RL at solv-
ing games, we believe that winning isn't everything. We
consider the alternative problem of training human-like and
believable agents that would make the video game engag-
1While the original DQNs worked with pixels as state space,
the same idea could be applied to other cases by changing the
network structure appropriately.
2The amount of AI compute has been doubling every 3-4
months in the past few years (AI & Compute, 2018).
On Multi-Agent Learning in Team Sports Games
ing and fun for the human players. As video games have
evolved, so have the game graphics and the gameplaying
AI, also referred to as game AI. Considering games with a
limited state-action space, such as Atari games, the human-
likeness and believability of AI agents would be non-issues.
Today, we have reached a point where game worlds look
very realistic calling for more intelligent and realistic game-
playing agents.
While the traditional game AI solutions are already pro-
viding excellent experiences for players, it is becoming
increasingly more difficult to scale those handcrafted solu-
tions up as the game worlds are becoming larger, the content
is becoming more dynamic, and the number of interacting
agents is increasing. This calls for alternative approaches
to train human-like and believable game AI. We build on
a variety of planning methods and machine learning tech-
niques (including the state-of-the-art deep RL) and move
away from the recent trends at training superhuman agents
in solving the game AI problem (Zhao et al., 2019).
In this paper, we describe a work-in-progress hierarchical
solution to a team sports video game. At a low level, the
agents need to take actions that are believable and human-
like whereas at a high level the agents should appear to be
following a "game plan". While imitation learning seems
apt for solving the low level problem, we propose to rely on
reinforcement learning and planning to solve the high-level
game strategic plan.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2,
we provide the basic problem setup. In Section 3, we de-
scribe the solution techniques used to solve the problem.
In Section 4, we provide a more in-depth presentation of
the reinforcement learning techniques used for achieving
multi-agent strategic gameplay. Finally, concluding remarks
are presented in Section 5.
2. Problem Setup & Related Work
In this paper, we study a team sports video game, where
the designer's goal is to train agents that exhibit strategic
teamplay with a high skill level while the agents play like
human players. Hence, the solution would entail a variety
of techniques, which will be discussed in more detail in this
section.
2.1. Multi-agent learning
Our problem naturally lends itself to the multi-agent learn-
ing (MAL) framework. In such a framework, iteratively
optimizing for a policy could suffer from non-convergence
due to the breakdown of the stationarity of the decision pro-
cess and partial observability of the state space (Littman,
1994; Chang et al., 2004). This is because the environment
for each of the agents would change whenever any other
agent updates their policy, and hence independent reinforce-
ment learning agents do not work well in practice (Matignon
et al., 2012).
More recently, (Lowe et al., 2017) proposed an actor-critic
algorithm with a centralized critic during training and a
decentralized actor at training and inference. (Gupta et al.,
2017) compare policy gradient, temporal-difference error,
and actor-critic methods on cooperative deep multi-agent
reinforcement learning (MARL). See (Hernandez-Leal et al.,
2017; 2018) for recent surveys on MAL and deep MARL
advancements.
We emphasize that our problem is fundamentally simpler
than the MAL framework. In contrast to the robotics prob-
lems where each agent would need to execute their own
decentralized policy, in a video game all agents could be
trained centrally and executed centrally as well on a single
CPU. However, in the centralized treatment of the problem,
in addition to the action space growing exponentially with
the number of agents in the field, the chance of randomly
executing a strategic play is very low, which requires col-
lecting a huge number of state-action pairs for the agent to
be able to learn such strategies if they start from random
gameplay. We will discuss some of these challenges in
Section 4.
2.2. Learning from demonstrations
To ensure human-like behavior, we use human demonstra-
tions in the training loop. There are three general ways of
using the demonstrations to train agents. Inverse reinforce-
ment learning (IRL) (Ng & Russell, 2000; Abbeel & Ng,
2004) would infer reward functions that promote the ob-
served behavior in demonstrations, which can then be used
in model-free RL. However, IRL is by nature an ill-posed
inverse problem and tricky to solve, especially in a multi-
agent framework. (Ho & Ermon, 2016) proposed a direct
approach to distilling a policy from the demonstrations us-
ing adversarial training, which has recently been extended
to the multi-agent case (Yu et al., 2019).
It is also possible to use demonstrations to guide RL. (Levine
& Koltun, 2013) train off-policy RL using demonstrations.
(Mnih et al., 2015) use behavioral cloning to initialize value
and policy networks that would solve Go, and (AlphaStar,
2019) is built on the same thought process. (Vecer´ık et al.,
2017; Harmer et al., 2018) use demonstrations in the replay
buffer to guide the policy to a better local optimum. (Ra-
jeswaran et al., 2017; Peng et al., 2018) shape the reward
function to promote actions that mimic the demonstrator.
(Kartal et al., 2019) use demonstrations to teach the policy
to avoid catastrophic events in the game of Pommerman
where model-free RL fails.
On Multi-Agent Learning in Team Sports Games
2.3. Hierarchical learning
To manage the complexity of the posed problem (see Sec-
tion 3), our solution involves a hierarchical approach. (Le
et al., 2018) consider a hierarchical approach where the un-
derlying low level actions are learned via RL whereas the
high-level goals are picked up via IL from human demon-
strations. This is in contrast to the hierarchical approach that
we consider in this paper where we use IL at the low-level
to achieve human-like behavior. (Pang et al., 2018) break
down the complexity of the StarCraft learning environment
(Vinyals et al., 2017) by breaking down the problem to a
hierarchy of simpler learning tasks. (Bacon et al., 2017)
apply a planning layer on top of RL where they infer the ab-
stractions from the data as well. Finally, (Vezhnevets et al.,
2017) consider a bi-level neural network architecture where
at the top level the Manager sets goals at a low temporal
resolution, and at the low level the Worker produces prim-
itive actions conditioned on the high-level goals at a high
temporal resolution. More recently, (Zhan et al., 2018) pro-
vide a hierarchical generative model for achieving human
gameplay using weak supervision.
2.4. Human-Robot Interaction
The human-robot interaction problem shares many similari-
ties with the problem at hand (Sheridan, 2016). However,
training agents in video games is simpler in many ways.
First, the agents can execute their policies centrally and
there is no need for decentralized execution. Second, ex-
tracting semantic information from sensory signals such as
processing images/videos and text-to-speech conversion is
not needed as all of the semantic information is available
from the game engine. On the other hand, many of the
sample efficient learning techniques designed for training
robots are applicable to training agents in team sports video
games as well (Doering et al., 2019).
3. Solution Techniques
End-to-end model-free RL requires millions of state-action
pairs equivalent of many years of experience for the agent
to reach human-level performance.3 Applying these same
techniques to modern complex games for playtesting and
game AI requires obtaining and processing hundreds of
years of experience, which is only feasible using significant
cloud infrastructure costing millions of dollars (AlphaStar,
2019; Vinyals et al., 2017). Hence, we move away from the
end-to-end solutions in favor of hierarchical solutions by
breaking the complex problem into a hierarchy of simpler
learning tasks.
We assume multiple levels of the problem abstraction in a
3AlphaStar is trained using the equivalent of 60,000 years of
human experience.
team sports game. At the lowest level, the agent's actions
and movements should resemble that of actual human play-
ers. At the highest level, the agents should learn how to
follow a (learned) high-level game plan. In the mid-level,
the agents should learn to exhibit skill and to coordinate
their movements with each other, e.g., to complete success-
ful passes or to shoot toward the opponent's goal when they
have a good chance of scoring.
While making RL more sample efficient is an active area of
research (e.g., by curiosity-driven exploration (Pathak et al.,
2017)), to apply RL to modern team sport video games or
any part of the problem, we would have to shape rewards
that promote a certain style or human-like behavior given
human demonstrations. Reward shaping in this setup is
an extremely challenging problem. Additionally, we also
need to capture human-like cooperation/conflict in multi-
agent strategic gameplay. These make reward shaping ex-
tremely challenging with mathematically vague objectives.
Hence, we rely on imitation learning and behavior cloning
(such as DAGGER (Ross et al., 2011), learning from play
(LFP) (Lynch et al., 2019), or GAIL (Ho & Ermon, 2016))
to achieve human-like low-level actions while we rely on RL
to achieve high skill at the top level. In this paper, we leave
out the details of the imitation learning that has been used
to train the low-level tactics and only focus on the mid-level
strategic gameplay.
To achieve faster convergence, we rely on curriculum learn-
ing (Bengio et al., 2009) in our training. We start training the
agent to deal with easy situations more often and then make
the environment more difficult. For example, the agent can
learn to shoot when the opponent's net is undefended fairly
quickly while it is harder to learn when to shoot when the
opponent is actively defending the net. We also train the
agent against simpler existing game AI agents first and then
make the AI level harder once the agent has already learned
the basics. Similar approaches are reported in (Yang et al.,
2018) to achieve cooperation in simulating self-driving cars,
and in (Gao et al., 2019) to solve the game of Pommerman.
To deal with the MAL aspect of the problem, as the first
step we train agents one at a time within the team, and let
them blend into the overall strategic gameplay. Of course,
there is little control gained from this process and shaping
rewards is highly dependent on the status of the other agents
in the environment While we have not yet implemented the
centralized training of multiple agents, this is the immediate
problem we are tackling now. We will also have to solve
the credit assignment in MARL for each individual agent's
behavior (Devlin et al., 2014). We remind the reader that the
goal is to provide a viable approach to solving the problem
with reasonable amount of computational resources.
Last but not least, we also move away from using the raw
state space through the screen pixels. On the contrary, we
On Multi-Agent Learning in Team Sports Games
the coordinates of the players and their velocities as well
as an indicator for the possession of the ball. The action
space is discrete and is considered to be left, right, forward,
backward, pass, and shoot. Although the player can hit two
or more of the actions together we do not consider that pos-
sibility to keep the action space small for better scalability.
We currently use this mid-level simulator to inform passing
and shooting decisions in the low-level imitation learning.
In the rest of this section, we report our progress toward
applying deep RL in the STS2 environment to achieve multi-
agent gameplay. Future work will entail a better integration
between these levels of abstraction.
4.1. Single agent in a 1v1 game
As the simplest first experiment, we consider training an
agent that learns to play against the traditional game AI
in a 1v1 match. We start with a sparse reward function of
'+1' for scoring and '-1' for being scored against. We used
DQN (Mnih et al., 2015), Rainbow (Hessel et al., 2017),
and PPO (Schulman et al., 2017) to train agents that would
replace the home team (player). DQN shows the best sign
of learning useful policies after an equivalent of ∼5 years
of human gameplay experience. The gameplay statistics of
the DQN agent are reported in Table 1. As can be seen the
DQN agent was losing 1:4 to the traditional AI. Note that
we randomize the orientation of the agents at the beginning
of each episode, and hence, the agent encounters several
easy situations with an open net for scoring. On the other
hand, the agent does not learn how to play defensively when
the opponent is in possession of the ball. In fact, we believe
that a successful strategy for defense is more difficult to
learn than that of offensive gameplay.
Table 1. DQN agent in a 1v1 match against a traditional game AI
agent with a sparse '+/-1' reward for scoring.
Statistics
Score rate
Possession
DQN Agent
Trad. Game AI
22%
36%
78%
64%
Next, we shape the rewarding mechanism with the goal of
training agents that also learn how to play defensively. In
addition to the '+/-1' scoring reward, we reward the agent
with '+0.8' for gaining the possession of the ball and '-0.8'
for losing it. The statistics of the DQN agent are reported
in Table 2. In this case, we observe that the DQN agent
learns to play the game with an offensive style of chasing
the opponent down, gaining the ball, and attempting to shoot.
Its score rate as compared to the traditional game AI is 4:1,
and it dominates the game.
We repeated this experiment using PPO and Rainbow as
well. We observe that the PPO agent's policy converges
quickly to a simple one. When it is in possession of the
Figure 1. A screen shot of the simple team sports simulator (STS2).
The red agents are home agents attempting to score at the upper
end and the white agents are away agents attempting to score the
lower end. The highlighted player has the possession of the ball.
provide the agent with any additional form of information
that could ease training and might otherwise be hard to infer
from the screen pixels. Our ultimate goal is to train human-
like agents with believable behavior. Thus, so long as the
agents would pass the Turing test we are not alarmed by
the unfair extra information at their disposal while training.
Furthermore, in the game development stage, the game
itself is dynamic in the design and multiple parameters
and attributes (particularly related to graphics) may change
between different builds, hence it is desirable to train agents
on more stable features rather than screen pixels.
4. Strategic Gameplay via RL
Our training takes place on a mid-level simulator, which we
call simple team sports simulator (STS2).4 A screenshot of
STS2 gameplay is shown in Fig. 1. The simulator embeds
the rules of the game and the physics at a high level ab-
stracting away the low-level tactics. The simulator supports
kvk matches for any positive integer k. The two teams are
shown as red (home) and white (away). Each of the players
can be controlled by a human, traditional game AI, or any
other learned policy. The traditional game AI consists of a
handful of rules and constraints that govern the gameplay
strategy of the agents. The STS2 state space consists of the
4We intend to release the STS2 gameplay environment as an
open-source package.
On Multi-Agent Learning in Team Sports Games
Table 2. DQN agent in a 1v1 match against a traditional game AI
agent with a sparse '+/-1' reward for scoring and a '+/0.8' reward
for gaining/losing the possession of the ball.
Statistics
Score rate
Possession
DQN Agent
Trad. Game AI
80%
65%
20%
35%
ball, it wanders around in its own half without attempting to
cross the half-line or to shoot until the game times out. This
happens because the traditional game AI is programmed
not to chase the opponent in their half when the opponent
is in possession of the ball, and hence, the game goes on
as described until timeout with no scoring on either side.
PPO has clearly reached a local minimum in the space of
policies, which is not unexpected as it is optimizing the
policy directly. Finally, the Rainbow agent does not learn a
useful policy for either offense or defense.
As the last 1v1 experiment, we train a PPO agent against the
abovementioned DQN agent with exactly the same reward
function. The gameplay statistics is reported in Table 3. We
observe that the PPO agent is no longer stuck in a local
optimum policy, and it is dominating the DQN agent with a
score rate of 6:1. Notice that this is not a fair comparison as
the DQN agent was only trained against traditional game AI
agent and had not played against the PPO agent, whereas
the PPO agent is directly trained against the DQN agent.
While dominating the score rate, we also observe that the
game is much more even in terms of the possession of the
ball.
Table 3. PPO agent in a 1v1 match against a DQN agent, both
with a sparse '+/-1' reward for scoring and a '+/0.8' reward for
gaining/losing the possession of the ball.
Statistics
Score rate
Possession
PPO Agent DQN Agent
86%
55%
14%
45%
Note that in this experiment the DQN agent is fixed, i.e., not
learning, and PPO can overfit to exploit it because DQN is
deterministic, easier to overfit against as an opponent.
4.2. Single agent in a 2v2 game
Having gained some confidence with single agent training,
as the simplest multi-agent experiment, we consider training
a single agent in a 2v2 game. We let the traditional game AI
be in control of the opponent players as well as the teammate
player. The first experiment entails a '+/-0.8' team reward
for any player in the team gaining/losing the ball in addition
to the '+/-1' reward for scoring. The agent does not learn
a useful defensive or offensive policy and the team loses
overall.
In the second experiment, we change the rewarding mech-
anism to '+/-0.8' individual reward for the agent gain-
ing/losing the ball. This seems to turn the agent into an
offensive player that chases the opponent down, gains the
ball, and attempts to shoot. The team statistics for this agent
are shown in Table 4. We observe that the agent has learned
an offensive gameplay style where it scores most of the
time.
Table 4. Offensive DQN agent in a 2v2 match against two tradi-
tional game AI agents and playing with a traditional game AI agent
as teammate, with a sparse '+/-1' reward for scoring and a '+/0.8'
individual reward for gaining/losing the possession of the ball.
Opponent 2
DQN Agent
Teammate
Opponent 1
Statistics
Score rate
Possession
54%
30%
20%
18%
13%
26%
13%
26%
While the team is winning in the previous case, we observe
that the teammate is not participating much in the game
with even less possession of the ball than the opponent play-
ers. Next, we explore training an agent that can assist the
teammate score and possess the ball. We add another '-0.8'
teammate reward, which occurs whenever the teammate
loses the ball. The difference with a team reward (which re-
sulted in an agent that did not learn defense/offense policies)
here is that the agent is not getting a reward if the teammate
gains puck from the opponents. The gameplay statistics of
this team are reported in Table 5. In terms of gameplay,
we observe that the agent spends more time defending their
own goal and passes the ball to the teammate to score when
gains the possession of the ball.
Table 5. Defensive DQN agent in a 2v2 match against two tradi-
tional game AI agents and playing with a traditional game AI agent
as teammate, with a sparse '+/-1' reward for scoring and a '+/0.8'
individual reward for gaining/losing the possession of the ball and
a '-0.8' teammate reward when the teammate loses the possession
of the ball to the opponent team.
Statistics
Score rate
Possession
DQN Agent
Teammate
Opponent 1
Opponent 2
20%
36%
46%
22%
17%
21%
17%
21%
4.3. Two agents trained separately in a 2v2 game
After successful training of a single agent in a 2v2 game,
we train a second agent in the home team while reusing one
of the previously trained agents as the teammate. For this
experiment, we choose the DQN agent with an offensive
gameplay style from the previous set of experiments as
the teammate. This agent was described in the previous
experiment. We train another agent as the teammate using
exactly the same reward function as the offensive DQN
agent. The statistics of the gameplay for the two agents
On Multi-Agent Learning in Team Sports Games
playing together against the traditional game AI agents are
shown in Table 6. While the second agent is trained with
the same reward function as the first one, it is trained in a
different environment as the teammate is now the offensive
DQN agent trained in the previous experiment rather than
the traditional game AI agent. As can be seen, the second
agent now becomes defensive and is more interested in
protecting the net, gaining the possession of the ball back,
and passing it to the offensive teammate.
Table 6. Two DQN agents in a 2v2 match against two traditional
game AI agents, with a sparse '+/-1' reward for scoring and a
'+/0.8' individual reward for gaining/losing the possession of the
ball.
Opponent 1
Opponent 2
12%
25%
12%
25%
Statistics
Score rate
Possession
DQN 1
50%
28%
DQN 2
26%
22%
As the second 2v2 experiment, we train two PPO agents in
the exact same manner as we trained the DQN agents in the
previous experiment. We observe a similar trait in the role
of the agents as offensive and defensive. Then we let the
PPO team play against the DQN team. We observe that the
PPO team defeats the DQN team by a slight edge, 55:45.
While this experiment is a fair comparison between PPO
and DQN, we emphasize that these teams are both trained
against the traditional game AI agents and are now both
playing in a new environment. In a sense, this is measuring
how generalizable the learned policy is to environments that
it has not experienced before. The training would converge
using equivalent of ∼5 years of human experience using
DQN (Mnih et al., 2015). On the other hand, PPO (Schul-
man et al., 2017) was an order of magnitude faster on all
of the experiments reaching convergence in ∼6 months of
human experience.
We repeated all of these experiments using Rainbow (Hes-
sel et al., 2017) agents as well, and they failed all of the
experiments. We suspect that the default hyperparameters
in distributional RL (Bellemare et al., 2017) or prioritized
experience replay (Schaul et al., 2015) is not suited to this
problem, however, we are still investigating which addition
in Rainbow is resulting in the failure of the algorithm in the
described team sports environment.
4.4. Two agents trained simultaneously in a 2v2 game
Finally, we consider centralized training of the two home
agents where a single policy controls them at the same time.
We tried multiple reward functions including rewarding the
team by '+1' for scoring, '-1' for being scored against,
'+0.8' for gaining the possession of the ball, and '-0.8' for
losing the possession of the ball. We observed that neither
algorithm learned a useful policy in this case. We believe
with a higher level planner on top of the reinforcement
learning, we should be able to train the agents to exhibit
teamplay but that remains for future investigation. We are
currently looking into centralized training of actor-critic
methods on this environment.
5. Concluding Remarks & Future Work
In this paper, we consider a team sports game. The goal is
to train agents that play like humans, both in terms of tactics
and strategies. We presented a hierarchical approach to solv-
ing the problem, where the low-level problem is solved via
imitation learning and the high-level problem is addressed
via reinforcement learning. We focus on strategy using a
mid-level simulator, called simple team sports simulator
(STS2) which we intend to release as an open-source repos-
itory. Our main takeaways are summarized below:
• End-to-end model-free RL is unlikely to provide
human-like and believable agent behavior, and we re-
sort to a hierarchical approach using demonstrations to
solve the problem.
• Sparse rewards for scoring do not provide sufficient
signal for training agents, even a high level, which
required us to apply more refined reward shaping.
• Using proper reward shaping, we trained agents with a
variety of offensive and defensive styles. In particular,
we trained an agent that can assist the teammate player
to achieve better scoring and ball possession.
• PPO (Schulman et al., 2017) trained about one order of
magnitude faster than DQN (Mnih et al., 2015), while
in one occasion it got stuck in a bad local minimum.
• Rainbow (Hessel et al., 2017) failed at training agents
in this environment, and we are investigating the reason
this happens.
In future work, we will be working on better integrating
the mid-level simulation results with the low-level imitation
learned model. We also plan to better understand and ex-
plore multi-agent credit assignment in this environment (De-
vlin et al., 2014). We also plan to investigate transfer learn-
ing for translating the policies from this environment to the
actual HD game (Andrychowicz et al., 2018). We plan to
explore further on centralized training of the multi-agent
policy using QMIX (Rashid et al., 2018) and centralized
actor-critic methods (Foerster et al., 2018).
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Bilal Kartal (Borealis AI)
and Jiachen Yang (Georgia Tech) for useful discussions and
feedback. The authors are also thankful to the anonymous
reviewers for their valuable feedback.
On Multi-Agent Learning in Team Sports Games
References
Abbeel, P. and Ng, A. Y. Apprenticeship learning via inverse
reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the twenty-first
international conference on Machine learning, pp. 1.
ACM, 2004.
AI & Compute, 2018.
[Online, May 2018] https://
blog.openai.com/ai-and-compute.
AlphaStar, 2019.
[Online, January 2019] https://
tinyurl.com/yc2knerv.
Andrychowicz, M., Baker, B., Chociej, M., Jozefowicz,
R., McGrew, B., Pachocki, J., Petron, A., Plappert, M.,
Powell, G., Ray, A., et al. Learning dexterous in-hand
manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1808.00177, 2018.
Bacon, P.-L., Harb, J., and Precup, D. The option-critic ar-
chitecture. In Thirty-First AAAI Conference on Artificial
Intelligence, 2017.
Bellemare, M. G., Dabney, W., and Munos, R. A distribu-
tional perspective on reinforcement learning. In Proceed-
ings of the 34th International Conference on Machine
Learning-Volume 70, pp. 449 -- 458. JMLR. org, 2017.
Bengio, Y., Louradour, J., Collobert, R., and Weston, J.
Curriculum learning. In Proceedings of the 26th annual
international conference on machine learning, pp. 41 -- 48.
ACM, 2009.
Chang, Y.-H., Ho, T., and Kaelbling, L. P. All learning is
local: Multi-agent learning in global reward games. In
Advances in neural information processing systems, pp.
807 -- 814, 2004.
Chaslot, G., Bakkes, S., Szita, I., and Spronck, P. Monte-
In
carlo tree search: A new framework for game ai.
AIIDE, 2008.
Coulom, R. Efficient selectivity and backup operators in
Monte-Carlo tree search. In International conference on
computers and games, pp. 72 -- 83. Springer, 2006.
Deep Blue, 1997.
[Online] http://www-03.ibm.
com/ibm/history/ibm100/us/en/icons/
deepblue.
Devlin, S., Yliniemi, L., Kudenko, D., and Tumer, K.
Potential-based difference rewards for multiagent rein-
forcement learning. In Proceedings of the 2014 interna-
tional conference on Autonomous agents and multi-agent
systems, pp. 165 -- 172. International Foundation for Au-
tonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 2014.
Foerster, J. N., Farquhar, G., Afouras, T., Nardelli, N., and
Whiteson, S. Counterfactual multi-agent policy gradi-
In Thirty-Second AAAI Conference on Artificial
ents.
Intelligence, 2018.
Gao, C., Hernandez-Leal, P., Kartal, B., and Taylor, M. E.
Skynet: A top deep rl agent in the inaugural pommerman
team competition. In 4th Multidisciplinary Conference
on Reinforcement Learning and Decision Making, 2019.
Gupta, J. K., Egorov, M., and Kochenderfer, M. Cooperative
multi-agent control using deep reinforcement learning.
In International Conference on Autonomous Agents and
Multiagent Systems, pp. 66 -- 83. Springer, 2017.
Harmer, J., Gisslen, L., del Val, J., Holst, H., Bergdahl, J.,
Olsson, T., Sjoo, K., and Nordin, M. Imitation learning
with concurrent actions in 3d games, 2018.
Hernandez-Leal, P., Kaisers, M., Baarslag, T., and de Cote,
E. M. A survey of learning in multiagent environ-
ments: Dealing with non-stationarity. arXiv preprint
arXiv:1707.09183, 2017.
Hernandez-Leal, P., Kartal, B., and Taylor, M. E. Is multia-
gent deep reinforcement learning the answer or the ques-
tion? a brief survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.05587,
2018.
Hessel, M., Modayil, J., Van Hasselt, H., Schaul, T., Ostro-
vski, G., Dabney, W., Horgan, D., Piot, B., Azar, M., and
Silver, D. Rainbow: Combining improvements in deep
reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.02298,
2017.
Heyden, C. Implementing a computer player for Carcas-
sonne. PhD thesis, Maastricht University, 2009.
Ho, J. and Ermon, S. Generative adversarial imitation learn-
ing. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Sys-
tems, pp. 4565 -- 4573, 2016.
Huchler, C. An mcts agent for ticket to ride. Master's thesis,
Maastricht University, 2015.
Kartal, B., Hernandez-Leal, P., Gao, C., and Taylor, M. E.
Safer deep RL with shallow MCTS: A case study in
Pommerman. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.05759, 2019.
Kocsis, L. and Szepesv´ari, C. Bandit based Monte-Carlo
planning. In European conference on machine learning,
pp. 282 -- 293. Springer, 2006.
Doering, M., Glas, D. F., and Ishiguro, H. Modeling in-
teraction structure for robot imitation learning of human
social behavior. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine
Systems, 2019.
Le, H., Jiang, N., Agarwal, A., Dudik, M., Yue, Y., and
Daum´e, H. Hierarchical imitation and reinforcement
learning. In International Conference on Machine Learn-
ing, pp. 2923 -- 2932, 2018.
On Multi-Agent Learning in Team Sports Games
Levine, S. and Koltun, V. Guided policy search.
In In-
ternational Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 1 -- 9,
2013.
Littman, M. L. Markov games as a framework for multi-
agent reinforcement learning. In Machine learning pro-
ceedings 1994, pp. 157 -- 163. Elsevier, 1994.
Lowe, R., Wu, Y., Tamar, A., Harb, J., Abbeel, O. P.,
and Mordatch, I. Multi-agent actor-critic for mixed
cooperative-competitive environments. In Advances in
Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 6379 -- 6390,
2017.
Lynch, C., Khansari, M., Xiao, T., Kumar, V., Tompson, J.,
Levine, S., and Sermanet, P. Learning latent plans from
play. arXiv preprint arXiv:1903.01973, 2019.
Matignon, L., Laurent, G. J., and Le Fort-Piat, N. Inde-
pendent reinforcement learners in cooperative markov
games: a survey regarding coordination problems. The
Knowledge Engineering Review, 27(1):1 -- 31, 2012.
Mnih, V., Kavukcuoglu, K., Silver, D., Rusu, A. A., Veness,
J., Bellemare, M. G., Graves, A., Riedmiller, M., Fidje-
land, A. K., Ostrovski, G., et al. Human-level control
through deep reinforcement learning. Nature, 518(7540):
529, 2015.
Ng, A. Y. and Russell, S. Algorithms for inverse reinforce-
ment learning. In in Proc. 17th International Conf. on
Machine Learning, 2000.
OpenAI Five, 2018.
[Online, June 2018] https://
openai.com/five.
Pang, Z.-J., Liu, R.-Z., Meng, Z.-Y., Zhang, Y., Yu, Y., and
Lu, T. On reinforcement learning for full-length game of
starcraft. arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.09095, 2018.
Pathak, D., Agrawal, P., Efros, A. A., and Darrell, T.
Curiosity-driven exploration by self-supervised predic-
tion. In Proceedings of the 34th International Conference
on Machine Learning-Volume 70, pp. 2778 -- 2787. JMLR.
org, 2017.
Peng, X. B., Abbeel, P., Levine, S., and van de Panne, M.
Deepmimic: Example-guided deep reinforcement learn-
ing of physics-based character skills. ACM Transactions
on Graphics (TOG), 37(4):143, 2018.
Rajeswaran, A., Kumar, V., Gupta, A., Vezzani, G., Schul-
man, J., Todorov, E., and Levine, S. Learning complex
dexterous manipulation with deep reinforcement learning
and demonstrations. arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.10087,
2017.
Rashid, T., Samvelyan, M., Witt, C. S., Farquhar, G., Fo-
erster, J., and Whiteson, S. Qmix: Monotonic value
function factorisation for deep multi-agent reinforcement
learning. In International Conference on Machine Learn-
ing, pp. 4292 -- 4301, 2018.
Robilliard, D., Fonlupt, C., and Teytaud, F. Monte-carlo tree
search for the game of 7 wonders. In Computer Games,
pp. 64 -- 77. Springer, 2014.
Ross, S., Gordon, G., and Bagnell, D. A reduction of imita-
tion learning and structured prediction to no-regret online
learning. In Proceedings of the fourteenth international
conference on artificial intelligence and statistics, pp.
627 -- 635, 2011.
Samuel, A. Some studies in machine learning using the
game of checkers. IBM Journal of Research and Devel-
opment, 3(3):210 -- 29, July 1959.
Schaul, T., Quan, J., Antonoglou, I., and Silver, D. Priori-
tized experience replay. arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.05952,
2015.
Schulman, J., Wolski, F., Dhariwal, P., Radford, A., and
Klimov, O. Proximal policy optimization algorithms.
arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06347, 2017.
Sheridan, T. B. Human -- robot interaction: status and chal-
lenges. Human factors, 58(4):525 -- 532, 2016.
Silver, D., Huang, A., Maddison, C. J., Guez, A., Sifre, L.,
Van Den Driessche, G., Schrittwieser, J., Antonoglou, I.,
Panneershelvam, V., Lanctot, M., et al. Mastering the
game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search.
Nature, 529(7587):484 -- 489, 2016.
Silver, D., Hubert, T., Schrittwieser, J., Antonoglou, I., Lai,
M., Guez, A., Lanctot, M., Sifre, L., Kumaran, D., Grae-
pel, T., et al. Mastering Chess and Shogi by self-play
with a general reinforcement learning algorithm. arXiv
preprint arXiv:1712.01815, 2017a.
Silver, D., Schrittwieser, J., Simonyan, K., Antonoglou,
I., Huang, A., Guez, A., Hubert, T., Baker, L., Lai, M.,
Bolton, A., et al. Mastering the game of Go without
human knowledge. Nature, 550(7676):354, 2017b.
Szita, I., Chaslot, G., and Spronck, P. Monte-carlo tree
In Advances in Computer
search in settlers of catan.
Games, pp. 21 -- 32. Springer, 2009.
Tesauro, G. Temporal difference learning and td-gammon.
Communications of the ACM, 38(3):58 -- 69, 1995.
Vecer´ık, M., Hester, T., Scholz, J., Wang, F., Pietquin, O.,
Piot, B., Heess, N., Rothorl, T., Lampe, T., and Riedmiller,
M. Leveraging demonstrations for deep reinforcement
On Multi-Agent Learning in Team Sports Games
learning on robotics problems with sparse rewards. arXiv
preprint arXiv:1707.08817, 2017.
Vezhnevets, A. S., Osindero, S., Schaul, T., Heess, N.,
Jaderberg, M., Silver, D., and Kavukcuoglu, K. Feu-
dal networks for hierarchical reinforcement learning. In
Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Ma-
chine Learning-Volume 70, pp. 3540 -- 3549. JMLR. org,
2017.
Vinyals, O., Ewalds, T., Bartunov, S., Georgiev, P., Vezhn-
evets, A. S., Yeo, M., Makhzani, A., Kuttler, H., Agapiou,
J., Schrittwieser, J., et al. StarCraft II: A new challenge for
reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.04782,
2017.
Yang, J., Nakhaei, A., Isele, D., Zha, H., and Fujimura,
K. CM3: Cooperative multi-goal multi-stage multi-agent
reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.05188,
2018.
Yu, L., Song, J., and Ermon, S. Multi-agent adversarial in-
verse reinforcement learning. In International Conference
on Machine Learning, pp. 7194 -- 7201, 2019.
Zhan, E., Zheng, S., Yue, Y., Sha, L., and Lucey, P. Gener-
ating multi-agent trajectories using programmatic weak
supervision. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.07612, 2018.
Zhao, Y., Borovikov, I., Beirami, A., Rupert, J., Somers, C.,
Harder, J., Silva, F. d. M., Kolen, J., Pinto, J., Pourabol-
ghasem, R., et al. Winning Isn't Everything: Training
Human-Like Agents for Playtesting and Game AI. arXiv
preprint arXiv:1903.10545, 2019.
|
1607.02963 | 1 | 1607 | 2016-07-08T05:36:27 | Modelling movement for collective adaptive systems with CARMA | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.PL"
] | Space and movement through space play an important role in many collective adaptive systems (CAS). CAS consist of multiple components interacting to achieve some goal in a system or environment that can change over time. When these components operate in space, then their behaviour can be affected by where they are located in that space. Examples include the possibility of communication between two components located at different points, and rates of movement of a component that may be affected by location. The CARMA language and its associated software tools can be used to model such systems. In particular, a graphical editor for CARMA allows for the specification of spatial structure and generation of templates that can be used in a CARMA model with space. We demonstrate the use of this tool to experiment with a model of pedestrian movement over a network of paths. | cs.MA | cs | Modelling movement for collective adaptive systems with
CARMA
Natalia Zo´n
Vashti Galpin
Stephen Gilmore
Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science
School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Space and movement through space play an important role in many collective adaptive systems
(CAS). CAS consist of multiple components interacting to achieve some goal in a system or en-
vironment that can change over time. When these components operate in space, then their behaviour
can be affected by where they are located in that space. Examples include the possibility of commu-
nication between two components located at different points, and rates of movement of a component
that may be affected by location. The CARMA language and its associated software tools can be used
to model such systems. In particular, a graphical editor for CARMA allows for the specification of
spatial structure and generation of templates that can be used in a CARMA model with space. We
demonstrate the use of this tool to experiment with a model of pedestrian movement over a network
of paths.
1 Introduction
Collective adaptive systems consist of multiple components or agents that interact collaboratively on
common goals, and compete to achieve individual goals. They are characterised by the fact that each
component does not have a global view of the whole system but rather has local information on which
to act. These systems are called collective because of the interaction of many components, and adaptive
because they respond to changes in the environment in which they operate. They are often characterised
as having emergent behaviour, that is behaviour which cannot be predicted in advance by considering the
individual components in isolation from each other. Modelling of CAS is crucial because it is difficult
to understand the behaviour of the overall system just by inspecting the behaviour of the components.
Modelling allows us to experiment with the system before implementation and deployment. This paper
considers the CARMA language which has been developed specifically for the modelling of CAS [12]
with a particular focus on smart city concerns such as smart transport and smart energy grids.
The use of local versus global above suggests that space may play an important role in CAS. While
this is not necessarily true of all CAS since the distinction between local and global may be logical or
virtual rather than physical, it is true for many CAS, and hence this is an important part of understanding
their behaviour. This paper focusses on a spatial example and illustrates how CARMA can be used to
model this example.
We consider the example of pedestrians moving over a network of paths. This could be a specific
part of a city, a pedestrianised network of lanes, or paths through a large park. The defining feature of our
example is that there are essentially two groups of pedestrians that start on opposite sides of the network
who wish to traverse the paths to get to the side opposite to where they started. This scenario could arise
in a city where there are two train stations on opposite sides of the central business district serving the
eastern and the western suburbs of the city, and a number of people who commute from the west work
close to the east station and vice versa. During rush hour in the morning and afternoon, people want to
M.H. ter Beek and M. Loreti (Eds.): Workshop on
FORmal methods for the quantitative Evaluation
of Collective Adaptive SysTems (FORECAST'16).
EPTCS 217, 2016, pp. 43–52, doi:10.4204/EPTCS.217.6
c(cid:13) N. Zo´n, V. Galpin and S. Gilmore
This work is licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution License.
44
Modelling movement for collective adaptive systems
traverse the park or lanes as fast as possible so that they are not late, and we wish to investigate what
features enable these pedestrians to pass through the network efficiently. If there are multiple paths, it
would seem in advance that it makes sense to use some paths for one direction and other paths for the
other direction. This raises the question of what routing or information such as signs is sufficient for the
two groups of pedestrians to separate out onto different paths. This paper presents an initial investigation
into the modelling of this scenario, and we demonstrate how this can be achieved using CARMA, its
Eclipse Plug-In and its Graphical Eclipse Plug-in, considering different possibilities for the network.
The paper starts with a brief discussion of the CARMA language before describing the modelling
of the scenario in more detail and presentation of our experiments and results from various networks,
followed by conclusions and discussion of future work.
2 CARMA
The CARMA process calculus has been developed specifically for the modelling of collective adaptive
systems and a full description of the language can be found in [12]. Here, we give a brief outline. A
CARMA model consists of a collective N and the environment E in which it operates, using the syntax
N in E . A collective is either a component C or collectives in parallel N (cid:107) N. Each component is either
null, 0, or a combination of behaviour described by a process P and a store of attributes γ, denoted
by (P,γ). We use function notation to denote store access, thus if γ = {x (cid:55)→ v} then γ(x) = v.
Prefix, constants, choice and parallel composition can be expressed in the standard manner by defin-
ing P appropriately. Additionally, there is the nil process which does nothing, the kill process which
results in the component being removed from the collective, and the option of prefixing a process with a
predicate [π]P, in which case the process P can only proceed if the predicate π evaluates to true using the
values of the attributes in the component's store γ. To improve readability we sometimes parenthesise
the process expression P, writing this term as [π](P). The meaning is unchanged.
Process prefixes are rich and permit actions that provide value-passing unicast and broadcast com-
munication using predicates on the attributes in the store of the sending and receiving component. Com-
munication between components will only take place if the predicates evaluate to true. The value false
indicates that no communication partner is needed. Furthermore, attribute values can be updated (prob-
abilistically) on completion of an action.
Unicast communication is blocking; the sender cannot output values unless there is a matching input
action which can be performed by another component. In contrast, broadcast is not blocking, and we can
use a specific form with a constant false predicate (written as ⊥ here) to allow components to act without
interaction with other components, as seen in the example to follow.
The syntax of a non-blocking broadcast on name α is α (cid:63)[π](cid:104)(cid:126)v(cid:105)σ where π is a predicate which must
be satisfied by all processes wishing to receive this broadcast. The vector (cid:126)v is a vector of values to be
communicated; this vector may be empty. The suffix σ is an update of variables in the local store of a
component. A component refers to its local store with the prefix my (similar to this in Java) so an update
to store the value of x as the new value of my.x is written as {my.x ← x}. As an example, the prefix
i j[⊥](cid:104)(cid:105){my.x ← i, my.y ← j}.Ped broadcasts that it is performing a movei j activity,
process term move(cid:63)
updates its local x and y values, and continues as the process Ped.
The environment contains both the global store and an evolution rule which returns a tuple of four
functions (µp, µw, µr, µu) known as the evaluation context. Communication between sender s and re-
ceiver r on activity α has both an associated probability (determined by µp) and a weight (determined
by µw). These functions depend on activity α and both the attribute values of the sender (in the store γs)
N. Zo´n, V. Galpin and S. Gilmore
45
and the attribute values of the receiver (in the store γr). The activity rate however depends on only the
attribute values in the store of the sender (γs); the attribute values of the receiver do not affect the rate
at which a communication activity is performed. Thus the first three functions in the evaluation context
determine probabilities, weights and rates that supply quantitative information about the behaviour of
actions. The fourth function µu performs global updates, either of the attributes in the global store or
of the collective by adding new components. These updates include the usual initialisation of variables,
incrementing counters, or accumulating totals.
The operational semantics of CARMA are defined in FUTS style [3] and define for each model a
time-inhomogeneous continuous-time Markov chain (ICTMC). The behaviour of these ICTMCs can be
simulated and the CARMA Eclipse Plug-in provides this functionality. The software tools for processing
CARMA models are available from http://quanticol.sourceforge.net. More information about
the QUANTICOL project which created these tools is available from http://www.quanticol.eu.
3 Automatic code generation
The CARMA Graphical Editor allows the user to specify the structure of movement in a CAS model by
laying out graphical symbols on a plane [15]. The editor generates CARMA code from the graph which
the user has defined. In addition to normal attributes, CARMA components which are defined in this way
have a set of distinguished attributes to specify their current location in space.
Each CARMA component in the model may further have its mobility restricted to a given set of paths
through the graph defined by the user. Paths in this context are subgraphs of the user-defined graph
consisting of a set of uniform vertices connected by directed, coloured edges. At any given time in the
system's evolution, the location attributes of a component instance must be equal to the location of one
of the nodes belonging to the subgraph where that component is restricted. A component can change
its location attributes only if there exists a path from its current node to the new node, and if this path
belongs to the subgraph where the mobility of this component is restricted.
In CARMA, functions are used for storing the information about each subgraph's topology. Compo-
nent actions query these functions during the execution of their predicates, and can modify the compo-
nent's location attributes accordingly, in the update block. For each node which can be accessed by a
particular component type, a movement action must be included in the component's behaviour. If the
node can be accessed by a component in more than one state, the action must be specified separately for
each state. In systems with complex mobility restriction graphs, topology-defining functions, as well as
component behaviour blocks may require a large number of lines of code. This code is automatically
generated by the CARMA Graphical Editor, freeing the modeller from the task of manually producing
this CARMA model code.
4 Pedestrian model
The CARMA model is illustrated in Figures 1 and 2. It assumes that there are two types of pedestrians,
A and B, and that P and Q are variables of type pedestrian. The two Arrival components generate
pedestrians at two different locations (on opposite sides of the graph), and the pedestrians move from
their origin side to the opposite side. Once a pedestrian has reached its goal, the count for that type of
pedestrian is incremented and the time taken for traversal is added to the total time so that the average
traversal time can be calculated for each pedestrian type.
46
Modelling movement for collective adaptive systems
Store of Pedestrian component:
P
x
y
stime
pedestrian type - an enumeration with values A and B
current x coordinate
current y coordinate
time of arrival
Behaviour of Pedestrian component:
Ped
def= ∑(i, j)∈V
(cid:2)ExistsPath(P,x,y,i, j)(cid:3)(cid:0)move(cid:63)
+(cid:2)AtGoal(P,x,y)(cid:3)(cid:0)fin(cid:63)[⊥](cid:104)(cid:105).nil(cid:1)
i j[⊥](cid:104)(cid:105){my.x ← i, my.y ← j}.Ped(cid:1)
Initial state of Pedestrian component: Ped
Store of Arrival component:
P
pedestrian type
Behaviour of Arrival component:
Arr
def= arrive(cid:63)[⊥](cid:104)(cid:105).Arr
Initial state of Arrival component: Arr
Figure 1: The Pedestrian and Arrival components
The model is parameterised by a number of functions that capture the graph information and are
generated automatically as described above.
• ExistsPath(P,x,y,i, j) is a Boolean function that determines if an edge exists between a pedes-
i j action can only occur when
trian's current position and another node in the graph, hence a move(cid:63)
such an edge exists.
• AtGoal(P,x,y) is a Boolean function that checks if the pedestrian has reached its goal, hence fin(cid:63)
can only occur once the destination has been reached. After this the pedestrian does not move any
more.
• ArrivalRate(P) determines the arrival rate for each type of pedestrian.
• Startx(P) and Starty(P) define the initial location of a new pedestrian depending on its type.
A function that is not directly related to the graph structure is MoveRate(P,x,y,i, j, . . .) which determines
the rate of movement along a particular edge, and can take additional parameters that can affect this
rate such as the current count of other pedestrians of the same or different type. We use the following
definition that uses the numbers of pedestrians of the other type at the target node to reduce the movement
rate.
(cid:40)
MoveRate(P,x,y,i, j,Ai j,Bi j) =
moveA/(Bi j + 1)
moveB/(Ai j + 1)
if P = A
if P = B
where Ai j are the number of A pedestrians at the target node and Bi j are the number of B pedestrians at
the target node, and moveQ is a basic movement rate for each pedestrian type.
N. Zo´n, V. Galpin and S. Gilmore
47
Constants:
V
Measures:
averageP
Global store:
countP
totalP
set of coordinate pairs representing nodes in the graph
average time for traversal by pedestrians of type P
number of P pedestrians to complete traversal
total time for all completed P pedestrian traversals
Evolution rule functions:
µp(γs,γr,α)
µw(γs,γr,α)
=
=
1
1
λfast
µr(γs,α)
=
µu(γs,α)
=
ArrivalRate(cid:0)γs(P)(cid:1)
MoveRate(cid:0)γs(P),γs(x),γs(y),i, j, . . .(cid:1)
(cid:8)(cid:9),(cid:0)Pedestrian,{P ← γs(P),x ← Startx(γs(P)),y ← Starty(γs(P)),stime ← now}(cid:1)
(cid:8)countγs(P) ← countγs(P) + 1,totalγs(P) ← totalγs(P) + (now− γs(stime))(cid:9),0
(cid:8)(cid:9),0
if α = arrive(cid:63)
if α = move(cid:63)
i j
otherwise
if α = fin(cid:63)
otherwise
if α = arrive(cid:63)
Collective:
PedAB def= (cid:0)Arrival,{P (cid:55)→ A}(cid:1) (cid:107)(cid:0)Arrival,{P (cid:55)→ B}(cid:1)
Figure 2: Environment and collective
Figure 2 specifies the four functions (µp, µw, µr, µu) known as the evaluation context. Probabilities
and weights on activities are not used in this model so the µp and µw functions are trivially constant
functions.
5 Model instances
Four instances of this CARMA model are shown in Figure 3. These show instantiations of the general
CARMA model from the previous section with increasing size and shape complexity. The central repeat-
ing features of the path network are the cross-bars in the centre of the network. In the simplest instance
we have only one cross-bar and we describe this instance as having height 1 and width 1, representing
it as instance 1× 1. As the cross-bar structure is repeated we have instances 1× 2, 2× 1, and 2× 2,
depending where the additional structure is added into the network.
An increase in the width of the network has the obvious consequence that journeys across the network
take longer. An increase in the height of the network has the consequence that pedestrians are offered
an increased choice of routes, with the implicit consequence that individual paths are less congested
(because there are more of them on offer). The edges are equally long and thus the time to traverse them
is the same under comparable conditions.
In each instance of the network of paths there are two sub-networks which restrain the movement of
48
Modelling movement for collective adaptive systems
1× 1
2× 1
1× 2
2× 2
Figure 3: Four model instances of increasing size and complexity.
the pedestrians of type A and type B. Pedestrians of type A are restricted to the red sub-network and must
cross the network from left to right. Pedestrians of type B are restricted to the blue sub-network and must
cross the network from right to left. The networks illustrated in Figure 3 are symmetric but this is of no
particular significance and it would pose no difficulty to work with networks which were not symmetric.
These graphs were drawn in the CARMA Graphical Editor and CARMA code was generated from it,
including all necessary instances of the ExistsPath, AtGoal, and ArrivalRate functions and applications
of these in predicate guards on processes.
6 Analysis and results
We analysed our CARMA model using the CARMA Eclipse Plugin [12]. The CARMA Eclipse Plugin pro-
vides a helpful syntax-aware editor for the CARMA Specification Language, implemented in the XText
editor framework. The CARMA Specification Language provides a wrapper around the CARMA process
calculus adding non-essential (but useful) features such as data types and data structures, functions, and
the ability to specify real-valued measures of interest over the model. In some modelling languages
measures of interest or Markov reward structures are defined externally to the model but in CARMA and
languages such as CASPA [10], PRISM [11] and ProPPA [6], the specification of measures of interest
and reward structures is included in the modelling language itself.
Given a CARMA specification, the CARMA Eclipse Plug-in compiles the model into a set of Java
classes which are linked with the CARMA simulator classes to provide a custom simulator for this model.
The compiled Java code is executed to compute the measures of interest from an ensemble of simulation
runs. The CARMA simulator uses a kinetic Monte-Carlo algorithm to select the next simulation event to
fire and draws from the appropriate weighted random number distribution to determine the duration of
the event. The simulation state is updated as specified by the event which was fired and the simulation
proceeds forward until a pre-specified simulation stop time is reached.
N. Zo´n, V. Galpin and S. Gilmore
49
The measure functions defined by the modeller are passed into the simulation environment and pro-
vide a view onto the raw simulation results at intervals which are specified by the modeller. The Apache
Commons Math Library is used within the Plug-in to perform statistical analysis of the data. The Simula-
tion Laboratory View provided by the CARMA Eclipse Plug-in acts as an electronic laboratory notebook,
recording details of the simulation studies which have been performed.
The CARMA Eclipse Plugin and the CARMA Graphical Editor are available from the SourceForge
website at http://quanticol.sourceforge.net. After installation they can be kept up-to-date using
the standard mechanism in Eclipse to check for updates.
6.1 Design of experiments
We designed a suite of experiments to explore the behaviour of the model. To provide a baseline for
average travel time we investigated the travel time in the presence of only one type of pedestrian (thereby
giving a model which has no congestion). Thereafter we investigated the models with congestion in
the presence or absence of pedestrian routing. When routing is present, only one starting route has a
non-zero rate, and the non-zero rate is assigned in order to direct pedestrians away from each other.
We used the CARMA Graphical Editor to automatically create CARMA code models. Fig. 4 shows
how the number of lines of CARMA code grows with model structure complexity.
Model Nodes Connections LoC
208
1x1
1x2
248
288
1x3
258
2x1
328
2x2
2x3
398
308
3x1
408
3x2
3x3
508
6
8
10
8
11
14
10
14
18
8
12
16
13
20
27
18
28
38
Figure 4: The number of lines of CARMA code per model structure. Left, for small values of width and
height. Right, for larger values of width and height.
6.2 Analysis
The results from our experiments are presented in Figure 5. We have three results (no congestion, routing,
and no routing) for each of the four model instances considered (1 × 1, 1 × 2, 2 × 1, and 2 × 2). An
inspection of the results shows that, unsurprisingly, for any structure the best average travel times are
obtained when there is no congestion in the network. As anticipated, networks with greater height have
lower average travel times because they have greater capacity, due to the inclusion of additional routes
(thus 2× 1 results are better than 1× 1 results, and 2× 2 results are better than 1× 2 results).
where congestion in experienced most (i.e. in the 1× 1 structure and the 1× 2 structure).
Finally, we see that routing is always advantageous, especially so in the case of narrow networks
50
Modelling movement for collective adaptive systems
Figure 5: Average travel time results from the experiments on structure and network usage.
7 Related work
The CARMA language provides high-level language constructs for describing communicating processes.
The language has a stochastic semantics expressed in terms of continuous-time Markov chains. The
language contains some features which are familiar from languages such as Bio-PEPA [2], PRISM [11]
and the Attributed π-calculus [8]. In this section we compare CARMA to these established modelling
languages and highlight differences in approach between them.
Each of the languages considered here has the potential to be used to model stochastic systems with
mobile populations of individuals but language design decisions, the choice of language features, and
underlying analysis mechanisms can make one of the languages better-suited for a particular modelling
problem than the others. As examples of modelled systems, Bio-PEPA has been used to model scenarios
where safe movement of people is an important factor in systems including emergency egress [13] and
crowd formation and movement [1]. PRISM has been used to model dynamic power management con-
trollers [14] and human-in-the-loop UAV mission planning [4]. The Attributed π-calculus has been used
to model spatial movement in phototaxis [8], and cooperative protein binding in gene regulation [9].
CARMA has been used to model a number of spatial CAS including carpooling [15], taxi movement [7]
and ambulance deployment [5].
Inter-process communication in CARMA is attribute-based; communication partners are determined
dynamically as the model evolves through state-to-state transitions. Communication in the Attributed π-
calculus is similarly dynamic. In contrast, the communication partners of Bio-PEPA and PRISM com-
ponents are determined statically, and do not change as state-to-state transitions occur. Additionally,
CARMA and the Attributed π-calculus support value-passing communication whereas the Bio-PEPA and
PRISM languages do not.
The primary analysis method for CARMA models is simulation. This is also the case for Bio-
PEPA and the Attributed π-calculus whereas analysis of PRISM models is typically through probabilistic
model-checking.
The CARMA language and the PRISM language are explicitly-typed. Types such as boolean, integer
N. Zo´n, V. Galpin and S. Gilmore
51
and real are ascribed to variables in the language by the modeller, or inferred by the language type-
checker. In contrast, types in Bio-PEPA and the Attributed π calculus are implicit. Explicitly-typed
languages can make the modeller's intentions more obvious, when, for example, expecting to receive an
initial integer value instead of a real value.
CARMA provides guarded process definitions (used in a similar way to the guarded commands found
in the PRISM language; the Attributed π-calculus does not support these directly; Bio-PEPA has no
boolean expressions at all). Guarded process definitions allow declarative descriptions of the relation-
ships between locations in a network and we have used this description mechanism comprehensively
here.
In common with PRISM, CARMA provides strong support for encapsulation, with variable declara-
tions being local to an enclosing structure (in PRISM this is a module, whereas in CARMA it is a com-
ponent). A structuring mechanism such as this is not found in Bio-PEPA or the Attributed π-calculus
where declarations of rate functions, channel names, process definitions or species definitions have global
scope.
Differently from the other languages considered here, CARMA treats location and space as an aspect
of a model which can be described separately from the detailed model dynamics. Through the provision
of a graphical editor for CARMA, space, location, and connectivity can be treated separately from logic,
communication, and synchronisation. This separation of concerns may make it easier to maintain a
model of a system when the spatial structure of the system changes.
8 Conclusions and future work
We have demonstrated a simple model of pedestrian movement over a number of different graphs, to
illustrate the modelling of spatial aspects of CAS. The CARMA Graphical Editor allowed us to auto-
matically generate the CARMA code for different networks which simplified the task, and allowed our
pedestrian components to be generic in nature. Our initial experiments have considered situations with
and without congestion as well as with and without explicit routing of pedestrians as they enter the
network.
There are many directions for future work. For example, another group of pedestrians could also be
introduced, namely, tourists, and the focus would be on efficient traversal of the network during afternoon
rush hours when commuters want to get home quickly and tourists wish to sightsee, and hence move
slowly. We are also interested in identifying when the model shows emergent behaviour, in the sense that
different groups of pedestrian use different paths through the network in response to environmental cues
such as information about congestion or routing suggestions (rather than explicit routing).
Acknowledgements: This work is supported by the EU project QUANTICOL, 600708. We thank the
anonymous reviewers for many helpful comments which encouraged us to improve the paper.
References
[1] L. Bortolussi, D. Latella & M. Massink (2013): Stochastic Process Algebra and Stability Analysis of Collec-
tive Systems. In R. De Nicola & C. Julien, editors: Coordination Models and Languages, 15th International
Conference, COORDINATION 2013, Held as Part of the 8th International Federated Conference on Dis-
tributed Computing Techniques, DisCoTec 2013, Florence, Italy, June 3-5, 2013. Proceedings, Lecture Notes
in Computer Science 7890, Springer, pp. 1–15, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-38493-6 1.
52
Modelling movement for collective adaptive systems
[2] F. Ciocchetta & J. Hillston (2009): Bio-PEPA: A framework for the modelling and analysis of biological
systems. Theor. Comput. Sci. 410(33-34), pp. 3065–3084, doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2009.02.037.
[3] R. De Nicola, D. Latella, M. Loreti & M. Massink (2013): A uniform definition of stochastic process calculi.
ACM Computing Surveys 46, p. 5, doi:10.1145/2522968.2522973.
[4] L. Feng, C. Wiltsche, L. Humphrey & U. Topcu (2015): Controller Synthesis for Autonomous Systems Inter-
acting with Human Operators. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE Sixth International Conference on Cyber-
Physical Systems, ICCPS '15, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 70–79, doi:10.1145/2735960.2735973.
[5] V. Galpin (2016): Modelling Ambulance Deployment with CARMA.
In A. Lluch Lafuente & J. Proenc¸a,
editors: Coordination Models and Languages: 18th IFIP WG 6.1 International Conference, COORDINA-
TION 2016, Held as Part of the 11th International Federated Conference on Distributed Computing Tech-
niques, DisCoTec 2016, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, June 6-9, 2016, Proceedings, Springer, pp. 121–137,
doi:10.1007/978-3-319-39519-7 8.
[6] A. Georgoulas, J. Hillston, D. Milios & G. Sanguinetti (2014): Probabilistic Programming Process Al-
gebra.
In G. Norman & William Sanders, editors: Quantitative Evaluation of Systems: 11th Interna-
tional Conference, QEST 2014, Florence, Italy, September 8-10, 2014. Proceedings, Springer, pp. 249–264,
doi:10.1007/978-3-319-10696-0 21.
[7] J. Hillston & M. Loreti (2015): Specification and Analysis of Open-Ended Systems with CARMA. In: Fourth
International Workshop on Agent Environments for Multi-Agent Systems, Revised Selected and Invited Pa-
pers (E4MAS 2014), LNCS 9068, Springer, pp. 95–116, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-23850-0 7.
[8] M. John, C. Lhoussaine, J. Niehren & A.M. Uhrmacher (2008): The Attributed Pi Calculus. In M. Heiner &
A.M. Uhrmacher, editors: Computational Methods in Systems Biology: 6th International Conference CMSB
2008, Rostock, Germany, October 12-15, 2008. Proceedings, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg,
pp. 83–102, doi:10.1007/978-3-540-88562-7 10.
[9] M. John, C. Lhoussaine, J. Niehren & A.M. Uhrmacher (2010): The Attributed Pi-calculus with Priorities.
In C. Priami, R. Breitling, D. Gilbert, M. Heiner & A.M. Uhrmacher, editors: Transactions on Computational
Systems Biology XII, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 13–76, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-11712-1 2.
[10] M. Kuntz, M. Siegle & E. Werner (2004): Symbolic Performance and Dependability Evaluation with the Tool
CASPA. In M. N´unez, Z. Maamar, F.L. Pelayo, K. Pousttchi & F. Rubio, editors: Applying Formal Methods:
Testing, Performance and M/ECommerce, FORTE 2004 Workshops The FormEMC, EPEW, ITM, Toledo,
Spain, October 1-2, 2004, LNCS 3236, Springer, pp. 293–307, doi:10.1007/978-3-540-30233-9 22.
[11] M. Kwiatkowska, G. Norman & D. Parker (2011): PRISM 4.0: Verification of Probabilistic Real-time Sys-
tems. In G. Gopalakrishnan & S. Qadeer, editors: Proc. 23rd International Conference on Computer Aided
Verification (CAV'11), LNCS 6806, Springer, pp. 585–591, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-22110-1 47.
[12] M. Loreti & J. Hillston (2016): Modelling and Analysis of Collective Adaptive Systems with CARMA and its
Tools. In M. Bernardo, R. De Nicola & J. Hillston, editors: Formal Methods for the Quantitative Evaluation
of Collective Adaptive Systems: 16th International School on Formal Methods for the Design of Computer,
Communication, and Software Systems, SFM 2016, Bertinoro, Italy, June 20-24, 2016, Advanced Lectures,
Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 83–119, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-34096-8 4.
[13] M. Massink, D. Latella, A. Bracciali, M. D. Harrison & J. Hillston (2012): Scalable context-dependent
analysis of emergency egress models. Formal Asp. Comput. 24(2), pp. 267–302, doi:10.1007/s00165-011-
0188-1.
[14] G. Norman, D. Parker, M. Kwiatkowska, S. Shukla & R. Gupta (2002): Formal Analysis and Validation of
Continuous Time Markov Chain Based System Level Power Management Strategies. In W. Rosenstiel, editor:
Proc. 7th Annual IEEE International Workshop on High Level Design Validation and Test (HLDVT'02),
IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 45–50.
[15] N. Zo´n, S. Gilmore & J. Hillston (2016): Rigorous graphical modelling of movement in Collective Adaptive
Systems. In Proceedings of ISoLA 2016. To appear.
|
1109.2132 | 1 | 1109 | 2011-09-09T20:23:28 | Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming | [
"cs.MA"
] | Many current large-scale multiagent team implementations can be characterized as following the belief-desire-intention (BDI) paradigm, with explicit representation of team plans. Despite their promise, current BDI team approaches lack tools for quantitative performance analysis under uncertainty. Distributed partially observable Markov decision problems (POMDPs) are well suited for such analysis, but the complexity of finding optimal policies in such models is highly intractable. The key contribution of this article is a hybrid BDI-POMDP approach, where BDI team plans are exploited to improve POMDP tractability and POMDP analysis improves BDI team plan performance. Concretely, we focus on role allocation, a fundamental problem in BDI teams: which agents to allocate to the different roles in the team. The article provides three key contributions. First, we describe a role allocation technique that takes into account future uncertainties in the domain; prior work in multiagent role allocation has failed to address such uncertainties. To that end, we introduce RMTDP (Role-based Markov Team Decision Problem), a new distributed POMDP model for analysis of role allocations. Our technique gains in tractability by significantly curtailing RMTDP policy search; in particular, BDI team plans provide incomplete RMTDP policies, and the RMTDP policy search fills the gaps in such incomplete policies by searching for the best role allocation. Our second key contribution is a novel decomposition technique to further improve RMTDP policy search efficiency. Even though limited to searching role allocations, there are still combinatorially many role allocations, and evaluating each in RMTDP to identify the best is extremely difficult. Our decomposition technique exploits the structure in the BDI team plans to significantly prune the search space of role allocations. Our third key contribution is a significantly faster policy evaluation algorithm suited for our BDI-POMDP hybrid approach. Finally, we also present experimental results from two domains: mission rehearsal simulation and RoboCupRescue disaster rescue simulation. | cs.MA | cs | Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 23 (2005) 367-420
Submitted 07/04; published 04/05
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
Ranjit Nair
Automation and Control Solutions
Honeywell Laboratories, Minneapolis, MN 55416
Milind Tambe
Department of Computer Science
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089
[email protected]
[email protected]
Abstract
Many current large-scale multiagent team implementations can be characterized as
following the "belief-desire-intention" (BDI) paradigm, with explicit representation of team
plans. Despite their promise, current BDI team approaches lack tools for quantitative
performance analysis under uncertainty. Distributed partially observable Markov decision
problems (POMDPs) are well suited for such analysis, but the complexity of finding optimal
policies in such models is highly intractable. The key contribution of this article is a
hybrid BDI-POMDP approach, where BDI team plans are exploited to improve POMDP
tractability and POMDP analysis improves BDI team plan performance.
Concretely, we focus on role allocation, a fundamental problem in BDI teams: which
agents to allocate to the different roles in the team. The article provides three key con-
tributions. First, we describe a role allocation technique that takes into account future
uncertainties in the domain; prior work in multiagent role allocation has failed to address
such uncertainties. To that end, we introduce RMTDP (Role-based Markov Team De-
cision Problem), a new distributed POMDP model for analysis of role allocations. Our
technique gains in tractability by significantly curtailing RMTDP policy search; in partic-
ular, BDI team plans provide incomplete RMTDP policies, and the RMTDP policy search
fills the gaps in such incomplete policies by searching for the best role allocation. Our
second key contribution is a novel decomposition technique to further improve RMTDP
policy search efficiency. Even though limited to searching role allocations, there are still
combinatorially many role allocations, and evaluating each in RMTDP to identify the best
is extremely difficult. Our decomposition technique exploits the structure in the BDI team
plans to significantly prune the search space of role allocations. Our third key contribution
is a significantly faster policy evaluation algorithm suited for our BDI-POMDP hybrid ap-
proach. Finally, we also present experimental results from two domains: mission rehearsal
simulation and RoboCupRescue disaster rescue simulation.
1. Introduction
Teamwork, whether among software agents, or robots (and people) is a critical capability
in a large number of multiagent domains ranging from mission rehearsal simulations, to
RoboCup soccer and disaster rescue, to personal assistant teams. Already a large num-
ber of multiagent teams have been developed for a range of domains (Pynadath & Tambe,
2003; Yen, Yin, Ioerger, Miller, Xu, & Volz, 2001; Stone & Veloso, 1999; Jennings, 1995;
Grosz, Hunsberger, & Kraus, 1999; Decker & Lesser, 1993; Tambe, Pynadath, & Chauvat,
2000; da Silva & Demazeau, 2002). These existing practical approaches can be character-
ized as situated within the general "belief-desire-intention" (BDI) approach, a paradigm
c(cid:13)2005 AI Access Foundation. All rights reserved.
Nair & Tambe
for designing multiagent systems, made increasingly popular due to programming frame-
works (Tambe et al., 2000; Decker & Lesser, 1993; Tidhar, 1993b) that facilitate the design
of large-scale teams. Within this approach, inspired explicitly or implicitly by BDI logics,
agents explicitly represent and reason with their team goals and plans (Wooldridge, 2002).
This article focuses on analysis of such BDI teams, to provide feedback to aid human
developers and possibly to agents participating in a team, on how the team performance
in complex dynamic domains can be improved.
In particular, it focuses on the critical
challenge of role allocation in building teams (Tidhar, Rao, & Sonenberg, 1996; Hunsberger
& Grosz, 2000), i.e. which agents to allocate to the various roles in the team. For instance,
in mission rehearsal simulations (Tambe et al., 2000), we need to select the numbers and
types of helicopter agents to allocate to different roles in the team. Similarly, in disaster
rescue (Kitano, Tadokoro, Noda, Matsubara, Takahashi, Shinjoh, & Shimada, 1999), role
allocation refers to allocating fire engines and ambulances to fires and it can greatly impact
team performance. In both these and other such domains, the performance of the team is
linked to important metrics such as loss of human life and property and thus it is critical
to analyze team performance and suggest improvements.
While BDI frameworks facilitate human design of large scale teams, the key difficulty
in analyzing role allocation in these teams is due to the uncertainty that arises in complex
domains. For example, actions may fail and the world state may be only partially observable
to the agents owing to physical properties of the environment or imperfect sensing. Role
allocation demands such future uncertainties be taken into account, e.g. the fact that an
agent may fail during execution and may or may not be replaced by another must be taken
into account when determining the role allocation. Yet most current role allocation algo-
rithms do not address such uncertainty (see Section 7.4). Indeed, such uncertainty requires
quantitative comparison of different role allocations. However, tools for such quantitative
evaluations of BDI teams are currently absent. Thus, given these uncertainties, we may be
required to experimentally recreate a large number of possible scenarios (in a real domain
or in simulations) to evaluate and compare different role allocations.
Fortunately, the emergence of distributed Partially Observable Markov Decision Prob-
lems (POMDPs) provides models (Bernstein, Zilberstein, & Immerman, 2000; Boutilier,
1996; Pynadath & Tambe, 2002; Xuan, Lesser, & Zilberstein, 2001) that can be used for
quantitative analysis of agent teams in uncertain domains. Distributed POMDPs repre-
sent a class of formal models that are powerful enough to express the uncertainty in these
dynamic domains arising as a result of non-determinism and partial observability and in
principle, can be used to generate and evaluate complete policies for the multiagent team.
However, there are two shortcomings in these models that prevents their application in
the analysis of role allocation. First, previous work on analysis has focused on communi-
cation (Pynadath & Tambe, 2002; Xuan et al., 2001), rather than role allocation or any
other coordination decisions. Second, as shown by Bernstein et al. (2000), the problem
of deriving the optimal policy is generally computationally intractable (the corresponding
decision problem is NEXP-complete). Thus, applying optimal policies for analysis is highly
intractable.
To address the first difficulty, we derive RMTDP (Role-based Multiagent Team Decision
Problem), a distributed POMDP framework for quantitatively analyzing role allocations.
Using this framework, we show that, in general, the problem of finding the optimal role
368
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
completed policy =
additions to BDI team plan
RMTDP
Search Policy Space
Incomplete policy
BDI team plan
BDI Interpreter
Domain
RMTDP model
Figure 1: Integration of BDI and POMDP.
allocation policy is computationally intractable (the corresponding decision problem is still
NEXP-complete). This shows that improving the tractability of analysis techniques for role
allocation is a critically important issue.
Therefore, in order to make the quantitative analysis of multiagent teams using RMTDP
more tractable, our second contribution provides a hybrid BDI-POMDP approach that
combines the native strengths of the BDI and POMDP approaches, i.e., the ability in BDI
frameworks to encode large-scale team plans and the POMDP ability to quantitatively
evaluate such plans. This hybrid approach is based on three key interactions that improve
the tractability of RMTDP and the optimality of BDI agent teams. The first interaction is
shown in Figure 1. In particular, suppose we wish to analyze a BDI agent team (each agent
consisting of a BDI team plan and a domain independent interpreter that helps coordinate
such plans) acting in a domain. Then as shown in Figure 1, we model the domain via an
RMTDP, and rely on the BDI team plan and interpreter for providing an incomplete policy
for this RMTDP. The RMTDP model evaluates different completions of this incomplete
policy and provides an optimally completed policy as feedback to the BDI system. Thus,
the RMTDP fills in the gaps in an incompletely specified BDI team plan optimally. Here
the gaps we concentrate on are the role allocations, but the method can be applied to other
key coordination decisions. By restricting the optimization to only role allocation decisions
and fixing the policy at all other points, we are able to come up with a restricted policy
space. We then use RMTDPs to effectively search this restricted space in order to find the
optimal role allocation.
While the restricted policy search is one key positive interaction in our hybrid approach,
the second interaction consists of a more efficient policy representation used for converting
a BDI team plan and interpreter into a corresponding policy (see Figure 1) and a new
algorithm for policy evaluation. In general, each agent's policy in a distributed POMDP
is indexed by its observation history (Bernstein et al., 2000; Pynadath & Tambe, 2002).
369
Nair & Tambe
However, in a BDI system, each agent performs its action selection based on its set of
privately held beliefs which is obtained from the agent's observations after applying a belief
revision function. In order to evaluate the team's performance, it is sufficient in RMTDP to
index the agents' policies by their belief state (represented here by their privately held beliefs)
instead of their observation histories. This shift in representation results in considerable
savings in the amount of time needed to evaluate a policy and in the space required to
represent a policy.
The third key interaction in our hybrid approach further exploits BDI team plan struc-
ture for increasing the efficiency of our RMTDP-based analysis. Even though RMTDP
policy space is restricted to filling in gaps in incomplete policies, many policies may result
given the large number of possible role allocations. Thus enumerating and evaluating each
possible policy for a given domain is difficult. Instead, we provide a branch-and-bound al-
gorithm that exploits task decomposition among sub-teams of a team to significantly prune
the search space and provide a correctness proof and worst-case analysis of this algorithm.
In order to empirically validate our approach, we have applied RMTDP for allocation
in BDI teams in two concrete domains: mission rehearsal simulations (Tambe et al., 2000)
and RoboCupRescue (Kitano et al., 1999). We first present the (significant) speed-up
gained by our three interactions mentioned above. Next, in both domains, we compared
the role allocations found by our approach with state-of-the-art techniques that allocate
roles without uncertainty reasoning. This comparison shows the importance of reasoning
about uncertainty when determining the role allocation for complex multiagent domains. In
the RoboCupRescue domain, we also compared the allocations found with allocations chosen
by humans in the actual RoboCupRescue simulation environment. The results showed that
the role allocation technique presented in this article is capable of performing at human
expert levels in the RoboCupRescue domain.
The article is organized as follows: Section 2 presents background and motivation. In
Section 3, we introduce the RMTDP model and present key complexity results. Section
4 explains how a BDI team plan can be evaluated using RMTDP. Section 5 describes the
analysis methodology for finding the optimal role allocation, while Section 6 presents an
empirical evaluation of this methodology.
In Section 7, we present related work and in
Section 8, we list our conclusions.
2. Background
This section first describes the two domains that we consider in this article: an abstract
mission rehearsal domain (Tambe et al., 2000) and the RoboCupRescue domain (Kitano
et al., 1999). Each domain requires us to allocate roles to agents in a team. Next, team-
oriented programming (TOP), a framework for describing team plans is described in the
context of these two domains. While we focus on TOP, as discussed further in Section 7.1,
our techniques would be applicable in other frameworks for tasking teams (Stone & Veloso,
1999; Decker & Lesser, 1993).
2.1 Domains
The first domain that we consider is based on mission rehearsal simulations (Tambe et al.,
2000). For expository purposes, this has been intentionally simplified. The scenario is as
370
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
follows: A helicopter team is executing a mission of transporting valuable cargo from point
X to point Y through enemy terrain (see Figure 2). There are three paths from X to Y of
different lengths and different risk due to enemy fire. One or more scouting sub-teams must
be sent out (one for each path from X to Y), and the larger the size of a scouting sub-team
the safer it is. When scouts clear up any one path from X to Y, the transports can then
move more safely along that path. However, the scouts may fail along a path, and may
need to be replaced by a transport at the cost of not transporting cargo. Owing to partial
observability, the transports may not receive an observation that a scout has failed or that
a route has been cleared. We wish to transport the most amount of cargo in the quickest
possible manner within the mission deadline.
The key role allocation decision here is given a fixed number of helicopters, how should
they be allocated to scouting and transport roles? Allocating more scouts means that the
scouting task is more likely to succeed, but there will be fewer helicopters left that can
be used to transport the cargo and consequently less reward. However, allocating too few
scouts could result in the mission failing altogether. Also, in allocating the scouts, which
routes should the scouts be sent on? The shortest route would be preferable but it is more
risky. Sending all the scouts on the same route decreases the likelihood of failure of an
individual scout; however, it might be more beneficial to send them on different routes, e.g.
some scouts on a risky but short route and others on a safe but longer route.
Thus there are many role allocations to consider. Evaluating each is difficult because
role allocation must look-ahead to consider future implications of uncertainty, e.g. scout
helicopters can fail during scouting and may need to be replaced by a transport. Further-
more, failure or success of a scout may not be visible to the transport helicopters and hence
a transport may not replace a scout or transports may never fly to the destination.
transports
scout
route 1
X
route 2
Y
enemy gun
route 3
Figure 2: Mission rehearsal domain.
The second example scenario (see Figure 3), set up in the RoboCupRescue disaster
simulation environment (Kitano et al., 1999), consists of five fire engines at three different
fire stations (two each at stations 1 & 3 and the last at station 2) and five ambulances
stationed at the ambulance center. Two fires (in top left and bottom right corners of the
map) start that need to be extinguished by the fire engines. After a fire is extinguished,
ambulance agents need to save the surviving civilians. The number of civilians at each
371
Nair & Tambe
location is not known ahead of time, although the total number of civilians in known. As
time passes, there is a high likelihood that the health of civilians will deteriorate and fires
will increase in intensity. Yet the agents need to rescue as many civilians as possible with
minimal damage to the buildings. The first part of the goal in this scenario is therefore to
first determine which fire engines to assign to each fire. Once the fire engines have gathered
information about the number of civilians at each fire, this is transmitted to the ambulances.
The next part of the goal is then to allocate the ambulances to a particular fire to rescue
the civilians trapped there. However, ambulances cannot rescue civilians until fires are fully
extinguished. Here, partial observability (each agent can only view objects within its visual
range), and uncertainty related to fire intensity, as well as location of civilians and their
health add significantly to the difficulty.
C1
F3
C2
F2
F1
A
Figure 3: RoboCupRescue Scenario: C1 and C2 denote the two fire locations, F1, F2 and
F3 denote fire stations 1, 2 and 3 respectively and A denotes the ambulance
center.
2.2 Team-Oriented Programming
The aim of the team-oriented programming (TOP) (Pynadath & Tambe, 2003; Tambe et al.,
2000; Tidhar, 1993b) framework is to provide human developers (or automated symbolic
planners) with a useful abstraction for tasking teams. For domains such as those described
in Section 2.1, it consists of three key aspects of a team: (i) a team organization hierarchy
consisting of roles; (ii) a team (reactive) plan hierarchy; and (iii) an assignment of roles
to sub-plans in the plan hierarchy. The developer need not specify low-level coordination
details. Instead, the TOP interpreter (the underlying coordination infrastructure) automat-
ically enables agents to decide when and with whom to communicate and how to reallocate
372
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
roles upon failure. The TOP abstraction enables humans to rapidly provide team plans for
large-scale teams, but unfortunately, only a qualitative assessment of team performance is
feasible. Thus, a key TOP weakness is the inability to quantitatively evaluate and optimize
team performance, e.g., in allocating roles to agents only a qualitative matching of capa-
bilities may be feasible. As discussed later, our hybrid BDI-POMDP model addresses this
weakness by providing techniques for quantitative evaluation.
As a concrete example, consider the TOP for the mission rehearsal domain. We first
specify the team organization hierarchy (see Figure 4(a)). Task Force is the highest level
team in this organization and consists of two roles Scouting and Transport, where the
Scouting sub-team has roles for each of the three scouting sub-sub-teams. Next we specify
a hierarchy of reactive team plans (Figure 4(b)). Reactive team plans explicitly express
joint activities of the relevant team and consist of: (i) pre-conditions under which the plan
is to be proposed; (ii) termination conditions under which the plan is to be ended; and (iii)
team-level actions to be executed as part of the plan (an example plan will be discussed
shortly).
In Figure 4(b), the highest level plan Execute Mission has three sub-plans:
DoScouting to make one path from X to Y safe for the transports, DoTransport to
move the transports along a scouted path, and RemainingScouts for the scouts which
have not reached the destination yet to get there.
Execute Mission [Task Force]
DoScouting
[Task Force]
RemainingScouts
[Scouting Team]
DoTransport
[Transport Team]
Task Force
Scouting Team
Transport Team
WaitAtBase
ScoutRoutes
[Transport Team]
[Scouting Team]
SctTeamA SctTeamB SctTeamC
(a)
ScoutRoute1
[SctTeamA]
ScoutRoute2
[SctTeamB]
ScoutRoute3
[SctTeamC]
(b)
Figure 4: TOP for mission rehearsal domain a: Organization hierarchy; b: Plan hierarchy.
Figure 4(b) also shows coordination relationships: An AND relationship is indicated
with a solid arc, while an OR relationship is indicated with a dashed arc. Thus, Wai-
tAtBase and ScoutRoutes must both be done while at least one of ScoutRoute1,
ScoutRoute2 or ScoutRoute3 need be performed. There is also a temporal depen-
dence relationship among the sub-plans, which implies that sub-teams assigned to perform
DoTransport or RemainingScouts cannot do so until the DoScouting plan has com-
pleted. However, DoTransport and RemainingScouts execute in parallel. Finally, we
assign roles to plans – Figure 4(b) shows the assignment in brackets adjacent to the plans.
For instance, Task Force team is assigned to jointly perform Execute Mission while Sct-
TeamA is assigned to ScoutRoute1.
The team plan corresponding to Execute Mission is shown in Figure 5. As can be
seen, each team plan consists of a context, pre-conditions, post-conditions, body and con-
straints. The context describes the conditions that must be fulfilled in the parent plan while
the pre-conditions are the particular conditions that will cause this sub-plan to begin exe-
373
Nair & Tambe
cution. Thus, for Execute Mission, the pre-condition is that the team mutually believes
(MB)1 that they are the "start" location. The post-conditions are divided into Achieved,
Unachievable and Irrelevant conditions under which this sub-plan will be terminated. The
body consists of sub-plans that exist within this team plan. Lastly, constraints describe any
temporal constraints that exist between sub-plans in the body. The description of all the
plans in the plan hierarchy of Figure 4(b) is given in Appendix A.
ExecuteMission:
Context:∅
Pre-conditions: (MB <TaskForce> location(TaskForce) = START)
Achieved: (MB <TaskForce> (Achieved(DoScouting) ∧ Achieved(DoTransport))) ∧ (time
> T ∨ (MB <TaskForce>
Achieved(RemainingScouts) ∨ (∄ helo ∈ ScoutingTeam, alive(helo) ∧
location(helo) 6= END)))
Unachievable: (MB <TaskForce> Unachievable(DoScouting)) ∨ (MB <TaskForce>
Unachievable(DoTransport) ∧
(Achieved(RemainingScouts) ∨(∄ helo ∈ ScoutingTeam, alive(helo) ∧
location(helo) 6= END)))
Irrelevant: ∅
Body:
DoScouting
DoTransport
RemainingScouts
Constraints: DoScouting → DoTransport, DoScouting → RemainingScouts
Figure 5: Example team plan. MB refers to mutual belief.
Just as in HTN (Dix, Muoz-Avila, Nau, & Zhang, 2003; Erol, Hendler, & Nau, 1994), the
plan hierarchy of a TOP gives a decomposition of the task into smaller tasks. However, the
language of TOPs is richer than the language of early HTN planning (Erol et al., 1994) which
contained just simple ordering constraints. As seen in the above example, the plan hierarchy
in TOPs can also contain relationships like AND and OR. In addition, just like more recent
work in HTN planning (Dix et al., 2003), sub-plans in TOPs can contain pre-conditions and
post-conditions, thus allowing for conditional plan execution. The main differences between
TOPs and HTN planning are: (i) TOPs contain an organization hierarchy in addition to a
plan hierarchy, (ii) the TOP interpreter ensures that the team executes its plans coherently.
As seen later, TOPs will be analyzed with all of this expressiveness including conditional
execution; however, since our analysis will focus on a fixed time horizon, any loops in the
task description will be unrolled up to the time horizon.
1. Mutual Belief (Wooldridge, 2002), shown as (MB hteami x) in Figure 5, refers to a private belief held
by each agent in the team that they each believe that a fact x is true, and that each of the other agents
in the team believe that x is true, and that every agent believes that every other agent believes that x
is true and so on. Such infinite levels of nesting are difficult to realize in practice. Thus, as in practical
BDI implementations, for the purposes of this article, a mutual belief is approximated to be a private
belief held by an agent that all the agents in the team believe that x is true.
374
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
new observation for
agent i
Belief Update
function
Private beliefs of
agent i
Figure 6: Mapping of observations to beliefs.
During execution, each agent has a copy of the TOP. The agent also maintains a set
of private beliefs, which are a set of propositions that the agent believes to be true (see
Figure 6). When an agent receives new beliefs, i.e. observations (including communication),
the belief update function is used to update its set of privately held beliefs. For instance,
upon seeing the last scout crashed, a transport may update its privately held beliefs to
In practical BDI systems, such belief
include the belief "CriticalFailure(DoScouting)".
update computation is of low complexity (e.g.
constant or linear time). Once beliefs
are updated, an agent selects which plan to execute by matching its beliefs with the pre-
conditions in the plans. The basic execution cycle is similar to standard reactive planning
systems such as PRS (Georgeff & Lansky, 1986).
During team plan execution, observations in the form of communications often arise
because of the coordination actions executed by the TOP interpreter. For instance, TOP
interpreters have exploited BDI theories of teamwork, such as Levesque et al.'s theory
of joint intentions (Levesque, Cohen, & Nunes, 1990) which require that when an agent
comes to privately believe a fact that terminates the current team plan (i.e. matches the
achievement or unachievability conditions of a team plan), then it communicates this fact
to the rest of the team. By performing such coordination actions automatically, the TOP
interpreter enables coherence at the initiation and termination of team plans within a TOP.
Some further details and examples of TOPs can be seen in the work of Pynadath and
Tambe (2003), Tambe et al. (2000) and Tidhar (1993b).
We can now more concretely illustrate the key challenges in role allocation mentioned
earlier. First, a human developer must allocate available agents to the organization hierar-
chy (Figure 4(a)), to find the best role allocation. However, there are combinatorially many
allocations to choose from (Hunsberger & Grosz, 2000; Tambe et al., 2000). For instance,
starting with just 6 homogeneous helicopters results in 84 different ways of deciding how
many agents to assign to each scouting and transport sub-team. This problem is exacer-
bated by the fact that the best allocation varies significantly based on domain variations.
For example, Figure 7 shows three different assignments of agents to the team organiza-
tion hierarchy, each found in our analysis to be the best for a given setting of failure and
observation probabilities (details in Section 6). For example, increasing the probability of
failures on all routes resulted in the number of transports in the best allocation changing
from four (see Figure 7(b)) to three (see Figure 7(a)), where an additional scout was added
to SctTeamB. If failures were not possible at all, the number of transports increased to
five (see Figure 7(c)). Our analysis takes a step towards selecting the best among such
allocations.
375
Nair & Tambe
Task Force
Task Force
Scouting Team Transport Team=3
Scouting Team Transport Team=4
SctTeamA=2 SctTeamB=1 SctTeamC=0
SctTeamA=2 SctTeamB=0 SctTeamC=0
(a) Medium probability
(b) Low probability
Task Force
Scouting Team Transport Team=5
SctTeamA=0 SctTeamB=0 SctTeamC=1
(c) Zero probability
Figure 7: Best role allocations for different probabilities of scout failure.
Figure 8 shows the TOP for the RoboCupRescue scenario. As can be seen, the plan hi-
erarchy for this scenario consists of a pair of ExtinguishFire and RescueCivilians plans
done in parallel, each of which further decompose into individual plans. (These individ-
ual plans get the fire engines and ambulances to move through the streets using specific
search algorithms, however, these individual plans are not relevant for our discussions in
this article; interested readers should refer to the description of our RoboCupRescue team
entered into the RoboCup competitions of 2001 (Nair, Ito, Tambe, & Marsella, 2002).) The
organizational hierarchy consists of Task Force comprising of two Engine sub-teams, one
for each fire and an Ambulance Team, where the engine teams are assigned to extinguishing
the fires while the ambulance team is assigned to rescuing civilians. In this particular TOP,
the assignment of ambulances to AmbulanceTeamA and AmbulanceTeamB is conditioned
on the communication "c", indicated by "AmbulanceTeamAc" and "AmbulanceTeamBc".
"c" is not described in detail in this figure, but it refers to the communication that is re-
ceived from the fire engines that describes the number of civilians present at each fire. The
problem is which engines to assign to each Engine Team and for each possible value of "c",
which ambulances to assign to each Ambulance Team. Note that engines have differing
capabilities owing to differing distances from fires while all the ambulances have identical
capabilities.
Task Force
EngineTeamA
EngineTeamB
AmbulanceTeam
AmbulanceTeamA c AmbulanceTeamB c
(a)
ExecuteMission
[Task Force]
ExtinguishFire1
[EngineTeamA]
RescueCivilians1
[AmbulanceTeamA]
ExtinguishFire2
[EngineTeamB]
RescueCivilians2
[AmbulanceTeamB]
(b)
Figure 8: TOP for RoboCupRescue scenario a: Organization hierarchy; b: Plan hierarchy.
376
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
3. Role-based Multiagent Team Decision Problem
Multiagent Team Decision Problem (MTDP) (Pynadath & Tambe, 2002) is inspired by
the economic theory of teams (Marschak & Radner, 1972; Ho, 1980; Yoshikawa, 1978).
In order to do quantitative analysis of key coordination decisions in multiagent teams, we
extend MTDP for the analysis of the coordination actions of interest. For example, the
COM-MTDP (Pynadath & Tambe, 2002) is an extension of MTDP for the analysis of com-
munication. In this article, we illustrate a general methodology for analysis of other aspects
of coordination and present the RMTDP model for quantitative analysis of role allocation
and reallocation as a concrete example. In contrast to BDI systems introduced in the previ-
ous section, RMTDP enables explicit quantitative optimization of team performance. Note
that, while we use MTDP, other possible distributed POMDP models could potentially also
serve as a basis (Bernstein et al., 2000; Xuan et al., 2001).
3.1 Multiagent Team Decision Problem
Given a team of n agents, an MTDP (Pynadath & Tambe, 2002) is defined as a tuple:
hS, A, P, Ω, O, Ri. It consists of a finite set of states S = Ξ1 × · · · × Ξm where each Ξj,
1 ≤ j ≤ m, is a feature of the world state. Each agent i can perform an action from its
set of actions Ai, where ×1≤i≤nAi = A. P (s, < a1, . . . , an >, s′) gives the probability of
transitioning from state s to state s′ given that the agents perform the actions < a1, . . . , an >
jointly. Each agent i receives an observation ωi ∈ Ωi (×1≤i≤nΩi = Ω) based on the function
O(s, < a1, . . . , an >, ω1, . . . , ωn), which gives the probability that the agents receive the
observations, ω1, . . . , ωn given that the world state is s and they perform < a1, . . . , an >
jointly. The agents receive a single joint reward R(s, < a1, . . . , an >) based on the state s
and their joint action < a1, . . . , an >. This joint reward is shared equally by all members
and there is no other private reward that individual agents receive for their actions. Thus,
the agents are motivated to behave as a team, taking the actions that jointly yield the
maximum expected reward.
i , . . . , ωt
Each agent i in an MTDP chooses its actions based on its local policy, πi, which is a
mapping of its observation history to actions. Thus, at time t, agent i will perform action
πi(ω0
i). This contrasts with a single-agent POMDP, where we can index an agent's
policy by its belief state – a probability distribution over the world state (Kaelbling, Littman,
& Cassandra, 1998), which is shown to be a sufficient statistic in order to compute the
optimal policy (Sondik, 1971). Unfortunately, we cannot directly use single-agent POMDP
techniques (Kaelbling et al., 1998) for maintaining or updating belief states (Kaelbling et al.,
1998) in a MTDP – unlike in a single agent POMDP, in MTDP, an agent's observation
depends not only on its own actions, but also on unknown actions of other agents. Thus,
as with other distributed POMDP models (Bernstein et al., 2000; Xuan et al., 2001), in
MTDP, local policies πi are indexed by observation histories. π =< π1, . . . , πn > refers to
the joint policy of the team of agents.
3.2 Extension for Explicit Coordination
Beginning with MTDP, the next step in our methodology is to make an explicit separation
between domain-level actions and the coordination actions of interest. Earlier work intro-
377
Nair & Tambe
duced the COM-MTDP model (Pynadath & Tambe, 2002), where the coordination action
was fixed to be the communication action, and got separated out. However, other coordina-
tion actions could also be separated from domain-level actions in order to investigate their
impact. Thus, to investigate role allocation and reallocations, actions for allocating agents
to roles and to reallocate such roles are separated out. To that end, we define RMTDP
(Role-based Multiagent Team Decision Problem) as a tuple hS, A, P, Ω, O, R, RLi with a
new component, RL. In particular, RL = {r1, . . . , rs} is a set of all roles that the agents
can undertake. Each instance of role rj may be assigned some agent i to fulfill it. The
actions of each agent are now distinguishable into two types:
Role-Taking actions: Υi = {υirj } contains the role-taking actions for agent i. υirj ∈ Υi
means that agent i takes on the role rj ∈ RL.
Role-Execution Actions: Φi = Srj ∈RL Φirj contains the execution actions for agent i
where Φirj is the set of agent i's actions for executing role rj ∈ RL
In addition we define the set of states as S = Ξ1 × · · · × Ξm × Ξroles, where the fea-
ture Ξroles (a vector) gives the current role that each agent has taken on. The reason for
introducing this new feature is to assist us in the mapping from a BDI team plan to an
RMTDP. Thus each time an agent performs a new role-taking action successfully, the value
of the feature Ξroles will be updated to reflect this change. The key here is that we not only
model an agent's initial role-taking action but also subsequent role reallocation. Modeling
both allocation and reallocation is important for an accurate analysis of BDI teams. Note
that an agent can observe the part of this feature pertaining to its own current role but it
may not observe the parts pertaining to other agents' roles.
The introduction of roles allows us to represent the specialized behaviors associated
with each role, e.g. a transport vs. a scout role. While filling a particular role, rj, agent
i can perform only role-execution actions, φ ∈ Φirj , which may be different from the role-
execution actions Φirl for role rl. Thus, the feature Ξroles is used to filter actions such that
only those role-execution actions that correspond to the agent's current role are permitted.
In the worst case, this filtering does not affect the computational complexity (see Theorem 1
below) but in practice, it can significantly improve performance when trying to find the
optimal policy for the team, since the number of domain actions that each agent can choose
from is restricted by the role that the agent has taken on. Also, these different roles can
produce varied effects on the world state (modeled via transition probabilities, P ) and the
team's reward. Thus, the policies must ensure that agents for each role have the capabilities
that benefit the team the most.
Just as in MTDP, each agent chooses which action to perform by indexing its local policy
πi by its observation history. In the same epoch some agents could be doing role-taking
actions while others are doing role-execution actions. Thus, each agent's local policy πi can
be divided into local role-taking and role-execution policies such that for all observation
histories, ω0
i) = null. πΥ =<
π1Υ, . . . , πnΥ > refers to the joint role-taking policy of the team of agents while πΦ =<
π1Φ, . . . , πnΦ > refers to the joint role-execution policy.
i) = null or πiΦ(ω0
i , . . . , ωt
i , . . . , ωt
i, either πiΥ(ω0
i , . . . , ωt
378
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
In this article we do not explicitly model communicative actions as a special action.
Thus communication is treated like any other role-execution action and the communication
received from other agents are treated as observations.2
3.3 Complexity Results with RMTDP
While Section 2.2 qualitatively emphasized the difficulty of role allocation, RMTDP helps
us in understanding the complexity more precisely. The goal in RMTDP is to come up with
joint policies πΥ and πΦ that will maximize the total expected reward over a finite horizon
T . Note that agents can change their roles according to their local role-taking policies. The
agent's role-execution policy subsequent to this change would contain actions pertaining to
this new role. The following theorem illustrates the complexity of finding such optimal joint
policies.
Theorem 1 The decision problem of determining if there exist policies, πΥ and πΦ, for an
RMTDP, that yield an expected reward of at least K over some finite horizon T is NEXP-
complete.
Proof sketch: Proof follows from the reduction of MTDP (Pynadath & Tambe, 2002)
to/from RMTDP. To reduce MTDP to RMTDP, we set RMTDP's role taking actions, Υ′,
to null and set the RMTDP's role-execution actions, Φ′, to the MTDP's set of actions, A.
To reduce RMTDP to MTDP, we generate a new MTDP such that its set of actions, A′
is equal to ΥS Φ. Finding the required policy in MTDP is NEXP-complete (Pynadath &
Tambe, 2002).(cid:3)
As this theorem shows us, solving the RMTDP for the optimal joint role-taking and role-
execution policies over even a finite horizon is highly intractable. Hence, we focus on the
complexity of just determining the optimal role-taking policy, given a fixed role-execution
policy. By fixed role-execution policy, we mean that the action selection of an agent is
predetermined by the role it is executing.
Theorem 2 The decision problem of determining if there exists a role-taking policy, πΥ, for
an RMTDP, that yields an expected reward of at least K together with a fixed role-execution
policy πΦ, over some finite horizon T is NEXP-complete.
Proof sketch: We reduce an MTDP to an RMTDP with a different role-taking and a
role-execution action corresponding to each action in the MTDP. Hence, in the RMTDP we
have a role-taking action υirj for agent i to take on role rj created for each action aj ∈ Ai in
the MTDP and each such role rj contains a single role-execution action, i.e. Φirj = 1. For
the RMTDP, construct the transition function to be such that a role-taking action always
succeeds and the only affected state feature is Ξroles. For the role-execution action φ ∈ Φirj ,
the transition probability is the same as that of the MTDP action, aj ∈ Ai corresponding
to the last role-taking action υirj . The fixed role-execution policy is to simply perform
the action, φ ∈ Φirj , corresponding to the last successful role-taking action, υirj . Thus,
the decision problem for an RMTDP with a fixed role-execution policy is at least as hard
2. For a more explicit analysis of communication please refer to work done by Pynadath and Tambe (2002)
and Goldman et al. (2003).
379
Nair & Tambe
as the decision problem for an MTDP. Furthermore, given Theorem 1, we can conclude
NEXP-Completeness.(cid:3)
This result suggests that even by fixing the role-execution policy, solving the RMTDP for
the optimal role-taking policy is still intractable. Note that Theorem 2 refers to a completely
general globally optimal role-taking policy, where any number of agents can change roles at
any point in time. Given the above result, in general the globally optimal role-taking policy
will likely be of doubly exponential complexity, and so we may be left no choice but to run
a brute-force policy search, i.e. to enumerate all the role-taking policies and then evaluate
them, which together determine the run-time of finding the globally optimal policy. The
number of policies is (cid:18)Υ
ΩT −1
Ω−1 (cid:19)n
, i.e. doubly exponential in the number of observation
histories and the number of agents. Thus, while RMTDP enables quantitative evaluation of
team's policies, computing optimal policies is intractable; furthermore, given its low level of
abstraction, in contrast to TOP, it is difficult for a human to understand the optimal policy.
This contrast between RMTDP and TOP is at the root of our hybrid model described in
the following section.
4. Hybrid BDI-POMDP Approach
Having explained TOP and RMTDP, we can now present a more detailed view of our
hybrid methodology to quantitatively evaluate a TOP. We first provide a more detailed
interpretation of Figure 1. BDI team plans are essentially TOP plans, while the BDI
interpreter is the TOP coordination layer. As shown in Figure 1, an RMTDP model is
constructed corresponding to the domain and the TOP and its interpreter are converted
into a corresponding (incomplete) RMTDP policy. We can then analyze the TOP using
analysis techniques that rely on evaluating the RMTDP policy using the RMTDP model
of the domain.
Thus, our hybrid approach combines the strengths of the TOPs (enabling humans to
specify TOPs to coordinate large-scale teams) with the strengths of RMTDP (enabling
quantitative evaluation of different role allocations). On the one hand, this synergistic
interaction enables RMTDPs to improve the performance of TOP-based BDI teams. On
the other hand, we have identified at least six specific ways in which TOPs make it easier
to build RMTDPs and to efficiently search RMTDP policies: two of which are discussed in
this section, and four in the next section. In particular, the six ways are:
1. TOPs are exploited in constructing RMTDP models of the domain (Section 4.1);
2. TOPs are exploited to present incomplete policies to RMTDPs, restricting the RMTDP
policy search (Section 5.1);
3. TOP belief representation is exploited in enabling faster RMTDP policy evaluation
(Section 4.2);
4. TOP organization hierarchy is exploited in hierarchically grouping RMTDP policies
(Section 5.1);
5. TOP plan hierarchy is exploited in decomposing RMTDPs (Section 5.3);
380
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
6. TOP plan hierarchies are also exploited in cutting down the observation or belief
histories in RMTDPs (Section 5.3).
The end result of this efficient policy search is a completed RMTDP policy that improves
TOP performance. While we exploit the TOP framework, other frameworks for tasking
teams, e.g. Decker and Lesser (1993) and Stone and Veloso (1999) could benefit from a
similar synergistic interaction.
4.1 Guidelines for Constructing an RMTDP
As shown in Figure 1, our analysis approach uses as input an RMTDP model of the domain,
as well as an incomplete RMTDP policy. Fortunately, not only does the TOP serve as a
direct mapping to the RMTDP policy, but it can also be utilized in actually constructing
the RMTDP model of the domain. In particular, the TOP can be used to determine which
domain features are important to model.
In addition, the structure in the TOP can be
exploited in decomposing the construction of the RMTDP.
The elements of the RMTDP tuple, hS, A, P, Ω, O, R, RLi, can be defined using a pro-
cedure that relies on both the TOP as well as the underlying domain. While this procedure
is not automated, our key contribution is recognizing the exploitation of TOP structures
in constructing the RMTDP model. First, in order to determine the set of states, S, it
is critical to model the variables tested in the pre-conditions, termination conditions and
context of all the components (i.e. sub-plans) in the TOP. Note that a state only needs
to model the features tested in the TOP; if a TOP pre-condition expresses a complex test
on the feature, that test is not modeled in the state, but instead gets used in defining the
incomplete policy input to RMTDP. Next we define the set of roles, RL, as the leaf-level
roles in the organization hierarchy of the TOP. Furthermore, as specified in Section 3.2, we
define a state feature Ξroles as a vector containing the current role for each agent. Having
defined RL and Ξroles, we now define the actions, A as follows. For each role rj ∈ RL, we
define a corresponding role-taking action, υirj which will succeed or fail depending on the
agent i that performs the action and the state s that the action was performed in. The
role-execution actions, Φirj for agent i in role rj, are those allowed for that role according
to the TOP.
Thus, we have defined S, A and RL based on the TOP. To illustrate these steps, consider
the plans in Figure 4(b). The pre-conditions of the leaf-level plan ScoutRoute1 (See
Appendix A), for instance, tests start location of the helicopters to be at start location X,
while the termination conditions test that scouts are at end location Y. Thus, the locations
of the helicopters are modeled as features in the set of states in the RMTDP. Using the
organization hierarchy, we define the set of roles RL with a role corresponding to each of the
four different kinds of leaf-level roles, i.e. RL = {memberSctT eamA, memberSctT eamB,
memberSctT eamC, memberT ransportT eam}. The role-taking and role-execution actions
can be defined as follows:
• A role-taking action is defined corresponding to each of the four roles in RL, i.e.
becoming a member of one of the three scouting teams or of the transport team. The
domain specifies that only a transport can change to a scout and thus the role-taking
action, jointTransportTeam, will fail for agent i, if the current role of agent i is a scout.
381
Nair & Tambe
• Role-execution actions are obtained from the TOP plans corresponding to the agent's
role.
In the mission rehearsal scenario, an agent, fulfilling a scout role (members
of SctTeamA, SctTeamB or SctTeamC), always goes forward, making the current
position safe, until it reaches the destination and so the only execution action we will
consider is "move-making-safe". An agent in a transport role (members of Transport
Team) waits at X until it obtains observation of a signal that one scouting sub-team
has reached Y and hence the role-execution actions are "wait" and "move-forward".
We must now define Ω, P, O, R. We obtain the set of observations Ωi for each agent i
directly from the domain. For instance, the transport helos may observe the status of scout
helos (normal or destroyed), as well as a signal that a path is safe. Finally, determining
the functions, P, O, R requires some combination of human domain expertise and empirical
data on the domain behavior. However, as shown later in Section 6, even an approximate
model of transitional and observational uncertainty is sufficient to deliver significant ben-
efits. Defining the reward and transition function may sometimes require additional state
variables to be modeled, if they were only implicitly modeled in the TOP. In the mission
rehearsal domain, the time at which the scouting and transport mission were completed
determined the amount of reward. Thus, time was only implicitly modeled in the TOP and
needed to be explicitly modeled in the RMTDP.
Since we are interested in analyzing a particular TOP with respect to uncertainty, the
procedure for constructing an RMTDP model can be simplified by exploiting the hierar-
chical decomposition of the TOP in order to decompose the construction of the RMTDP
model. The high-level components of a TOP often represent plans executed by different
sub-teams, which may only loosely interact with each other. Within a component, the
sub-team members may exhibit a tight interaction, but our focus is on the "loose coupling"
across components, where only the end results of one component feed into another, or the
components independently contribute to the team goal. Thus, our procedure for construct-
ing an RMTDP exploits this loose coupling between components of the plan hierarchy in
order to build an RMTDP model represented as a combination of smaller RMTDPs (fac-
tors). Note that if such decomposition is infeasible, our approach still applies except that
the benefits of the hierarchical decomposition will be unavailable.
We classify sibling components as being either parallel or sequentially executed (con-
tains a temporal constraint). Components executed in parallel could be either independent
or dependent. For independent components, we can define RMTDPs for each of these
components such that the sub-team executing one component cannot affect the transi-
tions, observations and reward obtained by the sub-teams executing the other compo-
nents. The procedure for determining the elements of the RMTDP tuple for component k,
hSk, Ak, Pk, Ωk, Ok, Rk, RLki, is identical to the procedure described earlier for constructing
the overall RMTDP. However, each such component has a smaller set of relevant variables
and roles and hence specifying the elements of its corresponding RMTDP is easier.
We can now combine the RMTDPs of the independent components to obtain the
RMTDP corresponding to the higher-level component. For a higher level component l,
whose child components are independent, the set of states, Sl = ×∀Ξx∈FSl
Ξx such that
FSl = S∀k s.t. Child(k,l)=true FSk where FSl and FSk are the sets of features for the set
of states Sl and set of states Sk. A state sl ∈ Sl
sk ∈ Sk if ∀Ξx ∈ FSk , sl[Ξx] = sk[Ξx], i.e.
is said to correspond to the state
the state sl has the same value as state sk
382
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
Q∀k s.t. Child(k,l)=true Pk(s′
k, ak, sk), where sl and s′
for all features of state sk. The transition function is defined as follows, Pl(s′
l, al, sl) =
l of component l corresponds to states
sk and s′
k of component k and ak is the joint action performed by the sub-team as-
signed to component k corresponding to the joint action al performed by the sub-team
assigned to component l. The observation function is defined similarly as Ol(sl, al, ωl) =
Q∀k s.t. Child(k,l)=true Ok(sk, ak, ωk). The reward function for component l is defined as
Rl(sl, al) = P∀k s.t. Child(k,l)=true Rk(sk, ak).
In the case of sequentially executed components (those connected by a temporal con-
straint), the components are loosely coupled since the end states of the preceding component
specify the start states of the succeeding component. Thus, since only one component is
active at a time, the transition function is defined as follows, Pl(s′
l, al, sl) = Pk(s′
k, ak, sk),
where component k is the only active child component, sk and s′
k represent the states of
component k corresponding to states sl and s′
l of component l and ak is the joint action
performed by the sub-team assigned to component k corresponding to the joint action
al performed by the sub-team corresponding to component l. Similarly, we can define
Ol(sl, al, ωl) = Ok(sk, ak, ωk) and Rl(sl, al) = Rk(sk, ak), where k is the only active child
component.
Consider the following example from the mission rehearsal domain where components
exhibit both sequential dependence and parallel independence. Concretely, the component
DoScouting is executed first followed by DoTransport and RemainingScouts, which
are parallel and independent and hence, either DoScouting is active or DoTransport and
RemainingScouts are active at any point in the execution. Hence, the transition, observa-
tion and reward functions of their parent Execute Mission is given by the corresponding
functions of either DoScouting or by the combination of the corresponding functions of
DoTransport and RemainingScouts.
We use a top-down approach in order to determine how to construct a factored RMTDP
from the plan hierarchy. As shown in Algorithm 1, we replace a particular sub-plan by its
constituent sub-plans if they are either independent or sequentially executed. If not, then
the RMTDP is defined using that particular sub-plan. This process is applied recursively
starting at the root component of the plan hierarchy. As a concrete example, consider
again our mission rehearsal simulation domain and the hierarchy illustrated in Figure 4(b).
Given the temporal constraints between DoScouting and DoTransport, and DoScout-
ing and RemainingScouts, we exploited sequential decomposition, while DoTransport
and RemainingScouts were parallel and independent components. Hence, we can replace
ExecuteMission by DoScouting, DoTransport and RemainingScouts. We then ap-
ply the same process to DoScouting. The constituent components of DoScouting are
neither independent nor sequentially executed and thus DoScouting cannot be replaced by
its constituent components. Thus, RMTDP for the mission rehearsal domain is comprised
of smaller RMTDPs for DoScouting, DoTransport and RemainingScouts.
Thus, using the TOP to identify relevant variables and building a factored RMTDP
utilizing the structure of TOP to decompose the construction procedure, reduce the load
on the domain expert for model construction. Furthermore, as shown in Section 5.3, this
factored model greatly improves the performance of the search for the best role allocation.
383
Nair & Tambe
Algorithm 1 Build-RMTDP(TOP top, Sub-plan subplan)
1: children ← subplan→children() {subplan→children() returns the sub-plans within sub-
plan}
2: if children = null or children are not (loosely coupled or independent) then
3:
rmtdp ← Define-RMTDP(subplan) {not automated}
return rmtdp
4:
5: else
6:
7:
for all child in children do
factors[child] ← Build-RMTDP(top,child)
8:
9:
rmtdp ← ConstructFromFactors(factors)
return rmtdp
4.2 Exploiting TOP Beliefs in Evaluation of RMTDP Policies
We now present a technique for exploiting TOPs in speeding up evaluation of RMTDP
policies. Before we explain our improvement, we first describe the original algorithm for
determining the expected reward of a joint policy, where the local policies of each agent
are indexed by its entire observation histories (Pynadath & Tambe, 2002; Nair, Pynadath,
Yokoo, Tambe, & Marsella, 2003a). Here, we obtain an RMTDP policy from a TOP as
follows. We obtain πi(~ωt
i), i.e. the action performed by agent i for each observation history
~ωt
i, as the action a performed by the agent i following the TOP when it has a set of privately
held beliefs corresponding to the observation history, ~ωt
i. We compute the expected reward
for the RMTDP policy by projecting the team's execution over all possible branches on
different world states and different observations. At each time step, we can compute the
expected value of a joint policy, π =< π1, . . . , πn >, for a team starting in a given state, st,
with a given set of past observations, ~ωt
n, as follows:
1, . . . , ~ωt
1, . . . , ~ωt
1), . . . , πn(~ωt
V t
π (st,(cid:10)~ωt
·Xωt+1∈Ω
n(cid:11)) = R(st,(cid:10)π1(~ωt
1(cid:1) , . . . , πn(cid:0)~ωt
O(cid:0)st+1,(cid:10)π1(cid:0)~ωt
n)(cid:11)) + Xst+1∈S
n (cid:11)(cid:1) · V t+1
P (cid:0)st,(cid:10)π1(cid:0)~ωt
(cid:0)st+1,(cid:10)~ωt+1
1(cid:1) , . . . , πn(cid:0)~ωt
n (cid:11)(cid:1)
, . . . , ~ωt+1
π
1
n(cid:1)(cid:11) , st+1(cid:1)
(1)
1 , . . . , ωt+1
n(cid:1)(cid:11) ,(cid:10)ωt+1
The expected reward of a joint policy π is given by V 0
π (s0, < null, . . . , null >) where s0
is the start state. At each time step t, the computation of V t
π performs a summation over all
possible world states and agent observations and so has a time complexity of O (S · Ω).
This computation is repeated for all states and all observation histories of length t, i.e.
O(cid:0)S · Ωt(cid:1) times. Therefore, given a time horizon T , the overall complexity of this algo-
rithm is O(cid:0)S2 · ΩT +1(cid:1).
As discussed in Section 2.2, in a team-oriented program, each agent's action selection
is based on just its currently held private beliefs (note that mutual beliefs are modeled
as privately held beliefs about all agents as per footnote 2). A similar technique can be
exploited when mapping TOP to an RMTDP policy. Indeed, the evaluation of a RMTDP
policy that corresponds to a TOP can be speeded up if each agent's local policy is indexed
by its private beliefs, ψ t
i , as the TOP-congruent belief state of agent i
i . We refer to ψ t
384
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
in the RMTDP. Note that this belief state is not a probability distribution over the world
states as in a single agent POMDP, but rather the privately held beliefs (from the BDI
program) of agent i at time t. This is similar to the idea of representing a policy by a
finite-state controller (Hansen & Zhou, 2003; Poupart & Boutilier, 2003). In this case, the
private beliefs would map to the states of the finite-state controller.
Belief-based RMTDP policy evaluation leads to speedup because multiple observation
histories map to the same belief state, ψ t
i . This speedup is a key illustration of exploitation
of synergistic interactions of TOP and RMTDP. In this instance, belief representation tech-
niques used in TOP are reflected in RMTDP, and the resulting faster policy evaluation can
help us optimize TOP performance. A detailed example of belief state is presented later
after a brief explanation of how such belief-based RMTDP policies can be evaluated.
Just as with evaluation using observation histories, we compute the expected reward
of a belief-based policy by projecting the team's execution over all possible branches on
different world states and different observations. At each time step, we can compute the
expected value of a joint policy, π =< π1, . . . , πn >, for a team starting in a given state, st,
with a given team belief state, < ψ t
n > as follows:
1 , . . . , ψ t
1 . . . ψ t
V t
π (st,(cid:10)ψ t
·Xωt+1∈Ω
n(cid:11)) = R(st,(cid:10)π1(ψ t
1 (cid:1) , . . . , πn(cid:0)ψ t
O(cid:0)st+1,(cid:10)π1(cid:0)ψ t
1 ), . . . , πn(ψ t
n )(cid:11)) +Xst+1∈S
P (cid:0)st,(cid:10)π1(cid:0)ψ t
1 (cid:1) , . . . , πn(cid:0)ψ t
n(cid:1)(cid:11) , st+1(cid:1)
n(cid:1)(cid:11) ,(cid:10)ωt+1
1 , . . . , ωt+1
n (cid:11)(cid:1) · V t+1
π
(cid:0)st+1,(cid:10)ψ t+1
1
, . . . , ψ t+1
n
(cid:11)(cid:1)
(2)
where ψ t+1
i
= BeliefUpdateFunction(cid:0)ψ t
i , ωt+1
i
(cid:1)
The complexity of computing this function (expression 2) is O (S · Ω) · BF , where BF
represents the complexity of the belief update function, BeliefUpdateFunction. At each
time step the computation of the value function is done for every state and for all possible
reachable belief states. Let Ψi = max1≤t≤T (ψt
i ) represent the maximum number of
possible belief states that agent i can be in at any point in time, where ψt
i is the number
of belief states that agent i can be in at t. Therefore the complexity of this algorithm is
given by O(S2 · Ω · (Ψ1 · . . . · Ψn) · T ) · BF . Note that, in this algorithm T is not in
the exponent unlike in the algorithm in expression 1. Thus, this evaluation method will
give large time savings if: (i) the quantity (Ψ1 · . . . · Ψn) · T is much less than ΩT and
(ii) the belief update cost is low. In practical BDI systems, multiple observation histories
map often onto the same belief state, and thus usually, (Ψ1 · . . . · Ψn) · T is much less
than ΩT . Furthermore, since the belief update function mirrors practical BDI systems,
its complexity is also a low polynomial or a constant.
Indeed, our experimental results
show that significant speedups result from switching to our TOP-congruent belief states
ψ t
i . However, in the absolute worst case, the belief update function may simply append
the new observation to the history of past observations (i.e., TOP-congruent beliefs will
be equivalent to keeping entire observation histories) and thus belief-based evaluation will
have the same complexity as the observation history-based evaluation.
We now turn to an example of belief-based policy evaluation from the mission rehearsal
domain. At each time step, the transport helicopters may receive an observation about
385
Nair & Tambe
whether a scout has failed based on some observation function. If we use the observation-
history representation of the policy, then each transport agent would maintain a complete
history of the observations that it could receive at each time step. For example, in a setting
with two scout helicopters, one on route 1 and the other on route 2, a particular transport
helicopter may have several different observation histories of length two. At every time step,
the transports may receive an observation about each scout being alive or having failed.
Thus, at time t = 2, a transport helicopter might have one of the following observation his-
tories of length two, < {sct1OnRoute1Alive, sct2OnRoute2Alive}1, {sct1OnRoute1F ailed,
sct2OnRoute2F ailed}2 >, < {sct1OnRoute1Alive, sct2OnRoute2F ailed}1 , {sct1OnRoute1
F ailed}2 >, < {sct1OnRoute1F ailed, sct2OnRoute2Alive}1, {sct2OnRoute2F ailed}2 >,
etc. However, the action selection of the transport helicopters depends on only whether
a critical failure (i.e. the last remaining scout has crashed) has taken place to change its
role. Whether a failure is critical can be determined by passing each observation through
a belief-update function. The exact order in which the observations are received or the
precise times at which the failure or non-failure observations are received are not relevant
to determining if a critical failure has taken place and consequently whether a transport
should change its role to a scout. Thus, many observation histories map onto the same
belief states. For example, the above three observation histories all map to the same belief
CriticalF ailure(DoScouting) i.e. a critical failure has taken place. This results in signif-
icant speedups using belief-based evaluation, as Equation 2 needs to be executed over a
smaller number of belief states, linear in T in our domains, as opposed to the observation
history-based evaluation, where Equation 1 is executed over an exponential number of ob-
servation histories (ΩT ). The actual speedup obtained in the mission rehearsal domain is
demonstrated empirically in Section 6.
5. Optimizing Role Allocation
While Section 4 focused on mapping a domain of interest onto RMTDP and algorithms for
policy evaluation, this section focuses on efficient techniques for RMTDP policy search, in
service of improving BDI/TOP team plans. The TOP in essence provides an incomplete,
fixed policy, and the policy search optimizes decisions left open in the incomplete policy; the
policy thus completed optimizes the original TOP (see Figure 1). By enabling the RMTDP
to focus its search on incomplete policies, and by providing ready-made decompositions,
TOPs assist RMTDPs in quickly searching through the policy space, as illustrated in this
section. We focus, in particular, on the problem of role allocation (Hunsberger & Grosz,
2000; Modi, Shen, Tambe, & Yokoo, 2003; Tidhar et al., 1996; Fatima & Wooldridge, 2001),
a critical problem in teams. While the TOP provides an incomplete policy, keeping open
the role allocation decision for each agent, the RMTDP policy search provides the optimal
role-taking action at each of the role allocation decision points.
In contrast to previous
role allocation approaches, our approach determines the best role allocation, taking into
consideration the uncertainty in the domain and future costs. Although demonstrated for
solving the role allocation problem, the methodology is general enough to apply to other
coordination decisions.
386
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
5.1 Hierarchical Grouping of RMTDP Policies
As mentioned earlier, to address role allocation, the TOP provides a policy that is complete,
except for the role allocation decisions. RMTDP policy search then optimally fills in the
role allocation decisions. To understand the RMTDP policy search, it is useful to gain an
understanding of the role allocation search space. First, note that role allocation focuses on
deciding how many and what types of agents to allocate to different roles in the organization
hierarchy. This role allocation decision may be made at time t = 0 or it may be made at a
later time conditioned on available observations. Figure 9 shows a partially expanded role
allocation space defined by the TOP organization hierarchy in Figure 4(a) for six helicopters.
Each node of the role allocation space completely specifies the allocation of agents to roles
at the corresponding level of the organization hierarchy (ignore for now, the number to the
right of each node). For instance, the root node of the role allocation space specifies that
six helicopters are assigned to the Task Force (level one) of the organization hierarchy while
the leftmost leaf node (at level three) in Figure 9 specifies that one helicopter is assigned
to SctTeamA, zero to SctTeamB, zero to SctTeamC and five helicopters to Transport Team.
Thus, as we can see, each leaf node in the role allocation space is a complete, valid role
allocation of agents to roles in the organization hierarchy.
In order to determine if one leaf node (role allocation) is superior to another we evaluate
each using the RMTDP by constructing an RMTDP policy for each.
In this particular
example, the role allocation specified by the leaf node corresponds to the role-taking actions
that each agent will execute at time t = 0. For example, in the case of the leftmost leaf in
Figure 9, at time t = 0, one agent (recall from Section 2.2 that this is a homogeneous team
and hence which specific agent does not matter) will become a member of SctTeamA while
all other agents will become members of Transport Team. Thus, for one agent i, the role-
taking policy will include πiΥ(null) = joinSctT eamA and for all other agents, j, j 6= i, it
will include πjΥ(null) = joinT ransportT eam. In this case, we assume that the rest of the
role-taking policy, i.e. how roles will be reallocated if a scout fails, is obtained from the role
reallocation algorithm in the BDI/TOP interpreter, such as the STEAM algorithm (Tambe
et al., 2000). Thus for example, if the role reallocation is indeed performed by the STEAM
algorithm, then STEAM's reallocation policy is included into the incomplete policy that
the RMTDP is initially provided. Thus, the best role allocation is computed keeping in
mind STEAM's reallocation policy. In STEAM, given a failure of an agent playing RoleF ,
an agent playing RoleR will replace it if:
Criticality (RoleF ) − Criticality (RoleR) > 0
Criticality (x) = 1 if x is critical; = 0 otherwise
Thus, if based on the agents' observations, a critical failure has taken place, then the
replacing agent's decision to replace or not will be computed using the above expression
and then included in the incomplete policy input to the RMTDP. Since such an incomplete
policy is completed by the role allocation at each leaf node using the technique above, we
have been able to construct a policy for the RMTDP that corresponds to the role allocation.
In some domains like RoboCupRescue, not all allocation decisions are made at time
t = 0. In such domains, it is possible for the role allocation to be conditioned on observations
(or communication) that are obtained during the course of the execution. For instance, as
shown in Figure 8(a), in the RoboCupRescue scenario, the ambulances are allocated to the
sub-team AmbulanceTeamA or AmbulanceTeamB only after information about the location
387
Nair & Tambe
6
[0]
6
6
0
6
5
1
[4167]
6
2
4
[3420]
6
3
3
[2773]
6
4
2
[1926]
6
5
1
[1179]
6
6
0
[432]
6
1
5
001
613.81
1500.12
6
5
1
100
6
4
2
011
1359.57
6
4
2
200
2926.08
Figure 9: Partially expanded role allocation space for mission rehearsal domain(six helos).
of civilians is conveyed to them by the fire engines. The allocation of the ambulances is
then conditioned on this communication, i.e. on the number of civilians at each location.
Figure 10 shows the partially expanded role allocation for a scaled-down rescue scenario
with three civilians, two ambulances and two fire engines (one at station 1 and the other at
station 2). In the Figure, 1;1;2 depicts the fact that there are two ambulances, while there
is one fire engine at each station. As shown, there is a level for the allocation of fire engines
to EngineTeamA and EngineTeamB which gives the number of engines assigned to each
EngineTeam from each station. The next level (leaf level) has different leaf nodes for each
possible assignment of ambulances to AmbulanceTeamA and AmbulanceTeamB depending
upon the value of communication "c". Since there are three civilians and we exclude the
case where no civilians are present at a particular fire, there are two possible messages i.e.
one civilian at fire 1 or two civilians at fire 1 (c = 1 or 2).
TaskForce=1;1;2
1;1;2
1;1;2
EngineTeamA=0;1 EngineTeamB=1;0 AmbTeam=2
EngineTeamA=1;0 EngineTeamB=0;1 AmbTeam=2
1;1;2
0;1 1;0 2
c=1
c=2
1;1;2
0;1 1;0 2
c=1
c=2
AmbTeamA=2 AmbTeamB=0
AmbTeamA=1 AmbTeamB=1
AmbTeamA=1 AmbTeamB=1
AmbTeamA=1 AmbTeamB=1
Figure 10: Partially expanded role allocation space for Rescue domain (one fire engine at
station 1, one fire engine at station 2, two ambulances, three civilians).
We are thus able to exploit the TOP organization hierarchy to create a hierarchical
grouping of RMTDP policies.
In particular, while the leaf node represents a complete
RMTDP policy (with the role allocation as specified by the leaf node), a parent node
represents a group of policies. Evaluating a policy specified by a leaf node is equivalent to
evaluating a specific role allocation while taking future uncertainties into account. We could
388
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
do a brute force search through all role allocations, evaluating each in order to determine
the best role allocation. However, the number of possible role allocations is exponential in
the leaf roles in the organization hierarchy. Thus, we must prune the search space.
5.2 Pruning the Role Allocation Space
We prune the space of valid role allocations using upper bounds (MaxEstimates) for the
parents of the leaves of the role allocation space as admissible heuristics (Section 5.3). Each
leaf in the role allocation space represents a completely specified policy and the MaxEsti-
mate is an upper bound of maximum value of all the policies under the same parent node
evaluated using the RMTDP. Once we obtain MaxEstimates for all the parent nodes (shown
in brackets to the right of each parent node in Figure 9), we use branch-and-bound style
pruning (see Algorithm 2). While we discuss Algorithm 2 below, we note that in essence
it performs branch-and-bound style pruning; the key novelty is step 2 which we discuss in
Section 5.3.
The branch-and-bound algorithm works as follows: First, we sort the parent nodes by
their estimates and then start evaluating children of the parent with the highest MaxEsti-
mate (Algorithm 2: steps 3-13). Evaluate(RMTDP, child) refers to the evaluation of the
leaf-level policy, child, using the RMTDP model. This evaluation of leaf-level policies (step
13) can be done using either of the methods described in Section 4.
In the case of the
role allocation space in Figure 9, we would start with evaluating the leaves of the parent
node that has one helicopter in Scouting Team and five in Transport Team. The value of
evaluating each leaf node is shown to the right of the leaf node. Once we have obtained
the value of the best leaf node (Algorithm 2: steps 14,15), in this case 1500.12, we compare
this with the MaxEstimates of the other parents of the role allocation space (Algorithm 2:
steps 16-18). As we can see from Figure 9 this would result in pruning of three parent nodes
(leftmost parent and right two parents) and avoid the evaluation of 65 of the 84 leaf-level
policies. Next, we would then proceed to evaluate all the leaf nodes under the parent with
two helos in Scouting Team and four in Transport Team. This would result in pruning of all
the remaining unexpanded parent nodes and we will return the leaf with the highest value,
which in this case is the node corresponding to two helos allocated to SctTeamA and four
to Transport Team. Although demonstrated for a 3-level hierarchy, the methodology for
applying to deeper hierarchies is straightforward.
5.3 Exploiting TOP to Calculate Upper Bounds for Parents
We will now discuss how the upper bounds of parents, called MaxEstimates, can be calcu-
lated for each parent. The MaxEstimate of a parent is defined as a strict upper bound of
the maximum of the expected reward of all the leaf nodes under it. It is necessary that the
MaxEstimate be an upper bound or else we might end up pruning potentially useful role
allocations. In order to calculate the MaxEstimate of each parent we could evaluate each of
the leaf nodes below it using the RMTDP, but this would nullify the benefit of any subse-
quent pruning. We, therefore, turn to the TOP plan hierarchy (see Figure 4(b)) to break up
this evaluation of the parent node into components, which can be evaluated separately thus
decomposing the problem. In other words, our approach exploits the structure of the BDI
program to construct small-scale RMTDPs unlike other decomposition techniques which
389
Nair & Tambe
Algorithm 2 Branch-and-bound algorithm for policy search.
1: Parents ← list of parent nodes
2: Compute MAXEXP(Parents) {Algorithm 3}
3: Sort Parents in decreasing order of MAXEXP
4: bestVal ← −∞
5: for all parent ∈ Parents do
6:
7: for all parent ∈ Parents do
8:
done[parent] ← false; pruned[parent] ← false
if done[parent] = false and pruned[parent] = false then
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
15:
16:
17:
child ← parent→nextChild() {child is a leaf-level policy under parent}
if child = null then
done[parent] ← true
else
childVal ← Evaluate(RMTDP,child)
if childVal > bestVal then
bestVal ← childVal;best ← child
for all parent1 in Parents do
if MAXEXP[parent1] < bestVal then
18:
19: return best
pruned[parent1] ← true
just assume decomposition or ultimately rely on domain experts to identify interactions in
the agents' reward and transition functions (Dean & Lin, 1995; Guestrin, Venkataraman,
& Koller, 2002).
For each parent in the role allocation space, we use these small-scale RMTDPs to eval-
uate the values for each TOP component. Fortunately, as discussed in Section 4.1, we
exploited small-scale RMTDPs corresponding to TOP components in constructing larger
scale RMTDPs. We put these small-scale RMTDPs to use again, evaluating policies within
each component to obtain upper bounds. Note that just like in evaluation of leaf-level
policies, the evaluation of components for the parent node can be done using either the
observation histories (see Equation 1) or belief states (see Equation 2). We will describe
this section using the observation history-based evaluation method for computing the values
of the components of each parent, which can be summed up to obtain its MaxEstimate (an
upper bound on its children's values). Thus, whereas a parent in the role allocation space
represents a group of policies, the TOP components (sub-plans) allow a component-wise
evaluation of such a group to obtain an upper bound on the expected reward of any policy
within this group.
Algorithm 3 exploits the smaller-scale RMTDP components, discussed in Section 4.1,
to obtain upper bounds of parents. First, in order to evaluate the MaxEstimate for each
parent node in the role allocation space, we identify the start states for each component from
which to evaluate the RMTDPs. We explain this step using a parent node from Figure 9 –
Scouting Team = two helos, Transport Team = four helos (see Figure 11). For the very first
component which does not have any preceding components, the start states corresponds
to the start states of the policy that the TOP was mapped onto. For each of the next
390
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
components – where the next component is one linked by a sequential dependence – the
start states are the end states of the preceding component. However, as explained later in
this section, we can significantly reduce this list of start states from which each component
can be evaluated.
Algorithm 3 MAXEXP method for calculating upper bounds for parents in the role allo-
cation space.
1: for all parent in search space do
2: MAXEXP[parent] ← 0
3:
for all component i corresponding to factors in the RMTDP from Section 4.1 do
4:
5:
6:
7:
8:
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
if component i has a preceding component j then
Obtain start states, states[i] ← endStates[j]
states[i] ← removeIrrelevantFeatures(states[i]) {discard features not present
in Si}
Obtain corresponding observation histories at
endOHistories[j]
OHistories[i] ← removeIrrelevantObservations(OHistories[i])
start OHistories[i] ←
else
Obtain start states, states[i]
Observation histories at start OHistories[i] ← null
maxEval[i] ← 0
for all leaf-level policies π under parent do
maxEval[i] ← max(maxEval[i], maxsi∈states[i],ohi∈OHistories[i](Evaluate(RM T DPi,
si, ohi, π)))
15: MAXEXP[parent]
+← maxEval[i]
Similarly, the starting observation histories for a component are the observation his-
tories on completing the preceding component (no observation history for the very first
component). BDI plans do not normally refer to entire observation histories but rely only
on key beliefs which are typically referred to in the pre-conditions of the component. Each
starting observation history can be shortened to include only these relevant observations,
thus obtaining a reduced list of starting observation sequences. Divergence of private ob-
servations is not problematic, e.g. will not cause agents to trigger different team plans.
This is because as indicated earlier in Section 2.2, TOP interpreters guarantee coherence
in key aspects of observation histories. For instance, as discussed earlier, TOP interpreter
ensures coherence in key beliefs when initiating and terminating team plans in a TOP; thus
avoiding such divergence of observation histories.
In order to compute the maximum value for a particular component, we evaluate all
possible leaf-level policies within that component over all possible start states and observa-
tion histories and obtain the maximum (Algorithm 3:steps 13-14). During this evaluation,
we store all the end states and ending observation histories so that they can be used in
the evaluation of subsequent components. As shown in Figure 11, for the evaluation of
DoScouting component for the parent node where there are two helicopters assigned to
Scouting Team and four helos to Transport Team, the leaf-level policies correspond to all
possible ways these helicopters could be assigned to the teams SctTeamA, SctTeamB, Sct-
391
Nair & Tambe
TeamC and Transport Team, e.g. one helo to SctTeamB, one helo to SctTeamC and four
helos to Transport Team, or two helos to SctTeamA and four helos to Transport Team, etc.
The role allocation tells the agents what role to take in the first step. The remainder of the
role-taking policy is specified by the role replacement policy in the TOP infrastructure and
role-execution policy is specified by the DoScouting component of the TOP.
To obtain the MaxEstimate for a parent node of the role allocation space, we simply
sum up the maximum values obtained for each component (Algorithm 3:steps 15), e.g.
the maximum values of each component (see right of each component in Figure 11) were
summed to obtain the MaxEstimate (84 + 3330 + 36 = 3420). As seen in Figure 9, third
node from the left indeed has an upper bound of 3420.
The calculation of the MaxEstimate for a parent nodes should be much faster than
evaluating the leaf nodes below it in most cases for two reasons. Firstly, parent nodes are
evaluated component-wise. Thus, if multiple leaf-level policies within one component result
in the same end state, we can remove duplicates to get the start states of the next compo-
nent. Since each component only contains the state features relevant to it, the number of
duplicates is greatly increased. Such duplication of the evaluation effort cannot be avoided
for leaf nodes, where each policy is evaluated independently from start to finish. For in-
stance, in the DoScouting component, the role allocations, SctTeamA=1, SctTeamB=1,
SctTeamC=0, TransportTeam=4 and SctTeamA=1, SctTeamB=0, SctTeamC=1, Trans-
portTeam=4, will have end states in common after eliminating irrelevant features when the
scout in SctTeamB for the former allocation and the scout in SctTeamC for the latter al-
location fail. This is because through feature elimination (Algorithm 3:steps 6), the only
state features retained for DoTransport are the scouted route and number of transports
(some transports may have replaced failed scouts) as shown in Figure 11.
The second reason computation of MaxEstimates for parents is much faster is that the
number of starting observation sequences will be much less than the number of ending ob-
servation histories of the preceding components. This is because not all the observations in
the observation histories of a component are relevant to its succeeding components (Algo-
rithm 3:steps 8). Thus, the function removeIrrelevantObservations reduces the number
of starting observation histories from the observation histories of the preceding component.
We refer to this methodology of obtaining the MaxEstimates of each parent as MAX-
EXP. A variation of this, the maximum expected reward with no failures (NOFAIL), is
obtained in a similar fashion except that we assume that the probability of any agent fail-
ing is 0. We are able to make such an assumption in evaluating the parent node, since we
focus on obtaining upper bounds of parents, and not on obtaining their exact value. This
will result in less branching and hence evaluation of each component will proceed much
quicker. The NOFAIL heuristic only works if the evaluation of any policy without failures
occurring is higher than the evaluation of the same policy with failures possible. This should
normally be the case in most domains. The evaluation of the NOFAIL heuristics for the
role allocation space for six helicopters is shown in square brackets in Figure 9.
The following theorem shows that the MAXEXP method for finding the upper bounds
indeed finds an upper bound and thus yields an admissible search heuristic for the branch-
and-bound search of the role allocation space.
Theorem 3 The MAXEXP method will always yield an upper bound.
392
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
DoScouting
DoTransport
[ScoutingTeam=2,TransportTeam=4]
[TransportTeam=4]
RemainingScouts
[ScoutTeam=2]
[84]
[3300]
[36]
Alloc:
SctTeamA=2
SctTeamB=0
SctTeamC=0
Alloc:
SctTeamA=0
SctTeamB=1
SctTeamC=1
TransportTeam=4
TransportTeam=4
StartState:
StartState:
RouteScouted=1
RouteScouted=1
Transports=4
Transports=3
StartState:
RouteScouted=1
Transports=0
Figure 11: Component-wise decomposition of a parent by exploiting TOP.
Proof: See Appendix C.
From Theorem 3, we can conclude that our branch-and-bound policy search algorithm
will always find the best role allocation, since the MaxEstimates of the parents are true
upper bounds. Also, with the help of Theorem 4, we show that in the worst case, our
branch-and-bound policy search has the same complexity as doing a brute force search.
Theorem 4 Worst-case complexity for evaluating a single parent node using MAXEXP is
the same as that of evaluating every leaf node below it within a constant factor.
Proof sketch:
• The worst case complexity for MAXEXP arises when:
1. Let ESjπ be the end states of component j executing policy π after removing
features that are irrelevant to the succeeding component k. Similarly, let ESjπ′
be the end states of component j executing policy π′ after removing features that
are irrelevant to the succeeding component k. If ESjπT ESjπ′ = null then no
duplication in the end states will occur.
2. Let OHjπ be the ending observation histories of component j executing policy
π after removing observations that are irrelevant to the succeeding component
k. Similarly, let OHjπ′ be the ending observation histories of component j ex-
ecuting policy π′ after removing observation histories that are irrelevant to the
succeeding component k. If OHjπT OHjπ′ = null then no duplication in the
observation histories will occur. Note that if the belief-based evaluation was used
then we would replace observation histories by the TOP congruent belief states
(see Sect 4).
• In such a case, there is no computational advantage to evaluating each component's
MaxEstimate separately. Thus, it is equivalent to evaluating each child node of the
parent. Thus, in the worst case, MAXEXP computation for the parent is the same as
the evaluating all its children within a constant factor. (cid:3)
In addition, in the worst case, no pruning will result using MAXEXP and each and every
leaf node will need to be evaluated. This is equivalent to evaluating each leaf node twice.
393
Nair & Tambe
Thus, the worst case complexity of doing the branch-and-bound search using MAXEXP is
the same as that of finding the best role allocation by evaluating every leaf node. We refer
to this brute-force approach as NOPRUNE. Thus, the worst case complexity of MAXEXP
is the same as NOPRUNE. However, owing to pruning and the savings through decom-
position in the computation of MaxEstimates, significant savings are likely in the average
case. Section 6 highlights these savings for the mission rehearsal and the RoboCupRescue
domains.
6. Experimental Results
This section presents four sets of results in the context of the two domains introduced
in Section 2.1, viz. mission rehearsal and RoboCupRescue (Kitano et al., 1999). First,
we investigated empirically the speedups that result from using the TOP-congruent belief
states ψi (belief-based evaluation) over observation history-based evaluation and from using
the algorithm from Section 5 over a brute-force search. Here we focus on determining
the best assignment of agents to roles; but assume a fixed TOP and TOP infrastructure.
Second, we conducted experiments to investigate the benefits of considering uncertainty in
determining role allocations. For this, we compared the allocations found by the RMTDP
role allocation algorithm with (i) allocations which do not consider any kind of uncertainty,
and (ii) allocations which do not consider observational uncertainty but consider action
uncertainty. Third, we conducted experiments in both domains to determine the sensitivity
of the results to changes in the model. Fourth, we compare the performance of allocations
found by the RMTDP role allocation algorithm with allocations of human subjects in the
more complex of our domains – RoboCupRescue simulations.
6.1 Results in Mission Rehearsal Domain
For the mission rehearsal domain, the TOP is the one discussed in Section 2.2. As can be
seen in Figure 4(a), the organization hierarchy requires determining the number of agents
to be allocated to the three scouting sub-teams and the remaining helos must be allocated
to the transport sub-team. Different numbers of initial helicopters were attempted, varying
from three to ten. The details on how the RMTDP is constructed for this domain are given
Appendix B. The probability of failure of a scout at each time step on routes 1, 2 and 3
are 0.1, 0.15 and 0.2, respectively. The probability of a transport observing an alive scout
on routes 1, 2 and 3 are 0.95, 0.94 and 0.93, respectively. False positives are not possible,
i.e. a transport will not observe a scout as being alive if it has failed. The probability of a
transport observing a scout failure on routes 1, 2 and 3 are 0.98, 0.97 and 0.96, respectively.
Here too, false positives are not possible and hence a transport will not observe a failure
unless it has actually taken place.
Figure 12 shows the results of comparing the different methods for searching the role
allocation space. We show four methods. Each method adds new speedup techniques to
the previous:
1. NOPRUNE-OBS: A brute force evaluation of every role allocation to determine the
best. Here, each agent maintains its complete observation history and the evaluation
algorithm in Equation 1 is used. For ten agents, the RMTDP is projected to have in
394
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
the order of 10,000 reachable states and in the order of 100,000 observation histories
per role allocation evaluated (thus the largest experiment in this category was limited
to seven agents).
2. NOPRUNE-BEL: A brute force evaluation of every role allocation. The only difference
between this method and NOPRUNE-OBS is the use of the belief-based evaluation
algorithm (see Equation 2).
3. MAXEXP: The branch-and-bound search algorithm described in Section 5.2 that
uses upper bounds of the evaluation of the parent nodes to find the best allocation.
Evaluation of the parent and leaf nodes uses the belief-based evaluation.
4. NOFAIL: The modification to branch-and-bound heuristic mentioned in Section 5.3.
In essence it is same as MAXEXP, except that the upper bounds are computed making
the assumption that agents do not fail. This heuristic is correct in those domains where
the total expected reward with failures is always less than if no failures were present
and will give significant speedups if agent failures is one of the primary sources of
stochasticity. In this method, too, the evaluation of the parent and leaf nodes uses
the belief-based evaluation. (Note that only upper bounds are computed using the
no-failure assumption – no changes are assumed in the actual domains.)
In Figure 12(a), the Y-axis is the number of nodes in the role allocation space evaluated
(includes leaf nodes as well as parent nodes), while in Figure 12(b) the Y-axis represents
the runtime in seconds on a logarithmic scale. In both figures, we vary the number of agents
on the X-axis. Experimental results in previous work using distributed POMDPs are often
restricted to just two agents; by exploiting hybrid models, we are able to vary the number of
agents from three to ten as shown in Figure 12(a). As clearly seen in Figure 12(a), because
of pruning, significant reductions are obtained by MAXEXP and NOFAIL over NOPRUNE-
BEL in terms of the numbers of nodes evaluated. This reduction grows quadratically to
about 10-fold at ten agents.3 NOPRUNE-OBS is identical to NOPRUNE-BEL in terms of
number of nodes evaluated, since in both methods all the leaf-level policies are evaluated,
only the method of evaluation differs. It is important to note that although NOFAIL and
MAXEXP result in the same number of nodes being evaluated for this domains, this is
not necessarily true always. In general, NOFAIL will evaluate at least as many nodes as
MAXEXP since its estimate is at least as high as the MAXEXP estimate. However, the
upper bounds are computed quicker for NOFAIL.
Figure 12(b) shows that the NOPRUNE-BEL method provides a significant speedup
over NOPRUNE-OBS in actual run-time. For instance, there was a 12-fold speedup using
NOPRUNE-BEL instead of NOPRUNE-OBS for the seven agent case (NOPRUNE-OBS
could not be executed within a day for problem settings with greater than seven agents).
This empirically demonstrates the computational savings possible using belief-based eval-
uation instead of observation history-based evaluation (see Section 4). For this reason, we
use only belief-based evaluation for the MAXEXP and NOFAIL approaches and also for all
3. The number of nodes for NOPRUNE up to eight agents were obtained from experiments, the rest can
be calculated using the formula [m]n/n! = (m + n − 1) · . . . · m/n!, where m represents the number of
[m]n = (m + n − 1) · . . . · m is
heterogeneous role types and n is the number of homogeneous agents.
referred to as a rising factorial.
395
Nair & Tambe
the remaining experiments in this paper. MAXEXP heuristic results in a 16-fold speedup
over NOPRUNE-BEL in the eight agent case.
The NOFAIL heuristic which is very quick to compute the upper bounds far outperforms
the MAXEXP heuristic (47-fold speedup over MAXEXP for ten agents). Speedups of
MAXEXP and NOFAIL continually increase with increasing number of agents. The speedup
of the NOFAIL method over MAXEXP is so marked because, in this domain, ignoring
failures results in much less branching.
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
s
e
d
o
n
f
o
r
e
b
m
u
N
0
3
4
100000
10000
1000
100
10
1
0.1
)
e
l
a
c
s
g
o
l
(
s
c
e
s
n
i
e
m
T
i
0.01
3
4
6
5
8
Number of agents
7
6
5
8
Number of agents
7
NOFAIL, MAXEXP
NOPRUNE-OBS,
NOPRUNE-BEL
MAXEXP
NOFAIL
NOPRUNE-BEL
NOPRUNE-OBS
9
10
9
10
Figure 12: Performance of role allocation space search in mission rehearsal domain, a) (left)
Number of nodes evaluated, b) (right)Run-time in seconds on a log scale.
Next, we conducted experiments illustrating the importance of RMTDP's reasoning
about action and observation uncertainties on role allocations. For this, we compared the
allocations found by the RMTDP role allocation algorithm with allocations found using two
different methods (see Figure 13):
1. Role allocation via constraint optimization (COP) (Modi et al., 2003; Mailler & Lesser,
2004) allocation approach: In the COP approach4, leaf-level sub-teams from the or-
4. Modi et al.'s work (2003) focused on decentralized COP, but in this investigation our emphasis is on the
resulting role allocation generated by the COP, and not on the decentralization per se.
396
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
ganization hierarchy are treated as variables and the number of helicopters as the
domain of each such variable (thus, the domain may be 1, 2, 3,..helicopters). The
reward for allocating agents to sub-teams is expressed in terms of constraints:
• Allocating a helicopter to scout a route was assigned a reward corresponding to
the route's distance but ignoring the possibility of failure (i.e. ignoring transition
probability). Allocating more helicopters to this subteam obtained proportion-
ally higher reward.
• Allocating a helicopter a transport role was assigned a large reward for trans-
porting cargo to the destination. Allocating more helicopters to this subteam
obtained proportionally higher reward.
• Not allocating at least one scout role was assigned a reward of negative infinity
• Exceeding the total number of agents was assigned a reward of negative infinity
2. RMTDP with complete observability: In this approach, we consider the transition
probability, but ignore partial observability; achieved by assuming complete observ-
ability in the RMTDP. An MTDP with complete observability is equivalent to a
Markov Decision Problem (MDP) (Pynadath & Tambe, 2002) where the actions are
joint actions. We, thus, refer to this allocation method as the MDP method.
Figure 13(a) shows a comparison of the RMTDP-based allocation with the MDP allo-
cation and the COP allocation for increasing number of helicopters (X-axis). We compare
using the expected number of transports that get to the destination (Y-axis) as the metric
for comparison since this was the primary objective of this domain. As can be seen, consid-
ering both forms of uncertainty (RMTDP) performs better than just considering transition
uncertainty (MDP) which in turn performs better than not considering uncertainty (COP).
Figure 13(b) shows the actual allocations found by the three methods with four helicopters
and with six helicopters. In the case of four helicopters (first three bars), RMTDP and MDP
are identical, two helicopters scouting route 2 and two helicopters taking on transport role.
The COP allocation however consists of one scout on route 3 and three transports. This
allocation proves to be too myopic and results in fewer transports getting to the destination
safely.
In the case of six helicopters, COP chooses just one scout helicopter on route 3,
the shortest route. The MDP approach results in two scouts both on route 1, which was
longest route albeit the safest. The RMTDP approach, which also considers observational
uncertainty chooses an additional scout on route 2, in order to take care of the cases where
failures of scouts go undetected by the transports.
It should be noted that the performance of the RMTDP-based allocation will depend
on the values of the elements of the RMTDP model. However, as our next experiment
revealed, getting the values exactly correct is not necessary. In order to test the sensitivity
of the performance of the allocations to the actual model values, we introduced error in the
various parameters of the model to see how the allocations found using the incorrect model
would perform in the original model (without any errors). This emulates the situation where
the model does not correctly represent the domain. Figure 14 shows the expected number
of transports that reach the destination (Y-axis) in the mission rehearsal scenario with six
helicopters as error (X-axis) is introduced to various parameters in the model. For instance,
397
Nair & Tambe
RMTDP
COP
MDP
5
6
7
8
Number of agents
4 helos
6 helos
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
M T D P
R
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
D P
M
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxx
O P
C
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
M T D P
R
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
D P
M
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
O P
C
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
Rt3
xxxx Rt2
xxxRt1
xxxx Transports
xxx
xxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
s
t
r
o
p
s
n
a
r
t
f
o
r
e
b
m
u
N
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
l
s
o
e
h
f
o
r
e
b
m
u
N
4
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Figure 13: a) Comparison of performance of different allocation methods, b)Allocations
found using different allocation methods.
398
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
when the percentage error in failure rate on route 1 (route1-failure-rate) was between -15%
(i.e. erroneous failure rate is 85% of actual failure rate) and 10%, there was no difference
in the number of transports that reached their destination (3.498). However when the
percentage error was greater than 10%, the allocation found was too conservative resulting
in fewer transports getting to the destination. Similarly, when the percentage error was less
than -15%, the allocation found was too risky, with too few scouts assigned, resulting in
more failures. In general, Figure 14 shows that the model is insensitive to errors of 5 to 10%
in the model parameters for the mission rehearsal domain, but if the model parameters were
outside this range, non-optimal allocations would result. In comparing these non-optimal
allocations with COP, we find that they always perform better than COP for the range of
errors tested (+/-25%) for both failure rate as well as observability of routes. For instance,
at an error of 25% in failure rate on route 1, RMTDP managed to have 2.554 transports
safely reach the destination, and COP only managed to get 1.997 transports reach safely. In
comparing the non-optimal allocations with MDP, we also find that they performed better
than MDP within the range of +/- 25% for error in the observability of the routes. Thus,
although the allocations found using an incorrect model were non-optimal they performed
better than COP and MDP for large ranges of errors in the model. This shows that getting
the model exactly correct is not necessary to find good allocations. We are thus able to
obtain benefits from RMTDP even without insisting on an accurate model.
route1-failure-rate
route-2-failure-rate
route3-failure-rate
route1-observability
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
s
t
r
o
p
s
n
a
r
T
f
o
r
e
b
m
u
N
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5
0
5
10 15 20 25
Percentage error
Figure 14: Model sensitivity in mission rehearsal domain.
6.2 Results in RoboCupRescue Domain
6.2.1 Speedups in RoboCupRescue Domain
In our next set of experiments, we highlight the computational savings obtained in the
RoboCupRescue domain. The scenario for this experiment consisted of two fires at different
locations in the city. Each of these fires has a different initially unknown number of civilians
in it, however the total number of civilians and the distribution from which the locations
of the civilians is chosen is known ahead of time. For this experiment, we fix the number of
civilians at five and set the distribution used to choose the civilians' locations to be uniform.
The number of fire engines is set at five, located in three different fire stations as described
399
Nair & Tambe
in Section 2.1 and vary the number of ambulances, all co-located at an ambulance center,
from two to seven. The reason we chose to change only the number of ambulances is because
small number of fire engines are unable to extinguish fires, changing the problem completely.
The goal is to determine which fire engines to allocate to which fire and once information
about civilians is transmitted, how many ambulances to send to each fire location.
Figure 15 highlights the savings in terms of the number of nodes evaluated and the actual
runtime as we increase the number of agents. We show results only from NOPRUNE-BEL
and MAXEXP. NOPRUNE-OBS could not be run because of slowness. Here the NOFAIL
heuristic is identical to MAXEXP since agents cannot fail in this scenario. The RMTDP
in this case had about 30,000 reachable states.
In both Figures 15(a) and 15(b), we increase the number of ambulances along the X-
axis. In Figure 15(a), we show the number of nodes evaluated (parent nodes + leaf nodes)5
on a logarithmic scale. As can be seen, the MAXEXP method results in about a 89-fold
decrease in the number of nodes evaluated when compared to NOPRUNE-BEL for seven
ambulances, and this decrease becomes more pronounced as the number of ambulances is
increased. Figure 15(b) shows the time in seconds on a logarithmic scale on the Y-axis and
compares the run-times of the MAXEXP and NOPRUNE-BEL methods for finding the best
role allocation. The NOPRUNE-BEL method could not find the best allocation within a
day when the number of ambulances was increased beyond four. For four ambulances (and
five fire engines), MAXEXP resulted in about a 29-fold speedup over NOPRUNE-BEL.
6.2.2 Allocation in RoboCupRescue
Our next set of experiments shows the practical utility of our role allocation analysis in
complex domains. We are able to show significant performance improvements in the actual
RoboCupRescue domain using the role allocations generated by our analysis. First, we
construct an RMTDP for the rescue scenario, described in Section 2.1, by taking guidance
from the TOP and the underlying domain (as described in Section 4.1). We then use
the MAXEXP heuristic to determine the best role allocation. We compared the RMTDP
allocation with the allocations chosen by human subjects. Our goal in comparing RMTDP
allocations with human subjects was mainly to show that RMTDP is capable at performing
at or near human expert levels for this domain. In addition, in order to determine that
reasoning about uncertainty actually impacts the allocations, we compared the RMTDP
allocations with allocations determined by two additional allocation methods:
1. RescueISI: Allocations used by the our RoboCupRescue agents that were entered in
the RoboCupRescue competitions of 2001(RescueISI) (Nair et al., 2002), where they
finished in third place. These agents used local reasoning for their decision making,
ignoring transitional as well and observational uncertainty.
2. RMTDP with complete observability: As discussed earlier, complete observability in
RMTDP leads to an MDP, and we refer to this method as the MDP method.
5. The number of nodes evaluated using NOPRUNE-BEL can be computed as (f1 + 1) · (f2 + 1) · (f3 + 1) ·
(a + 1)c+1, where f1, f2 and f3 are the number of fire engines are station 1, 2 and 3, respectively, a is
the number of ambulances and c is the number of civilians. Each node provides a complete conditional
role allocation, assuming different numbers of civilians at each fire station.
400
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
)
e
l
a
c
s
g
o
l
(
s
e
d
o
n
f
o
r
e
b
m
u
N
10000000
1000000
100000
10000
1000
100
10
1
2
100000
10000
1000
100
10
)
e
l
a
c
s
g
o
l
(
s
c
e
s
n
i
e
m
i
t
n
u
R
1
2
3
MAXEXP
NOPRUNE
7
MAXEXP
NOPRUNE
4
3
6
Number of ambulances
5
4
Number of ambulances
5
6
7
Figure 15: Performance of role allocation space search in RoboCupRescue, a: (left) Number
of nodes evaluated on a log scale, and b: (right) Run-time in seconds on a log
scale.
401
Nair & Tambe
Note that these comparisons were performed using the RoboCupRescue simulator with
multiple runs to deal with stochasticity6. The scenario is as described in Section 6.2.1. We
fix the number of fire engines, ambulances and civilians at five each. For this experiment,
we consider two settings, where the location of civilians is drawn from:
• Uniform distribution – 25% of the cases have four civilians at fire 1 and one civilian
at fire 2, 25% with three civilians at fire 1 and two at fire 2, 25% with two civilians
at fire 1 and three at fire 2 and the remaining 25% with one civilian at fire 1 and
four civilians at fire 2. The speedup results of Section 6.2.1 were obtained using this
distribution.
• Skewed distribution – 80% of the cases have four civilians at fire 1 and one civilian at
fire 2 and the remaining 20% with one civilian at fire 1 and four civilians at fire 2.
Note that we do not consider the case where all civilians are located at the same fire as
the optimal ambulance allocation is simply to assign all ambulances to the fire where the
civilians are located. A skewed distribution was chosen to highlight the cases where it
becomes difficult for humans to reason about what allocation to choose.
The three human subjects used in this experiment were researchers at USC. All three
were familiar with RoboCupRescue. They were given time to study the setup and were not
given any time limit to provide their allocations. Each subject was told that the allocations
were going to be judged first on the basis of the number of civilian lives lost and next on the
damage sustained due to fire. These are exactly the criteria used in RoboCupRescue (Kitano
et al., 1999).
We then compared "RMTDP" allocation with those of the human subjects in the
RoboCupRescue simulator and with RescueISI and MDP. In Figure 16, we compared the
performance of the allocations on the basis of the number of civilians who died and the
average damage to the two buildings (lower values are better for both criteria). These two
criteria are the main two criteria used in RoboCupRescue (Kitano et al., 1999). The val-
ues shown in Figure 16 were obtained by averaging forty simulator runs for the uniform
distribution and twenty runs for the skewed distribution for each allocation. The average
values were plotted to account for the stochasticity in the domain. Error bars are provided
to show the standard error for each allocation method.
As can be seen in Figure 16(a), the RMTDP allocation did better than the other five
allocations in terms of a lower number of civilians dead (although human3 was quite close).
For example, averaging forty runs, the RMTDP allocation resulted in 1.95 civilian deaths
while human2's allocation resulted in 2.55 civilian deaths. In terms of the average building
damage, the six allocations were almost indifferentiable, with the humans actually perform-
ing marginally better. Using the skewed distribution, the difference between the allocations
was much more perceptible (see Figure 16(b)). In particular, we notice how the RMTDP
allocation does much better than the humans in terms of the number of civilians dead. Here,
human3 did particularly badly because of a bad allocation for fire engines. This resulted in
more damage to the buildings and consequently to the number of civilians dead.
6. For the mission rehearsal domain, we could run on the actual mission rehearsal simulator since that
simulator is not public domain and no longer accessible, and hence the difference in how we tested role
allocations in the mission rehearsal and the RoboCupRescue domains.
402
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
Comparing RMTDP with RescueISI and the MDP approach showed that reasoning
about transitional uncertainty (MDP) does better than a static reactive allocation method
(RescueISI) but not as well as reasoning about both transitional and observational uncer-
tainty. In the uniform distribution case, we found that RMTDP does better than both MDP
and RescueISI, with the MDP method performing better than RescueISI. In the skewed dis-
tribution case, the improvement in allocations using RMTDP is greater. Averaging twenty
simulation runs, RMTDP allocations resulted in 1.54 civilians deaths while MDP resulted
in 1.98 and RescueISI in 3.52. The allocation method used by RescueISI often resulted
in one of the fires being allocated too few fire engines. The allocations determined by the
MDP approach turned out to be the same as human1.
A two-tailed t-test was performed in order to test the statistical significance of the means
for the allocations in Figure 16. The means of number of civilians dead for the RMTDP
allocation and the human allocations were found to be statistically different (confidence
> 96%) for both the uniform as well as the skewed distributions. The difference in the fire
damage was not statistically significant in the uniform case, however, the difference between
the RMTDP allocation and human3 for fire damage was statistically significant (> 96%) in
the skewed case.
Civilians casualties
Building damage
M T D P
R
hu m an1
hu m an2
hu m an3
R escueISI
D P
M
Civilians casualties
Building damage
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
M T D P
R
hu m an1
hu m an2
hu m an3
R escueISI
D P
M
Figure 16: Comparison of performance in RoboCupRescue, a: (left) uniform, and b: (right)
skewed.
403
Nair & Tambe
Considering just the average performance of these different allocations does not highlight
the individual cases where marked differences were seen in the performance. In Figure 17, we
present the comparison of particular settings where the other allocation methods showed a
bigger difference from RMTDP in terms of their allocations. The standard error is shown in
error bars for each allocation. Figures 17(a) and 17(b) compare the allocations for uniform
civilian distributions in the setting where there was one civilian at fire 1 and four civilians at
fire 2 (1-4 civilian setting) and four civilians at fire 1 and one at fire 2 (4-1 civilian setting)
respectively. As can be seen in these figure, the RMTDP allocation results in fewer civilian
casualties but in slightly more damage to the buildings due to fire (difference in fire damage
was not statistically significant because the damage values were very close). Figures 17(c)
and 17(d) compare the allocations for the skewed civilian distribution. The key difference
arises for human3. As can be seen, human3 results in more damage due to fire. This is
because human3 allocated too few fire engines to one of the buildings, which in turn resulted
in that building being burnt down completely. Consequently, civilians located at this fire
location could not be rescued by the ambulances. Thus, we see specific instances where
the allocation done using the RMTDP-based allocation algorithm is superior to allocations
that a human comes up with.
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Civilians casualties
Building damage
M T D P
R
hu m an1
hu m an2
hu m an3
D P
M
R escueISI
Civilians casualties
Building damage
M T D P
R
hu m an1
hu m an2
hu m an3
D P
M
R escueISI
Civilians casualties
Building damage
Civilians casualties
Building damage
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
M T D P
R
hu m an1
hu m an2
hu m an3
D P
M
R escueISI
M T D P
R
hu m an1
hu m an2
hu m an3
D P
M
R escueISI
Figure 17: Comparison of performance in RoboCupRescue for particular settings, a: (top-
left) uniform 1-4 civilian setting b:(top-right) uniform 4-1 civilian setting, c:
(bottom-left) skewed 1-4 civilian setting d:(bottom-right) skewed 4-1 civilian
setting.
404
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
Table 1 shows the allocations to fire 1 (agents not assigned to fire 1 are allocated to fire
2) found by the RMTDP role allocation algorithm and those used by the human subjects for
the skewed 4-1 civilian setting (we consider this case since it shows the most difference). In
particular, this table highlights the differences between the various allocators for the skewed
4-1 civilian setting and helps account for the differences seen in their performance in the
actual simulator. As can be seen from Figure 17(d), the main difference in performance
was in terms of the number of civilians saved. Recall that in this scenario, there are four
civilians at fire 1, and one at fire 2. Here all the human subjects and MDP chose to
send only one ambulance to fire 2 (number of ambulances allocated to f ire 2 = 5 −
number of ambulances allocated to f ire 1). This lone ambulance was unable to rescue the
civilian at fire 1, resulting in the humans and MDP saving fewer civilians. RescueISI chose to
send all the ambulances to fire 2 using a greedy selection method based on proximity to the
civilians resulting in all the civilians at fire 1 dying7. In terms of the fire engine allocation,
human3 sent in four fire engines to fire 1 where more civilians were likely to be located
(number of engines allocated to f ire 2 = 5 − number of engines allocated to f ire 1).
Unfortunately, this backfired since the lone fire engine at fire 2 was not able to extinguish
the fire there, causing the fire to spread to other parts of the city.
Distribution
Skewed 4-1
RMTDP human1
human2
human3 RescueISI MDP
Engines from station 1
Engines from station 2
Engines from station 3
Ambulances
0
1
1
3
2
1
0
4
2
1
0
4
1
1
2
4
2
1
0
0
2
1
0
4
Table 1: Allocations of ambulances and fire engines to fire 1.
These experiments show that the allocations found by the RMTDP role allocation algo-
rithm performs significantly better than allocations chosen by human subjects and RescueISI
and MDP in most cases (and does not do significantly worse in any case). In particular
when the distribution of civilians is not uniform, it is more difficult for humans to come up
with an allocation and the difference between human allocations and the RMTDP allocation
becomes more significant. From this we can conclude that the RMTDP allocation performs
at near-human expertise.
In our last experiment done using the RoboCupRescue simulator, we introduced error
in the RMTDP model in order to determine how sensitive the model was to errors in the
parameters of the model. Figure 18 compares the allocations found, when there were five
ambulances, 5 fire engines and 5 civilians, in terms of the number of civilian casualties (Y-
axis) when error (X-axis) was introduced to the probability of fire spread and the probability
of civilian health deterioration. As can be seen increasing the error in the probability of fire
spread to 20% and higher results in allocations that save fewer civilians as the fire brigades
choose to concentrate their effort on only one of the fires. The resulting allocation was
found to have the same value in terms of the number of civilians casualties as that used by
RescueISI, which did not consider any uncertainty. Reducing the error in the probability of
fire did not have an impact on the allocations found. Increasing the error in probability of
7. This strategy of ambulances going to the closest civilian worked fairly well because the ambulances were
usually well spread out
405
Nair & Tambe
civilian health deterioration to 15% and higher caused some civilians to be sacrificed. This
allocation was found to have the same value in terms of the number of civilians casualties as
that used by RescueISI. Decreasing the error in probability of civilian health deterioration
-5% and lower (more negative) caused the number of ambulances to be allocated to a fire
to be the same as the number of civilians at that fire (same as human1).
s
e
i
t
l
a
u
s
a
c
n
a
i
l
i
v
i
C
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
fire-rate
civilian-health
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5
0
5
10 15 20 25
Percentage error
Figure 18: Model sensitivity in the RoboCupRescue scenario.
7. Related Work
There are four related areas of research, that we wish to highlight. First, there has been
a considerable amount of work done in the field of multiagent teamwork (Section 7.1).
The second related area of research is the use of decision theoretic models, in particular
distributed POMDPs (Section 7.2). The third area of related work we describe (Section 7.3)
are hybrid systems that used Markov Decision Process and BDI approaches. Finally, in
Section 7.4, the related work in role allocation and reallocation in multiagent teams is
described.
7.1 BDI-based Teamwork
Several formal teamwork theories such as Joint Intentions (Cohen & Levesque, 1991),
SharedPlans (Grosz & Kraus, 1996) were proposed that tried to capture the essence of
multiagent teamwork in the logic of Beliefs-Desires-Intentions. Next, practical models
of teamwork such as COLLAGEN (Rich & Sidner, 1997), GRATE* (Jennings, 1995),
STEAM (Tambe, 1997) built on these teamwork theories (Cohen & Levesque, 1991; Grosz
& Kraus, 1996) and attempted to capture the aspects of teamwork that were reusable
across domains.
In addition, to complement the practical teamwork models, the team-
oriented programming approach (Pynadath & Tambe, 2003; Tidhar, 1993a, 1993b) was
introduced to allow large number of agents to be programmed as teams. This approach
was then expanded on and applied to a variety of domains (Pynadath & Tambe, 2003; Yen
et al., 2001; da Silva & Demazeau, 2002). Other approaches for building practical multia-
406
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
gent systems (Stone & Veloso, 1999; Decker & Lesser, 1993), while not explicitly based on
team-oriented programming, could be considered in the same family.
The research reported in this article complements this research on teamwork by intro-
ducing hybrid BDI-POMDP models that exploit the synergy between BDI and POMDP
approaches.
In particular, TOP and teamwork models have traditionally not addressed
uncertainty and cost. Our hybrid model provides this capability, and we have illustrated
the benefits of this reasoning via detailed experiments.
While this article uses team-oriented programming (Tambe et al., 2000; da Silva &
Demazeau, 2002; Tidhar, 1993a, 1993b) as an example BDI approach, it is relevant to
other similar techniques of modeling and tasking collectives of agents, such as Decker and
Lesser's (1993) TAEMS approach.
In particular, the TAEMS language provides an ab-
straction for tasking collaborative groups of agents similar to TOP, while the GPGP in-
frastructure used in executing TAEMS-based tasks is analogous to the "TOP interpreter"
infrastructure shown in Figure 1. While Lesser et al. have explored the use of distributed
MDPs in analyses of GPGP coordination (Xuan & Lesser, 2002), they have not exploited
the use of TAEMS structures in decomposition or abstraction for searching optimal policies
in distributed MDPs, as suggested in this article. Thus, this article complements Lesser
et al.'s work in illustrating a significant avenue for further efficiency improvements in such
analyses.
7.2 Distributed POMDP Models
Distributed POMDP models represent a collection of formal models that are expressive
enough to capture the uncertainty in the domain and the costs and rewards associated
with states and actions. Given a group of agents, the problem of deriving separate poli-
cies for them that maximize some joint reward can be modeled using distributed POMDP
models. In particular, the DEC-POMDP (Decentralized POMDP) (Bernstein et al., 2000)
and MTDP (Multiagent Team Decision Problem) (Pynadath & Tambe, 2002) are gen-
eralizations of POMDPs to the case where there are multiple, distributed agents, basing
their actions on their separate observations. These frameworks allow us to formulate what
constitutes an optimal policy for a multiagent team and in principle derive that policy.
However, with a few exceptions, effective algorithms for deriving policies for distributed
POMDPs have not been developed. Significant progress has been achieved in efficient
single-agent POMDP policy generation algorithms (Monahan, 1982; Cassandra, Littman,
& Zhang, 1997; Kaelbling et al., 1998). However, it is unlikely such research can be directly
carried over to the distributed case. Finding optimal policies for distributed POMDPs is
NEXP-complete (Bernstein et al., 2000). In contrast, finding an optimal policy for a single
agent POMDP is PSPACE-complete (Papadimitriou & Tsitsiklis, 1987). As Bernstein et
al. note (Bernstein et al., 2000), this suggests a fundamental difference in the nature of the
problems. The distributed problem cannot be treated as one of separate POMDPs in which
individual policies can be generated for individual agents because of possible cross-agent
interactions in the reward, transition or observation functions. (For any one action of one
agent, there may be many different rewards possible, based on the actions that other agents
may take.)
407
Nair & Tambe
Three approaches have been used to solve distributed POMDPs. One approach that
is typically taken is to make simplifying assumptions about the domain. For instance, in
Guestrin et al. (2002), it is assumed that each agent can completely observe the world state.
In addition, it is assumed that the reward function (and transition function) for the team
can be expressed as the sum (product) of the reward (transition) functions of the agents
in the team. Becker et al. (2003) assume that the domain is factored such that each agent
has a completely observable local state and also that the domain is transition-independent
(one agent cannot affect another agent's local state).
The second approach taken is to simplify the nature of the policies considered for each
of the agents. For example, Chad`es et al. (2002) restrict the agent policies to be memoryless
(reactive) policies, thereby simplifying the problem to solving multiple MDPs. Peshkin et
al. (2000) take a different approach by using gradient descent search to find local optimum
finite-controllers with bounded memory. Nair et al. (2003a) present an algorithm for finding
a locally optimal policy from a space of unrestricted finite-horizon policies. The third
approach, taken by Hansen et al. (2004), involves trying to determine the globally optimal
solution without making any simplifying assumptions about the domain. In this approach,
they attempt to prune the space of possible complete policies by eliminating dominated
policies. Although a brave frontal assault on the problem, this method is expected to
face significant difficulties in scaling up due to the fundamental complexity of obtaining a
globally optimal solution.
The key difference with our work is that our research is focused on hybrid systems where
we leverage the advantages of BDI team plans, which are used in practical systems, and
distributed POMDPs that quantitatively reason about uncertainty and cost. In particular,
we use TOPs to specify large-scale team plans in complex domains and use RMTDPs for
finding the best role allocation for these teams.
7.3 Hybrid BDI-POMDP Approaches
POMDP models have been used in the context of analysis of both single agent (Schut,
Wooldridge, & Parsons, 2001) and multiagent (Pynadath & Tambe, 2002; Xuan et al., 2001)
behavior. Schut et al. compare various strategies for intention reconsideration (deciding
when to deliberate about its intentions) by modeling a BDI system using a POMDP. The
key differences with this work and our approach are that they apply their analysis to a single
agent case and do not consider the issues of exploiting BDI system structure in improving
POMDP efficiency.
Xuan and Lesser (2001) and Pynadath and Tambe (2002), both analyze multiagent
communication. While Xuan and Lesser dealt with finding and evaluating various commu-
nication policies, Pynadath and Tambe used the COM-MTDP model to deal with the prob-
lem of comparing various communication strategies both empirically and analytically. Our
approach is more general in that we explain an approach for analyzing any coordination ac-
tions including communication. We concretely demonstrate our approach for analysis of role
allocation. Additional key differences from the earlier work by Pynadath and Tambe (2002)
are as follows: (i) In RMTDP, we illustrate techniques to exploit team plan decomposition
in speeding up policy search, absent in COM-MTDP, (ii) We also introduce techniques for
belief-based evaluation absent from previous work. Nonetheless, combining RMTDP with
408
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
COM-MTDP is an interesting avenue for further research and some preliminary steps in
this direction are presented in Nair, Tambe and Marsella (2003b).
Among other hybrid systems not focused on analysis, Scerri et al. (2002) employ Markov
Decision Processes within team-oriented programs for adjustable autonomy. The key dif-
ference between that work and ours is that the MDPs were used to execute a particular
sub-plan within the TOP's plan hierarchy and not for making improvements to the TOP.
DTGolog (Boutilier, Reiter, Soutchanski, & Thrun, 2000) provides a first-order language
that limits MDP policy search via logical constraints on actions. Although it shares with
our work the key idea of synergistic interactions in MDPs and Golog, it differs from our
work in that it focuses on single agent MDPs in fully observable domains, and does not
exploit plan structure in improving MDP performance. ISAAC (Nair, Tambe, Marsella,
& Raines, 2004), a system for analyzing multiagent teams, also employs decision theoretic
methods for analyzing multiagent teams.
In that work, a probabilistic finite automaton
(PFA) that represents the probability distribution of key patterns in the team's behavior
are learned from logs of the team's behaviors. The key difference with that work is that the
analysis is performed without having access to the actual team plans that the agents are
executing and hence the advice provided cannot directly be applied to improving the team,
but will need a human developer to change the team behavior as per the advice generated.
7.4 Role Allocation and Reallocation
There are several different approaches to the problem of role allocation and reallocation.
For example, Tidhar et al. (1996) and Tambe et al. (2000) performed role allocation based
on matching of capabilities, while Hunsberger and Grosz (2000) proposed the use of com-
binatorial auctions to decide on how roles should be assigned. Modi et al. (2003) showed
how role allocation can be modeled as a distributed constraint optimization problem and
applied it to the problem of tracking multiple moving targets using distributed sensors.
Shehory and Kraus (1998) suggested the use of coalition formation algorithms for deciding
quickly which agent took on which role. Fatima and Wooldridge (2001) use auctions to
decide on task allocation. It is important to note that these competing techniques are not
free of the problem of how to model the problem, even though they do not have to model
transition probabilities. Other approaches to reforming a team are reconfiguration meth-
ods due to Dunin-Keplicz and Verbrugge (2001), self-adapting organizations by Horling
and Lesser (2001) and dynamic re-organizing groups (Barber & Martin, 2001). Scerri et
al. (2003) present a role (re)allocation algorithm that allows autonomy of role reallocation
to shift between a human supervisor and the agents.
The key difference with all this prior work is our use of stochastic models (RMTDPs)
to evaluate allocations: this enables us to compute the benefits of role allocation, taking
into account uncertainty and costs of reallocation upon failure. For example, in the mission
rehearsal domain, if uncertainties were not considered, just one scout would have been
allocated, leading to costly future reallocations or even in mission failure. Instead, with
lookahead, depending on the probability of failure, multiple scouts were sent out on one or
more routes, resulting in fewer future reallocations and higher expected reward.
409
Nair & Tambe
8. Conclusion
While the BDI approach to agent teamwork has provided successful applications, tools and
techniques that provide quantitative analyses of team coordination and other team behav-
iors under uncertainty are lacking. The emerging field of distributed POMDPs provides
a decision theoretic method for quantitatively obtaining the optimal policy for a team of
agents, but faces a serious intractability challenge. Therefore, this article leverages the
benefits of both the BDI and POMDP approaches to analyze and improve key coordination
decisions within BDI-based team plans using POMDP-based methods. In order to demon-
strate these analysis methods, we concentrated on role allocation – a fundamental aspect
of agent teamwork – and provided three key contributions. First, we introduced RMTDP,
a distributed POMDP based framework, for analysis of role allocation. Second, this article
presented an RMTDP-based methodology for optimizing key coordination decisions within
a BDI team plan for a given domain. Concretely, the article described a methodology for
finding the best role allocation for a fixed team plan. Given the combinatorially many
role allocations, we introduced methods to exploit task decompositions among sub-teams
to significantly prune the search space of role allocations.
Third, our hybrid BDI-POMDP approach uncovered several synergistic interactions
between BDI team plans and distributed POMDPs:
1. TOPs were useful in constructing the RMTDP model for the domain, in identifying
the features that need to be modeled as well as in decomposing the model construction
according to the structure of the TOP. The RMTDP model could then be used to
evaluate the TOP.
2. TOPs restricted the policy search by providing RMTDPs with incomplete policies
with a limited number of open decisions.
3. The BDI approach helped in coming up with a novel efficient "belief-based" represen-
tation of policies suited for this hybrid BDI-POMDP approach and a corresponding
algorithm for evaluating such policies. This resulted in faster evaluation and also a
more compact policy representation.
4. The structure in the TOP was exploited to decompose the problem of evaluating
abstract policies, resulting in significant pruning in the search for the optimal role
allocations.
We constructed RMTDPs for two domains – RoboCupRescue and mission rehearsal
simulation – and determined the best role allocation in these domains. Furthermore, we
illustrated significant speedups in RMTDP policy search due to the techniques introduced
in this article. Detailed experiments revealed the advantages of our approach over state-of-
the-art role allocation approaches that failed to reason with uncertainty.
Our key agenda for future work is to continue scale-up of RMTDPs to even larger
scale agent teams. Such scale-up will require further efficiency improvements. We propose
to continue to exploit the interaction in the BDI and POMDP approaches in achieving
such scale-up. For instance, besides disaster rescue, distributed sensor nets and large area
monitoring applications could benefit from such a scale-up.
410
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by NSF grant #0208580. We would like to thank Jim Blythe,
Anthony Cassandra, Hyuckchul Jung, Spiros Kapetanakis, Sven Koenig, Michael Littman,
Stacy Marsella, David Pynadath and Paul Scerri for discussions related to this article.
We would also like to thank the reviewers of this article whose comments have helped in
significantly improving this article.
Appendix A. TOP details
In this section, we will describe the TOP for the helicopter scenario. The details of each
subplan in Figure 4(b) are shown below:
ExecuteMission:
Context:∅
Pre-conditions: (MB <TaskForce> location(TaskForce) = START)
Achieved: (MB <TaskForce> (Achieved(DoScouting) ∧ Achieved(DoTransport)))
∧ (time > T ∨ (MB <TaskForce> Achieved(RemainingScouts) ∨
(∄ helo ∈ ScoutingTeam, alive(helo) ∧ location(helo) 6= END)))
Unachievable: (MB <TaskForce> Unachievable(DoScouting))
∨ (MB <TaskForce> (Unachievable(DoTransport)
∧ (Achieved(RemainingScouts)
∨(∄ helo ∈ ScoutingTeam, alive(helo) ∧ location(helo) 6= END))))
Irrelevant: ∅
Body:
DoScouting
DoTransport
RemainingScouts
Constraints:
DoScouting → DoTransport
DoScouting → RemainingScouts
DoScouting:
Context:ExecuteMission <TaskForce>
Pre-conditions: ∅
Achieved: ∅
Unachievable: ∅
Irrelevant:∅
Body:
WaitAtBase
ScoutRoutes
Constraints:
WaitAtBase AND ScoutRoutes
WaitAtBase:
Context: DoScouting <TaskForce>
Pre-conditions: ∅
Achieved: ∅
Unachievable: (MB <TransportTeam> ∄ helo ∈ TransportTeam, alive(helo))
411
Nair & Tambe
Irrelevant: ∅
Body:
no-op
ScoutRoutes:
Context: DoScouting <TaskForce>
Achieved: ∅
Unachievable: ∅
Irrelevant:(MB <ScoutingTeam> ∄ helo ∈ TransportTeam, alive(helo))
Body:
ScoutRoute1
ScoutRoute2
ScoutRoute3
Constraints:
ScoutRoute1 OR ScoutRoute2 OR ScoutRoute3
ScoutRoute1:
Context: ScoutRoutes <ScoutingTeam>
Pre-conditions: ∅
Achieved: (MB <SctTeamA> ∃ helo ∈ SctTeamA, location(helo) = END)
Unachievable: time > T ∨ (MB <SctTeamA> ∄ helo ∈ SctTeamA, alive(helo))
Irrelevant: ∅
Body:
if (location(SctTeamA) = START) then route(SctTeamA) ← 1
if (location(SctTeamA) 6= END) then move-forward
ScoutRoute2:
Context: ScoutRoutes <ScoutingTeam>
Pre-conditions: ∅
Achieved: (MB <SctTeamB> ∃ helo ∈ SctTeamB, location(helo) = END)
Unachievable: time > T ∨ (MB <SctTeamB> ∄ helo ∈ SctTeamB, alive(helo))
Irrelevant: ∅
Body:
if (location(SctTeamB) = START) then route(SctTeamB) ← 2
if (location(SctTeamB) 6= END) then move-forward
ScoutRoute2:
Context: ScoutRoutes <ScoutingTeam>
Pre-conditions: ∅
Achieved: (MB <SctTeamA> ∃ helo ∈ SctTeamA, location(helo) = END)
Unachievable: time > T ∨ (MB <SctTeamA> ∄ helo ∈ SctTeamA, alive(helo))
Irrelevant: ∅
Body:
if (location(SctTeamA) = START) then route(SctTeamA) ← 1
if (location(SctTeamA) 6= END) then move-forward
DoTransport:
Context: ExecuteMission <TaskForce>
Pre-conditions: ∅
412
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
Achieved: (MB <TransportTeam> location(TransportTeam) = END)
Unachievable: time > T ∨ (MB <TransportTeam> ∄ helo ∈ TransportTeam, alive(helo))
Irrelevant: ∅
Body:
if (location(TransportTeam) = start) then
if (MB <TransportTeam> Achieved(ScoutRoute1)) then
route(TransportTeam) ← 1
elseif (MB <TransportTeam> Achieved(ScoutRoute2)) then
route(TransportTeam) ← 2
elseif (MB <TransportTeam> Achieved(ScoutRoute3)) then
route(TransportTeam) ← 3
if (route(TransportTeam) 6= null) and (location(TransportTeam) 6= END) then
move-forward
RemainingScouts:
Context: ExecuteMission <TaskForce>
Pre-conditions: ∅
Achieved: (MB <ScoutingTeam> location(ScoutingTeam) = END)
Unachievable: time > T ∨ (MB <ScoutingTeam> (∄ helo ∈ ScoutingTeam
alive(helo) ∧ location(helo) 6= END))
Irrelevant: ∅
Body:
if (location(ScoutingTeam) 6= END) then move-forward
The predicate Achieved(tplan) is true if the Achieved conditions of tplan are true. Simi-
larly, the predicates Unachievable(tplan) and Irrelevant(tplan) are true if the the Unachiev-
able conditions and the Irrelevant conditions of tplan are true, respectively. The predicate
(location(team) = END) is true if all members of team are at END.
Figure 4(b) also shows coordination relationships: An AND relationship is indicated
with a solid arc, while an OR relationship is indicated with a dotted arc. These coordi-
nation relationships indicate unachievability, achievability and irrelevance conditions that
are enforced by the TOP infrastructure. An AND relationship between team sub-plans
means that if any of the team sub-plans fail, then the parent team plan will fail. Also, for
the parent team plan to be achieved, all the child sub-plans must be achieved. Thus, for
DoScouting, WaitAtBase and ScoutRoutes must both be done:
Achieved: (MB <TaskForce> Achieved(WaitAtBase) ∧ Achieved(ScoutRoutes))
Unachievable: (MB <TaskForce> Unachievable(WaitAtBase)
∨ Unachievable(ScoutRoutes))
An OR relationship means that all the subplans must fail for the parent to fail and success of
any of the subplans means that the parent plan has succeeded. Thus, for ScoutingRoutes,
at least one of ScoutRoute1, ScoutRoute2 or ScoutRoute3 need be performed:
Achieved: (MB <ScoutingTeam> Achieved(ScoutRoute1) ∨
Achieved(ScoutRoute2)∨ Achieved(ScoutRoute3))
Unachievable: (MB <TaskForce> Unachievable(ScoutRoute1) ∧
Unachievable(ScoutRoute2) ∧ Unachievable(ScoutRoute3))
413
Nair & Tambe
Also an AND relationship affects the irrelevance conditions of the subplans that it joins. If
the parent is unachievable then all its subplans that are still executing become irrelevant.
Thus, for WaitAtBase:
Irrelevant: (MB <TaskForce> Unachievable(ScoutRoutes))
Similarly for ScoutingRoutes:
Irrelevant: (MB <TaskForce> Unachievable(ScoutRoutes))
.
Finally, we assign roles to plans - Figure 4(b) shows the assignment in brackets adja-
cent to the plans. For instance, Task Force team is assigned to jointly perform Execute
Mission.
Appendix B. RMTDP details
In this section, we present details of the RMTDP constructed for the TOP in Figure 4.
• S: We get the features of the state from the attributes tested in the preconditions
and achieved, unachievable and irrelevant conditions and the body of the team plans
and individual agent plans. Thus the relevant state variables are:location of each
helicopter, role of each helicopter,route of each helicopter, status of each helicopter
(alive or not) and time. For a team of n helicopters, the state is given by the tuple
< time, role1, . . . , rolen, loc1, . . . , locn, route1, . . . , routen, status1, . . . , statusn >.
• A: We consider actions to be the primitive actions that each agent can perform
within its individual plans. The TOP infrastructure enforces mutual belief through
communication actions. Since analyzing the cost of these is not the focus of this
research we consider communication to be implicit and we model the effect of this
communication directly in the observation function.
We consider 2 kinds of actions role-taking and role-execution actions. We assume
that the initial allocation will specify roles for all agents. This specifies whether the
agent is a scout or a transport and if a scout which scout team it is assigned to. A
scout cannot become a transport or change its team after its initial allocation while a
transport can change its role by taking one of the role-taking actions.The role-taking
and role-execution actions for each agent i are given by:
Υi,memberT ransportT eam = {joinSctT eamA, joinSctT eamB, joinSctT eamC}
Υi,memberSctT eamA = Υi,memberSctT eamB = Υi,memberSctT eamCx = ∅
Φi,memberT ransportT eam = {chooseRoute, moveF orward}
Φi,memberSctT eamA = Φi,memberSctT eamB = Φi,memberSctT eamC = {moveF orward}
• P : We obtain the transition function with the help of a human expert or through
simulations if a simulator is available. In this domain, helicopters can crash (be shot
down) if they are not at START, END or an already scouted location. The probability
that scouts will get shot down depends on which route they are on, i.e. probability
of crash on route1 is p1, probability of crash on route2 is p2 and probability of crash
on route3 is p3 and how many scouts are on the same spot. We assume that the
414
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
probability of a transport being shot down in an unscouted location to be 1 and in
a scouted location to be 0. The probability of multiple crashes can be obtained by
multiplying the probabilities of individual crashes.
The action, moveForward, will have no effect if routei = null or loci = END or if
statusi = dead. In all other cases, the location of the agent gets incremented. We
assume that the role-taking actions scoutRoutex will always succeed if the role of the
performing agent is transport and it has not been assigned a route already.
• Ω: Each transport at START can observe the status of the other agents with some
probability depending on their positions. Each helicopter on a particular route can
observe all the helicopters on that route completely and cannot observe helicopters
on other routes.
• O: The observation function gives the probability for a group of agents to receive a
particular joint observation. In this domain we assume that observations of one agent
are independent of the observations of other agents, given the current state and the
previous joint action. Thus the probability of a joint observation can be computed by
multiplying the probabilities of each individual agent's observations.
The probability of a transport at START observing the status of an alive scout on
route 1 is 0.95. The probability of a transport at START observing nothing about
that alive scout is 0.05 since we don't have false negatives. Similarly if a scout on
route 1 crashes, the probability that this is visible to a transport at START is 0.98
and the probability that the transport doesn't see this failure is 0.02. Similarly the
probabilities for observing an alive scout on route 2 and route 3 and 0.94 and 0.93
respectively and the probabilities for observing a crash on route 2 and route 3 and
0.97 and 0.96 respectively.
• R: The reward function is obtained with the help of a human expert who helps
assign value to the various states and the cost of performing various actions. For
this analysis, we assume that actions moveForward and chooseRoute have no cost.
We consider the negative reward (cost) for the replacement action, scoutRoutex, to
be RΥ, the negative reward for a failure of a helicopter to be RF , the reward for a
scout reaching END to be Rscout and the reward for a transport reaching END to be
Rtransport. E.g. RΥ = −10, RF = −50, Rscout = 5, Rtransport = 75.
• RL: These are the roles that individual agents can take in TOP organization hierarchy.
RL = {transport, scoutOnRoute1, scoutOnRoute2, scoutOnRoute3}.
Appendix C. Theorems
Theorem 3 The MAXEXP method will always yield an upper bound.
Proof sketch:
• Let policy π∗ be the leaf-level policy with the highest expected reward under a par-
ticular parent node, i, in the restricted policy space.
Vπ∗ = maxπ∈Children(i)Vπ
(3)
415
Nair & Tambe
• Since the reward function is specified separately for each component, we can sepa-
rate the expected reward V into the rewards from the constituent components given
the starting states and starting observation histories of these components. Let the
team plan be divided into m components such that the components are parallel and
independent or sequentially executed.
Vπ∗ ≤ X1≤j≤m
maxstates[j],oHistories[j]Vjπ∗
• The expected value obtained for any component j, 1 ≤ j ≤ m for π∗ cannot be greater
than that of the highest value obtained for j using any policy.
maxstates[j],oHistories[j]Vjπ∗ ≤ maxπ∈Children(i)maxstates[j],oHistories[j](Vjπ)
(4)
Vπ∗ ≤ X1≤j≤m
maxπ∈Children(i)maxstates[j],oHistories[j](Vjπ)
Vπ∗ ≤ MaxEstimate(i)
(5)
• Hence,
(cid:3)
References
Barber, S., & Martin, C. (2001). Dynamic reorganization of decision-making groups. In
Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents-01),
pp. 513–520.
Becker, R., Zilberstein, S., Lesser, V., & Goldman, C. V. (2003). Transition-independent
decentralized Markov decision processes. In Proceedings of the Second International
Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems (AAMAS-03), pp.
41–48.
Bernstein, D. S., Zilberstein, S., & Immerman, N. (2000). The complexity of decentral-
ized control of MDPs. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Conference on Uncertainty in
Artificial Intelligence(UAI-00), pp. 32–37.
Boutilier, C. (1996). Planning, learning & coordination in multiagent decision processes. In
Proceedings of the Sixth Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Rationality and Knowl-
edge (TARK-96), pp. 195–210.
Boutilier, C., Reiter, R., Soutchanski, M., & Thrun, S. (2000). Decision-theoretic, high-
level agent programming in the situation calculus. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth
National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-00), pp. 355–362.
Cassandra, A., Littman, M., & Zhang, N. (1997).
Incremental pruning: A simple, fast,
exact method for partially observable Markov decision processes. In Proceedings of
the Thirteenth Annual Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI-97),
pp. 54–61.
416
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
Chad`es, I., Scherrer, B., & Charpillet, F. (2002). A heuristic approach for solving
decentralized-pomdp: Assessment on the pursuit problem. In Proceedings of the 2002
ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC-02), pp. 57–62.
Cohen, P. R., & Levesque, H. J. (1991). Teamwork. Nous, 25 (4), 487–512.
da Silva, J. L. T., & Demazeau, Y. (2002). Vowels co-ordination model. In Proceedings
of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent
Systems (AAMAS-2002), pp. 1129–1136.
Dean, T., & Lin, S. H. (1995). Decomposition techniques for planning in stochastic do-
mains. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial
Intelligence (IJCAI-95), pp. 1121–1129.
Decker, K., & Lesser, V. (1993). Quantitative modeling of complex computational task
environments. In Proceedings of the Eleventh National Conference on Artificial Intel-
ligence (AAAI-93), pp. 217–224.
Dix, J., Muoz-Avila, H., Nau, D. S., & Zhang, L. (2003).
Impacting shop: Putting an
ai planner into a multi-agent environment. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial
Intelligence, 37 (4), 381–407.
Dunin-Keplicz, B., & Verbrugge, R. (2001). A reconfiguration algorithm for distributed
problem solving. Engineering Simulation, 18, 227–246.
Erol, K., Hendler, J., & Nau, D. S. (1994). HTN planning: Complexity and expressivity. In
Proceedings of the Twelfth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-94),
pp. 1123–1128.
Fatima, S. S., & Wooldridge, M. (2001). Adaptive task and resource allocation in multi-
agent systems. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Autonomous
Agents (Agents-01), pp. 537–544.
Georgeff, M. P., & Lansky, A. L. (1986). Procedural knowledge. Proceedings of the IEEE
special issue on knowledge representation, 74, 1383–1398.
Goldman, C. V., & Zilberstein, S. (2003). Optimizing information exchange in cooperative
multi-agent systems. In Proceedings of the Second International Joint Conference on
Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems (AAMAS-03), pp. 137–144.
Grosz, B., Hunsberger, L., & Kraus, S. (1999). Planning and acting together. AI Magazine,
20 (4), 23–34.
Grosz, B., & Kraus, S. (1996). Collaborative plans for complex group action. Artificial
Intelligence, 86 (2), 269–357.
Guestrin, C., Venkataraman, S., & Koller, D. (2002). Context specific multiagent coordi-
nation and planning with factored MDPs. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth National
Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-02), pp. 253–259.
Hansen, E., & Zhou, R. (2003). Synthesis of hierarchical finite-state controllers for pomdps.
In Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Automated Planning and
Scheduling (ICAPS-03), pp. 113–122.
417
Nair & Tambe
Hansen, E. A., Bernstein, D. S., & Zilberstein, S. (2004). Dynamic programming for partially
observable stochastic games. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth National Conference
on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-04), pp. 709–715.
Ho, Y.-C. (1980). Team decision theory and information structures. Proceedings of the
IEEE, 68 (6), 644–654.
Horling, B., Benyo, B., & Lesser, V. (2001). Using self-diagnosis to adapt organizational
In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Autonomous
structures.
Agents (Agents-01), pp. 529–536.
Hunsberger, L., & Grosz, B. (2000). A combinatorial auction for collaborative planning. In
Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Multiagent Systems (ICMAS-
2000), pp. 151–158.
Jennings, N. (1995). Controlling cooperative problem solving in industrial multi-agent
systems using joint intentions. Artificial Intelligence, 75 (2), 195–240.
Kaelbling, L., Littman, M., & Cassandra, A. (1998). Planning and acting in partially
observable stochastic domains. Artificial Intelligence, 101 (2), 99–134.
Kitano, H., Tadokoro, S., Noda, I., Matsubara, H., Takahashi, T., Shinjoh, A., & Shimada,
S. (1999). RoboCup-Rescue: Search and rescue for large scale disasters as a domain
for multiagent research. In Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Systems, Men, and
Cybernetics (SMC-99), pp. 739–743.
Levesque, H. J., Cohen, P. R., & Nunes, J. (1990). On acting together. In Proceedings of the
National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 94–99. Menlo Park, Calif.: AAAI
press.
Mailler, R. T., & Lesser, V. (2004). Solving distributed constraint optimization problems us-
ing cooperative mediation. In Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference
on Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS-04), pp. 438–445.
Marschak, J., & Radner, R. (1972). The Economic Theory of Teams. Cowles Foundation
and Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
Modi, P. J., Shen, W.-M., Tambe, M., & Yokoo, M. (2003). An asynchronous complete
method for distributed constraint optimization.
In Proceedings of the Second In-
ternational Joint Conference on Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS-03), pp.
161–168.
Monahan, G. (1982). A survey of partially observable Markov decision processes: Theory,
models and algorithms. Management Science, 101 (1), 1–16.
Nair, R., Ito, T., Tambe, M., & Marsella, S. (2002). Task allocation in the rescue simulation
domain. In RoboCup 2001: Robot Soccer World Cup V, Vol. 2377 of Lecture Notes in
Computer Science, pp. 751–754. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany.
Nair, R., Pynadath, D., Yokoo, M., Tambe, M., & Marsella, S. (2003a). Taming decentralized
POMDPs: Towards efficient policy computation for multiagent settings. In Proceedings
of the Eighteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-03),
pp. 705–711.
418
Hybrid BDI-POMDP Framework for Multiagent Teaming
Nair, R., Tambe, M., & Marsella, S. (2003b). Team formation for reformation in multi-
agent domains like RoboCupRescue. In Kaminka, G., Lima, P., & Roja, R. (Eds.),
Proceedings of RoboCup-2002 International Symposium, pp. 150–161. Lecture Notes
in Computer Science, Springer Verlag.
Nair, R., Tambe, M., Marsella, S., & Raines, T. (2004). Automated assistants to analyze
team behavior. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 8 (1), 69–
111.
Papadimitriou, C., & Tsitsiklis, J. (1987). Complexity of Markov decision processes. Math-
ematics of Operations Research, 12 (3), 441–450.
Peshkin, L., Meuleau, N., Kim, K.-E., & Kaelbling, L. (2000). Learning to cooperate via
policy search. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Conference in Uncertainty in Artificial
Intelligence (UAI-00), pp. 489–496.
Poupart, P., & Boutilier, C. (2003). Bounded finite state controllers.
In Proceedings of
Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 16 (NIPS).
Pynadath, D. V., & Tambe, M. (2002). The communicative multiagent team decision
problem: Analyzing teamwork theories and models. Journal of Artificial Intelligence
Research, 16, 389–423.
Pynadath, D. V., & Tambe, M. (2003). Automated teamwork among heterogeneous soft-
ware agents and humans. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems
(JAAMAS), 7, 71–100.
Rich, C., & Sidner, C. (1997). COLLAGEN: When agents collaborate with people.
In
Proceedings of the First International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents-
97), pp. 284–291.
Scerri, P., Johnson, L., Pynadath, D., Rosenbloom, P., Si, M., Schurr, N., & Tambe, M.
(2003). A prototype infrastructure for distributed robot, agent, person teams.
In
Proceedings of the Second International Joint Conference on Agents and Multiagent
Systems (AAMAS-03), pp. 433–440.
Scerri, P., Pynadath, D. V., & Tambe, M. (2002). Towards adjustable autonomy for the
real-world. Journal of Artificial Intelligence (JAIR), 17, 171–228.
Schut, M. C., Wooldridge, M., & Parsons, S. (2001). Reasoning about intentions in un-
certain domains. In Proceedings of the Sixth European Conference on Symbolic and
Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty (ECSQARU-2001), pp. 84–
95.
Shehory, O., & Kraus, S. (1998). Methods for task allocation via agent coalition formation.
Artificial Intelligence, 101 (1-2), 165–200.
Sondik, E. J. (1971). The optimal control of partially observable Markov processes. Ph.D.
Thesis, Stanford.
Stone, P., & Veloso, M. (1999). Task decomposition, dynamic role assignment, and low-
bandwidth communication for real-time strategic teamwork. Artificial Intelligence,
110 (2), 241–273.
419
Nair & Tambe
Tambe, M. (1997). Towards flexible teamwork. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research,
7, 83–124.
Tambe, M., Pynadath, D., & Chauvat, N. (2000). Building dynamic agent organizations in
cyberspace. IEEE Internet Computing, 4 (2), 65–73.
Tidhar, G. (1993a). Team-oriented programming: Preliminary report. Tech. rep. 41, Aus-
tralian Artificial Intelligence Institute.
Tidhar, G. (1993b). Team-oriented programming: Social structures. Tech. rep. 47, Aus-
tralian Artificial Intelligence Institute.
Tidhar, G., Rao, A., & Sonenberg, E. (1996). Guided team selection. In Proceedings of the
Second International Conference on Multi-agent Systems (ICMAS-96), pp. 369–376.
Wooldridge, M. (2002). An Introduction to Multiagent Systems. John Wiley & Sons.
Xuan, P., & Lesser, V. (2002). Multi-agent policies: from centralized ones to decentral-
ized ones. In Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Agents and
Multiagent Systems (AAMAS-02), pp. 1098–1105.
Xuan, P., Lesser, V., & Zilberstein, S. (2001). Communication decisions in multiagent
In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Autonomous
cooperation.
Agents (Agents-01), pp. 616–623.
Yen, J., Yin, J., Ioerger, T. R., Miller, M. S., Xu, D., & Volz, R. A. (2001). Cast: Collabora-
tive agents for simulating teamwork. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth International
Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-01), pp. 1135–1144.
Yoshikawa, T. (1978). Decomposition of dynamic team decision problems. IEEE Transac-
tions on Automatic Control, AC-23 (4), 627–632.
420
|
1809.10007 | 2 | 1809 | 2018-12-22T13:49:32 | Learning through Probing: a decentralized reinforcement learning architecture for social dilemmas | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI",
"cs.GT",
"cs.LG"
] | Multi-agent reinforcement learning has received significant interest in recent years notably due to the advancements made in deep reinforcement learning which have allowed for the developments of new architectures and learning algorithms. Using social dilemmas as the training ground, we present a novel learning architecture, Learning through Probing (LTP), where agents utilize a probing mechanism to incorporate how their opponent's behavior changes when an agent takes an action. We use distinct training phases and adjust rewards according to the overall outcome of the experiences accounting for changes to the opponents behavior. We introduce a parameter eta to determine the significance of these future changes to opponent behavior. When applied to the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma (IPD), LTP agents demonstrate that they can learn to cooperate with each other, achieving higher average cumulative rewards than other reinforcement learning methods while also maintaining good performance in playing against static agents that are present in Axelrod tournaments. We compare this method with traditional reinforcement learning algorithms and agent-tracking techniques to highlight key differences and potential applications. We also draw attention to the differences between solving games and societal-like interactions and analyze the training of Q-learning agents in makeshift societies. This is to emphasize how cooperation may emerge in societies and demonstrate this using environments where interactions with opponents are determined through a random encounter format of the IPD. | cs.MA | cs | Learning through probing: a decentralized reinforcement
learning architecture for social dilemmas
Mirco Musolesi
Nicolas Anastassacos
The Alan Turing Institute
University College London
The Alan Turing Institute
University College London
8
1
0
2
c
e
D
2
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
2
v
7
0
0
0
1
.
9
0
8
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
ABSTRACT
Multi-agent reinforcement learning has received significant inter-
est in recent years notably due to the advancements made in deep
reinforcement learning which have allowed for the developments
of new architectures and learning algorithms. However, while they
have been successful at solving stationary games, there has been
less development in cooperation-type games due to the nature
of these algorithms to optimize their play against the opponent's
current strategy and don't consider how that strategy can change.
Using social dilemmas, notably the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma
(IPD) as the training ground, we present a novel learning archi-
tecture, Learning through Probing (LTP), where Q-learning agents
utilize a probing mechanism to determine how an opponent's strat-
egy changes when an agent takes an action. We use distinct train-
ing phases and adjust rewards according to the overall outcome
of the experiences accounting for changes to the opponents be-
havior. We introduce a parameter η to determine the significance
of these future changes to opponent behavior. When applied to
the IPD, LTP agents demonstrate that they can learn to cooperate
with each other, achieving higher average cumulative rewards than
other reinforcement learning methods while also maintaining good
performance in playing against static agents that are present in
Axelrod tournaments. We compare this method with traditional re-
inforcement learning algorithms and agent-tracking techniques to
highlight key differences and potential applications. We also draw
attention to the differences between solving games and studying be-
haviour using societal-like interactions and analyze the training of
Q-learning agents in makeshift societies. This is to emphasize how
cooperation may emerge in societies and demonstrate this using
environments where interactions with opponents are determined
through a random encounter format of the IPD.
KEYWORDS
Reinforcement Learning, Cooperation, Social Dilemmas, Multi-
Agent Learning
INTRODUCTION
Multi-agent reinforcement learning (RL) has garnered a significant
amount of interest in recent years also due to the advancements
in deep RL which has allowed for extensive study on agent behav-
iors. There has been emphasis on designing cooperative agents for
decades [12, 31] yet extending this success to multi-agent environ-
ments has proven difficult as the Markov property is not satisfied
since agent behaviors are continuously changing [30] and the use
of experience replay does little to inhibit unstable learning in pres-
ence of multiple learners. Indeed, there are still challenges to be
tackled in order to enable broader applications, e.g., in automated
decision-making such as self-driving cars, personalized assistants,
and the eventuality of artificial agents operating in society. A cen-
tral aspect of this evolution lies in understanding the competitive
and collaborative nature of environments and the emergence of
such behaviors [2, 21].
Humans have cooperated and maintained cooperation to great
effect, which has been paramount for the development of civiliza-
tion [2, 3, 8]. Many plants and animals have also demonstrated
the tendency to cooperate with relatives and have even been ob-
served cooperating with members of a different species even in
highly competitive environments, likely to take advantage of long-
term rewards [6, 29]. The evolution of cooperation in competitive
environments has therefore been relevant to studies in econom-
ics, game-theory, psychology, social science, and now computer
science as the future will certainly demand interaction between
artificial agents in human and artificial societies. The emergence of
cooperative and competitive strategies has been studied in Social
Dilemmas [14, 15, 23, 34]. These are games where an individual
profits from selfishness unless everyone chooses to behave self-
ishly, in which case the group as a whole achieves an undesirable
outcome. In other words, problems arise when too many group
members choose to pursue individual profit and immediate satis-
faction rather than behave in the group's best long-term interests.
From a game-theoretic perspective, the dominant strategy in social
dilemmas is often to behave selfishly, which results in arriving at a
Nash Equilibria that can be described as socially deficient [15] and
is an undesirable result. One of the first and most studied examples
of social dilemmas is the Prisoner's Dilemma (PD), a two-player
social dilemma that is formalized by a payoff matrix and a dominant
strategy to defect despite a collaborative effort from both players
leading to a higher reward. The Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma (IPD)
is an extended, sequential version of the PD that has often been
the focus for multi-agent RL. In order to succeed in these types of
games, it is important for each agent to distinguish between how
to play against the current strategy of their opponent and how
their opponent's strategy might change to be either more or less
cooperative as a result of their own actions as time goes on.
Most RL algorithms are designed for single-agent case scenarios.
Qualitatively, the Q-value describes how much reward an agent is
expected to receive when taking a particular action at a particu-
lar state [30]. As the environment changes, the learned Q-values
become increasingly irrelevant and this is exemplified as the num-
ber of agents who are learning increases. Other research projects
have aimed to address the issue of non-stationarity in multi-agent
environments in a variety of ways ranging from refreshing the
experience replay buffer [15] using importance sampling [10, 33] to
stabilize learning, using defined policy-types [16], agent-tracking
techniques to predict the policy of an opposing agent [10, 17, 32, 35],
and centralized functions to share information across to all par-
ticipating agents [17]. To tackle this, we instead propose a train-
ing mechanism, Learning through Probing, which allows agents
to gather experiences that have been adjusted to reflect behav-
ioral changes in a sequence of events over a period of time via
an adjusted reward signal and, therefore, enables them to learn
cooperative strategies. Experimentally, we demonstrate that two
agents trained with this approach learn to cooperate in the IPD
as each agent accounts for the opposing agent's learning while
also revealing how their own behavior will change as a result of an
opposing agent's chosen actions. Furthermore, we also demonstrate
how this type of training mechanism results in a RL agent learning
optimal policies for the IPD when matched with other stationary
and quasi-stationary strategies from Axelrod tournaments. Finally,
we contrast this with current methodologies in multi-agent RL to
highlight potential difficulties and we discuss how probing and
using experiences through updates might help established methods
achieve better performance in dynamic environments.
Alongside this architecture, we also demonstrate that adjusting
the training environment can lead to cooperative behaviors using
a standard Q-learning algorithm to take into account the effect of
external factors beyond each individual agent's decision-making
in determining what behaviors can emerge when introducing ar-
tificial agents into open environments like societies. The focus in
multi-agent RL is predominantly based around stationarizing the
environment in order for agents to learn how to achieve optimal
outcomes in closed environments. This typically requires the same
agents to be used in training and testing. However, an overlooked
aspect of agent behavior is how to design environments to nurture
certain types of behavior. We present experimental results on how
untrained agents can learn to cooperate with other untrained agents
using standard Q-learning when interacting with static agents at
the same time.
RELATED WORK AND MOTIVATION
Modeling multi-agent systems and designing learning algorithms
for dynamic settings is hard and the majority of work in this area
focuses on competitive, zero-sum games. A common approach is
to simply have each agent treat all other agents as part of the envi-
ronment and learn independently, however, this generally leads to
less than optimal performance [12, 28]. Firstly, a naive implementa-
tion of experience replay is not suitable for dynamically changing
environments [1, 27]. Others have employed importance sampling
in order to stabilize the application of replay buffers where ex-
periences that are collected from "old" environments can still be
used to update Q-values [10, 33]. Secondly, agents have to account
for actions taken by other agents in their Q-value approximations
[4]. Finally, learning to play optimally against just an opponent's
current behavior may trap players in undesirable states, as can be
the case in social dilemmas, as there is no consistent and suitable
method of exploration.
However, while Q-learning and other reinforcement learning
algorithms have shown to perform well in zero-sum games for
single player, there has been less work in analyzing their resulting
behavior when trained in general-sum games. While in zero-sum
games, the rewards between two opposing agents are negatively
correlated, in general-sum games, the rewards between two oppos-
ing agents can be correlated arbitrarily as the resulting outcome for
one individual doesn't necessarily directly impact the outcome for
others. This case is generally more representative of interactions in
the real-world. The accepted baseline solution for such games is the
Nash equilibrium. In a Nash equilibrium, each player has chosen a
strategy and neither player can benefit by changing their strategy
unilaterally and it is proven to exist for every finite game. Inspired
by this approach, several game-theoretic reinforcement learning
algorithms have been proposed to solve general-sum games such
as Nash Q-learning. This algorithm modifies its update such that
its update is based on the expectation that agents would take their
equilibrium actions [11].
There is a parallel here between the goal of agent-tracking
methods and Nash Equilibrium as agent-tracking methods look
to identify the opponent's strategy and update assuming only small
changes in the opponent's behavior. However, while they may
account for the opponent's strategy, they both look to perform
updates conditioned on the opponent's current behavior. This is
a flawed approach for cooperation games as a key aspect of the
game involves adapting to your opponent's behavior and therefore
doesn't consider how an agent's learning influences how its oppo-
nent's behavior will change.
The study of sequential social dilemmas, notably the IPD, has
been prevalent across numerous disciplines such as game theory,
economics, and across social sciences as a way of analyzing complex
behaviors such as altruism, reciprocity and cooperation [18, 22, 25].
A strategy known as Tit-For-Tat (TFT) where an agent cooperates
on the first move and then replicates an opponent's previous action,
known as equivalent retaliation, is a simple strategy yet has shown
to be one of the most effective strategies in the IPD and has served
as a basis for the modeling of many real-world behaviors [2]. So-
cial dilemmas like the IPD have proven to be an effective training
ground for multi-agent RL as they might involve cooperation as
a viable method of achieving optimal performance against fixed
policies as well as learning agents [16, 26, 35]. In order to perform
well in social dilemmas, agents must learn to forgo their desire
for early rewards and "agree" on strategies that will benefit those
involved. Many agents designed for Axelrod tournaments utilize
reciprocating behavior which is the general philosophy behind the
Tit-For-Tat strategy whereas others employ more grudging tech-
niques to manoeuvre opponents into cooperating.
Leibo et al. have attempted to train Q-learning agents for se-
quential social dilemmas so as to analyze how conflict, competition,
and cooperation can emerge via a multiplayer Wolfpack hunting
game and a Gathering game [15]. Replay buffers of a fixed capacity
were used to try and accommodate for the multiple learners; once
filled, they were refreshed so that the agent emphasized training
on more recent experiences. A more recently popular approach
to multi-agent reinforcement learning involves policy prediction
which, alongside Q-learning (independent learners), we will con-
trast our approach with. We emphasize this approach because we
think that it closely captures a necessary element of multi-agent
learning: understanding opponent behavior and incorporating it
directly into learning. It expands on methods like fictitious play
[7] and joint action learning (JAL) to more accurately represent
an opponent's policy [5, 19] and enables coordinations (in coop-
erative games). Tesauro presents Hyper-Q learning, which learns
the value of mixed strategies instead of base actions by estimating
opponent actions using observed data and evaluates it using Rock-
Paper-Scissors [32]. He further argues that Hyper-Q learning may
be effective against agents even if they are persistently dynamic.
This has been corroborated by other research employing similar
philosophy of policy prediction. Experiments on Starcraft and other
abstract games that require complex multi-agent coordination have
shown that this methodology significantly improves performance
compared to independent learners trained with Q-learning though
they are often combined with other techniques, e.g., sampling tech-
niques and a centralized value function [10, 17]. However, as we
will demonstrate in our experiments, these types of methods do not
perform adequately in social dilemmas as they aim to shape learn-
ing around what is happening currently rather than what could
happen in the future. In contrast, our approach focuses directly on
understanding the consequence of actions on opponent's behavior
and incorporates that knowledge directly into agent learning via
an adjusted reward function.
The use of social behavior metrics is another approach to tackle the
issue of describing what is really happening in a state at any mo-
ment in time in decentralized learning environments [24]. However,
it is difficult to determine how these metrics should be designed as
they are contextually dependent on the environment. Matignon et
al. achieve cooperative behavior in a decentralized RL system using
a modified update equation that is conditioned on the size of the
reward [20]. Another decentralized method by Yu et al. attempts to
embed emotional context into agents to drive them to learn cooper-
ative behaviors using various metrics to represent an agent's drive
and emotions relative to neighbouring agents [34]. However, these
approaches represent only the current standings that are available
without an indication of how things may or may not change which
we maintain is essential to developing cooperative behavior. An
approach that also emphasizes integrating future behavior of one's
opponents is LOLA which looks to consider opponent learning,
optimizing its return using a one-step look ahead which requires
direct access to the opposing agent's parameters [9]. Our approach
differs in a number of ways. Firstly, we identify two distinct phases.
The first phase is the probing phase where each agent can probe
the opponent agent in order to gather information about how their
opponent's strategy changes after an update and adjust any col-
lected experiences. We use a defined time horizon to determine the
number of updates to the opponent's strategy to consider. In the
second phase, the agent trains on the adjusted experiences only.
Secondly, with the addition of the probing phase, the agent's do not
need to have information about the parameters of the opponent
agent or need to track their strategy in advance.
PRELIMINARIES
Q-Learning
Q-learning is a popular off-policy reinforcement learning technique
to learn optimal behaviors. An agent trained with Q-learning looks
to take actions that maximize its expected cumulative reward. A
value function for a policy π is given by
γ i−1ris0 = s, π] ∀s ∈ S
(1)
V π(s) = E[ T
i =1
Among all possible value functions there exists a maximum
optimal value function V ∗ = maxπ V π(s) ∀s ∈ S and an opti-
mal policy that corresponds to the optimal value function π∗ =
arg maxπ V π(s) ∀s ∈ S. The Q-function, Q, is defined as the ex-
pected cumulative reward received by an agent starting in s, picking
action a and behaving optimally from that point onward. We can
therefore write the optimal Q-function as
Q
′)]
∗(s
∗(s, a) = r(s, a) + γ Ep(s′s,a)[V
(2)
From our definition of the optimal value function, we can derive that
V ∗ = maxa Q∗(s, a) and therefore, π∗ = arg maxπ Qπ(s, a). The
optimal policy is therefore the policy that chooses the action with
the highest Q-value at every state. However, we can see clearly in (2)
that the optimal Q-value is subject to state transition distribution
remaining the same. This is sensible in single-agent games but
not in multi-agent settings since we expect the state distribution
to change as agents change their behavior and therefore affect
the resulting state transitions as they are learning. Agent-tracking
methods expand on this, conditioning the transition to s′ on both
the agent's own action as well as any opponent's actions in order
to better approximate their Q-values, however, as we will see, they
fail to achieve the desired solution for cooperation-type games like
the IPD.
Hyper-Q-Learning
Hyper-Q-learning is an agent-tracking technique and an extension
of Q-learning for multi-agent systems. It estimates an opponent's
mixed strategy y and then evaluates the best response. In the single
agent case, the Hyper-Q function Qπ(s, y, a) is adjusted such that
Qπ(s, y, a) = r(s, y, a) + γ max
′
a′ Qπ(s
′
, y
, a
′)
where y′ is a new estimated opponent strategy in s′. Variations of
Hyper-Q have performed well using deep neural networks with
sampling modifications to the replay buffer. A similar approach in
multi-agent scenarios has been implemented with success using
actor critic techniques such that the target value of agent j is
Qπj(s, a1, ..., aN ) =
rj(s, a1, ..., aN ) + γ Es′ max
a′ Qπj(s
′
, a
′
1, ..., a
′
N )a−j =π−j
where −j denotes all agents except of agent j. In this paper, we
use a variation of Hyper-Q for simplicity in the IPD adopting a
separate neural network to estimate an opponent's next action
directly from an observation and optimize by taking recent sam-
ples of an agent from a replay buffer. While agent-tracking meth-
ods have performed better than independent learners, they still
suffer from a problem of non-stationarity, which is that the dis-
tribution of states changes as each agent updates their policy . If
the updates to π−j are small and the environment is less dynamic
then pi(s′s, a1, ..., aN )a−j =π−j ≈ pi +1(s′s, a1, ..., aN )a−j =π−j , and
is sufficient for calculating an optimal policy though this problem is
made more difficult with more learners. Furthermore, since agents
cannot anticipate how behavior will change in the future, they
cannot avoid getting trapped in socially deficient Nash Equilib-
ria (which are optimal and dominant strategies given knowledge
only of an opponent's current policy). We contrast this with our
approach that, instead, emphasizes an awareness of how an agent's
actions can influence an opponent's future response as we argue
that optimizing against the current policy of an opponent can trap
agents into policies that result in both parties receiving inadequate
rewards.
Forms of Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma
The Prisoner's Dilemma (PD) is a simple game that serves as the
basis for research on social dilemmas. The premise of the game
is that two partners in crime are imprisoned separately and each
are offered leniency if they provide evidence against the other.
Each player can choose between two actions: cooperation (C) or
defection (D), and the payoffs of the game are displayed in Figure 1.
The game is modeled so that T > R > P > S and 2R > T +S. Solving
this from a game-theoretic perspective, the dominant strategy is to
defect, however, if both players take this action then they arrive at
a Nash Equilibrium that is socially deficient. Originally, the PD is
a one round game, but the IPD is a sequential PD often studied to
understand the effects of previous outcomes and the emergence of
cooperative behaviors.
SD
C
D
C
R, R
T, S
D
S, T
P, P
IPD
C
D
C
3, 3
5, 0
D
0, 5
1, 1
Figure 1: Payoff Matrix for Social Dilemmas and Iterated
Prisoner's Dilemma. The motivation to defect comes from
fear of an opponent defecting or acting greedily to gain the
maximum reward when one anticipates the opponent might
cooperate.
LEARNING THROUGH PROBING
In this section, we present and summarize the architecture and
learning methodology of the probing technique that we apply to
RL agents. Each agent consists of two separate components that
we term the probe and the player. Each player i has a policy πpi
parameterized by θpi . Each probe, similarly, has a policy πbi param-
eterized by θbi . The role of the probe is to generate experiences
(st , at , rt +1, st +1) that account for opponent strategy changing due
to learning when performing action at after observing st . The even-
tual consequences of this action are measured by aggregating the
rewards of the total sequence of events τ over a finite time horizon
T . This is an adjusted experience to capture the affects of taking
that action on the opponent's policy which will eventually be used
to train the player component. To start, each probe must gauge
the consequences of a type of action. Paired with an opponent, the
probes explore the environment and store experiences in a replay
buffer. These experiences are then grouped according to the ac-
tions of the opponent. The probe then updates on the subset of
experiences and continues to play versus its opponent. Each probe
update is based on the set of opposing experiences stored. After
taking a one-step update based on these initial experiences, the
probes play against each other according to their learned policies
and repeat the process for T updates. Eventually, the sequence
τ = (s0, a0, r1, s1, ..., sT−1, aT−1, rT , sT ) is stored.
During the probing phase, the experiences are grouped by the
tuple (a1, a2), the agent's action and opponent's action similarly
to JAL and agent-tracking methods. Alternatively, actions could
grouped according to the reward outcome. In the context of the
PD, grouping actions according to the opponent's action or the
reward outcome is the same, however, in general, grouping while
considering the opponent's action is less ambiguous.
R(τ) =T
After the probes have interacted and generated experiences,
the rewards of the resulting sequences τ are adjusted such that
t =1 ηt−1rt and are used to train the player components
of the agents. η is an added discount through updates term to de-
termine how many future interactions the agent should consider.
By manipulating the value of η we can determine how each player
values the approximated long-term outcome and η = 0 indicates
an approach identical to Q-learning. The gradient of the player
updates according to
Qπi +1(s, a) ← Qπi(s, a) − R(τ) + γ max
a
Qπi(s
′
, a
′)
After training has concluded on the adjusted experiences, the
learned policy is transferred to the probe. When only one of the
participants is learning to maximize an RL objective function the
architecture is adjusted so that the probe interacts directly with the
opponent rather than establishing a probing phase for both agents.
IMPLEMENTATION AND EXPERIMENTS
In this section, we describe the methodology and experimental
setup. The first subsection describes how RL agents train against
Axelrod agents simultaneously, and compares and contrasts the
results of Q-learning and Hyper-Q-learning to examine how policy
prediction improves learning under certain conditions. The sec-
ond subsection describes how we tackle these difficulties using a
probing technique and Q-learning to account for behavior changes
through updates and investigating the influence of this new learning
methodology on the emergence of cooperation. The default neural
networks had two hidden layers with 40 hidden units and ReLU
activation functions. Agents were trained with gradient descent
with a buffer size of 1e5, learning rate of 1e-4 and a batch size of
300. Exploration, ϵ, was initially set to 1.0 and decreased linearly
with iterations, stopping at 0.1. The discount rate γ was set to 0.99.
Target networks were also used to further stabilize training. After
testing multiple values for the time horizon, T , we set it to 5. Us-
ing values greater than 5 produced results that were very similar
while using values smaller than 5 had a higher variance. Finally, the
Figure 2: Learning through Probing architecture diagram involving two RL agents. 1) After exploring the environment, the
probe component trains on subsets of experiences to learn consequences for actions. Actions are then selected according to a
learned policy. 2) Experiences are collected into a replay buffer and adjusted. 3) The player component trains on the adjusted
experiences. 4) The players are matched against each other after training. 5) In continuously adaptive games, probes could
adopt learned player policies and adapt their strategies over time.
b2
,
,
b2
i
, θ
b2
i
b1
i
b1
b2
b1
i
b2
i
b2
o
b1
i
b1
i ← Dilemma(aдent1, aдent2)
i ),(o
b1
o
i
i ← θ
a1
(o
b1
i +1, r
replay_buffer1.append(o
replay_buffer2.append(o
i ← θ
a2
b2
i +1, r
, a1
i , r1
i , o
i , r2
, a2
i , o
i +1)
i +1)
i ) ← Dilemma.play(a1
Algorithm 1 Learning through Probing
1: Input: ← θ
2: for i in ranдe(0, episode) do
3:
4:
5:
6:
7:
8: end for
9: group experiences according to joint actions(a1
10: and store in separate buffers
11: for buffer in replay_buffers do
12:
13:
14:
15:
16:
17:
18:
19:
20:
21: end for
b1
22: reset θ
i
23: Adjust overall sequences τ1, τ2
24: Train players, θ
b1
Update θ
t
t ← bu f f er
b2
b1
o
o
t ,
for t in ranдe(0,T) do
t ← θ
a2
i ),(o
b2
t +1, r
b2
i
b1
t
end for
τ1 ← (o
t , a1
t , r1
b1
t , o
τ2 ← (o
t , r2
t , a2
b2
t , o
b2
i
t ← θ
a1
b1
t
(o
b1
b1
t +1, r
Update θ
t +1, ..., a1
t +1, ..., a2
t +1, a1
b1
t +1, a2
b2
t +1, r1
t +1, r2
T , r1
T , r2
, θ
b2
t
b2
t
, θ
,
, θ
i )
i , a2
i )
i , a2
b1
b2
T +1)
T +1)
T , o
T , o
b2
t ) ← Dilemma.play(a1
t)
t , a2
p1
i
, θ
p2
i on adjusted experiences, τ1, τ2
third section describes the external aspects of learning in artificial
societies and the impact on agent behavior.
RL Agents versus Axelrod Agents
The Axelrod library [13] contains an extensive set of strategies that
have been used in previous Axelrod tournaments as well as those
that have been rigorously covered in scientific literature. We will
refer to the collection of these strategies as "Axelrod agents". All
strategies in the tournament follow a simple set of rules: players
are unaware of the number of turns in a match, players carry no
acquired state between matches, players cannot observe the out-
come of other matches and players cannot manipulate or inspect
their opponent in any way beyond what is required in a match. We
highlight a diverse set of strategies taken from the Axelrod library
that will be used as opponents.
Tit for Tat (TFT). The Tit for Tat strategy is a forgiving strategy
that will cooperate on the first move and then perform the same
action as the opponent's most recent move.
Punisher. The Punisher strategy is a grudging strategy that
starts by cooperating, however, if at any point its opponent defects,
it will defect for memory length where memory length is propor-
tional to the opponent's historical percentage of defecting.
Forgetful Grudger. The Forgetful Grudger strategy is a grudg-
ing strategy which defects for a fixed length of time if an opponent
defects at any point. If an opponent cooperates for long enough it
forgets its grudge and will cooperate until it sees another defection.
Prober. The Prober strategy plays an initial sequence of moves
to feel out an opponent's strategy. It keeps a count of defections
that are retaliating and defections that are unmerited. If the number
of justified defections and number of unjustified defections differs
by more than 2, cooperate for the next 5 turns and then play TFT's
strategy. Otherwise defect forever.
Sneaky. The Sneaky strategy is an original strategy that tracks
the three most recent actions of the opponent. If all three actions
are to cooperate, then it will defect. Also, if the total number of
opponent defections are greater than the total number of opponent
(a) Average cumulative rewards and standard deviation for various RL agents
over 20 encounters at numerous training iterations.
(b) Average rewards and standard deviation of LTP agents over 20 timesteps
trained with various η values.
Figure 3: (a) The blue line shows the results achieved by LTP agents trained with η = 0.99. These agents learn to cooperate
early and consistently with decreasing variance with more training iterations indicating stable performance. Trained with
η = 0.01, LTP agents are slower to converge than Deep-Q or Hyper-Q agents, however, achieve similar results with consistency.
Hyper-Q agents are the quickest in learning to defect. (b) Agents trained with higher η values learn cooperative policies with
little error rate. A threshold value specific to the used configuration of the IPD is noted at approximately η = 0.7.
cooperations then it will defect.
Some of these agents, like the Prober, are not stationary to begin
with but converge to stationary distributions given enough time.
We refer to these as quasi-stationary behaviors. Q-learning, Hyper-
Q-learning and LTP agents are each trained to play against the
above agents. Agents are able to observe the previous four actions
taken by themselves and their opponent. Each match lasts for 100
timesteps. Agents are paired using a round robin matchmaking
format. This was run for 10,000 episodes. For Q-learning and Hyper-
Q-learning agents, ϵ was set to 1.0 initially and decreased linearly
with iterations until it reached 0.1.
RL Agents versus RL Agents
We carry out experiments in order to see how Q-learning agents,
Hyper-Q-learning agents and LTP agents perform against their
counterparts in the IPD. Each state was characterized by the agent's
and its opponent's previous four interactions. Agents had no in-
formation about who they were playing with beyond what was
available in the observation data. While versus Axelrod agents,
though Q-learning and Hyper-Q learning agents keeping an explo-
ration rate at 1.0 is feasible when playing against static strategies,
Hyper-Q relies on developing accurate predictions of an opponent's
next move and so we ensure that the observed policies are non-
random. We train LTP agents against one another using η values
of 0.99, 0.7, 0.5, and 0.01 to demonstrate the effect of accounting for
behavioral adaptations. These agents play against each other for
1000 iterations. After each iteration agents would play the IPD for
20 timesteps and the cumulative reward was recorded.
External Factors Influencing Agent Learning
The emphasis in current multiagent RL is to stationarize the envi-
ronment using techniques that give the agent more information
about the dynamics of the environment. However, in the previous
section, we use an adaptation to training without changing the
RL objective function or using a centralized control function. In
this experiment we will also adapt training of Q-learning agents so
they develop cooperative tendencies by inserting other agents into
the environment that act as regulators. In open environments such
as artificial societies, agents are likely to come into contact with
unseen scenarios and their learning in these new environment is
hard to predict. We are interested in understanding what happens
when an agent is inserted in an unseen multi-agent environment
with given dynamics, like a society with established social norms
and how we can control for certain types of behavior without spec-
ifying changes to the agent's objective function. Evaluating these
developmental aspects may provide key insights to understanding
how types of behaviors are established in a society or how certain
behaviors might provide the basis for stable social norms while
others might not. We look to demonstrate in a simple, yet insightful,
way that agents' behaviors may change in society based on their
encounters with others and how this analysis can be useful for
understanding social interactions.
We start with an environment that features only two players,
both RL agents that train with a Q-learning update. TFT agents are
added one-by-one to the environment to observe the changes in
Q-values. Sneaky agents and Punisher agents are also added to see
how cumulative reward increases and decreases. The format was
(a) 0 TFT agents
(b) 1 TFT agents
(c) 2 TFT agents
(d) 1 Sneaky agent, 0 TFT agents
(e) 1 Sneaky agent, 1 TFT agents
(f) 1 Sneaky agent, 2 TFT agents
(g) 1 Punisher agent, 0 TFT agents
(h) 1 Punisher agent, 1 TFT agents
(i) 1 Punisher agent, 2 TFT agents
Figure 4: Adapting surroundings using TFT agents to get two independent Q-learning agents to cooperate in the IPD. (a) Q-
learning agents learn independently to play the IPD and both learn defecting policies to achieve the minimum cumulative
reward. As more TFT agents are introduced, cumulative reward rises. In (b) one TFT agent agents perform significantly better
and in (c) two TFT agents both Q-learning agents learn to cooperate consistently achieving the maximum cumulative reward
with less variance. We further display the changes in agent reward with a Sneaky agent and TFT agents, displayed in (d-f), and
a Punisher agent and TFT agents, displayed in (g-i).
modeled as a random encounters where each agent was matched
with a random opponent with equal probability. Each match lasted
for 20 timesteps, with each agent performing a total of 500 updates,
one after each match. RL agents implemented ϵ-greedy policies
with ϵ decreasing linearly.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Optimal Policies under Stationary Distributions
Individually, Q-learning agents and Hyper-Q learning agents score
well against Axelrod agents due to their patterned behavior. The
strategies that Axelrod agents use can be considered stationary
and it is straightforward for the RL agents to learn an appropriate
policy to play when matched against these agents provided that
they have access to enough information to determine their strategy.
In the case of the Sneaky agent, it requires at least four previous
interactions at every time step in order to learn the optimal policy
as it can then determine what the pattern in its behavior is. Both Q-
learning and Hyper-Q-learning perform well against these agents.
However, against the Prober agent, Hyper-Q performs significantly
better and more consistently than either of the other two RL agents
demonstrating an advantage of agent-tracking techniques in quasi-
stationary environments. The average scores over 100 timesteps are
recorded in Table 1. Overall, when matched with the Axelrod agents,
LTP agents achieve desirable results versus all the opponents and
perform at least as well as Q-learning though Hyper-Q outperforms
both.
TFT Punisher
300
Hyper-Q 300
300
300
300
300
Q
LTP
Prober
166.7
305
154.5
Sneaky
391.6
400
384.9
FG
300
300
300
Table 1: Average scores vs. Static agents
Incorporating Information about Future
Behaviors
In the case of LTP versus LTP agents, we observe that the agents
are able to consistently achieve maximum cumulative reward when
playing in the IPD. A variety of learned policies can be observed by
setting η to different values. By setting the value of η to 0.99 (the
same for all the agents), LTP agents heavily favor cooperation and
consistently learn to cooperate with each other. In Figure 3 we see
the scores of LTP agents trained when η = [0.01, 0.5, 0.7, 0.99]. Be-
tween η = 0.01 and η = 0.5 there are no stark differences and both
result in defecting policies. When η = 0.7 there is a noticeable sep-
aration from a "defect only"-type policy. LTP agents with η values
of less than 0.7 learn to defect following a similar trajectory to that
of Q-learning and Hyper-Q-learning. With η greater than 0.7 both
agents learn cooperative policies to achieve the maximum cumu-
lative reward. When matching Q-learning agents with each other,
they learn defecting policies every time over the course of 10,000
iterations. The number of times they defect increases exponentially
until every action taken is to defect. While Hyper-Q-learning agents
outperformed the other algorithms versus stationary agents, they
performs poorly in this scenario. As the exploration rate decreases,
the predicted probability of the opponent defecting increases and
Hyper-Q agents learn to defect the quickest with negligible vari-
ance. We expect this will be further compounded using sampling
techniques and buffer refreshing for social dilemmas as the new
policies learned by its opponent will involve a higher likelihood
to defect than before. Since the optimal policy to play against an
opponent that is increasingly likely to defect is to defect oneself,
predicting what the opponent might do next is not a viable strategy
to maximize cumulative reward in the IPD. However, as LTP agents
demonstrated, it is beneficial to take actions that maximize reward
conditioned on changes in an opponent's behavior.
Cooperative Behavior in Presence of Stable
Norms
This experiment demonstrates how we can adjust the learning of
our Q-learning agents by adapting the training procedure. We dis-
play the changes in the behavior of two Q-learning agents that
would normally learn defect under a regular training procedure af-
ter interacting with regulating TFT agents. As can be seen in Figure
3, neither Q-learning agents nor agent-tracking agents like Hyper-
Q learning learn to cooperate with one another when matched
together in the IPD. However, we can show that tailoring their
overall experience without explicitly changing the cost function
or reward function, they can learn to cooperate with other RL
agents which is an interesting find as it better represents how these
agents would act in societal-like contexts rather than closed envi-
ronments. By adding TFT agents to the environment and modeling
it as random-encounters, the Q-values associated with cooperative
behavior increase as the punishment for defecting is more likely
to be immediate. In this way, the strategy of defecting is regulated
by other existing agents. When facing other agents that are also
exploring the environment, a Q-learning agent may be able to reap
rewards from defecting behavior before other agents have adapted.
This would cause the rest of the agents to also learn defecting be-
havior as shown in Figure 3. However, in a more strict environment,
this behavior can be punished. By inserting more TFT agents into
the environment, this behavior can be eliminated altogether and
agents will learn to cooperate with one another consistently as
shown in Figure 4. In addition, we can see that with only additional
TFT agents in the environment, both agents achieve similar end
rewards with neither consistently exploiting the other. In contrast,
when a Sneaky agent is present, agent 1 barely manages to attain
any reward as it has learned some cooperative behavior while agent
2 has learned primarily to defect due to the Sneaky agent's presence.
When two TFT agents are introduced as shown in Figure 4 (f), de-
fecting behavior can be regulated. However, one agent still manages
to take advantage of the other and they do not achieve maximum
cumulative reward as consistently. Surprisingly, the addition of a
Punisher agent is not effective in producing cooperative behavior
between agents. Though agents are punished in a similar fashion to
TFT (immediate retaliation) this scenario lacks the consistency of
TFT and the involvement of another RL agent exploring simultane-
ously. From these experiments we see that TFT is most successful
out of the selected agents to regulate behavior and encourage RL
agents to be cooperative. Hyper-Q agents do not learn to coop-
erate with each other in this setting. When paired versus other
Hyper-Q learning agents, they continue to learn defecting policies
when matched together and are unable to achieve the same results.
In this regard, it is more difficult to regulate their strategies and
are therefore these agents are less suitable for cooperation games.
These initial experiments provide insights about the emergence of
cooperation (or other behaviors) in the presence of environments
or societies with stable pre-established dynamics, i.e., social norms.
CONCLUSION
In this paper we have presented a novel architecture for agents to
learn optimal strategies for the IPD where elements of cooperation
and competition are prevalent and important. Our LTP agents suc-
cessfully learn to cooperate with one another by demonstrating
changes to behavior via the use of probes and adjusting experiences
to reflect these changes. We also show that these agents are able
to learn optimal strategies when matched against stationary and
quasi-stationary agents that have been used in Axelrod tourna-
ments without adapting the objective function, focusing only on
variations to training. We plan to focus on scaling this research to
investigate more advanced social dilemmas and to incorporate the
useful aspects of agent-tracking techniques to broaden the applica-
bility of our approach. Building on this work, we also plan to study
further how different types of behaviors may emerge in agent so-
cieties and how they might develop according to their surroundings.
[31] Ming Tan. 1993. Multi-agent reinforcement learning: Independent vs. cooperative
[32] Gerald Tesauro. 2004. Extending Q-learning to general adaptive multi-agent
agents. In ICML, Vol. 10. 330 -- 337.
systems.. In NIPS. 871 -- 878.
[33] Eiji Uchibe and Kenji Doya. 2004. Competitive-Cooperative-Concurrent Rein-
forcement Learning with Importance Sampling. In Proceedings of International
Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior: From Animals to Animats. 287 -- 296.
[34] Chao Yu, Minjie Zhang, Fenghui Ren, and Guozhen Tan. 2015. Emotional multi-
agent reinforcement learning in spatial social dilemmas. IEEE Transactions on
Neural Networks and Learning Systems (2015), 3083 -- 3096.
[35] Chonjie Zhang and Victor R Lesser. 2010. Multi-Agent Learning with Policy
Prediction. In AAAI.
REFERENCES
[1] Sander Adam, Lucian Buçoniu, and Robert Babuška. 2012. Experience replay for
real-time reinforcement learning control. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and
Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews) 42, 2 (2012), 201 -- 212.
[2] Robert Axelrod and William Donald Hamilton. 1981. The evolution of cooperation.
Science 221, 4489 (1981), 1390 -- 1396.
[3] Robert Boyd and Peter J Richerson. 2009. Culture and the evolution of human
cooperation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological
Sciences 364, 1533 (2009), 3281 -- 3288.
[4] Lucian Buçoniu, Robert Babuška, and Bart De Schutter. 2010. Multi-agent re-
Innovations in Multi-agent Systems and
inforcement learning: An overview.
Applications 1, 310 (2010), 183 -- 221.
[5] Caroline Claus and Craig Boutilier. 1998. The dynamics of reinforcement learning
in cooperative multiagent systems. AAAI/IAAI (1998), 746 -- 752.
[6] Tim Clutton-Brock. 2004. Cooperation between non-kin in animal societies.
Nature 462, 7269 (2004), 51.
[7] Ido Erev and Alvin E Roth. 1998. Predicting how people play games: Reinforce-
ment learning in experimental games with unique, mixed strategy equilibria.
American Economic Review (1998), 848 -- 881.
[8] Ernst Fehr and Urs Fischbacher. 2004. Social norms and human cooperation.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8, 4 (2004), 185 -- 190.
[9] Jakob Foerster, Richard Y Chen, Maruan Al-Shedivat, Shimon Whiteson, Pieter
Abbeel, and Igor Mordatch. 2018. Learning with Opponent-Learning Awareness.
In AAMAS.
[10] Jakob Foerster, Nantas Nardelli, Gregory Farquhar, Triantafyllos Afouras,
Philip HS Torr, Pushmeet Kohli, and Shimon Whiteson. 2017. Stabilising ex-
perience replay for deep multi-agent reinforcement learning. In ICML.
[11] Junling Hu and Michael P. Wellman. 2003. Nash Q-learning for general-sum
stochastic games. Journal of Machine Learning Research 4, 1 (2003).
[12] Spiros Kapetanakis and Daniel Kudenko. 2002. Reinforcement learning of coor-
dination in cooperative multi-agent systems. In AAAI/IAAI. 326 -- 331.
[13] Vincent A. Knight, Owen Campbell, Marc Harper, and Karol M. Langner et al.
2016. An open reproducible framework for the study of the Iterated Prisoner's
Dilemma. Journal of Open Research Software 4, 1 (2016).
[14] Paul AM Van Lange, Jeff Joireman, Craig D Parks, and Eric Van Dijk. 2013. The
psychology of social dilemmas: A review. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes 120, 2 (2013), 125 -- 141.
[15] Joel Z Leibo, Vinicius Zambaldi, Mac Lanctot, Janusz Marecki, and Thore Graepel.
2017. Multi-agent reinforcement learning in sequential social dilemmas. In
AAMAS. 464 -- 473.
[16] Adam Lerer and Alexander Peysakhovich. 2017. Maintaining cooperation in
complex social dilemmas using deep reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint
arXiv:1707.01068 (2017).
[17] Ryan Lowe, Yi Wu, Aviv Tamar, Jean Harb, Pieter Abbeel, and Igor Mordatch.
2017. Multi-agent actor-critic for mixed cooperative-competitive environments.
In NIPS. 6379 -- 6390.
[18] Michael W Macy and Andreas Flache. 2002. Learning dynamics in social dilemmas.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99, suppl 3 (2002), 7229 -- 7236.
[19] Jason R Marden, Gürdal Arslan, and Jeff S Shamma. 2009. Joint strategy fictitious
play with inertia for potential games. In IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,
Vol. 54. 208 -- 220.
[20] Laëtitia Matignon, Guillaume Laurent, and Nadine le Fort-Piat. 2007. Hysteric
Q-Learning: an algorithm for decentralized reinforcement learning in cooperative
multi-agent teams. In IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and
Systems. 64 -- 69.
[21] Martin Nowak. 2006. Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science 314,
5805 (2006), 1560 -- 1563.
Nature 437, 7063 (2005), 1291.
[22] Martin A Nowak and Karl Sigmund. 2005. Evolution of indirect reciprocity.
[23] Elinor Ostrum, Roy Gardner, and James Walker. 1994. Rules, games, and common-
pool resources. University of Michigan Press.
[24] Julien Perolat, Joel Z Leibo, Vinicius Zambaldi, Charles Beattie, Karl Tuyls, and
Thore Graepel. 2017. A multi-agent reinforcement learning model of common-
pool resource appropriation. In NIPS. 3643 -- 3652.
[25] Anatol Rapoport. 1974. Prisoner's Dilemma -- Recollections and observations.
Game Theory as a Theory of a Conflict Resolution (1974), 17 -- 34.
[26] Tuomas W Sandholm and Robert H Crites. 1996. Multiagent reinforcement
learning in the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma. Biosystems 37, 1-2 (1996).
[27] Tom Schaul, John Quan, Ioannis Antonoglou, and David Silver. 2016. Prioritized
experience replay. In ICLR.
[28] Yoav Shoham, Rob Powers, and Trond Grenager. 2003. Multi-agent reinforcement
learning: a critical survey. Technical report, Stanford University (2003), 1 -- 13.
[29] Jeffrey R Stevens and Marc D Hauser. 2004. Why be nice? Psychological con-
straints on the evolution of cooperations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8, 2 (2004),
60 -- 65.
[30] Richard S Sutton and Andrew G Barto. 1998. Reinforcement Learning: An Intro-
duction. MIT Press.
|
1804.08667 | 1 | 1804 | 2018-04-23T18:55:05 | Influencing Flock Formation in Low-Density Settings | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI"
] | Flocking is a coordinated collective behavior that results from local sensing between individual agents that have a tendency to orient towards each other. Flocking is common among animal groups and might also be useful in robotic swarms. In the interest of learning how to control flocking behavior, recent work in the multiagent systems literature has explored the use of influencing agents for guiding flocking agents to face a target direction. The existing work in this domain has focused on simulation settings of small areas with toroidal shapes. In such settings, agent density is high, so interactions are common, and flock formation occurs easily. In our work, we study new environments with lower agent density, wherein interactions are more rare. We study the efficacy of placement strategies and influencing agent behaviors drawn from the literature, and find that the behaviors that have been shown to work well in high-density conditions tend to be much less effective in lower density environments. The source of this ineffectiveness is that the influencing agents explored in prior work tended to face directions optimized for maximal influence, but which actually separate the influencing agents from the flock. We find that in low-density conditions maintaining a connection to the flock is more important than rushing to orient towards the desired direction. We use these insights to propose new influencing agent behaviors, which we dub "follow-then-influence"; agents act like normal members of the flock to achieve positions that allow for control and then exert their influence. This strategy overcomes the difficulties posed by low density environments. | cs.MA | cs | Influencing Flock Formation in Low-Density Settings
Daniel Y. Fu
Harvard University
Cambridge, MA, USA
[email protected]
Peter M. Krafft
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, MA, USA
[email protected]
ABSTRACT
Flocking is a coordinated collective behavior that results from local
sensing between individual agents that have a tendency to orient
towards each other. Flocking is common among animal groups and
might also be useful in robotic swarms. In the interest of learning
how to control flocking behavior, recent work in the multiagent
systems literature has explored the use of influencing agents for
guiding flocking agents to face a target direction. The existing
work in this domain has focused on simulation settings of small
areas with toroidal shapes. In such settings, agent density is high,
so interactions are common, and flock formation occurs easily. In
our work, we study new environments with lower agent density,
wherein interactions are more rare. We study the efficacy of place-
ment strategies and influencing agent behaviors drawn from the
literature, and find that the behaviors that have been shown to
work well in high-density conditions tend to be much less effective
in lower density environments. The source of this ineffectiveness
is that the influencing agents explored in prior work tended to
face directions optimized for maximal influence, but which actu-
ally separate the influencing agents from the flock. We find that
in low-density conditions maintaining a connection to the flock
is more important than rushing to orient towards the desired di-
rection. We use these insights to propose new influencing agent
behaviors, which we dub "follow-then-influence"; agents act like
normal members of the flock to achieve positions that allow for
control and then exert their influence. This strategy overcomes the
difficulties posed by low density environments.
KEYWORDS
Ad hoc teamwork; flocking; influence maximization; collective be-
havior; algorithms; simulation studies
ACM Reference Format:
Daniel Y. Fu, Emily S. Wang, Peter M. Krafft, and Barbara J. Grosz. 2018.
Influencing Flock Formation in Low-Density Settings. In Proc. of the 17th
International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems
(AAMAS 2018), Stockholm, Sweden, July 10–15, 2018, IFAAMAS, 9 pages.
8
1
0
2
r
p
A
3
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
7
6
6
8
0
.
4
0
8
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Emily S. Wang
Harvard University
Cambridge, MA, USA
[email protected]
Barbara J. Grosz
Harvard University
Cambridge, MA, USA
[email protected]
1 INTRODUCTION
Flocking behavior can be found in a variety of species across na-
ture, from flocks of birds to herds of quadrupeds, schools of fish,
and swarms of insects. Researchers have argued that flocking as
a collective behavior emerges from simple, local rules [22]. It is
therefore natural to imagine placing externally-controlled artificial
agents into flocks to influence them. Yet it remains an open ques-
tion whether such techniques are actually effective. Previous work
[3–9] has explored the use of influencing agents to guide flocking
agents to face a target direction in small and toroidal1 settings, but
in such settings, agent density is high, so interactions are common,
and flock formation is rapid.
In the present work, we focus on lower-density settings where
interactions are rarer and flock formation is more difficult. We study
how influencing agent priorities must change in these settings to be
successful and propose new influencing agent strategies to adapt to
the challenges posed by these settings. Low-density settings are im-
portant to study because they capture dynamics in situations where
flocking may not occur naturally, but where we might want to in-
stigate flocking behavior; imagine a herd of buffalo that is currently
grazing, or a spooked flock of birds where individual agents fail to
coordinate. Our work may also have implications for coordination
in low-density swarms of robotic multi-agent systems, where con-
trol may be imperfect, such as RoboBees [1]. More broadly, flocking
has implications for consensus in animal groups [2, 23, 27] and in
human social networks [13]. Flocking algorithms have also been
used to simulate multivariate timeseries and human movement
[18, 20]. In all these cases, agent density may vary greatly, so it is
important to understand influencing agent dynamics in both low
density and high density settings.
To study flocking in lower density environments, we introduce
two new test settings. In one setting, we keep the simulation space
toroidal but increase the size of the space by several factors, greatly
decreasing agent density. Flock formation is still provably guaran-
teed [12] in this setting, but is much less rapid, so we study whether
influencing agents can speed up flock formation. In the second
setting, similar to existing "sheep herding" tasks [15], we use a
non-toroidal simulation space and start the flocking agents inside
a circle in the center. Since this space is non-toroidal, flock forma-
tion is not guaranteed, so we study whether influencing agents
Proc. of the 17th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems
(AAMAS 2018), M. Dastani, G. Sukthankar, E. André, S. Koenig (eds.), July 10–15, 2018,
Stockholm, Sweden. © 2018 International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and
Multiagent Systems (www.ifaamas.org). All rights reserved.
1In a toroidal environment, agents that exit the simulation space from one side imme-
diately re-appear on the other side.
can instigate flocking behavior by keeping the flocking agents in a
pre-defined area, or by moving them all in a certain direction.
We find that results from the existing literature are not robust in
these environments with low agent density, since agent interactions
are more rare. In particular, with less frequent local interactions
between agents, maintaining a connection to the flock becomes a
key factor in the efficacy of influencing agent behaviors. Simple be-
haviors such as "face the goal direction" are often superior to more
complex behaviors that try to optimize for speed of convergence.
We experiment with a number of new strategies and find that a
multi-stage approach of "follow-then-influence" is most effective
in low-density environments. In this approach, influencing agents
start out by participating as normal members of the group, embed-
ding themselves inside small, naturally-forming flocks. After some
time, the influencing agents start pushing their neighbors to face a
given goal direction.
The main contributions of this work are:
• An investigation of two new low-density flocking settings,
where flock formation is more difficult.
• The introduction of new influencing agent behaviors to adapt
• Analysis of the major differences in influencing agent priori-
to the difficulties presented by these new settings.
ties in low-density vs. high-density settings.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: §2 describes the
flocking model we use and the new test settings. §3 describes the
role of influencing agents and formalizes agent behaviors. §4 de-
scribes our experimental setup and the experiments we run to
evaluate agent behaviors in the new test settings, and §5 presents
the results. Finally, we conclude and discuss future work in §7.
2 PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
2.1 Flocking Model
Like other studies in the literature, we use a simplified version of
Reynold's Boid algorithm [17] to model the flock. In this simplified
model, also proposed independently by Vicsek and collaborators
[25], agents change their alignment at every step to be similar to
the average alignment of other agents in their neighborhood. At
each time step, each agent i moves with constant speed s = 0.7
and has orientation θi(t) with position pi(t) = (xi(t), yi(t)). At
timestep t, agent i updates its position based on its alignment:
xi(t) = xi(t − 1) + s cos(θi(t)) and yi(t) = yi(t − 1) + s sin(θi(t)).
At the same time, the agents change their orientation based on
the alignments of neighboring agents. Let the neighbors Ni(t) be
the set of agents at time t that are within neighborhood radius r
of agent i, not including agent i itself. At timestep t, each agent
updates its orientation to turn towards the average of its neighbors'
orientations:
Ni(t) Σj∈Ni(t)(cid:0)θj(t) − θi(t)(cid:1)
1
θi(t + 1) = θi(t) + 1
2
The factor of 1
2 in the second term reflects a "momentum" factor.
2.2 New Settings
Previous work has studied influencing agents in a small toroidal
150 × 150 grid, with neighborhood radius r = 20 [7, 8]. In this work,
we study low-density dynamics by introducing two new settings
that are more adverse to flock formation; we call these new settings
the large setting and the herd setting. In these settings, we set the
neighborhood radius to r = 10.
In the large setting, non-influencing agents are randomly placed
in a toroidal 1,000 × 1,000 grid with random initial orientations. The
larger grid size results in lower agent density; as a result, agents
start out much farther away from other agents' neighborhoods,
and interactions are much rarer. However, since the simulation
space remains toroidal, convergence to a single direction is still
provably guaranteed, so we are primarily interested in studying the
length of time to convergence in this case [12]. In the herd setting,
non-influencing agents are placed randomly in a circle of radius
500 whose origin lies at the center of a 5,000 × 5,000 non-toroidal
grid. When agents reach the edge of the grid, they move off-world;
in this way, agents can get "lost" from the rest of the flock. As a
result, convergence to a single flock is not guaranteed. Therefore,
we are interested in studying how well influencing agents can keep
the non-influencing agents from getting lost.
3 INFLUENCING AGENTS
We can change flock dynamics by introducing influencing agents
that we control. We refer to non-influencing agents as Reynolds-
Vicsek agents. We do not give the influencing agents any special
control over the Reynolds-Vicsek agents; we simply let them inter-
act with influencing agents using the same local sensing rules as
with any other agent. We also limit the influencing agents to have
the same speed as Reynolds-Vicsek agents, both to help the influenc-
ing agents "blend in" in real applications and to be consistent with
the related prior work. We let the influencing agents have a sensing
radius of twice the normal neighborhood radius. This allows the
influencing agents to see their neighbors' neighbors, allowing for
more complex algorithms. In some cases, the influencing agents
can communicate with each other, but they do not need a global
view.
3.1 Placement
Each influencing agent algorithm we use is decomposed into two
parts: a placement strategy and an agent behavior. Except for slight
modifications to make some of these strategies work in a circular
environment, the placement strategies we use are drawn from the
literature [3, 9]. The placement strategies we use in this work are
shown in Figure 1. We note that the question of how to maneuver
influencing agents to reach the positions given by these placement
strategies is important, but out of scope for this paper. For a dis-
cussion of this question, we refer the reader to Genter and Stone
[3, 8].
We use three placement strategies for the large setting: random,
grid, and k-means. The random placement strategy, as its name
suggests, places influencing agents randomly throughout the grid.
The grid placement strategy computes a square lattice on the grid
and places influencing agents on the lattice points. This strategy
ensures regular placement of influencing agents throughout the
grid. The k-means placement strategy uses a k-means clustering
algorithm on the positions of Reynolds-Vicsek agents in the simula-
tion space. This strategy finds a cluster for each influencing agent
Table 1: Summary of the behaviors we investigate
Setting Goal Type Name
Large
Herd
Traveling
Stationary
Face
Offset Momentum
One-Step Lookahead
Coordinated
Multistep
Face
Offset Momentum
One-Step Lookahead
Coordinated
Circle
Polygon
Multicircle
Description
Always face goal direction
Offset last average velocity
Simulate one step, choose best
Pair off and coordinate
Follow-then-influence
(As above)
(As above)
(As above)
(As above)
Trace circle around agents
Trace polygon around agents
Follow-then-influence
Figure 1: The different placement strategies we explore in
this paper. Red agents are influencing agents, and white
agents are Reynolds-Vicsek agents. Note that k-means is the
only placement strategy where the placement of influencing
agents depends on placement of Reynolds-Vicsek agents.
by setting k equal to the number of influencing agents, and then
places an influencing agent at the center of each cluster.
We develop similar placement strategies for the herd setting,
with some slight modifications. To adapt the strategies to a circular
arrangement of agents, we define each strategy in terms of some
radius r about an origin O, except for the k-means strategy, which
remains the same. We modify the random placement strategy to
randomly distribute agents within the circle of radius r about the
origin O, instead of the entire simulation space. We adapt the grid
placement strategy to a circular setting using a sunflower spiral
[19]. In polar coordinates relative to O, the position of the n-th in-
fluencing agent in a sunflower spiral is given by (c
ϕ2 n), where
ϕ is the golden ratio, and c is a normalizing constant such that the
last influencing agent has distance r from O. We also introduce
a circular placement strategy, inspired from the border strategies
used in prior work [9]. This strategy places agents on the circum-
ference of the circle of radius r around the origin O. We refer to
the circular strategies as circle-random, circle-grid, and circle-border,
respectively.
√
n, 2π
3.2 Behaviors
Once we have placed the influencing agents, we still need to design
how they will work together to influence the flock. We call this
aspect of the design "agent behaviors." In the present work we focus
on decentralized "ad-hoc" algorithms for the influencing agents,
since this class of algorithms has been the focus of the existing
multiagent systems literature on this topic [3, 6, 7]. A summary of
the behaviors we investigate is shown in Table 1.
3.3 Large Setting
For the large setting, we study four behaviors drawn from prior
work [7–9], and one new multistep behavior.
In previous work, Genter and Stone have introduced baselines
face and offset momentum behaviors, as well as more sophisticated
one-step lookahead and coordinated behaviors. Each of these behav-
iors aims to turn Reynolds-Vicsek agents to a pre-set goal angle θ∗
Influencing agents using the face behavior always face the angle θ∗.
With the offset momentum behavior, influencing agents calculate
the average velocity vector of the agents in their neighborhood,
and align to a velocity vector that, when added to the average ve-
locity vector, sums to the vector pointing in direction θ∗. We note
that such a vector always exists; if the average velocity vector is
(x, y), and θ∗ is represented by vector (x′, y′), then the agents align
to vector (x′ − x, y′ − y). A one-step lookahead influencing agent
cycles through different angles and simulates one step of each of its
neighbors if it were to move in that angle. It adopts the angle that
results in the smallest average difference in angle from θ∗ among
all its neighbors. Finally, with the coordinated behavior, each agent
pairs with another and runs a one-step lookahead to minimize the
average difference in angle from θ∗ among both their neighbors.
For a more detailed explanation of these behaviors, especially the
coordinated behavior, we direct the reader to Genter and Stone [7].
The multistep behavior is a novel contribution and adopts what
we call a "follow-then-influence" behavior. In the initial stage, influ-
encing agents simply behave like normal Reynolds-Vicsek agents;
as a result, they easily join flocks and become distributed through-
out the grid. At the same time, each influencing agent estimates how
many Reynolds-Vicsek agents are path-connected to it; here, we de-
fine two agents as being path-connected if there is a path between
them, where edges are created by two agents being in each other's
neighborhood. An accurate calculation of path-connectedness re-
quires a global view from every influencing agent, since paths may
extend arbitrarily far away from the influencing agent. In our algo-
rithm, we only consider Reynolds-Vicsek agents that are within the
sensing radius of the influencing agents. Given their local estimates,
the influencing agents compute a global sum of all their estimates;
once that sum passes over some threshold T , the influencing agents
calculate the average angle θ among all the agents that are locally
connected to influencing agents, and from there adopt the face
behavior with goal direction θ.
We also explore some variations of the multistep behavior by
noticing that once the sum of connected agents passes the thresh-
old T , any of the other behaviors studied can be used to turn the
Reynolds-Vicsek agents towards the final goal direction θ. In other
words, the multistep behavior can be paired with any other behavior.
We study these pairings to see how effective they are.
3.4 Herd Setting
For the herd setting, we divide the behaviors into two categories:
traveling behaviors and stationary behaviors. As a reminder, in
the herd setting, the simulation space is non-toroidal, and all the
Reynolds-Vicsek agents start in a circle in the center. In this set-
ting, flock formation is not guaranteed, so we are interested in
using influencing agents to instigate flocking behavior. There are
two different choices we can make; we can either try to force the
Reynolds-Vicsek agents to stay in the center (stationary behaviors),
or we can let the influencing agents direct the Reynolds-Vicsek
agents away from their initial starting position (traveling behav-
iors). Since all the agents have a constant speed, the former is much
more difficult than the latter, so we must evaluate them separately.
For the traveling behaviors, we can use all the behaviors used in
the large setting, except for the multistep behavior. Since the world
is non-toroidal, it is not guaranteed that the number of connected
agents will ever pass the threshold T ; in this case, the influencing
agents would simply wander forever.
We study three stationary behaviors: circle, polygon, and multi-
circle. The circle and polygon behaviors have each influencing agent
trace a circle or polygon around the origin. For placement strategies
where influencing agents have different distances to the origin, the
influencing agents simply trace circles and polygons of different
radii.
The multicircle behavior is analogous to the multistep behavior
from large. The influencing agents start out by circling around the
origin and wait for Reynolds-Vicsek agents to enter their neigh-
borhood. Once they detect Reynolds-Vicsek agents in their neigh-
borhood, they adopt a "following" behavior where they act like
Reynolds-Vicsek agents to integrate into a small flock. They con-
tinue this following stage until reaching a final radius rF , at which
point they again adopt a circling behavior. In addition to building
influence by following before influencing, this behavior also makes
maintaining influence easier; since the final radius is larger than
the original radius, the final path turns less sharply than if the
influencing agents had stayed at their original radius. To the best of
our knowledge, this is the first presentation of such a multi-stage
behavior to induce circling behavior under the Reynolds-Vicsek
model in the literature.
4 EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
We extended the MASON simulator to run the experiments [14].
We used the default parameters for the Flocking simulation that is
included with the MASON simulator, except without any random-
ness, cohesion, avoidance, or dead agents. We sampled all metrics
every 100 time steps and ran all experiments for 100 trials.
4.1 No Influencing Agents
Previous literature compared new influencing agent behaviors with
baseline influencing agent behaviors, but did not compare to set-
tings with no influencing agents. In order to observe the marginal
contribution of influencing agents in future experiments, we start
our investigation of the large and herd settings by studying flock
formation in those environments without any influencing agents.
We use two metrics to understand flock formation: average number
of flocks formed and average proportion of lone agents at each time
step.
In the large setting, we test on a 1,000 × 1,000 grid and vary the
number N of Reynolds-Vicsek agents from 50 to 300 in increments
of 50. We run these simulations for 6,000 time steps. In the herd
setting, we use a 5,000 × 5,000 grid, position the herd in the center
of the grid with radius 500, and vary N from 50 to 300 in increments
of 50. We run these simulations for 6,000 time steps.
4.2 Influencing Agents
To evaluate the contributions of influencing agents in the large
setting, we measure time to convergence. We define convergence
as having half the Reynolds-Vicsek agents face the same direction,
since full convergence takes much longer.
We test the random, grid, and k-means placement strategies,
along with the full suite of behaviors in the large setting. We place
300 Reynolds-Vicsek agents on the grid and vary the number of
influencing agents from 10 to 100 in intervals of 10.
To evaluate the contributions of influencing agents in the herd
setting, we measure a slightly different metric. Since we have two
qualitatively different categories of behaviors (traveling behaviors
vs. stationary behaviors), the number of agents facing the same
direction is irrelevant. The stationary behaviors rotate the agents
around the origin (in fact, if the Reynolds-Vicsek agents are all
facing the same goal direction, the stationary behavior has failed).
Instead, we measure the number of Reynolds-Vicsek agents that are
connected to influencing agents at 15,000 time steps; at this point
in time, all the agents have travelled out of the grid, and no new
interactions occur. As a result, this quantity measures sustained
influence over the Reynolds-Vicsek agents over time.
In the herd setting, we examine the three circular placement
strategies-circle-border, circle-random, and circle-grid-with two
placement radii, 500 and 750, along with the k-means placement
strategy. We split our examination of behaviors between the travel-
ing behaviors (the same behaviors as used in the large setting, minus
the multistep behavior) and three stationary behaviors-circle, poly-
gon, and multicircle. We use a polygon with ten sides (a decagon)
for the polygon behavior, and we vary the final radius for the mul-
ticircle behavior based on the initial placement radius. When the
placement radius is 500, we set the final radius to 900; when the
placement radius is 750, we set the final radius to 1,100. We place
300 Reynolds-Vicsek agents on the grid and again vary the number
of influencing agents from 10 to 100 in intervals of 10.
5 RESULTS
5.1 No Influencing Agents
First, we briefly characterize the flocking behavior of a group of
Reynolds-Vicsek agents without influencing agents in the large and
herd settings. We measure the number of clusters of agents that
are path-connected and facing the same direction; each of these
clusters forms a small flock. We also measure the number of lone
agents (the number of agents with no neighbors). Figure 2 shows
graphs of these values over time for the two settings.
In the large setting, there are two qualitative stages of conver-
gence: initial flock formation and flock unification. In the first stage,
individual agents collide with each other and form small flocks, so
the number of flocks increases. In the second stage, these small
flocks that formed collide with one another and join together to
form larger flocks, so the number of flocks decreases. In Figure 2,
the first stage is represented by the initial increase in the average
number of flocks, and the second stage is represented by the fol-
lowing decrease in the average number of flocks. This behavior
is reflected in the continually decreasing number of lone agents;
since the number of lone agents continues to decrease over time,
we know that the decrease in the total number of flocks is due
to flock convergence. Note that when there are more total agents,
the absolute number of lone agents decreases faster and reaches
a similar value to the other cases by the end of the simulation. In
other words, the ratio of lone agents to total agents hits a lower
value when there are more agents, but the final absolute number of
total lone agents is still similar to the other cases.
The two stages of convergence also occur somewhat in the herd
setting, but the second stage is cut off by the non-toroidal nature of
the setup. As flocks leave the starting area, the chances of interact-
ing with other flocks vastly decreases, so most of the flocks formed
from the first stage never end up merging with other flocks. This
is reflected in the plateaus of both the total number of flocks and
the total number of lone agents. One small artifact in the metric
is worth mentioning; since the agents start off in a much smaller
area than in the large setting, many of the agents start out with a
non-zero number of neighbors. This causes the initial value of the
average number of flocks to be non-zero, and the average number
of lone agents to be less than the total number of agents.
5.2 Influencing Agents in the Large Setting
Next, we report on the efficacy of the behaviors in the large setting.
The average times for 50% convergence with different placement
strategies and the five behaviors are shown in Figure 3. We show
graphs for 300 Reynolds-Vicsek agents and 50 influencing agents
only, since the trends for the other numbers of influencing agents
were similar (the major difference being that when there are more
influencing agents, convergence happens faster, and when there
are fewer influencing agents, convergence happens slower). Note
that smaller is better in these graphs.
The most immediately striking finding is that, in less dense set-
tings, the one-step lookahead and coordinated behaviors significantly
underperform the "baseline" face and offset momentum behaviors,
irrespective of placement strategy. This is an opposite result from
Genter and Stone's findings on smaller simulation spaces [3, 7],
which found that the one-step lookahead and coordinated behaviors
outperform the face and offset momentum behaviors. This finding
is also rather counterintuitive; why should the "smarter" behaviors
underperform the simpler behaviors?
The answer is that, when agent interactions are rare, it is more
important for influencing agents to maintain influence than it is
for them to quickly change the direction of neighboring Reynolds-
Vicsek agents. The one-step lookahead and coordinated behaviors
underperform here because they tend to send influencing agents
away from neighboring agents. An example of this phenomenon is
shown in Figure 4. The influencing agent, shown in red, adopts an
orientation that turns neighboring Reynolds-Vicsek agents towards
the goal direction. Even though this action does turn Reynolds-
Vicsek agents towards the goal direction, the influencer cannot
successfully turn all the agents in a single step; as a result, the
influencing agent must maintain that orientation for future steps.
However, as long as the neighboring agents are not facing the goal
direction, the influencing agent's chosen orientation takes it away
from the center of the flock of Reynolds-Vicsek agents, causing
the agent to lose influence. Once the influencing agent has lost
influence, the agent has difficulty catching up with the same flock,
since influencing agents travel at the same speed2 as Reynolds-
Vicsek agents. As a result, the influencing agent is not actively
influencing the direction of any Reynolds-Vicsek agents until it
encounters another group of Reynolds-Vicsek agents.
Note that this effect also happens on a smaller simulation space,
but it is not nearly as pronounced; when interactions are very fre-
quent, influencing agents that have lost influence can find another
group of Reynolds-Vicsek agents very quickly. As a result, the gains
from the smarter local algorithm still outweigh the negative effects
from losing influence.
The multistep behavior does not suffer from the same problem;
it can both maintain influence and effectively turn Reynolds-Vicsek
agents and so outperforms all the other behaviors by a couple
hundred steps. When the multistep behavior is paired with the other
behaviors, though, it magnifies their inability to maintain influence.
The bottom graph of Figure 3 shows variations on the multistep
behavior, wherein influencing agents adopt different behaviors
after the number of Reynolds-Vicsek agents under control passes T .
Note that the variations that pair the multistep behavior with the
offset momentum, one-step lookahead, and coordinated behaviors
perform almost an order of magnitude worse than the multistep-face
behavior. What is the root cause of this difference? The multistep
behavior starts out by creating many local flocks, some of which
have influencing agents in them. When interactions are rare, the
offset momentum, one-step lookahead, and coordinated behaviors
have difficulty changing the orientation of existing flocks quickly
before losing influence. As a result, the multistep behavior takes an
order of magnitude longer to reach convergence when paired with
the other behaviors.
Finally, we note that the effect of placement behaviors on con-
vergence time are almost non-existent. When the density is lower,
2There are some approaches which remove this speed constraint from influencing
agents [11]. However, this choice allows for unrealistic behaviors wherein influencing
agents travel to one Reynolds-Vicsek agent at a time and change the direction of the
individual Reynolds-Vicsek agent before moving on to the next one. This behavior
results in Reynolds-Vicsek agents that are all facing the same direction, but that are
often not path-connected.
Figure 2: Average flock counts and lone agent counts over time for the large and herd settings with no influencing agents,
varying the number of Reynolds-Vicsek agents.
Figure 3: Average times to 50% convergence for 300 Reynolds-Vicsek agents with 50 influencing agents in the large setting
under different placement strategies and behaviors. Top: The five main behaviors for the large setting. Bottom: Variations on
the multistep behavior, in log scale. Smaller is better. Error bars show standard error of the mean.
there is a much smaller chance that any influencing agent will
start out with more than one Reynolds-Vicsek agent in its neigh-
borhood, even with the k-means placement behavior. As a result,
even the best clustering approach is almost the same as starting
out randomly or in a grid.
5.3 Influencing Agents in the Herd Setting
Next, we evaluate results for our experiments in the herd setting. In
many cases, measuring the number of agents facing the same direc-
tion is not interesting here, since it is impossible to keep Reynolds-
Vicsek agents in one place if they are facing the same direction.
Instead, we exclusively measure the number of Reynolds-Vicsek
agents that are path-connected to influencing agents and facing
the same direction as the influencing agent. This is a measure of
"control" of the Reynolds-Vicsek agents. The average number of
agents in such local flocks after 15,000 time steps is given in Figure
5 for both the traveling and stationary behaviors. We find that the
traveling behaviors vastly outperform any of the stationary behav-
iors. However, there may be environments in reality for which the
traveling behaviors are not applicable (suppose it is strictly neces-
sary to keep a flock in one place, for instance). Thus, we analyze
the traveling behaviors separately from the stationary behaviors.
5.3.1 Traveling. Again, we find that the face behavior tends
to outperform the offset momentum, one-step lookahead, and coor-
dinated behaviors; we attribute this to the tendency of the offset
momentum, one-step lookahead, and coordinated behaviors to lose
Figure 4: An example of an influencing agent losing influ-
ence under the one-step lookahead behavior. The influencing
agent is shown in red, and the Reynolds-Vicsek agents are
shown in white. In A, the influencing agent first encounters
the flock of Reynolds-Vicsek agents. In B-D, the influenc-
ing agent takes on directions that are oriented away from
the goal direction to try to rapidly influence the Reynolds-
Vicsek agents. This changes the orientation of the Reynolds-
Vicsek agents, but the influencing agent has started to travel
away from the flock by D.
influence over time. We note that the effect is not as pronounced
here as in the large experiments, since each influencing agent has
to control fewer agents.
In contrast to the large experiments, we find that here the place-
ment strategy has a major impact on the efficacy of the traveling
behaviors. Again, this has to do with density of influencing agents.
For example, notice that Border 750 (place the influencing agents
in a circle about the origin with radius 750) vastly underperforms
the other placement strategies. The larger radius results in a lower
density of influencing agents, so a greater number of Reynolds-
Vicsek agents slip through the "holes." Furthermore, by the time
the Reynolds-Vicsek agents reach the border, they have already
formed flocks, and it is more difficult for the influencing agents to
point them in the right direction. This effect is less pronounced
for Grid 750 and almost non-existant for Random 750, since these
strategies place influencing agents within the circle, and not simply
along its circumference. As a result, the Reynolds-Vicsek agents still
encounter influencing agents before reaching the circumference of
the circle.
Finally, we note that k-means outperforms all other placement
strategies by a few agents. Again, the main driving factor behind
this is agent density. When an influencing agent starts out in a
clustered area, it has at least one other Reynolds-Vicsek agent in its
neighborhood. As a result, its effective area of influence is slightly
larger than with the other placement strategies. This helps it pick
up more Reynolds-Vicsek agents.
5.3.2
Stationary. Among the stationary behaviors, the multi-
circle behavior achieves the best outcomes, but its performance
depends on its paired placement strategy. The multicircle behavior
slightly underperforms the circle behavior when paired with the
Border placement strategies; slightly overperforms when paired
with the k-means, Random, and Grid 500 placement strategies; and
performs the same as circle in the Grid 750 strategy. What drives
these trends? Once the multicircle behavior reaches the final stage,
it is tracing a larger circle than the circle behavior traces on its
own. As a result, it is easier to maintain influence and turn the
Reynolds-Vicsek agents over time in the final stage. Before that,
however, the influencing agents are in a following stage. When the
influencing agents start out inside the circle, they have more time
to infiltrate small flocks of Reynolds-Vicsek agents and induce a
circling behavior in the final stage.
Finally, we note that Border 750 is the worst placement strategy,
similar to when it is used in the traveling behaviors. Also, the
polygon behavior tends to underperform or match the performance
of circle, which tells us that adopting occasional sharper turns can
sometimes be detrimental.
6 RELATED WORK
Our work builds upon a series of papers by Genter and Stone ex-
amining ways to use external agents to influence flocking [4–9].
This prior work studied a number of placement strategies and influ-
encing agent behaviors, including questions of how best to join or
leave a flock in real scenarios. Genter also presented results from
simulations with different implementations of Reynold's flocking
model, as well as physical experiments with these algorithms in
a small RoboCup setting [3]. This prior work almost exclusively
studied small environments, where density of agents is high, and
quick flock formation was virtually guaranteed. We study two new
low-density environments and introduce behaviors to adapt to the
difficulties presented by these new environments.
Jadbadbaie et al. [12] studied Reynolds-Vicsek agents from an
analytical perspective. Two strong results from this work were
that a group of Reynolds-Vicsek agents in a toroidal setting will
eventually converge regardless of initial conditions, and that in the
presence of a single agent with fixed orientation (analogous to a
single influencing agent), all the agents will converge to that fixed
agent's orientation. This theory provides important context for
Genter and Stone's work and the work that we present here: when
the setting is toroidal, convergence is guaranteed, so the interesting
question is how fast we can reach convergence.
Couzin et al. [2] studied the design of influencing agents for
flocking as well, albeit with a slightly different flocking model.
They proposed an influencing behavior wherein influencing agents
adopt orientations "in between" their desired goal orientation and
the orientations of their neighbors, in order to still influence their
neighbors while not adopting orientations so extreme that they
have no chance of being effective in the long term. This is similar
in spirit to the motivation behind the multistep algorithm. We
adapted Couzin's algorithm to the new settings, but do not present
the results in this text for space reasons. The adaptation did not
perform as well as the new multistep behavior or the face behavior,
but it did outperform the one-step lookahead behavior.
Han et al. [11] published a series of papers showing how to align
a group of agents in the same direction. This work assumed a single
influencing agent with infinite speed, and used this property to
construct a behavior that has the influencing agent fly around and
correct the orientation of agents one at a time. The result is that
the Reynolds-Vicsek agents all eventually converge to the target
direction, but are not connected to each other. In our work, we limit
the speed of influencing agents to be the same as the Reynolds-
Vicsek agents to prevent the use of behaviors like this, in hopes that
our results will be more relevant to real applications; we suspect
that influencing agents that act similarly to real agents will be more
successful in real applications.
Figure 5: Average number of agents under influencing agent control after 15,000 steps with 300 Reynolds-Vicsek agents and
50 influencing agents in the herd setting under various placement strategies and influencing agent behaviors. The traveling
behaviors attempt to control the direction of the Reynolds-Vicsek agents, while the stationary behaviors keep the influencing
agents near the goal area using circling techniques. Larger is better. Error bars represent standard error of the mean.
Su et al. [21] studied the question of flock formation and conver-
gence, but in the context of the Olfati-Saber flocking model [16].
This model assumes the existence of a single virtual leader that
non-influencing agents know about. The virtual leader plays the
role of an influencer, but has special control over the other agents
based on its status. In our work, we assume that influencing agents
do not have any special interaction rules with Reynolds-Vicsek
agents.
Researchers of collective animal behavior have begun using
replica conspecifics in order to influence animal groups across
a range of species, from fish to ducks to cockroaches [10, 24, 26].
Halloy et. al. used robotic influencing agents to control groups of
cockroaches; they exploited the cockroaches' inability to differ-
entiate between real cockroaches and robotic influencing agents.
Vaugahn et. al. used robotic influencing agents to herd a flock of
ducks (on the ground) to a goal position in a small caged area; their
approach used robot agents to "push" the ducks from a distance,
like a dog herding sheep.
7 CONCLUSION
We have studied the problem of controlling flocks using influencing
agents under two new, more adversarial environments with lower
agent density, and have introduced novel control behaviors for these
settings. In addition to these new algorithms, we have found that
in low-density environments it is more important for influencing
agents to maintain influence than it is for them to rapidly turn
their neighbors towards the correct destination. As a result, earlier
results from smaller simulation environments often do not hold
in the environments we introduce. We found that a multi-stage
approach that first embeds influencing agents in small flocks before
attempting to steer these flocks to the goal direction can be effective
in addressing some of these shortcomings.
Although we did not present results from using the multi-stage
approach in the smaller simulation environments from previous
work, preliminary experiments suggest that, in the smaller envi-
ronments, it is not as effective as algorithms that optimize for rapid
convergence. Future work could try to find an algorithm that works
well in all settings.
It could also explore how to aggregate small flocks into one
larger flock. Many behaviors result in multiple small flocks clustered
around influencing agents that have converged in the sense that
they are all facing the same direction, but remain disconnected
from each other. A successful algorithm would have to change the
direction of the flock without losing individual Reynolds-Vicsek
agents on the edges of the flock.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The research reported in this paper evolved from a Harvard course
project done by the first two authors and taught by the last two.
We are grateful to Katie Genter for her advice and willingness to
share her flocking code.
REFERENCES
[1] Yufeng Chen, Hongqiang Wang, E. Farrell Helbling, Noah T. Jafferis, Raphael
Zufferey, Aaron Ong, Kevin Ma, Nicholas Gravish, Pakpong Chirarattananon,
Mirko Kovac, and Robert J. Wood. 2017. A biologically inspired, flapping-wing,
hybrid aerial-aquatic microrobot. Science Robotics 2, 11 (2017).
[2] Iain D Couzin, Jens Krause, Nigel R Franks, and Simon A Levin. 2005. Effective
leadership and decision-making in animal groups on the move. Nature 433 (Feb
2005).
[3] Katie Genter. 2017. Fly with Me: Algorithms and Methods for Influencing a Flock.
Ph.D. Dissertation. The University of Texas at Austin.
2010).
[4] Katie Genter, Noa Agmon, and Peter Stone. 2013. Ad Hoc Teamwork for Leading
a Flock. In Proc. of the 12th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and
Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2013).
[5] Katie Genter, Noa Agmon, and Peter Stone. 2013. Improving Efficiency of Lead-
ing a Flock in Ad Hoc Teamwork Settings. In AAMAS Autonomous Robots and
Multirobot Systems (ARMS) Workshop.
[6] Katie Genter and Peter Stone. 2014. Influencing a Flock via Ad Hoc Teamwork.
In Proc. of the 9th International Conference on Swarm Intelligence (ANTS 2014).
[7] Katie Genter and Peter Stone. 2016. Ad Hoc Teamwork Behaviors for Influencing
a Flock. Acta Polytechnica 56, 1 (2016). https://doi.org/10.14311/APP.2016.56.0018
[8] Katie Genter and Peter Stone. 2016. Adding Influencing Agents to a Flock. In
Proc. of the 15th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent
Systems (AAMAS-16).
[9] Katie Genter, Shun Zhang, and Peter Stone. 2015. Determining Placements of
Influencing Agents in a Flock. In Proc. of the 14th International Conference on
Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2015).
[10] José Halloy, Grégory Sempo, Gilles Caprari, Colette Rivault, Masoud Asadpour,
Fabien Tâche, Imen Saïd, Virginie Durier, Stephane Canonge, J. M. Amé, Claire
Detrain, Nikolaus Correll, A. Martinoli, Francesco Mondada, Roland Siegwart,
and Jean-Louis Deneubourg. 2007. Social Integration of Robots into Groups
of Cockroaches to Control Self-Organized Choices. Science 318, 5853 (2007),
1155–1158.
[11] Jing Han, Ming Li, and Lei Guo. 2010. Soft Control on Collective Behavior of a
Group of Autonomous Agents By a Shill Agent. 19 (07 2010).
[12] Ali Jadbabaie, Jie Lin, and A. Stephen Morse. 2003. Coordination of groups of
mobile autonomous agents using nearest neighbor rules. IEEE Trans. Automat.
Control 48, 6 (June 2003), 988–1001.
[13] Haili Liang, Yiping Yang, and Xiaofan Wang. 2013. Opinion dynamics in networks
with heterogeneous confidence and influence. Physica A 392 (2013).
[14] Sean Luke, Claudio Cioffi-Revilla, Liviu Panait, Keith Sullivan, and Gabriel Balan.
2005. MASON: A Multi-Agent Simulation Environment. In Simulation: Transac-
tions of the society for Modeling and Simulation International.
[15] Patrick Nalepka, Rachel W. Kallen, Anthony Chemero, Elliot Saltzman, and
Michael J. Richardson. 2017. Herd Those Sheep: Emergent Multiagent Coor-
dination and Behavioral-Mode Switching. Psychological science 28, 5 (2017),
630–650.
[16] Reza Olfati-Saber. 2006. Flocking for multi-agent dynamic systems: algorithms
and theory. IEEE Trans. Automat. Control 51, 3 (March 2006), 401–420.
[17] Craig W. Reynolds. 1987. Flocks, Herds and Schools: A Distributed Behavioral
Model. In Proc. of the 14th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive
Techniques (SIGGRAPH '87).
[18] Lee W. Schruben and Dashi I. Singham. 2010. Simulating Multivariate Time
Series Using Flocking. In Proc. of the 2010 Winter Simulation Conference.
[19] Henry Segerman. 2010. The Sunflower Spiral and the Fibonacci Metric. (December
[20] Dashi Singham, Meredith Therkildsen, and Lee Schruben. 2011. Applications of
Flocking Algorithms to Input Modeling for Agent Movement. In Proc. of the 2011
Winter Simulation Conference.
[21] Housheng Su, Xiaofan Wang, and Zongli Lin. 2009. Flocking of Multi-Agents
With a Virtual Leader. IEEE Trans. Automat. Control 54, 2 (Feb 2009), 293–307.
[22] David J.T. Sumpter. 2010. Collective animal behavior. Princeton University Press.
[23] David J.T. Sumpter, Jens Krause, Richard James, Iain D. Couzin, and Ashley J.W.
Ward. 2008. Consensus Decision Making by Fish. Current Biology 18 (2008).
[24] Richard Vaughan, Neil Sumpter, Andy Frost, and Stephen Cameron. 1998. Robot
Sheepdog Project achieves automatic flock control. In From Animals to Animats 5:
Proc. of the Fifth International Conference on the Simulation of Adaptive Behaviour.
MIT Press, 489–493.
[25] Tamás Vicsek, András Czirók, Eshel Ben-Jacob, Inon Cohen, and Ofer Shochet.
1995. Novel Type of Phase Transition in a System of Self-Driven Particles. Phys.
Rev. Lett. 75 (Aug 1995), 1226–1229. Issue 6.
[26] Ashley J.W. Ward, David J.T. Sumpter, Iain D. Couzin, Paul J.B. Hart, and Jens
Krause. 2008. Quorum decision-making facilitates information transfer in fish
shoals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105 (2008).
[27] Wen Yang, Lang Cao, Xiaofan Wang, and Xiang Li. 2006. Consensus in a hetero-
geneous influence network. Physical Review E 74 (2006).
|
1809.00564 | 1 | 1809 | 2018-09-03T11:51:13 | ViewpointS: towards a Collective Brain | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI",
"cs.SI",
"q-bio.QM"
] | Tracing knowledge acquisition and linking learning events to interaction between peers is a major challenge of our times. We have conceived, designed and evaluated a new paradigm for constructing and using collective knowledge by Web interactions that we called ViewpointS. By exploiting the similarity with Edelman's Theory of Neuronal Group Selection (TNGS), we conjecture that it may be metaphorically considered a Collective Brain, especially effective in the case of trans-disciplinary representations. Far from being without doubts, in the paper we present the reasons (and the limits) of our proposal that aims to become a useful integrating tool for future quantitative explorations of individual as well as collective learning at different degrees of granu-larity. We are therefore challenging each of the current approaches: the logical one in the semantic Web, the statistical one in mining and deep learning, the social one in recommender systems based on authority and trust; not in each of their own preferred field of operation, rather in their integration weaknesses far from the holistic and dynamic behavior of the human brain. | cs.MA | cs | ViewpointS: towards a Collective Brain
Philippe Lemoisson1, 2 and Stefano A. Cerri3
1 CIRAD, UMR TETIS, F-34398 Montpellier, France
2 TETIS, Univ Montpellier, AgroParisTech, CIRAD, CNRS, IRSTEA, Montpellier, France
3 LIRMM, Univ Montpellier, CNRS, 161 Rue Ada, 34095 Montpellier, France
[email protected];[email protected]
Abstract. Tracing knowledge acquisition and linking learning events to interac-
tion between peers is a major challenge of our times. We have conceived, de-
signed and evaluated a new paradigm for constructing and using collective
knowledge by Web interactions that we called ViewpointS. By exploiting the
similarity with Edelman's Theory of Neuronal Group Selection (TNGS), we
conjecture that it may be metaphorically considered a Collective Brain, espe-
cially effective in the case of trans-disciplinary representations. Far from being
without doubts, in the paper we present the reasons (and the limits) of our pro-
posal that aims to become a useful integrating tool for future quantitative explo-
rations of individual as well as collective learning at different degrees of granu-
larity. We are therefore challenging each of the current approaches: the logical
one in the semantic Web, the statistical one in mining and deep learning, the so-
cial one in recommender systems based on authority and trust; not in each of
their own preferred field of operation, rather in their integration weaknesses far
from the holistic and dynamic behavior of the human brain.
Keywords: collective brain, collective intelligence, knowledge graph, human
learning, knowledge acquisition, semantic web, social web.
1
Introduction
On one side, today's research on the human brain allows us to visualize and trace the
activity along the beams connecting the neural maps. When publishing the Theory of
Neuronal Group Selection (TNGS) more than thirty years ago, G. M. Edelman em-
phasized the observation/action loop and the social interactions loop. Both loops con-
tinuously evolve the beams connecting the neural maps under the supervision of our
homeostatic internal systems also called system of values, and generate learning. On
the other side, we live a digital revolution where the Web plays an increasing role in
the collective construction of knowledge; this happens through the semantic Web and
its ontologies, via the indexing and mining techniques of the search engines and via
the social Web and its recommender systems based on authority and trust.
The goal of our approach is twofold: i) to exploit the metaphor of the brain for im-
proving the collective construction of knowledge and ii) to better exploit our digital
traces in order to refine the understanding of our learning processes. We have de-
2
signed and prototyped a Knowledge Graph where resources (human or artificial
agents, documents and descriptors) are dynamically interlinked by beams of digital
connections called viewpoints (human viewpoints or artificial viewpoints issued from
algorithms). We-as-agents endlessly exploit and update this graph, so that by similari-
ty with the TNGS, we conjecture that it may be metaphorically considered a Collec-
tive Brain evolving under the supervision of all our individual systems of values.
In section 2, we present a schematic view of the biological bases of cognition,
starting by the "three worlds" of K. Popper (1978) where the interaction between
minds can be studied. We then re-visit the TNGS and the role played by our system of
values (internal drives, instinct, intentionality…). We finally illustrate "learning
through interaction" as exposed by D. Laurillard and J. Piaget.
In section 3, we explore the collective construction of knowledge in the Web para-
digm, assuming that a large proportion of the traces we produce and consume today
are digital ones. We distinguish three paradigms, respectively governed by logics, by
statistics and by authority and trust. Thus our challenge is to integrate these paradigms
and describe how individual systems of values participate to learning events.
Section 4 is dedicated to the ViewpointS approach, as a candidate for answering
the challenge. The metaphor of "neural maps interconnected by beams of neurons"
led to the design of a graph of "knowledge resources interconnected by beams of
viewpoints", where each agent can exploit the traces of others and react to them by
adding new traces. As a result, the combination of all individual "system of values"
regulates the evolution of knowledge. We conjecture that it may be metaphorically
considered a Collective Brain.
We conclude by recapitulating our proposal which has the limits inherent to any in-
tegrator: we are not yet sure if the collective knowledge emerging from our proposed
Collective Brain will perform competitively with the existing separate paradigms
respectively governed by logics, by statistics and by authority and trust. Nevertheless,
if our proposal does not ensure scientific discovery about learning, we hope it repre-
sents a progress toward its comprehension.
2
A Schematic View of the Biological Bases of Cognition
In this section, we start by adopting a well-known philosophical position where the
questions of cognition and interaction can be addressed. Then we draft a schematic
view of the lessons learned from Edelman about the biological mechanisms support-
ing cognition, and finally we use this representation within D. Laurillard's conversa-
tional learning scenario in order to test it against the question of knowledge acquisi-
tion through interaction.
2.1 The Three Worlds
To start with our analysis about minds in interaction, we need some philosophical
default position; "the three worlds" of K. Popper [1] provides a relevant framework.
Such a framework had already found an expression in the semantic triangle of Odgen
and Richards [2]. The strong interconnection of the three worlds is developed in [3]
3
where J. Searle explains how the interpretation of repeated collective experiences by
individuals bears the emergence of an institutional reality founded on the use of lan-
guage. In the following, we shall refer to the three worlds as W1, W2 and W3, with the
following definitions:
W1 is the bio-physical world where objects and events exist independently from us,
from our perceptions, our thoughts and our languages. Causal relations, insofar we are
not directly implied by some event, are also considered independent from us.
W2 is the internal world of subjectivity, where the perception of objects and events
of W1 leave traces in memory that are combined in order to participate to the con-
struction of our own knowledge, our consciousness about the world, where intentions
appear and the emotions that will be the trigger for our actions.
W3 is the world of the cultures and languages, made of interpretable traces: signs,
symbols, rules of behavior and rules for representing objects and events of W1. W3 is
the support of communication among individuals. Within W3, we find all specialized
languages of the scientific disciplines, as well as the language of emotions and feel-
ings, for instance represented by smileys. Digital images such as satellite images or
scanned documents are also part of W3.
W1 is where it happens, W3 is where we can communicate about what happens, and
W2 is where the links and the learning events are. For this reason, we are going to pay
special attention to the internal world W2.
2.2 The Internal World of the Mind
This section pays a heavy tribute to the work of G. M. Edelman [4], [5], founder of
the Theory of Neuronal Group Selection (TNGS), and one the firsts to emphasize that
the brain is not a computer, but a highly dynamic, distributed and complex system,
maybe the most complex "object" of the known universe. There is neither correlation
between our personality and the shape of our skull (despite the teachings of phrenolo-
gy), nor localized coding of information; no autopsy will ever reveal any single chunk
of knowledge available in the brain.
According to the TNGS, every brain is twice unique: first because its cellular or-
ganization results from the laws of morphogenesis. Most important, however, is
Edelman's second reason for the brain uniqueness: the brain is a set of "neural maps"
continuously selected according to the individual's experiences. These cards, or adap-
tive functional units, are bi-directionally linked one-another by a fundamental inte-
grating mechanism: the "re-entry". This crucial hypothesis allows a functional inte-
gration requiring neither any "super-card" nor any "supervising program": the neural
maps are like "musicians of an orchestra linked one-another by wires in the absence
of a unique conductor". The bi-directional re-entry links are the result of a selective
synaptic reinforcement among groups of neurons; similarly: the cards result from a
synaptic reinforcement internal to each group of neurons composing them. These
reinforcements are triggered and managed by the homeostatic internal systems, also
called "system of values" of each individual.
Fig. 1 (/left part of the figure) shows an observation-action loop that highlights
several brain cards re-entering when grasping an apple. This type of loops originates
4
the perceptual categorization event, common to all highly evolved organisms, deci-
sive for adapting the behavior to the likelihood of benefits or dangers.
In humans as well as in some higher mammals, there is a second level of categori-
zation, supported by cards situated in the temporal, frontal and parietal areas. Beyond
the immediate cartography of the world, humans may shape some durable concepts
(conceptual categorization) that consider the past and/or the future.
Finally, the human brain parts specialized in language (the Wernicke and Broca ar-
eas) play a major role in the emergence of a consciousness of a higher level, enabling
the human subject to "map" his-her own experience and study him-herself.
The basic principles of the TNGS (selective reinforcement and re-entry according
to the advantages offered to the subject) potentially explain any learning process,
from simple memorization to skill acquisition and knowledge acquisition. All these
processes are regulated by our system of values.
Fig. 1. The brain according to the TNGS of G.M. Edelman: a complex network of re-entrant
maps in interaction loops with the world
A kernel element of the TNGS is quite relevant for us: knowledge is supported by
a "physiological complex and adaptive network of neural maps"; the metaphor of
"knowledge graph" is therefore justified. It induces to search for a topology allowing
to define distances and proximity, like it was conjectured by the "zone of proximal
development" of Vygotsky [6], [7]; such a topology will be presented in chapter 4.
2.3 Minds in Social Interaction
According to the two loops at the right of Fig. 1, we always learn through interaction:
observation/action versus social interaction. These two loops clearly appear in D.
Laurillard's work [8] when analyzing the acquisition of knowledge in higher educa-
tion. In her scenario, a student and his teacher simultaneously experiment and discuss.
SensorysamplingMovementsSamplingupdatedbymovementsUpdatedoutputAn observation / action loopA schematicviewof the brainLocal primaryreentrantmapsCerebellumParietaland frontal areasReentrantmapsof the secondarycortexMotorCortexValue systemHippocampusSensorylayersMuscles and jointsSystemof valuesPrimaryconsciousnessLanguagemapsSystemof valuesSocialinteractionsObservation/ action 5
In [9] we extended this scenario to interactions within a group of peers co-
constructing a representation of a shared territory.
In this multi-peers scenario, interactions occur at two levels: i) peers act in the
shared territory (in W1/ objects and events) and ii) peers exchange personal views of
the shared territory (in W3/ language). Doing so, the assimilation / adaptation process-
es described by J. Piaget in [10] are activated (in W2/ mind), which can be interpreted
in terms of series of re-entry loops according to the TNGS. In [11] we proposed a
roadmap for understanding and forecasting cognitive and emotional events linked to
serendipitous learning.
As a consequence of all above processes, inner views tend to synchronize and yield
a shared representation. We propose that what happens on the Web is a generalization
of this prototypical scenario, and can be called collective knowledge acquisition. Our
approach aims at tracing it; this will be exemplified in chapter 4.
3
Humans in Web Interaction
The change in our lives that we have been experiencing since when Internet has
gained a significant place, often called the digital revolution, has been theoretically
addressed by several authors, among which S. Vial [12] and D. Cardon [13] who re-
spectively provide a philosophical and a sociological approach. This revolution has
suggested a significant hope: Internet as a space of shared knowledge able to bring in
new levels of understanding in the sense given by Gruber in [14]. Internet is a support
for a huge set of digital traces interpretable by humans but also by machines; if we
refer to the conceptual framework above, it is part of W3/language.
This space is far from being homogeneous however, and the approaches to co-
build shared knowledge are multiples; hereafter, we consider three paradigms.
The first paradigm is governed by the logical evidence: we usually call semantic
Web this logically structured part of Internet where humans interact with databases
encoding the knowledge of experts according to consensual conceptual schemes such
as ontologies. This allows logical responses (provided by reliable algorithms) to cor-
rectly formulated questions (and only to questions with such a property). But there are
problems and limits. Firstly, ontologies only represent a fragment of the reality, and
the consensus they reflect is necessarily local and temporary. Secondly, formal query
languages assume a closed world -- what is rarely the case. Thirdly, formal query
languages require a learning effort in order to be used properly. Finally, interconnect-
ing ontologies and supporting their evolution with time in a rapidly changing world
are very heavy and costly processes. Various approaches based on automatic align-
ment [15] or machine learning [16] exist, but the task is endless since each ontology's
evolution is domain-dependent.
The second paradigm is governed by the statistical evidence. The issue is to exploit
techniques of data mining, i.e.: scan without too many assumptions a corpus, also
called data set, of tweets, sequences, clicks, documents, … and detect regularities,
frequencies, co-occurrences of items or terms. In other words: to feed suitable algo-
rithms with the big data in order to reveal regularities. By reducing the complexity of
6
the digital world W3, the mining algorithms make it readable for humans. However,
the simplicity of these descriptions must pay a price to the expressiveness or even to
the effectiveness: we are just shown the surface and not the depth, the "meaning".
Today, a simple question with three independent keywords on Google may give very
disappointing results. What is even worse, inferential statistics -- the only one allow-
ing us to take significant decisions - require selecting the data according to a prede-
fined goal, and this remains hidden from the user. Interpreting the results in order to
build chunks of science is therefore heavily biased.
The third paradigm is based on authority and trust, which rely on emotions and
feelings. The algorithms of the social Web provide information search and recom-
mendations by graph analysis of the various personal, subjective and spontaneous
light traces such as 'likes', 'bookmarks' and 'tweets'. They clearly operate in an open
world; the limits are firstly the impossibility to logically assess the quality of respons-
es and secondly the absence of guarantee concerning their stability along time.
Coming back to the dream of Gruber and many others to fuse the three paradigms,
a first attempt is the semantic Web project [17] which somehow aims at subsuming
them within the logical one; after a first wave of enthusiasm it seems that the limits
listed above resist, even if they are daily pushed forward. The ViewpointS approach
discussed in chapter 4 aims to offer a potential step forward in the direction of sub-
suming the three paradigms within the third one i.e., building up upon trust towards
'peers', would they be humans, databases or mining algorithms.
4
The ViewpointS Approach Discussed and Exemplified
This section first briefly recalls the ViewpointS framework and formalism for build-
ing collective knowledge in the metaphor of the brain - a detailed description can be
found in [18], [19] - and then illustrates them through an imaginary case.
In the ViewpointS approach, the "neural maps interconnected by beams of neu-
rons" are transposed into a graph of "knowledge resources (agents, documents, topics)
interconnected by beams of viewpoints". The "systems of values" of the agents influ-
ence not only the viewpoints they emit, but also the way they interpret the graph.
We call knowledge resources all the resources contributing to knowledge: agents,
documents and topics. We call viewpoints the links between knowledge resources.
Each viewpoint is a subjective connection established by an agent (Human or Artifi-
cial) between two knowledge resources; the viewpoint (a1, {r2, r3},, τ) stands for: the
agent a1 believes at time τ that r2 and r3 are related according to the emotion carried by
. We call Knowledge Graph the bipartite graph consisting of knowledge resources
and viewpoints. Given two knowledge resources, the aggregation of the beam of all
connections (viewpoints) linking them can be quantified and interpreted as a proximi-
ty. We call perspective the set of rules implementing this quantification by evaluating
each viewpoint and then aggregating all these evaluations into a single value. The
perspective is tuned by the "consumer" of the information, not by third a part "pro-
ducer" such as Google or Amazon algorithms; each time an agent wishes to exploit
7
the knowledge of the community, he does so through his own subjective perspective
which acts as an interpreter.
Tuning a perspective may for instance consist in giving priority to trustworthy
agents, or to the most recent viewpoints, or to the viewpoints issued from the logical
paradigm. This clear separation between the storing of the traces (the viewpoints) and
their subjective interpretation (through a perspective) protects the human agents in-
volved in sharing knowledge against the intrusion of third-part algorithms reifying
external system of values, such as those aiming at invading our psyche, influencing
our actions [20], or even computing bankable profiles exploitable by brands or opin-
ion-makers [21]. Adopting a perspective yields a tailored knowledge map where dis-
tances can be computed between knowledge resources, i.e. where the semantics
emerge both from the topology of the knowledge graph and from our own system of
values expressed by the tuned perspective.
The shared semantics emerge from the dynamics of the observation/action loops.
Agents browse the shared knowledge through the perspectives they adopt (observa-
tion), and reversely update the graph by adding new viewpoints expressing their feed-
back (action). Along these exploitation/feedback cycles, shared knowledge is contin-
uously elicited against the systems of values of the agents in a selection process.
To illustrate this, we develop below an imaginary case where learners have to se-
lect resources inside an Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS) to which a Knowledge
Graph is associated. They wish to learn about the topic 'apple' and from step1 to
step4 the learners adopt a 'neutral' perspective which puts in balance all types of
viewpoints (issued from the logical or mining paradigms, or from the emotions and
feelings of the learners). However at step5 where B chooses a perspective discarding
his own viewpoints in order to discover new sources of knowledge.
Step1 illustrates the initial state of the knowledge. A, B and C are co-learners in the
ITS (linked as such within the logical paradigm); the big arrows within the icons rep-
resent their respective systems of values, which play a key role both in the choice of
perspectives and in the emission of viewpoints. D1, D2 and D3 are documents that a
mining algorithm has indexed by the topic/tag 'apple'.
Step2: A is a calm person who has time; she browses through D1, D2 and D3 and
has a positive feeling about D1 and D2 (she likes both and finds them relevant with
respect to 'apple'); the capture of her feedbacks results in linking D1 and D2 to her and
reinforcing the links between the documents and the topic 'apple'. B is always in a
hurry; he asks the Knowledge Graph the question "which is the shortest path between
me and the topic 'apple'?" According to the paths in the diagram, he gets a double
answer: B-A-D1-'apple'and B-A-D2-'apple'.
Step3: B's feedback to D1 is positive; this results in reinforcing the path B-A-D1-
'apple'. If he would re-ask his question, he would now get only D1.
Step4: C likes to explore; rather than taking a short path she browses through D1,
D2 and D3 and has a positive emotion about D3 (she likes it and finds it relevant with
respect to 'apple'); this results in linking D3 to her and reinforcing the linking between
D3 and the topic 'apple'. At this stage, if A, B and C would ask for the shortest path to
'apple', they would respectively get D1, D1 and D3.
8
Step5: B is not fully satisfied by D1. He asks for a novel short path between him
and the topic 'apple' using a new perspective: he discards the viewpoints expressing
his own feelings in order to discover new sources of knowledge. According to this
new perspective, B-A-D1-'apple', B-A-D2-'apple'and B-C-D3-'apple' have the same
length i.e., D1, D2 and D3 are equidistant from him. B may now discard D1 (already
visited) and D2 (already rejected) and read D3.
Fig. 2. The network of interlinked resources evolves along the attempts of the learners A, B and
C to "catch" the topic 'apple' through performing the modules D1, D2 or D. What is figured in
the schemas is not the Knowledge Graph itself, but the views (also called Knowledge Maps)
resulting from the perspectives; in these maps, the more links between two resources, the closer
they are.
Along the five steps of this imaginary case, the evolution of "knowledge paths"
follows the metaphor of the selective reinforcement of neural beams, except that this
reinforcement is not regulated by a single system of values, rather by a collabora-
tion/competition between the three systems of values of A, B and C. The three co-
learners learn as a whole, in a trans-disciplinary way: the dynamics are governed by a
topology mixing information and emotions, not by pure logics.
5
Conclusion
Starting from the three worlds proposed by K. Popper (the external world of ob-
jects and events, the internal world of mind and the world of language), we have
browsed through the TNGS of G. M. Edelman and learnt how the learning events are
supported by an adaptive neural network, are regulated by our systems of values and
occur mainly through social interactions. We have then focused on Web interactions
D1D2D3applestep1D3step2AgentTopicDocumentLogicalparadigmMining paradigmEmotions and FeelingsD1appleD2D3applestep3D1D2D3applestep4D1D2D3applestep5D1D2D1apple 9
and reformulated the question of the emergence of collective knowledge partially
supported by algorithms.
The ViewpointS approach and formalism offer to integrate most if not all these el-
ements in the metaphor of a collective brain; we illustrate through an imaginary case
how to trace and enhance collective knowledge acquisition. Within ViewpointS, the
three paradigms for knowledge acquisition (logical inferences of the semantic Web,
statistical recommendations of the mining community, authority and trust of the social
Web) are merged into a knowledge graph of digital traces interpretable by human and
artificial agents. Within this graph, the beams of connections are regulated by the
individual systems of values that support affect i.e., culture, personality traits, as de-
fined in [22].
What we gain in the integration may be lost with respect to the advantages of each
of the three knowledge acquisition paradigms taken individually. For this reason, we
are not yet sure if the collective knowledge emerging from ViewpointS graphs and
maps (our proposed Collective Brain) will perform competitively with a similar wis-
dom emerging from each of the three crowds.
Nevertheless: as it has been always the case in the synergies between technological
developments and scientific progress, the developments do not ensure scientific dis-
covery, rather may facilitate the process. For instance: Galileo's telescopes did not
directly produce the results of modern astronomy, but enabled a significant progress.
We hope and believe that our proposed Collective Brain will have a positive impact in
understanding and enhancing some aspects of human cognition.
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
K. Popper, "The Tanner Lectures on Human Values," Michigan, USA:
University of Michigan, 1978, pp. 143 -- 167.
J. A. Hampton, "Concepts in the Semantic Triangle," in The Conceptual
Mind : New Directions in the Study of Concepts, 2016.
J. Searle, Speech acts: an essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press, 1969.
G. M. Edelman, Neural Darwinism: The theory of neuronal group selection.
Basic Books, 1989.
G. M. Edelman and G. Tononi, Comment la matière devient conscience
Éditions Odile Jacob, Sciences. Paris, 2000.
L. Vygotski, "Apprentissage et développement: tensions dans la zone
proximale," Paris La Disput. (2ème éd. Augment., vol. 233, 1933.
L. S. Vygotsky, Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological
Processes, vol. 1978. 1978.
D. Laurillard, "A conversational framework for individual learning applied to
the 'learning organisation' and the 'learning society,'" Syst. Res. Behav. Sci.,
vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 113 -- 122, 1999.
P. Lemoisson and M. Passouant, "Un cadre pour la construction collaborative
de connaissances lors de la conception d'un observatoire des pratiques
territoriales," Cah. Agric., vol. 21, no. n°1, pp. 11 -- 17, 2012.
10
[10]
[11]
[12]
J. Piaget, "La construction du réel chez l'enfant," in La construction du réel
chez l'enfant, Fondation Jean Piaget, Ed. Lonay, Suisse: Delachaux et Niestlé,
1937, pp. 307 -- 339.
S. A. Cerri and P. Lemoisson, "Tracing and enhancing serendipitous learning
with viewpointS," in Brain Function Assessment in Learning, 2017, pp. 24 --
25.
S. Vial, L'être et l'écran - Comment le numérique change la perception.
2013.
[13] D. Cardon and M.-C. Smyrnelis, "La démocratie Internet," Transversalités,
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
vol. N° 123, no. 3. Institut Catholique de Paris, pp. 65 -- 73, 13-Sep-2012.
T. Gruber, "Collective knowledge systems: Where the Social Web meets the
Semantic Web," Web Semant. Sci. Serv. Agents World Wide Web, vol. 6, no.
1, pp. 4 -- 13, Feb. 2008.
P. Jain, P. Z. Yeh, K. Verma, R. G. Vasquez, M. Damova, P. Hitzler, and A.
P. Sheth, "Contextual Ontology Alignment of LOD with an Upper Ontology:
A Case Study with Proton," Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 80 -- 92.
L. Zhao and R. Ichise, "Ontology Integration for Linked Data," J. Data
Semant., vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 237 -- 254, Dec. 2014.
T. Berners-Lee, J. Hendler, and O. Lassila, "The Semantic Web," Sci. Am.,
2001.
P. Lemoisson, G. Surroca, C. Jonquet, and S. A. Cerri, "ViewpointS: When
Social Ranking Meets the Semantic Web," in AAAI Publications, The
Thirtieth International Flairs Conference, Special Track on Artificial
Intelligence for Big Social Data Analysis, Florida Artificial Intelligence
Research Society Conference, North America, 2017.
P. Lemoisson, G. Surroca, C. Jonquet, and S. A. Cerri, "ViewPointS :
capturing formal data and informal contributions into an evolutionary
knowledge graph," Int. J. Knowl. Learn., vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 119 -- 145, 2018.
[20] V. Duchatelle, "Hacker son auto-prophétie," Paris, 2017.
[21] M. Kosinski, Y. Bachrach, P. Kohli, D. Stillwell, and T. Graepel,
"Manifestations of user personality in website choice and behaviour on online
social networks," Mach. Learn., vol. 95, no. 3, pp. 357 -- 380, Jun. 2014.
P. D. Bamidis, "Affective Learning: Principles, Technologies, Practice," in
Brain Function Assessment in Learning, 2017, pp. 1 -- 13.
[22]
|
1907.10491 | 1 | 1907 | 2019-07-22T01:41:28 | Alternative Intersection Designs with Connected and Automated Vehicle | [
"cs.MA",
"eess.SP"
] | Alternative intersection designs (AIDs) can improve the performance of an intersection by not only reducing the number of signal phases but also change the configuration of the conflicting points by re-routing traffic. However the AID studies have rarely been extended to Connected and Automated Vehicle (CAV) which is expected to revolutionize our transportation system. In this study, we investigate the potential benefits of CAV to two AIDs: the diverging diamond interchange (DDI) and the restricted crossing U-turn intersection. The potential enhancements of AID, CAV, and the combination of both are quantified via microscopic traffic simulation. We found that CAV is able to positively contribute to the performance of an intersection. However, converting an existing conventional diamond interchange (CDI) to a diverging one is a more effective way according to the simulation results. DDI improves the throughput of a CDI by 950 vehicles per hour, a near 20% improvement; whereas with full penetration of CAV, the throughput of a CDI is increased only by 300 vehicles per hour. A similar trend is observed in the average delay per vehicle as well. Furthermore, we assess the impact for the driver's confusion, a concern for deploying AIDs, on the traffic flow. According to the ANOVA test, the negative impacts of driver's confusion are of statistical significance. | cs.MA | cs | Alternative Intersection Designs with Connected
and Automated Vehicle
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Zijia Zhong
Earl E. Lee II
University of Delaware
Newark, DE, USA
[email protected]
University of Delaware
Newark, DE, USA
[email protected]
9
1
0
2
l
u
J
2
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
1
9
4
0
1
.
7
0
9
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract -- Alternative intersection designs (AIDs) can improve
the performance of an intersection by not only reducing the
number of signal phases but also change the configuration of the
conflicting points by re-routing traffic. However the AID studies
have rarely been extended to Connected and Automated Vehicle
(CAV) which is expected to revolutionize our transportation
system. In this study, we investigate the potential benefits of
CAV to two AIDs: the diverging diamond interchange (DDI)
and the restricted crossing U-turn intersection. The potential
enhancements of AID, CAV, and the combination of both are
quantified via microscopic traffic simulation. We found that CAV
is able to positively contribute to the performance of an inter-
section. However, converting an existing conventional diamond
interchange (CDI) to a diverging one is a more effective way
according to the simulation results. DDI improves the throughput
of a CDI by 950 vehicles per hour, a near 20% improvement;
whereas with full penetration of CAV, the throughput of a CDI
is increased only by 300 vehicles per hour. A similar trend is
observed in the average delay per vehicle as well. Furthermore,
we assess the impact for the driver's confusion, a concern for
deploying AIDs, on the traffic flow. According to the ANOVA
test, the negative impacts of driver's confusion are of statistical
significance.
Index Terms -- Connected and Automated Vehicle, Alternative
Intersection Design, Diverging Diamond Interchange, Restricted
Crossing U-turn Intersection, Mixed Traffic Condition
I. INTRODUCTION
Signalized intersections are major sources of traffic delay
and collision within modern transportation systems. The mea-
sures to improve the operational efficiency of a signalized
intersection can be grouped in to four categories: 1) Opti-
mization of Signal Timing and Phase, 2) Conversion to a
grade-separated interchange, 3) Reconfiguration to alternative
intersection designs (AIDs), and 4) Adaptation of connected
and automated vehicle (CAV) technology.
The traditional approach via signal optimization is no longer
able to considerably alleviate congestion at signalized inter-
sections in saturated condition [1]. Grade-separation tends to
incur a significant amount of infrastructure investment, which
is difficult to economically justify under most circumstances.
AIDs have the potential in improving the efficiency and safety
of an intersection by strategically eliminating or changing the
nature of the intersection conflict points.
While the adoption of AIDs exhibits an increasing trend
in the U.S. as displayed in Fig. 1, additional research for
AID is still needed. The most common AIDs include the
diverging diamond interchange (DDI),
the median U-turn
intersection (MUT), the displaced left-turn intersection (DLT),
and roundabout (RDT).
Fig. 1: AID locations in contiguous U.S. (data source [2])
the same time,
The evolutionary role of the CAV technology to mobility,
safety, and driver convenience has been discussed extensively
in the past decades. At
the adaptation of
AIDs has been growing steadily and their benefits have gained
recognition. However, the joint benefits of implementing CAV
and AID have been seldom discussed. The Volpe National
Transportation Systems Center estimated that it may take 25-
30 for CAVs to reach 95% of market penetration (MPR), even
with a federal mandatory installation of DSRC devices on new
light vehicles in the U.S. [3].
In light of the aforementioned lead time, hybrid solutions
may be a logical step for solving the pressing transportation
issues. In this paper, we evaluate the potential benefits brought
by CAV, AID, and the combination of both. We also quantify
the influence of the driver's confusion on a restricted crossing
U-turn intersection (RCUT). Such driver's confusion that is
caused by the unconventional geometry deign is expected to
be eliminated by CAV.
II. RELATED WORK
1) Effectiveness of AIDs: The majority of the research
demonstrated the superior performance of AIDs to their con-
ventional counterparts under various volume scenarios, for
instance, heavy left-turn traffic, unbalanced split among inter-
section approaches, high overall volume, etc. Such scenarios
can reveal the inadequacy of a conventional intersection. A
diverging diamond interchange (DDI) outperform a conven-
tional diamond interchange (CDI) under high traffic volume
with left-turn demand exceeding 50% of the total demand [1].
When designed properly, the DDI can reduce 60% of total
intersection delay and 50% of the total number of stops [4].
A signal optimization model for DDI was developed in [5],
in which the common cycle length and green split for the two
up-stream crossover intersections were determined by taking
into account the adjacent conventional intersections.
The displaced left-turn (DLT) intersection is able to poten-
tially reduce average intersection delays in most traffic demand
scenarios. A before-and-after study for the DLT at Baton
Rouge, LA showed that the reduction in total crashes and
fatality were 24% and 19%, respectively. The simulation also
demonstrated 20% to 50% increase in throughput compared
to a conventional intersection [6]. The reduction for a median
u-turn (MUT) intersection in total crashes ranges from 20%
to 50%, as shown in the study conducted in [7], [8].
2) Effectiveness of CAV: A CAV-based application on real-
world signalized intersection was studied using Vissim in
[9]. The start-up lost time was assumed to be zero owing
to V2X communication. Addtionally, all the CAVs within a
platoon operated synchronously upon the commencement of a
green phase. Without changing the existing signal plan, the
average stop delay was reduced by 17% when the market
penetration rate (MPR) of CAV reached 70%. Le Vine et al.
[10] studied the queue discharging operation of CAVs with the
assured-clear-distance-ahead principle by using a deterministic
simulation model. On the contrary to [9], they observed only
marginal improvement to intersection throughput due to the
synchronous start-up movement. However, they found that the
processing time for a 10-vehicle queue did reduce by 25% with
full CAVs, compared to that for the human-driven vehicles
(HVs) with the same amount of vehicles.
Realizing the potential long path to full vehicle automation,
researchers also emphasized the possible cooperative scheme
between CAVs and HVs by strategically consider the following
HVs for intersection management [10]. A bi-level optimal
intersection control algorithm was proposed in [11]. The
algorithm performed trajectory design for CAVs as well as
the prediction for HVs based on real-time CAV data. The
prediction of the trajectory of HVs was based on Newells car
following model and the positional information of CAVs. The
baseline used for comparison was an actuated signal control
algorithm under a range of traffic demand between 1,000 and
2,000 vehicles per hour (vph).
3) Driver's Confusion: Unfamiliar urban intersections pose
high cognitive demand on drivers who are prone to make
unexpected maneuvers, which include hesitation, abrupt stop,
deviation from the planned path, suddent aggressive maneu-
vers [12], [13]. The drivers confusion was mentioned in most
of the AID studies as a potential drawback. As we observed
from practices, the off-ramp right tuning movements from
the freeway in DDIs are often signalized due to the safety
concern for unfamiliar drivers who may misidentify traffic
on the opposite side of the roadway passing through a DDI
interchange [14]. Some believe that the reduction in delay and
travel time would be discounted after accounting for drivers
confusion [15].
A driving simulator provides a safe virtual environment for
human subjects to experience a wide verity of scenario, in-
cluding investigating the driver's confusion for AIDs. In [16],
74 drivers within the Washington D.C. area were recruited
for the experiment which aimed to investigate the wrong way
violation, navigation errors, red-light violations, and driving
speed through the DDI. In [17], Park found that wrong way
crashes inside the crossroad between ramp terminals accounted
for 4.8% of the fatal and injury crashes occurring at the DDI.
The CAV technology could be an excellent complement for
the AIDs. The V2X connectivity is able to provide geometry
information to help unfamiliar drivers to navigate through
AIDs. Increasingly, the Automated Driver Assistant System
could, when necessary, intervene with the erroneous movement
as a result of the driver's confusion. Hence, the potential aid
gained from CAV technology could improve the performance
of AID by abating or even eliminating the concerns for the
drivers confusion.
III. EXPERIMENT
The primary benefits for the introduction of CAV to AIDs
are the enhanced driving performance due to automation and
the connectivity with the signal controller. In other words,
CAVs can closely follow their predecessors and have no
driver's confusion for AIDs nor start-up lost time. We first
demonstrate the improvement of AIDs with various penetra-
tion of CAVs for a diverging diamond interchange (DDI) and a
restricted crossing U-turn intersection (RCUT). Then a proof-
of-concept simulation for the impact of drivers confusion is
conducted.
Each CAV is assumed with SAE level 3 automation. The
Enhanced Intelligent Driver Model (EIDM), developed by
Kesting el al. [18] and expressed in (1), (2), and (3),
is
adapted for longitudinal control), whereas the human drivers
are responsible for the lateral control which is based on the
Weidemann model [19], [20].
x
xdes
s0
)δ − ( s∗( x, xlead)
a[1 − (
if x = xIDM ≥ xCAH
(1 − c)xIDM + c[xCAH + b · tanh( xIDM −xCAH
)]
b
x =
otherwise
)]
(1)
s∗( x, xlead) = s0 + xT +
x( x − xlead)
2√ab
x2
·min(xlead,x)
−2x·min(xlead,x)
x2
lead
xlead( x − xlead) ≤ −2x min(xlead, x)
min(xlead, x) −
otherwise
( x− xlead)2Θ( x− xlead)
2x
xCAH =
(2)
(3)
where a is the maximum acceleration; b is the desired
deceleration; c is the coolness factor; δ is the free acceleration
exponent; x is the current speed of the subject vehicle; xdes
is the desired speed, xlead is the speed of the lead vehicle; s0
is the minimal distance; x is the acceleration of the subject
vehicle; xlead is the acceleration of the lead vehicle; xIDM is
the acceleration calculated by the original IDM model [21];
T is the desired time gap; and xCAH is the acceleration
calculated by the CAH component; Θ is the Heaviside step
function. The IDM parameters used are listed in TABLE I.
TABLE I: CACC Vehicle Control Parameters
Parameter
value
T
0.9 s
s0
1 m 2 m/s2
a
b
2m/s2
c
0.99
θ
4
xdes
105 km/h
The benefits of AIDs and CAV are of complementary nature
as exhibited in TABLE II. The primary benefit for CAV is
the short following headway, which plays a crucial role in
improving roadway capacity. Additionally, the elimination of
start-up lost time (the time drivers takes to react and accelerate
when a signal turns green from red) is also feasible owing to
the vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) communication. The start-
up lost
time for HVs is set as 2 s. The effectiveness of
the synchronized start has not been substantiated by previous
research: some reserach found significant benefits [9], while
other did not [10]. Therefore, the first two benefits for CAV
(close following headway and no start-up lost time) are im-
plemented in the simulation. The simulation is conducted in
two settings. First, we will evaluate the overall intersection
performance. Then we shift the study focus on the region
where driver's confusion could occur in order to assess its
impact.
TABLE II: Benefits of CAV and AID
AID
Benefit
Intersection conflict point reduction X
X
Signal phase reduction
Traffic movement streamlining
Close following headway
Start-up lost time elimination
Synchronously discharge
Driver's confusion intervention
X
CAV
X
X
X
X
The PTV Vissim, a microscopic traffic simulation, and
its external driver model application programming interface
(API) are used to develop the simulation network. We have
constructed two AIDs: a real-world DDI (Fig. 2(a)) and a
1.61-mile, three-lane RCUT intersection Fig. 2(b). The DDI
is located at the intersection of the State Highway 72 (DE-
72) and US Highway 13 (US-13). It was converted from a
(a) DDI Network
(b) RCUT Netowrk
Fig. 2: Configurations of selected DDI and RCUT
convetional diamond interchange in early 2016 and open to
trafic in late 2016 [22]. Four settings for DDI are simulated
as shown in TABLE III.
TABLE III: Simulation Cases for DDI
CDI
Case
Base-CDI X
Base-DDI
CAV-CDI
CAV-DDI
X
DDI
AV MPR
X
X
X
X
0%
0%
10-100%
10-100%
The arterial demand is assumed to be 3,000 vph for both
westbound and eastbound direction. The traffic volume for
either of the on-ramp is 400 vph. A CDI network is built
for the comparison between a CDI and a DDI. Signalization
is only implemented at the two cross-over locations in the
DDI. Each through movements has a 55-s green phase in each
signal cycle which is 120 s. For the CDI, the phase timings
are set as 73 s, 17 s, and 18 s for through, left-turn to the
on-ramp, and left-turn from the off-ramp, respectively. The
speed limit is 50 mph for both of the networks. For the RCUT,
only the westbound direction of the RCUT is analyzed. The
distance between the minor street and the diverging point of
the median U-turn is approximately 1,300 ft., larger than the
600-ft. minimal design requirement set forth by ASSHTO [23]
for RCUT. The mainline demand from the westbound direction
is 5,000 vph and the demand from the southbound minor street
is 400 vph.
For each level of MPR, ten replications of simulation is
conducted to factor in the variability of the simulation. Each
replication runs for 3,900 s with 300 s as the warm-up time to
load the network with traffic. The simulation resolution is set
as 10 Hz. For studying the driver' confusion, 30 replications
for each level of the confused drivers are conducted to obtain
additional samples for the ANOVA test. The data collection is
performed every 5 min.
IV. RESULTS & DISCUSSION
A. Impact of CAV
The network throughput of both the DDI and the CDI
is shown in Fig. 3. The vertical bar associated with each
marker represents the size of the 90% confidence interval with
bootstrapping [24], a statistical technique. The throughput of
the network increased to 5,350 vph in DDI from 4,400 vph
that is observed in the CDI case. The standard deviation of the
throughput in the CDI case is greater than that of the DDI.
With CAVs in the network, the overall trend for throughput
for either DDI and CDI is increasing, given there are cases
of slight deceases (i.e. 50% and 60% in the CDI case).
Furthermore, with the same level of MPR, the observations in
DDI exhibits a narrower 90% confidence interval, an indication
of less standard deviation.
improving the efficiency of a signalized intersection than CAV
in terms of mobility.
Fig. 4: Average delay
When it comes to RCUT, the flow-speed observations in
three locations (diverging, upstream, and downstream) are
shown in Fig. 5. In all three locations, the flow-speed curve
of CAV systematically shifts to the higher flow rate region at
the right side of the chart. The carrying capacity for the CAV
case reaches 2,100 vph per lane.
Fig. 3: Network throughput
The average delay for each vehicle is plotted in Fig. 4.
Similar to the throughput, the geometry configuration of the
interchange greatly contributed to the reduction of the average
delay. There is a clear separation (i.e. 40 s delay per vehicle)
between the observations of DDI and those of the CDI. Again,
the delay observed in DDI not only has a lower mean value,
but also less standard deviation, compared to the CDI case.
However, the delay only marginally decreases as the MPR
increases.
Both Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 jointly indicate that only with the
short-following distance and the zero start-up lost time do not
significantly increase the performance of the signalized inter-
change. The start-up lost time is dedicated by the likelihood
of a CAV being in the first vehicle at the stop line during a
red phase. Even though zero start-up lost time are to be taken
advantage of, the benefits from it would still be limited. For
example for 120-s signal cycle within an hour, only 30 times
per lane of such advantage is possible at best. On the other
hand, by reducing the signal phase and separating conflict, the
network performance can be improved at a significant level.
Therefore, AIDs could instead play more significant roles in
Fig. 5: Flow-speed curve observed at the diverging area for
RCUT with full CAV penetration
B. Impact of Driver's Confusion
The corridor impact of the driver's confusion has not yet
been taken into account in the previous studies. We consider
the behaviors of drivers due to the confusion are: 1) sudden
slowdown due to confusion prior to the AID ramp and 2)
making an abrupt lane change at the last minute. The area for
each AID that could most likely create confusion for drivers
is identified in red in Fig. 2 based on the geometric design of
the networks. In the RCUT, it is the U-turn pocket lane in the
diverging area, which accommodates U- and left-turn traffic.
The route decision point is set closer to the U-turn pocket lane
to induce aggressive lane change that is likely observed from
the unfamiliar drivers in order to make it to the U-turn lane.
For the DDI, it is the signalized crossover intersections on the
arterial. A reduction in desired speed is set for the unfamiliar
drivers to mimic the slowdown behavior due to confusion.
The percentage of unfamiliar drivers is set from 0% to
20% with a 5% increment. For each scenario, 30 replications
are run. Point (road section) and network-wide performance
data are collected every 5 min. The shockwave created by
the drivers confusion is illustrated in Fig. 6, where each line
represents the trajectory of one vehicle from the simulation
with 10% unfamiliar drivers for RCUT. Red trajectory lines are
unfamiliar drivers, whereas the cyan lines represent commuter
drivers who are familiar and have gotten used to the RCUT.
As seen, the sudden slowdown due to the drivers confusion
creates a shockwave and it propagates upstream, affecting
the following vehicles. On the right side of Fig. 6,
the
traffic trajectories indicate a free-flow condition in the absence
of slowdown or abrupt lane change induced by the drivers
confusion. As demonstrated, too much drivers confusion could
easily disrupt the progression of the traffic, not to mention the
safety hazard it may create.
Fig. 6: Impact of driver's confusion
Fig. 7: Flow-speed curve observed at the diverging area for
RCUT for drivers confusion
TABLE IV: ANOVA Test for Average Vehicle Delay in RCUT
Confused
Driver Rate
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
N
360
360
360
360
360
Delay, s/veh Grouping
A
B
C
12.2
28.65
39.36
43.45
48.79
D
E
TABLE V: ANOVA Test for Average Vehicle Delay in DDI
Confused
Driver Rate
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
N
360
360
360
360
360
Delay, s/veh Grouping
A
B
C
81.42
82.44
83.54
84.41
85.78
D
E
scenarios at 95% confidence level. The ANOVA test result
(TABLE IV) shows that the pairwise differences among five
levels of confused drivers are statistically different. Similarly,
the ANOVA test for average vehicle delay for DDI exhibits
an increasing pattern that
the average vehicle delays are
statistically different at 95% confidence level as shown in
TABLE V.
The speed-flow diagram of the diverging area of the RCUT
network is shown in Fig. 7. The overall speed of the traffic
flow with confused drivers is lower than the base case. This
is due to the temporary traffic obstruction of the unexpected
behaviors of the confused drivers. The impacted vehicles at the
end of the diverging area where the data are collected have
not regained the prevailing speed of the roadway. As a result,
the data sample points shift downward to the range of 30 mph
and 40 mph with the presence of confused drivers.
The average vehicle delay for the entire network is collected.
ANOVA test with post-hoc Tukeys method [25] is conducted
to assess the statistical difference among the five tested
V. CONCLUSION
The alternative intersection designs have attracted an in-
creasing amount of attention as a promising measure to
improve the performance of an intersection, as evidenced by
field deployments and simulation study. The joint deployment
of alternative intersection designs and CAV is studied in
this paper via microscopic traffic simulation. According to
the results on mobility, only 7% increase in throughput is
observed under full CAV market penetration, compared to
the 20% gain in throughput with only the conversion from
a conventional diamond interchange to a diverging diamond
interchange. Note that the benefits of the CAV could be further
[8] S. Castronovo, P. W. Dorothy, M. C. Scheuer, T. L. Maleck, and
Others, "The Operational and Safety Aspects of the Michigan Design
for Divided Highways," Volume I, Michigan State University College of
Engineering, 1995.
[9] Z. Zhong, L. Joyoung, and L. Zhao, "Evaluations of Managed Lane
Strategies for Arterial Deployment of Cooperative Adaptive Cruise
Control," in 96th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting,
Washington DC, USA, 2017.
[10] S. Le Vine, X. Liu, F. Zheng, and J. Polak, "Automated cars: Queue
discharge at signalized intersections with Assured-Clear-Distance-
Ahead'driving strategies," Transportation Research Part C: Emerging
Technologies, vol. 62, pp. 35 -- 54, 2016.
[11] K. Yang, S. I. Guler, and M. Menendez, "Isolated intersection control
for various levels of vehicle technology: Conventional, connected, and
automated vehicles," Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Tech-
nologies, vol. 72, pp. 109 -- 129, 2016.
[12] J. Autey, T. Sayed, and M. El Esawey, "Operational performance
comparison of four unconventional intersection designs using micro-
simulation," Journal of Advanced Transportation, vol. 47, no. 5, pp.
536 -- 552, 2013.
[13] T. Sayed, P. Storer, and G. Wong, "Upstream signalized crossover inter-
section: optimization and performance issues," Transportation Research
Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, no. 1961, pp.
44 -- 54, 2006.
[14] V. Chilukuri, S. Siromaskul, M. Trueblood, T. Ryan, and Others, "Di-
verging diamond interchange performance evaluation (I-44 and Route
13)," Missouri. Dept. of Transportation, Tech. Rep., 2011.
[15] J. Reid and J. Hummer, "Travel
time comparisons between seven
unconventional arterial intersection designs," Transportation Research
Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, no. 1751, pp.
56 -- 66, 2001.
[16] J. Bared, T. Granda, and A. Zineddin, "FHWA tech brief: Drivers'
evaluation of the diverging diamond interchange," Washington DC:
Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center. Tech Brief. FHWA-HRT-07-
048, 2007.
[17] B. Claros, "Transportation safety modeling and evaluation: alternative
geometric designs, enforcement, and airfield applications," 2017.
[18] A. Kesting, M. Treiber, and D. Helbing, "Enhanced intelligent driver
model
to access the impact of driving strategies on traffic capac-
ity," Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathemati-
cal,Physical and Engineering Sciences, vol. 368, no. 1928, pp. 4585 --
4605, 2010.
[19] R. Wiedemann, "Simulation des Straenverkehrsflusses," Ph.D. disserta-
tion, Karlsruhe, 1974.
[20] -- -- , "Modelling of rti-elements on multi-lane roads," in Drive Confer-
ence (1991: Brussels, Belgium), vol. 2, 1991.
[21] M. Treiber, A. Hennecke, and D. Helbing, "Congested Traffic States in
Empirical Observations and Microscopic Simulations," pp. 1805 -- 1824,
2000.
[22] "Sr 72/sr 1 diverging diamond interchange," https://www.deldot.gov/
information/projects/SR72-SR1/index.shtml, accessed: 2019-05-01.
[23] M. W. Hancock and B. Wright, "A policy on geometric design of
highways and streets," 2013.
[24] J. S. Haukoos and R. J. Lewis, "Advanced statistics: bootstrapping
confidence intervals for statistics with difficult distributions," Academic
emergency medicine, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 360 -- 365, 2005.
[25] "Pairwise comparisons for one-way anova," https://support.minitab.
com/en-us/minitab/18/help-and-how-to/modeling-statistics/anova/
how-to/one-way-anova/interpret-the-results/ all-statistics-and-graphs/
pairwise-comparisons/, accessed: 2018-09-30.
optimized in operation, such as using eco-driving approaching
control, adaptive signal control, or ultimately with signal-free
autonomous intersection management. They will be part of the
future study.
The impact of the potential the driver's confusion is quan-
tified by analyzing the traffic flow and vehicle trajectory
data. It is found that the influence is more localized. Hence
limited impact on performance at network level is observed.
Future study should focus on the safety aspect at a more
granular level (e.g., individual vehicle level). Additionally,
explicit consideration for the increased safety brought by
CAV should be integrated into the subsequent study. Lastly,
more sophisticated scenarios, including signal plans, demand
composition, CAV applications, etc., should be included to
expand the comparison.
APPENDIX A
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviation Definition
AID
ANOVA
API
DDI
CDI
RDT
CAV
MUT
MPR
DLT
RCUT
V2X
V2I
SAE
HV
MPR
ASSHTO
alternative intersection design
analysis of variance
application programming interface
diverging diamond interchange
conventional diamond interchange
roundabout
connected and automated vehicle
median U-turn intersection
market penetration rate
displaced left-turn intersection
restricted crossing U-turn intersection
vehicle-to-anything
vehicle-to-infrastructure
Society of Automotive Engineers
human-driven vehicle
market penetration rate
American Association of State High-
way and Transportation Official
REFERENCES
[1] A. Dhatrak, P. Edara, and J. Bared, "Performance analysis of parallel
flow intersection and displaced left-turn intersection designs," Trans-
portation Research Record: Journal of
the Transportation Research
Board, no. 2171, pp. 33 -- 43, 2010.
[2] Institue for Transportation Research and Education, "Alternative
Intersections and Interchange." [Online]. Available: https://www.google.
com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1MMZKi0RdQqjZjtBxmSTznUVnurY
[3] Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, "Vehicle-infrastructure
integration (VII) initiative benefit-cost analysis version 2.3 (draft),"
2008.
[4] G. Chlewicki, "Should the diverging diamond interchange always be
considered a diamond interchange form?" Transportation Research
Record, vol. 2223, no. 1, pp. 88 -- 95, 2011.
[5] X. Yang, G.-L. Chang, and S. Rahwanji, "Development of a signal
optimization model for diverging diamond interchange," Journal of
Transportation Engineering, vol. 140, no. 5, p. 4014010, 2014.
[6] W. Hughes, R. Jagannathan, D. Sengupta, and J. E. Hummer, "Alterna-
tive intersections/interchanges: informational report (AIIR)," Tech. Rep.,
2010.
[7] M. Scheuer and K. L. Kunde, "Evaluation of Grand River Avenue
(M-5/M-102) Safety Improvement Project Before and After Study,"
Michigan Department of Transportation, Lansing, 1996.
|
1912.06019 | 1 | 1912 | 2019-12-12T15:14:17 | Leader Selection in Multi-Agent Networks with Switching Topologies via Submodular Optimization | [
"cs.MA",
"math.OC"
] | In leader-follower multi-agent networks with switching topologies, choosing a subset of agents as leaders is a critical step to achieve desired performances. In this paper, we concentrate on the problem of selecting a minimum-size set of leaders that ensure the tracking of a reference signal in a highorder linear multi-agent network with a set of given topology dependent dwell time (TDDT). First, we derive a sufficient condition that guarantees the states of all agents converging to an expected state trajectory. Second, by exploiting submodular optimization method, we formulate the problem of identifying a minimal leader set which satisfies the proposed sufficient condition. Third, we present an algorithm with the provable optimality bound to solve the formulated problem. Finally, several numerical examples are provided to verify the effectiveness of the designed selection scheme. | cs.MA | cs | Leader Selection in Multi-Agent Networks with
Switching Topologies via Submodular Optimization
Kaile Chen, Wangli He, Senior Member, IEEE, Yang Tang, Senior Member, IEEE, and Wenle Zhang
1
9
1
0
2
c
e
D
2
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
9
1
0
6
0
.
2
1
9
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract -- In leader-follower multi-agent networks with switch-
ing topologies, choosing a subset of agents as leaders is a
critical step to achieve desired performances. In this paper, we
concentrate on the problem of selecting a minimum-size set of
leaders that ensure the tracking of a reference signal in a high-
order linear multi-agent network with a set of given topology-
dependent dwell time (TDDT). First, we derive a sufficient
condition that guarantees the states of all agents converging to
an expected state trajectory. Second, by exploiting submodular
optimization method, we formulate the problem of identifying
leader set which satisfies the proposed sufficient
a minimal
condition. Third, we present an algorithm with the provable
optimality bound to solve the formulated problem. Finally, several
numerical examples are provided to verify the effectiveness of the
designed selection scheme.
Index Terms -- Leader selection, multi-agent networks, switch-
ing topologies, submoular optimization.
I. INTRODUCTION
R Ecent decades have witnessed an explosion of research
in multi-agent networks (MAN) [1]-[5], where the MAN
framework is applied to analyze dynamical systems in a
rich body of applications, containing the cooperative flight
of multiple manned/unmanned combat aerial vehicles [6] and
wireless sensor networks [7]. The leader-follower configura-
tion [8] is an important approach in MAN. This technique has
emerged due to its contribution to the design of practicable
strategies for formation control [9], and is applied to the study
of consensus tracking widely [10]-[11]. Specifically, a subset
of agents selected as leaders drive a multi-agent network
towards the desired objective [12]. In recent years, several
works have unveiled a fact that the suitable placement for
leaders would have a major impact on the effectiveness of
applying state-of-the-art control techniques [13]-[16]. There-
fore, the research interest of exploring systematic approaches
to leaders deployment grows gradually. In addition, the study
of such mechanisms parallels with controllability research. The
significance of leader selection lies in ensuring the desired
target with specified leaders as few as possible to impel the
feasibility of control.
The early related results are summarized into [17], where
several criteria are presented to show that for control system
design input selection plays an important role in realizing
expected objectives. Actually, in a leader-follower multi-agent
network, leaders act as the role of control inputs. Recent
progress on the problem of choosing a minimal set of leaders
K. Chen, W. He, Y. Tang and W. Zhang are with the Key Laboratory
of Advanced Control and Optimization for Chemical Processes, Ministry
of Education, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai
200237, China (e-mail: [email protected]).
mainly focuses on optimizing expected performances [15]. In
what follows, three existing frameworks are listed briefly. First,
several works study the leader selection problem from a graph-
theoretic perspective in [18] and references therein. Especially,
in the pioneering work [19], an applicable selection method
based on the maximum matching algorithm is presented in the
exploration of large-scale complex networks. Second, the au-
thors in [14] and [20] solve the leader selection problem with
a specific objective function, by relaxing the binary constraints
into the convex hull. Then, the convex relaxation problem can
be solved efficiently via a standard technique, such as the
customized interior point method. Third, the submodular opti-
mization technique is an another emerging focus [21]-[25]. For
instance, with such a tool, the leader selection problem for the
realization of synchronization within a desired level is studied
in [22]. The strength of the submodular optimization scheme
lies in the contribution to the establishment of polynomial-time
approximation algorithms with the provable optimality bound
for computationally prohibitive tasks [23], while the above-
mentioned convex relaxation algorithms cannot render such a
bound. In addition, an overview of submodularity in leader
selection is shown in [24].
In the study of dynamical networks, the situation where
the communication topology changes over time is widely
considered [26]-[28]. In practice, there are quite a few reasons
that cause the switching behavior of the interaction topology,
such as external disturbances and limitations of sensors [29].
The current literature on leader selection, including the above-
mentioned works and references therein, mainly considers that
the network topology is fixed, while we are interested in
the switching case. In [13] where robustness to link noise
could be optimized by selecting a leader set, the realization
of consensus that acts as the requirement of leader selection
only depends on connectivity [2] in the scenario of switching
topologies, due to the first-order agent model. However, except
for connectivity, the condition of the dwell time (the time
internal between two consecutive switchings [30]) is also
required to guarantee consensus in the case of the second-order
or high-order agent model [31]. Hence, we incorporate the
connectivity and the dwell time jointly into the consideration
so as to ensure consensus by leader selection. In addition,
we relax the condition that each agent is reachable in any
predefined graph in [32] where the authors investigate leader
selection in high-order linear MAS with switching graphs.
In this paper, we study the minimal leader selection problem
in the high-order linear multi-agent network with a set of given
TDDT. More specifically, we propose a heuristic algorithm
to obtain an eligible leader set which makes the states of
remaining followers converge to the state of leaders,
i.e.,
achieving consensus tracking. The main challenge of our work
lies in how to reduce the computational complexity, since the
solution to a desired leader set is a prohibitive task with an
exhaustive search if the number of agents is large. In this
paper, by leveraging submodularity-ratio [33], we present an
efficient approximation method with the provable optimality
bound to overcome the difficulty.
The main contributions in this paper are listed below.
• We derive a sufficient condition to determine the conver-
gence of each follower's state to the states of leaders
in the high-order multi-agent network with switching
topologies. Furthermore, this condition is based on the
case that each system mode corresponding to the prede-
fined topology is considered to be unstable, so that the
derived condition could be also applied to the scenario
where several or all of the modes are required to be stable.
• We formulate the optimization problem of determining
a minimum-cardinality set of leaders that ensure the
tracking with a set of given TDDT. Besides, the metric
of leader selection is constructed based on the proposed
sufficient condition, and is then utilized for evaluating
whether an agent could be selected as a leader.
• By submodularity ratio, we present an efficient algorithm
with the provable optimality bound to solve the formu-
lated problem. To reduce the conservativeness, we present
another heuristic selection algorithm.
The remaining content of this paper is organized as follows.
In Section II, preliminaries are presented. In Section III, the
concise problem description is given. In Section IV, a heuristic
algorithm is shown to determine adequate leaders with a set of
given TDDT. In Section IV, the effectiveness of the proposed
framework is validated by numerical examples. Section V
concludes the paper.
II. PRELIMINARIES
In this section, we provide notations throughout this paper,
and necessary concepts on algebraic graph theory. In addition,
two definitions related to submodularity are presented, which
are crucial points to describe main results.
A. Notations
Rn is the n-dimensional Euclidean space and 1n is a n-
dimensional vector with all components being 1. In represents
the identity matrix of dimension n. When a matrix P is
positive definite (positive semi-definite), then it is denoted as
P ≻ 0 (P (cid:23) 0). diag(A1, A2, ... , An) represents a block-
diagonal matrix with matrices or scalars Ai on its diagonal,
i = 1, 2, ... , n. ⊗ denotes Kronecker product, satisfying
A ⊗ B = (A ⊗ Ip)(In ⊗ B), where A ∈ Rm×n, and
B ∈ Rp×q.
S means the cardinality of a set S. λi(A)
represents the ith eigenvalue of the matrix A. Re(γ) is the
real part of the complex number γ. dist(x, y) represents the
Euclidean distance between vectors x and y. λmax(A) and
λmin(A) denote the largest and smallest eigenvalues of the
matrix A respectively. λr(A) represents the eigenvalue with
the largest real part of the matrix A. The superscript T means
transpose for real matrices.
2
B. Algebraic Graph theory
We define the digraph structure of a multi-agent network
as G = {Ω, E}, where the index set of N agents is denoted
as Ω = {1, 2, ... , N }, while the index set of directed links is
shown as E ∈ Ω × Ω. The N agents are divided into leaders
and followers. The former, whose set are denoted by S ⊆
Ω, act as external control inputs. They are available to the
reference signal as well as the state values of their neighbors.
The latter are only accessible to the information of adjacent
agents. In addition, the neighbors index set of the agent i is
defined as N (i) , {j : (j, i) ∈ E}. L = [lij] ∈ RN ×N means
the Laplacian matrix of G, i, j = 1, 2, ... , N , i 6= j, lij = −1
if (j, i) ∈ E and lij = 0 otherwise, where (j, i) is a directed
link from agent j to agent i, satisfying
N
Xj=1,j6=i
lij = −lii.
Moreover, in this paper, we focus on simple graph only, i.e.,
without multiple links.
C. Submodularity
Definition 1 ([13]). Set V as a finite set. A function f : 2V →
R, is submodular if for any subset of V , i.e., S ⊆ T ⊆ V ,
and any v ∈ V \T , such that:
f (S ∪ v) − f (S) ≥ f (T ∪ v) − f (T ).
This inequality characterizes the submodularity, which is the
quantitative measure of the diminishing-return property [34].
It is analogous to concavity of continuous functions, wherein
the increment of adding a new component v ∈ V \T to the set
S, is larger than or equal to the set T . Moreover, a function f
is submodular, if (-f ) is supermodular and vice versa.
Definition 2 ([33]). f : 2Ω → R is a non-negative set function.
With respect to a subset U ⊆ Ω as well as a given constant
k ≥ 1, the submodularity-ratio of f is given by
γU,k = min
W ⊆U
W ∩S=∅
S≤k
Pl∈S(f (W ∪ {l}) − f (W ))
f (W ∪ S) − f (W )
.
For a general set function f , the submodularity-ratio cap-
tures its "distance" to submodularity. f is submodular if and
only if γU,k ≥ 1, ∀U, k, and f is a nondecreasing function,
when γU,k ∈ [0, 1). Furthermore, this concept contributes
to extending derivation of the provable optimality bound for
algorithms, even though f is not exactly submodular. Actually,
it is straightforward to see that this definition is applicable to
depict the "distance" of a set function f to supermodularity.
III. PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
In this section, we present the dynamics of the multi-agent
network and then state the research problem briefly.
A. Dynamics
The dynamics of individual agent in the high-order linear
multi-agent network with switching topologies is described as
follows:
xi(t) = Axi(t) + Bui(t),
(1)
of the modes are required to be stable, then it would be better
to consider multiple leader sets so as to reduce the number of
unnecessary leaders in each predefined graph. This implies that
there are several leader sets switching as the communication
topology changes over time, and this direction is considered
as our future work.
3
where
ui(t) = Xj∈Nσ(t) (i)
[xj (t) − xi(t)] − diKσ(t)[xi(t) − x∗(t)],
and xi(t) ∈ Rn is the state of the agent i. A ∈ Rn×n
is the individual self-dynamics matrix. B is the individual
control input matrix and we consider it as IN for brevity.
For the sake of concise statement, we denote σ(t) as the
switching signal : [0, ∞) → P, a right continuous and piece-
wise constant mapping. σ(t) depicts the time dependence of
underlying graphs. P represents an index set for predefined
topologies, i.e., P = {G1, G2, ... , Gm}, where m is the number
of predefined topologies. The time internal between any two
consecutive switchings is called as the dwell time τ [30].
For reducing conservation, we consider that the dwell time
is not identical but topology-dependent, which is denoted as
τGi , Gi ∈ P, i = 1, 2, ..., m. di is defined to be 1 when the
agent i is selected as a leader and 0 otherwise. The calculation
for Kσ(t) is shown in Section IV. Besides, x∗(t) ∈ Rn is the
state of the given reference signal, where x∗(t) = Ax∗(t).
For the convenience of analysis, we define the tracking
error state between the agent i and the reference signal as
ǫi(t) = xi(t) − x∗(t). By collecting total tracking error states,
we introduce following mathematical expression:
ǫ(t) = (ǫT
1 (t), ǫT
2 (t), ... , ǫT
D = diag(d1, d2, ... , dN ).
N (t))T ,
Thus, the tracking error dynamics of the multi-agent network
is written as the compact form:
ǫ(t) = (IN ⊗ A − Lσ(t) ⊗ In − D ⊗ Kσ(t))ǫ(t).
(2)
Subsequently, the tracking problem is transformed into the
stabilization form, where we consider the (2) as the error
system. For brevity, we rewrite the system (2):
ǫ(t) = Aσ(t)ǫ(t),
(3)
where Aσ(t) = IN ⊗ A − Lσ(t) ⊗ In − D ⊗ Kσ(t). Besides, we
consider Ap as a system mode for the pth topology, p ∈ P. In
this paper, the interaction topology changes over time, which
leads to the mode switching.
Remark 1. Actually, it is permissible for any system mode
to be stable or unstable. If a system mode is considered as
the stable case, i.e., λr(Ap) ≤ 0, it is demanding for the
corresponding topology where each agent should be reachable.
However, this topology condition is not necessary if there
exists no specific constraint, since the topology requirement to
ensure the tracking is that each agent is reachable in the union
of the directed interaction graphs [2]. Therefore, generally, we
consider that each mode is unstable, i.e., λr(Ap) > 0, ∀p ∈ P,
which signifies that it is possible that there exist unreachable
agents in any predefined topology. Furthermore, if some or all
B. Minimal Leader Selection for Tracking
The problem that we focus on is to select a minimum-
size leader set S with a set of given TDDT, where the set S
determines the configuration matrix D = diag(d1, d2, ... , dn),
such that the asymptotic stability of the system (3) can be
guaranteed. Then, we further give the description for the
problem in terms of optimization form as follows:
¯P1
min
S⊆Ω
S
s.t. The system (3) is asymptotically stable,
(4)
S ≤ k,
where k is a given positive integer, as the upper bound for
the desired number of leaders. ¯P1 is combinatorial in nature,
so that acquiring the solution is a computationally prohibitive
task if the number of agents is large. In the next section, we
leverage submodularity-ratio to solve ¯P1 efficiently.
IV. THE LEADER SELECTION METHOD
In this section, we mainly propose the method of choosing
a minimal set of leaders with a set of given TDDT in
order to realize asymptotic stability of the system (3). In the
first subsection, a sufficient condition is derived to guarantee
the stability performance, which is equivalent to ensure the
convergence of each follower' state to that of leaders. In the
next subsection, based on the application of the submodular
optimization scheme, we formulate the minimal leader prob-
lem. In the remaining subsection, an efficient algorithm is
designed with the greedy rule, used for solving the formulated
combinatorial optimization problem, and then we prove the
optimality bound of the proposed method.
A. The Sufficient Condition for Tracking
We draw on an existing result, which is regarded as the
preparation for our sufficient condition that ensures the system
(3) asymptotically stable.
Lemma 1 ([35]). Given scalars η ≥ η∗ ≥ 0, µ ∈ (0, 1),
τ max ≥ τ min > 0, consider the system (3). If there exists a set
of matrices Pp,i ≻ 0, i = 0, 1, ..., l, p ∈ P, such that ∀i = 0,
1, ..., l − 1, ∀p, q ∈ P, p 6= q ,
AT
p Pp,i + Pp,iAp + ψ(i)
AT
p Pp,i+1 + Pp,i+1Ap + ψ(i)
AT
p − ηPp,i ≺ 0,
p − ηPp,i+1 ≺ 0,
p Pp,l + Pp,lAp − ηPp,l ≺ 0,
Pq,0 − µPp,l (cid:22) 0,
logµ + ητ max < 0,
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
where ψ(i)
2 η∗IN n) is
Hurwitz stable, ∀p ∈ P, then the system (3) is globally
p = l(Pp,i+1 − Pp,i)/τ min and (Ap − 1
uniformly asymptotically stable (GUAS) under any switching
law σ(t) ∈ D[τ min,τ max], where D[τ min,τ max] represents the set
of all feasible switching policies with the dwell time τz ∈
[τ min,τ max], ∀z = 0, 1, 2, ....
Remark 2. If we regard Lemma 1 as a sufficient condition
directly to ensure the performance of tracking, it is problematic
to formulate the minimal leader selection problem, since it is
not intuitive to evaluate whether an agent could be selected
as a leader by those linear matrix inequalities. In order to
solve such a matter, we derive a sufficient condition so as
to assure the asymptotic stability of the system (3), and then
we can formulate the leader selection problem via submodular
optimization method with a scalar metric. Then, we can design
an efficient algorithm to deal with the minimal leader selection
problem. Thus, the following result plays a basic role in the
construction of the proposed selection scheme.
Theorem 1. Given scalars ηp > 0, τ min
p > 0 and µp ∈ (0,1),
consider the system (3) with all unstable modes. If the follow-
ing conditions hold,
Re(λr(A(1)
p +
IN n)) < 0,
Re(λr(Ap +
1
2
(
− ηp)IN n)) < 0,
lp + ϕ
2βτ min
p
lp
τ min
p
(10)
(11)
∀p ∈ P, where ϕ > 0 is a constant with the sufficient small
value,
β =
λmax((A(1)
p )T + A(1)
p )
2Re(λr(A(1)
p ))
,
A(1)
p = Ap −
1
2
(
lp
τ min
p
+ ηp)IN n,
(12)
(13)
then there exist matrices IN n ≻ Pp,i ≻ 0, i = 0, 1, ..., lp,
such that ∀i = 0, 1, ..., lp − 1, ∀p ∈ P, satisfying
AT
p Pp,i + Pp,iAp + φp,i − ηpPp,i ≺ 0,
p Pp,i+1 + Pp,i+1Ap + φp,i − ηpPp,i+1 ≺ 0,
AT
(14)
(15)
where φp,i = lp(Pp,i+1−Pp,i)/τ min
matrices Pp,0 and Pp,lp , ∀p ∈ P, p 6= q, such that
p
. Furthermore, if there exist
Proof of Theorem 1. Considering Lemma 2 and the fact that
β ∈ (0, 1] [36], it is explicit to see
4
(lp + ϕ)/τ min
−2βRe(λr(A(1)
p
p ))
< 1.
(19)
According to [37], since ((A(1)
Px ≻ 0 of the following Lyapunov function
p )T + A(1)
p ) ≺ 0, the solution
(A(1)
p )T Px + PxA(1)
p +
lp + ϕ
τ min
p
IN n = 0,
is bounded by
λmax(Px) ≤
Thus, due to (19), one has
(lp + ϕ)/τ min
−2βRe(λr(A(1)
p
p ))
.
λmax(Px) < 1.
which implies 0 ≺ Px ≺ IN n. Then, we derive
(A(1)
p )T Px + PxA(1)
p = −
lp + ϕ
τ min
p
IN n ≺ −
lp
τ min
p
IN n,
Furthermore, combining with Pp,i ≺ IN n, ∀i = 0, 1, ... , lp,
then, it is intuitive to derive
AT
p Pp,i + Pp,iAp − (
lp
τ min
p
+ ηp)Pp,i ≺ −
lp
τ min
p
Pp,i+1.
which makes (14) hold. Similarly, in light of (11) as well as
Lemma 2, we have
Re(λr(Ap +
1
2
λmax((A(2)
βx =
− ηp)) < −
(
lp
τ min
p
p )T + A(2)
p )
ϕ
2βx
,
,
2Re(λr(A(2)
p ))
where A(2)
IN n ≻ P
′
p = Ap + (lp/τ min
x ≻ 0 of the following Lyapunov function exists,
p − ηp)/2. Hence, the solution
(A(2)
p )T P
x + P
xA(2)
p + ϕIN n = 0.
′
′
Then, ∀i = 0, 1, ... , lp − 1, one has
Pq,0 − µqPp,lp (cid:22) 0,
(16)
AT
p Pp,i+1 + Pp,i+1Ap +
lp
τ min
p
Pp,i+1 − ηpPp,i+1 ≺ 0.
(20)
then the total tracking error states of the system (3) can con-
verge to zero when the TDDT satisfies τp ∈ [τ min
], p ∈
P, where
, τ max
p
p
logµp + ηpτ max
p < 0.
(17)
Prior to showing the proof, a lemma is needed as follows.
Lemma 2. (10) holds, ∀p ∈ P, and then we have
Re(λr(A(1)
p )) < −
lp + ϕ
2βτ min
p
,
(18)
Since Pp,i ≻ 0, ∀i = 0, 1, ... , lp, we see
AT
p Pp,i+1 + Pp,i+1Ap +
lp
τ min
p
Pp,i+1 − ηpPp,i+1 ≺
lp
τ min
p
Pp,i.
which satisfies (15). Due to (20), it is obvious to see
AT
p Pp,i+1 + Pp,i+1Ap − ηpPp,i+1 ≺ −
lp
τ min
p
Pp,i+1 ≺ 0.
With i = lp − 1, we derive
AT
p Pp,lp + Pp,lpAp − ηpPp,lp+1 ≺ 0.
where ϕ > 0 is a constant with the sufficient small value.
Proof. We refer the readers to Appendix A for the proof in
details.
Here, it is ready to present the proof of our first result.
Thereby, based on Lemma 1, (14)-(17) make (5)-(9) hold. The
proof is complete.
Remark 3. There are three differences between Lemma 1 and
Theorem 1. First, the latter limits the solution range of the
matrices by IN n ≻ Pp,i ≻ 0, i = 0, 1, ... , lp, p ∈ P, which is
helpful to determine the existence of all qualified Pp,i. Second,
Theorem 1 utilizes the TDDT, which is less conservative [30]
compared to the dwell time. In addition, the utilization of
TDDT is beneficial to reduce the conservativeness for the
leader selection. Third, the proposed condition transforms the
existence of (5)-(7) into the determination of (10)-(11), which
is prepared for the construction of a scalar metric in the
leader selection algorithm. Furthermore, the exact value of
ηp > 0 is not arbitrary, but it has a specific lower bound
with ηp > lp/τ min
. Actually, if ηp is without such a bound,
then it is impossible to make (11) hold when λr(Ap) > 0.
Specially, it is accessible to extend this sufficient condition to
considering some or all of stable modes.
p
Subsequently, we present a straightforward corollary to deal
with the situation, where the system (3) is composed of stable
modes and unstable modes. In addition, S and U denote the
set of stable modes and unstable modes, respectively, where
S ∪ U = P and S ∩ U = ∅.
Corollary 1. Given scalars τ min
p > 0, p ∈ P, µp ∈ (1, + ∞),
ηp < 0, p ∈ S, µp(0,1), ηp > 0, p ∈ U , consider the system
(3) with stable modes and unstable modes. If the following
inequalities hold
then there exist matrices IN n ≻ Pp,i ≻ 0, i = 0, 1, ..., lp,
such that ∀i = 0, 1, ..., lp − 1, satisfying
AT
p Pp,i + Pp,iAp − ηpPp,i ≺ 0, p ∈ S,
(21)
and (14)-(15), p ∈ U . Thus,
if there exist matrices Pp,0
and Pp,lp , ∀p ∈ P, p 6= q, such that (16) holds, then the
total tracking error states of the system (3) can converge
to zero when the TDDT satisfies τp > − logµp
, p ∈ S,
ηp
τp ∈ [τ min
satisfies (17).
], p ∈ U , where τ max
, τ max
p
p
p
In what follows, we show another corollary, which aims at
the system (3) composed of stable modes. Hence, in the next
corollary, it is intuitive that S = P.
Corollary 2. Given scalars µp ∈ (1, + ∞), ηp < 0, consider
the system (3) with all stable modes. If the condition is fulfilled
as follows,
Re(λr(Ap)) <
1
2
ηp,
then there exist matrices IN n ≻ Pp,i ≻ 0, i = 0, 1, ..., lp, such
that ∀i = 0, 1, ..., lp − 1, satisfying (21), ∀p ∈ P. Hence, if
there exist matrices Pp,0 and Pp,lp , ∀p ∈ P, p 6= q, such that
(16) holds, then the total tracking error states of the system (3)
can converge to zero when the TDDT satisfies τp > − logµp
.
ηp
The proof of two corollaries can be obtained based on
Theorem 1 as well as [35], and then they are omitted here.
5
Thereby, the proposed sufficient condition characterizes the
situation that even if each mode of the system (3) is unstable,
it is still possible to realize tracking under an appropriate σ(t).
It is required to point out that the feasibility of (10)-(11) poses
the possibility of satisfaction for (16)-(17), so that the system
(3) is GUAS with the TDDT τp ∈ [τ min
], p ∈ P. As a
result, we consider (10)-(11) as decisive factors. Actually, they
serve as preconditions to the existence of an eligible leader
set in the proposed algorithm.
, τ max
p
p
For the convenience of the leader selection metric construc-
tion, we present following proposition to combine (10)-(11)
into one constraint.
Proposition 1. Due to β ∈ (0, 1] [36], we set β = 1. Then,
considering (10), we obtain
Re(λr(A(1)
p )) < −
lp + ϕ
2τ min
p
.
(22)
Thus, if (11) holds, then (22) is satisfied.
Proof. Based on Lemma 2, for (11), it is obvious to see
Re(λr(Ap)) <
1
2
(ηp −
lp
τmin
).
Similarly, for (22), we have
Re(λr(Ap)) <
1
2
(ηp +
lp
τmin
) −
lp + ϕ
2τ min
p
=
1
2
(ηp −
ϕ
τ min
p
).
Remark 4. Naturally, whatever the value of β is, we still can
obtain one condition that satisfies (10)-(11) simultaneously
based on Proposition 1. It is obvious to see that (10) is
almost equal to (11) when β = 0.5. In fact, based on the
proposed algorithm in the last subsection, after acquiring the
configuration matrix D as well as Kp, ∀p ∈ P, the value of β
could be obtained by calculations, and β should be verified. If
the computed value of β is less than 0.5, then we reduce the
setting value such as β = 0.4 to operate the selection method
all over again until the calculated value of β is more than or
equal to the setting value, and without any operation when the
computed value of β is more than 0.5.
B. A Metric for Leader Selection
In this subsection, we establish the metric for the leader
selection method with the form of the γ-submodular function.
Besides, the γ-submodular means the function with respect to
γ submodularity-ratio. Then, we finish the metric construction
by introducing the lemma below:
Lemma 3 ([23]). For a linear system such as
( x(t) = Ax(t) + B u(t),
y(t) = C x(t),
(23)
it is determined as a fully observable control system, where
x(t) ∈ Rn is the system state. There exists a feedback control
matrix K, if all eigenvectors vi of A with eigenvalues λi
satisfying Re(λi) ≥ λ, lie in the span of the controllability
Re(λr(Ap)) <
1
2
Re(λr(A(1)
p )) < −
Re(λr(Ap)) < −
1
2
(
ηp, p ∈ S,
lp + ϕ
2βτ min
p
lp
τ min
p
− ηp), p ∈ U ,
, p ∈ U ,
The ϕ > 0 is a constant with the sufficient small value, and
then Proposition 1 holds intuitively. The proof is complete.
matrix C( A, B). It ensures Re(λi( A − B K)) < λ for the
closed-loop system (23), where λ is a given constant. More-
over, span(C( A, B)) = span(W ( A, B)) [38], where
where
C( A, B) = [ B A B ... An−1 B] ,
W ( A, B) =Z t1
t0
for some t1 > t0.
A(t−t0) B BT e
AT (t−t0)dt,
e
Thus, due to Lemma 3, we rewrite the parameter matrices
in (11), p ∈ P:
Ap = IN ⊗ A − Lp ⊗ In +
1
2
B = D ⊗ In, Kp = IN ⊗ Kp.
(
lp
τ min
p
− ηp)IN n,
Thus, the metric is constructed as
f , Xp∈P Xi:Ref
dist2(vi, span(W ( Ap, B))),
where Ref = Re(λi( Ap)) ≥ 0, p ∈ P. Ref is an eigenvalue
of Ap with the condition of Re(λi( Ap)) ≥ 0, and vi is the
corresponding eigenvector.
Remark 5. In light of Lemma 3 and Proposition 1, it is
inferred that if f = 0 then there exists a set of Kp, which
makes (10)-(11) hold. Thus, if (16)-(17) are also satisfied,
then the tracking of a reference signal can be guaranteed if
τp ∈ [τ min
], ∀p ∈ P. The strength of such transformation
is that we can assure the existence of Kp by (11) after leader
selection, instead of designing the exact values of Kp before
the selection algorithm, p ∈ P.
, τ max
p
p
6
gv,p = N nvT ¯C−1
S,pv,
′
v = ¯C
¯CS,p = ¯C
S,pv/N n,
′T
S,p
¯C
′
S,p/N n.
Then, due to [33], the submodularity-ratio γ′
bounded by
U ,k,p of gv,p is
U ,k,p ≥ λmin( ¯Cp, k + U ) ≥ λmin( ¯Cp) .
γ′
Here, we are ready to show our further result, which
is helpful to acquire the provable optimality bound of the
proposed algorithm. Concisely, the submodularity-ratio of f
is bounded by γ′
U ,k.
Theorem 2. The submodularity-ratio γU ,k of f is bounded by
γU ,k ≥ min
p
p∈P λmin( ¯Cp, k + U ) ≥ min
p
p∈P λmin( ¯Cp) .
Proof. By definition,
γ′
U ,k,p = min
W ⊆U
W ∩S=∅
S≤k
= min
W ⊆U
W ∩S=∅
S≤k
gv,p(W ∪ S) − gv,p(W )
Pl∈S(gv,p(W ∪ {l}) − gv,p(W ))
Pl∈S(fv,p(W ∪ {l}) − fv,p(W ))
fv,p(W ∪ S) − fv,p(W )
.
Then, we derive the submodularity-ratio γU ,k of f bounded
by γ′
U ,k. It is explicit that
f = Xp∈P Xi:Re(λi( Ap))≥0
fvi,p .
Thus, we rewrite ¯P1 as follows.
Then, we obtain
P1
min
S⊆Ω
S
s.t. f = 0 ,
(16) − (17) ,
S ≤ k.
(24)
Here,
the metric f construction is completed. Prior to
showing our further result, some notations are listed below:
CΩ,p( Ap, BΩ) = [BΩ, ApBΩ, ..., AN n−1
Cp( Ap, BS) = [ BS , Ap BS, ..., AN n−1
p
BΩ],
BS],
p
BΩ = IN n, BS = D ⊗ In, p ∈ P,
¯Cp = (CΩ,pPt)T (CΩ,pPt)/(N n),
λmin( ¯Cp, k + U ) =
min
S:S=k+U
λmin( ¯CS,p),
where D is the diagonal matrix determined by leader set S,
where the ith diagonal element of D is 1 if ith agent is
selected as leader and 0 otherwise. Pt ∈ R(N n)2×(N n)2
is a
nonsingular matrix, leading to each column of (CΩ,pP ) have
norm 1. ¯CS, p is derived from ¯Cp by removing all zeroes rows
and columns. A vector v with kvk2 = 1, by referring to [23],
we have
fv,p = dist2(v, span(Cp( Ap, BS)) = 1 − gv,p , p ∈ P,
γU ,k = min
W ⊆U
W ∩S=∅
S≤k
≥ min
W ⊆U
W ∩S=∅
S≤k
≥ min
W ⊆U
W ∩S=∅
S≤k
min
vi,p
f (W ∪ S) − f (W )
Pl∈S(f (W ∪ {l})) − f (W )
p Pi:Ref Pl∈S f ▽
Pi:Ref Pl∈S f ▽
i:Ref Pl∈S f ▽
Pl∈S f ▽
Pl∈S(fv,p(W ∪ {l}) − fv,p(W ))
fv,p(W ∪ S) − fv,p(W )
min
vi,p,S
vi,p,S
vi,p
p
min
≥ min
p
≥ min
p
≥ min
p
where
min
W ⊆U
W ∩S=∅
S≤k
λmin( ¯Cp, k + U )
λmin( ¯Cp),
Ref = λi( Ap)) ≥ 0, p ∈ P ,
f ▽
vi,p = fvi,p(W ∪ {l}) − fvi,p(W ) ,
f ▽
vi,p,S = fvi,p(W ∪ {S}) − fvi,p(W ) .
The proof is complete.
Here, we finish total preparation for our algorithm, which is
utilized for figuring out the solution to P1 with the provable
optimality bound.
C. The Leader Selection Algorithm
In this subsection, we propose a heuristic algorithm with the
greedy rule to select a minimum-size leader set S, which leads
to f = 0 as well as ensures (16)-(17) in Theorem 1. Thereby,
the tracking of a reference signal can be guaranteed with a set
of given TDDT. Specially, in order to ensure the tracking, it is
a necessary condition that each agent is reachable in the union
of the directed interaction graphs [2]. Therefore, we take S0
as the index set of agents, which are unreachable in the union
of the directed interaction graphs. Then, we consider S0 as
the initial leader set in the algorithm, Tmin-max = {τ min
,τ max
p }
as the set of given TDDT, and Q = {lp, µp, ηp} as the set of
parameters in Theorem 1, ∀p ∈ P.
p
Algorithm 1 Algorithm for selection of a minimum-size
leader set S with a set of given TDDT to assure the tracking
of a reference signal
Input: The agents index set Ω, the metric f , a constant k,
Tmin-max and Q
Output: The leader set S
1: procedure MINSET (S, f )
2:
Initialization:
while f > 0 do
S ← S0 , z ← 0
for vx ∈ Ω\S do
Fvx ← f (S) − f (S ∪ {vx})
end for
v∗ ← arg maxvx Fvx
S ← S ∪ {v∗}
end while
if S ≤ k and (16)-(17) hold with a set of Kp
return S
else
z = z + 1
switch to next step
if f = 0 with a new set Q
switch to step 10
else
switch to next step
if z reaches a specified maximum number zmax
return "None with such a Tmax-min"
else
3:
4:
5:
6:
7:
8:
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
15:
16:
17:
18:
19:
20:
21:
22:
23: end procedure
switch to step 3 with S = S0
Remark 6. From the pseudo-code of Algorithm 1, a candidate
leader set S is obtained after step 9, and then Kp can be
acquired via (11) with the configuration matrix D. It is not
accessible to acquire a feasible leader set with the arbitrarily
given Tmax-min. In accordance with [35], by switching be-
haviors, the ability of the tracking error state compensation
is limited, and then the solution returned by the algorithm
may be none. Besides, the lower bound kmin of the integer
k depends on the number of unreachable agents in the union
7
of the directed interaction graphs before leader selection and
kmin = 1 otherwise. There is a predefined condition that is
λr( Ap) ≥ 0, which captures the
required to be satisfied: max
p∈P
rationality of the selection scheme. If this condition does not
hold, then it causes f = 0 when D = ∅, and it is impossible
to ensure the tracking obviously.
On the consideration of Theorem 2, the provable optimality
bound of Algorithm 1 is given as follows, which is served as
measuring the optimality of resulting leader set.
Proposition 2. Let the optimal solution of P1 be represented
by S∗, where S∗ ≥ kmin. Consider S = {s1, s2, ... , sS}
as the solution returned by the Algorithm 1 in the first S
iterations. Then, we have
k γ∆ f (∅) ≥ f (St−1) ,
e− kmin
p∈P λmin( ¯Cp, 2S) and St−1 denotes the
where γ∆ = min
result of Algorithm 1 at the second-to-last iteration.
p
Proof. By referring to [23] as well as the definition of the
submodularity-ratio, we obtain
Pl∈S f (∅) − f ({l})
f (∅) − f (S)
≥ γS,S ≥ γ∆.
Combining with the greedy rule of Algorithm 1, we have
S(f (∅) − f (s1)) ≥ γ∆(f (∅) − f (S)) ,
meaning that
(1 −
γ∆
S
)(f (∅) − f (S)) ≥ f (s1) − f (S) .
(25)
Subsequently, we derive that
S(f (s1) − f (s1, s2)) ≥ γ∆(f (s1) − f (S ∪ {s1}))
≥ γ∆(f (s1) − f (S)) .
(26)
Furthermore, (26) is equivalent to
(1 −
γ∆
S
)(f (s1) − f (S)) ≥ f (s1, s2) − f (S).
Considering the (25) jointly, we obtain
(1 −
γ∆
S
)2(f (∅) − f (S)) ≥ f (s1, s2) − f (S).
Thus, by induction method, it is explicit that
(1 −
γ∆
S
)S∗(f (∅) − f (S)) ≥ f (s1, s2, ... , sS∗) − f (S) ,
signifying further,
(1 −
γ∆
S
)S∗(f (∅) − f (S)) ≥ f (St−1) − f (S) .
It is noted that f (S) = 0, and then we obtain
S∗log(1 −
γ∆
S
) ≥ log
f (St−1)
f (∅)
.
Based on the fact that log(x) ≥ 1 − 1/x, ∀x ≥ 1, we derive
log
f (∅)
f (St−1)
≥ S∗log(1 −
γ∆
S
)−1 ≥ S∗
γ∆
S
,
implying that
γ0 =
1
γ∆
log
f (∅)
f (St−1)
≥
S∗
S
.
Furthermore, due to S∗ ≥ kmin and S ≤ k, we have
are shown, composing of the tracking error evolution curve
of followers, comparison with two selection methods and the
relation between number of leaders needed and the dwell time.
Finally, we describe the conservativeness analysis.
8
e− kmin
k γ∆ f (∅) ≥ e− S∗
S γ∆ f (∅) ≥ f (St−1).
(27)
A. Cases Statement
The proof is complete.
It is noticeable that the optimality bound γ0 ∈ (0, 1) can
be calculated after leader selection. Besides, this bound can
be as small as possible under certain parameter matrices,
which implies that
the solution approximates the optimal
one nearly. In (27), when γ∆ is larger, which points out
that the submodularity of f appears significantly, the value
of f (St−1)/f (∅) is smaller. Thus,
the
increment of adding a leader is larger, which is beneficial to
satisfy f = 0 with less leaders.
is inferred that
it
We consider a high-order linear multi-agent network with
six agents and three predefined topologies, shown in Fig. 1.
The individual self-dynamical matrix A [31] is
A =
0.4147 −0.4087 −0.1287
0.3802 −0.3380 −0.3305
0.1313 −0.7076
0.0233
,
where it is not Hurwitz stable, λ1(A) = −0.50, λ2(A) =
0.30 + 0.10i, λ3(A) = 0.30 − 0.10i. The initial state of every
agent is generated randomly within the range (−100, 100).
Furthermore, the switching law σ(t) is aperiod.
Actually,
there exists conservativeness for Algorithm 1,
which is analyzed in the next section. Here, we present another
one to reduce the conservativeness.
Algorithm 2 Algorithm for selection of a minimum-size
leader set S with a set of given TDDT to assure the tracking
of a reference signal
Input: The agents index set Ω, the metric f , a constant k,
(cid:24)
(cid:27)
Tmin-max and Q
Output: The leader set S
1: procedure MINSET ( S, f )
2:
Initialization:
while S ≤ k do
S ← S0 , z ← 0
3:
4:
5:
6:
7:
8:
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
15:
16:
17:
18:
while z < zmax do
If (14)-(17) hold with a set of Kp
return S
else
z = z + 1 with a new set Q
end while
If f = 0
return "None with such a Tmax-min"
else
for vx ∈ Ω\ S do
Fvx ← f ( S) − f ( S ∪ {vx})
end for
v∗ ← arg maxvx Fvx
S ← S ∪ {v∗}
z = 0
(cid:23)
(cid:25)
11
(cid:26)
(cid:24)
(cid:23)
(cid:25)
(cid:26)
(cid:24)
(cid:23)
(cid:25)
(cid:26)
(cid:28)
(cid:27)
(cid:28)
(cid:27)
(cid:28)
22
33
Fig. 1: Three predefined interaction topologies. It is intuitive that there exist
agents (agent 1 and agent 6) unreachable in the union of the directed interac-
tion topologies before leader selection. After Algorithm 1, every mode satisfies
λr(Ap) > 0 based on the parameters in our simulation, where S = {1, 5, 6}.
Specifically, λr(AG1 ) ≈ 0.05, λr(AG2 ) ≈ 0.30, λr(AG3 ) ≈ 0.30, it
signifies that each mode is unstable.
B. Leader Selection Numerical Examples
In this subsection, we depict
the results of numerical
examples for Algorithm 1. In the first place, we set
the
initial range of a set of given TDDT as τG1 ∈ [1.00, 2.00],
τG2 ∈ [0.50, 1.50], τG3 ∈ [0.50, 1.50]. k = 3. In view of
Algorithm 1, we acquire parameters as follows:
lG1 = 3, µG1 = 0.03, ηG1 = 2.0,
lG2 = 2, µG2 = 0.02, ηG2 = 4.2,
lG3 = 2, µG3 = 0.04, ηG3 = 2.8,
a leader set S = {1, 5, 6}, and the practical range of TDDT:
end while
19:
20: end procedure
The complexity of Algorithm 2 is O(ξzmaxn3), where ξ =
S − S0 + 1 ≥ 1, while the complexity of Algorithm 1 is
O(zmaxn3), which shows Algorithm 1 requires less running
time when ξ > 1.
V. EXAMPLES
In this section, numerical examples are provided to verify
the effectiveness for Algorithm 1. Firstly, we give the descrip-
tion for cases, including parameters settings. Then, the results
τ ∗
G1 ∈ [1.60, 1.74],
τ ∗
G2 ∈ [0.83, 0.92],
τ ∗
G3 ∈ [0.94, 1.13],
where the unit of time is second. Due to (11), we acquire the
input gain matrices:
KG1 =
KG2 =
0.0002
0.1399 −0.0604
0.2275 −0.0017
−00017
0.0002 −0.0604
0.1819
,
0.0013 −0.5190 0.8743
,
1.2657 −0.0143 0.0013
−0.0143
0.5130 −5190
The second agent tracking error evolution curve
5
10
15
20
25
The third agent tracking error evolution curve
Time/sec
5
10
15
20
25
The forth agent tracking error evolution curve
Time/sec
5
10
15
20
25
Time/sec
The topology evolution
200
100
0
3
,
2
,
1
=
i
,
i
2
)
t
(
-100
0
200
100
0
-100
-200
0
3
,
2
,
1
=
i
,
i
3
)
t
(
100
3
,
2
,
1
=
i
,
i
4
)
t
(
50
0
-50
0
r
e
b
m
u
N
y
g
o
o
p
o
T
l
3
2
1
0
5
10
15
20
25
Time/sec
Fig. 2: Followers tracking error evolution. In view of the leader set S =
{1, 5, 6},
the tracking error evolution
process of agent 2, 3, and 4 respectively. It is obvious to see that the switching
law is aperiod.
the former three subgraphs depict
1.2763 −0.0003
−0.0003
0.0000 −0.0104
0.0000
1.2612 −0.0104
1.2685
.
KG3 =
In what follows, the tracking error evolution curves of follow-
ers are shown in Fig. 2. Although we set no requirement on
connectivity, based on Algorithm 1, after a number of trails,
we find that each agent is reachable in one topology at least.
This signifies that each agent is reachable in the union of the
directed interaction graphs, which is the necessary topology
condition for the realization of the tracking.
index of fmax = Pp∈P λr(A(2)
In the second place, we show the comparison with other two
selection methods, where parameters are based on those that
are mentioned above. We direct at greedy selection with the
p ), as well as random selection
with f . To be precise, we construct the metric fmax which is
anticipated to be minimized, since it is an intuitive measure
to fulfill the decisive factor (11). For greedy selection with
fmax, we still draw on the proposed method, but the metric
f is replaced with fmax. For random selection, we refer to
Algorithm 1, but we select a new leader from Ω\S randomly
9
-submodular function evolution curve
Random
-submodular
maximum
e
u
l
a
v
n
o
i
t
c
n
u
f
r
a
l
u
d
o
m
b
u
s
-
5
4
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Number of leaders
Fig. 3: Comparison of three methods. Random corresponds to random selec-
tion with the metric f , selecting a new leader randomly for each iteration.
γ-submodular represents our method. Maximum denotes greedy selection,
with the metric fmax, adding a leader to minimize the index. It is shown
our algorithm is optimal comparatively, Especially, it is of interest to mention
that curves of γ-submodular and maximum almost coincide with each other,
with a certain set of Kp, p ∈ P. For instance, KG1 = 0.45 · IN n,
KG2 = 3.15 · IN n, KG2 = 2.75 · IN n.
Number of leaders needed as TDDT addition
s
r
e
d
a
e
l
f
o
r
e
b
m
u
N
7
6
5
4
3
2
0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
1
2
Increment of TDDT/sec
2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8
3
Fig. 4: Relation between leader selection and TDDT. For brevity, we set the
lateral axis as the increment of TDDT, which implies that the lateral axis
value of each point represents the augmentation for the TDDT based on the
parameters in the first numerical case.
rather than with the greedy rule. For the persuasiveness of this
scheme, we take the expected value of 100 trails. The signifi-
cance of this simulation between diverse three methods, lies in
the comparison of optimization performance when we add an
agent to S. Concretely, we explore fmax from the perspective
of the maximal real eigenvalue, while γ-submodular function
f from the Euclidean distance of controllability. The better
performance implies f = 0 with less leaders. Then, the result
is shown in Fig. 3. As is shown, the optimization performance
of the proposed method is optimal comparatively.
In the third place, we investigate the relation between the
number of leaders needed and the TDDT. As the basis of the
above-mentioned parameters configuration, we adjust the ηp
to alter the TDDT. Specifically, we operate Algorithm 1 at
every turn adding 0.2 second. Thereby, we obtain the result
shown in Fig. 4. This result shows the relationship between
leader selection and the dwell time. It is straightforward to
see that all the agents are required to be accessible to the
reference signal, when the increment of the TDDT is over 2.2
second. In addition, through a number of trails, it is interesting
to point out that there exists a proportion relation between the
eligible TDDT. This means that each TDDT is not allowed to
differ one other greatly. We consider that it is mainly due to
the connectivity between predefined topologies as well as the
feedback gains matrices.
TABLE I: COMPARISON AS NUMBER OF STABLE MODES ADDITION
λr(AG1 ) < 0, λr(AG2 ) > 0, λr(AG3 ) > 0,
λr(AG1 ) < 0, λr(AG2 ) < 0, λr(AG3 ) > 0,
λr(AG1 ) < 0, λr(AG2 ) < 0, λr(AG3 ) < 0,
S = {1, 5, 6}
S = {1, 2, 3, 5, 6}
S = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6}
τ ′
G1
> 1.77, τ ′
G2
= 0.65, τ ′
G3
= 0.85,
τ ′
G1
> 1.56, τ ′
G2
> 0.54, τ ′
G3
= 0.62,
τ ′
G1
> 1.51, τ ′
G2
> 0.51, τ ′
G3
> 0.51,
10
In the last place, based on Algorithm 1, we investigate the
comparison between different number of stable modes, includ-
ing the result of leader set and corresponding TDDT. The
result is shown in the Table I. As is shown, when the number of
stable modes increases, the number of leaders needed grows.
However, when we consider each mode unstable, we require
leaders with the minimum number to ensure the tracking.
C. Conservativeness Analysis
In this subsection, we illustrate the conservativeness analysis
of Algorithm 1. In Fig. 1, there are two unreachable agents in
the union of the directed interaction graphs, agent 1 and agent
6 respectively. We set {1, 6} as the leader set, by virtue of
Lemma 1, and then we can acquire a set of feasible TDDT to
ensure the tracking. However, if we take the same parameters
to execute Algorithm 1, we can not acquire the leader set
{1, 6}, but {1, 5, 6}. Thus, we consider the conservativeness is
due to without considering the impact of union of the directed
interaction topologies in Theorem 1 and Lemma 3. Then, it
causes that each part fp of the leader selection metric f has
to be satisfied separately, where
VI. CONCLUSION
In this paper, we investigate the problem of choosing a
minimum-size leader set to achieve the tracking of a reference
signal with a set of given TDDT. We show the problem
description as ¯P1. Then, we present Theorem 1 to assure the
desired tracking. Subsequently, we establish a metric based on
the proposed sufficient condition, and then we formulate the
combinatorial optimization problem as P2. We design Algo-
rithm 1 with the provable optimality bound to deal with P2.
Then, we propose Algorithm 2 to reduce the conservativeness
but the complexity may be higher than Algorithm 1. Finally,
we show the numerical cases to evaluate effectiveness of the
proposed method, and the conservativeness analysis for the
algorithm is provided. The switching leader set is considered
as our future work, while the leader set is fixed in this paper.
APPENDIX A
Proof of Lemma 2. It is intuitive to see
f = Xp∈P
fp, fp = Xi:Ref
dist2(vi, span(W ( Ap, B))).
Re(λi(A(1)
p − αIN n)) < 0, where α = −
lp + ϕ
2βτ min
p
, ∀p ∈ P.
For instance, for the first consequence in Leader Selection
Simulation:
G1 : λr( AG1 ) ≈ 0.2414,
G2 : λr( AG2 ) ≈ −0.5826,
G3 : λr( AG3 ) ≈ −0.0357.
Prior to leader selection, S = ∅, then fG1 = 3.2936, fG2 = 0,
fG3 = 0. In order to decease f = fG1 to zero, we operate
Algorithm 1 to obtain the result as {1, 5, 6}. Obviously, this
leader set satisfies the condition that with least leaders, each
agent is reachable in G1 instead of the union of the directed
interaction graphs. In addition, the conservativeness analysis
does not mean that it is enough to select the unreachable agents
as leaders in the union of the directed interaction topologies.
Actually, the system (3) requires more leaders to guarantee
the tracking when the TDDT increases, such as the result in
Fig. 4. To reduce the conservativeness, we propose an heuristic
method as Algorithm 2. By such a scheme, with parameters
in the Case Statement, we obtain the result S = {1, 6}, as
well as the corresponding TDDT:τG1 = 1.54, τG1 = 0.76,
τG3 = 1.18. In this example, ξ = S − S0 + 1 = 1. Besides,
because of the conservativeness in the condition f = 0, when
this requirement is removed, then it is definite that the S
returned by Algorithm 2 is less than or equal to S returned
by Algorithm 1.
Thus, we derive that
Re(vT
i (A(1)
p − αIN n)vi) < 0,
p − αIN n)), and vT
where vi is the ith eigenvector of (A(1)
p −αIN n) corresponding
to λi((A(1)
is
straightforward to see that vi is also the ith eigenvector of A(1)
p vi = λi(A(1)
i A(1)
corresponding to λi(A(1)
p ).
Then, based on the analysis above, we obtain
i vi = 1. In addition,
p ), and then vT
it
p
Re(λi(A(1)
i (A(1)
= Re(vT
i A(1)
= Re(vT
i A(1)
= Re(vT
= Re(λi(A(1)
< 0,
p − αIN n))
p − αIN n)vi)
p vi) − Re(vT
p vi) − α
p )) − α
i αIN nvi)
Thereby, we have
Re(λr(A(1)
p )) < α.
The proof is complete.
11
[24] A. Clark, B. Alomair, L. Bushnell, and R. Poovendran, "Submodularity
in input node selection for networked linear systems efficient algorithms
for performance and controllability," IEEE Control Systems Magazine,
vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 52-74, 2017.
[25] B. Guo, O. Karaka, T. H. Summers, and M. Kamgarpour, "Actuator
placement for optimizing network performance under controllability
constraints," arXiv preprint arXiv:1903.08120, 2019.
[26] K. Oh, M. Park, and H. Ahn, "A survey of multi-agent formation
control," Automatica, vol. 53, pp. 424-440, 2015.
[27] P. Wang, G. Wen, X. Yu, W. Yu, and T. Huang, "Synchronization of
multi-layer networks: from node-to-node synchronization to complete
synchronization," IEEE Transaction on Circuits and Systems-I: Regular
Papers, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 1141-1152, 2019.
[28] G. Wen, P. Wang, X. Yu, W. Yu, and J. Cao, "Pinning synchronization
of complex switching networks with a leader of nonzero control inputs,"
IEEE Transaction on Circuits and Systems-I: Regular Papers, vol. 66,
no. 8, pp. 3100-3112, 2019.
[29] G. Wen, W. Yu, G. Hu, J. Cao, and X. Yu, "Pinning synchronization of
directed networks with switching topologies: a multiple Lyapunov func-
tions approach," IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning
Systems, vol. 26, no. 12, pp. 3239-3250, 2015.
[30] H. Lin and P. J. Antsaklis, "Stability and stabilizability of switched linear
systems: a survey of recent results", IEEE Transactions on Automatic
Control, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 308-322, 2009.
[31] W. Ni, X. L. Wang, and C. Xiong, "Consensus controllability, observabil-
ity and robust design for leader-following linear multi-agent systems",
Automatica, vol. 49, no. 7, pp. 2199-2205, 2013.
[32] A. Tsiamis, S. Pequito, and G. J. Pappas, "Distributed leader selection in
switching networks of high-order integrators," in 55th Annual Allerton
Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing. USA, 2017,
pp. 413-420.
[33] A. Das and D. Kempe, "Submodular meets spectral: greedy algorithms
for subset selection, sparse approximation and dictionary selection", in
28th International Conference on International Confernce on Machine
Learning. Omnipress, 2011, pp. 1057-1064.
[34] Z. Zhang, Y. Wang, E. K. P. Chong, and A. Pezeshki, "Subspace
selection for projection maximization with matroid constraints," IEEE
Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 65, no. 5, pp. 1339-1351, 2017.
[35] W. Xiang and J. Xiao, "Stabilization of switched continuous-time
systems with all modes unstable via dwell time switching," Automatica,
vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 940-945, 2014.
[36] F. Zhang, Matrix Theory: basic Results and Techniques. Springer Sci-
ence & Business Media, 2011.
[37] C. Lee, "Solution bounds of the continuous and discrete Lyapunov
matrix equations," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications,
vol. 120, no. 3, pp. 559-578, 2004.
[38] "https://stanford.edu/class/ee363/lectures/contr.pdf" 2009.
REFERENCES
[1] R. Olfati-Saber and R. M. Murray,"Consensus problems in networks of
agents with switching topology and time-delays," IEEE Transactions on
Automatic Control, vol. 49, no. 9, pp. 1520-1533, 2004.
[2] W. Ren and R. W. Beard, "Consensus seeking in multi-agent systems
under dynamically changing interaction topologies," IEEE Transactions
on Automatic Control, vol. 50, no. 5, pp.655-661, 2005.
[3] Y. Cao, W. Yu, W. Ren, and G. Chen, "An overview of recent progress
in the study of distributed multi-agent coordination," IEEE Transactions
on Industrial Informatics, vol. 9, no. 1, 427-438, 2013.
[4] X. Jin, S. Wang, J. Qin, W. Zheng, and Yu Kang, "Adaptive fault-tolerant
consensus for a class of uncertain nonlinear second-order multi-agent
systems with circuit implementation," IEEE Transaction on Circuits and
Systems-I: Regular Papers, vol. 65, no. 7, pp. 2243-2255, 2018.
[5] J. Fu, G. Wen, W. Yu, T. Huang, and J. Cao, "Exponential consensus
of multi-agent systems with Lipschitz nonlinearities using sampled-
data information," IEEE Transaction on Circuits and Systems-I: Regular
Papers, vol. 65, no. 12, pp. 4363-4375, 2018.
[6] X. Dong and G. Hu, "Time-varying formation tracking for linear multi-
agent systems with multiple leaders," IEEE Transactions on Automatic
Control, vol. 62, no. 7, pp. 3658-3664, 2017.
[7] W. Yang, Y. Zhang, C. Yang, Z. Zuo, and X. Wang, "Online power
scheduling for distributed filtering over an energy-limited sensor net-
work," IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 65, no. 5,
pp.4216-4226, 2018.
[8] Q. Song, F. Liu, J. Cao, and W. Yu, "M-matrix strategies for pinning-
controlled leader-following consensus in multi-agent systems with non-
linear dynamics," IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, vol. 43, no. 6, pp.
1688-1697, 2013.
[9] M. Mesbahi and M. Egerstedt, "Graph theoretic methods in multi-agent
networks," Princeton University Press, 2010.
[10] G. Wen, Z. Duan, G. Chen, and W. Yu, "Consensus tracking of multi-
agent systems with Lipschitz-type node dynamics and switching topolo-
gies," IEEE Transaction on Circuits and Systems-I: Regular Papers, vol.
61, no. 2, pp. 499-511, 2014.
[11] K. Liu, P. Duan, Z. Duan, H. Cai, and J. Lu, "Leader-following
consensus of multi-agent systems with switching networks and event-
triggered control," IEEE Transaction on Circuits and Systems-I: Regular
Papers, vol. 65, no. 5, pp. 1696-1706, 2018.
[12] W. Ren and R. W. Beard, "Distributed consensus in multi-vehicle
cooperative control: Theory and applications," New York: Springer,
2007.
[13] A. Clark, L. Bushnell, and R. Poovendran, "A supermodular optimization
framework for leader selection under link noise in linear multi-agent
systems," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 59, no. 2, pp.
283-296, 2014.
[14] W. Yang, Z. Wang, Z. Zuo, C. Yang, and H. Shi, "Nodes selection
strategy in cooperative tracking problem," Automatica, vol. 74, pp. 118-
125, 2016.
[15] A. Clark, B. Alomair, L. Bushnell, and R. Poovendran, "Input selection
for performance and controllability of structured linear descriptor sys-
tems," SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, vol. 55, no. 1, pp.
457-485, 2017.
[16] E. Mackin and S. Patterson, "Submodularity in systems with higher
order consensus with absolute information," arXiv:1905.09156v1, 2019.
[17] M. Van De Wal and B. De Jager, "A review of methods for input
input/output selection," Automatica, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 487-510, 2001.
[18] S. Pequito, G. Ramos, S. Kar, A. P. Aguiar, and J. Ramos, "The robust
minimal controllability problem," Automatica, vol. 82, pp. 261-268,
2017.
[19] Y. Liu, J. Slotine, and A. L. Barab´asi, "Controllability of complex
networks," Nature, vol. 473, no. 7346, pp. 167-173, 2011.
[20] F. Lin, M. Fardad, and M. R. Jovanovi´c, "Algorithms for leader selection
in stochastically forced consensus networks," IEEE Transactions on
Automatic Control, vol. 59, no. 7, pp.1789-1802, 2014.
[21] V. Tzoumas, M. A. Rahimian, G. J. Pappas, and A. Jadbabaie, "Minimal
actuator placement with bounds on control effort," IEEE Transactions
on Control of Network Systems, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 67-78, 2016.
[22] A. Clark, B. Alomair, L. Bushnell, and R. Poovendran, "Toward
synchronization in networks with nonlinear dynamics: a submodular
optimization framework," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol.
62, no. 10, pp. 5055-5068, 2017.
[23] Z. Liu, Y. Long, A. Clark, L. Bushnell, D. Kirschen, and R. Poovendran,
"Minimal
input and output selection for stability of systems with
uncertainties," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 64, no.
4, pp. 1456-1471, 2019.
|
1709.09451 | 2 | 1709 | 2017-11-18T23:24:09 | Combining Prediction of Human Decisions with ISMCTS in Imperfect Information Games | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.GT"
] | Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) has been extended to many imperfect information games. However, due to the added complexity that uncertainty introduces, these adaptations have not reached the same level of practical success as their perfect information counterparts. In this paper we consider the development of agents that perform well against humans in imperfect information games with partially observable actions. We introduce the Semi-Determinized-MCTS (SDMCTS), a variant of the Information Set MCTS algorithm (ISMCTS). More specifically, SDMCTS generates a predictive model of the unobservable portion of the opponent's actions from historical behavioral data. Next, SDMCTS performs simulations on an instance of the game where the unobservable portion of the opponent's actions are determined. Thereby, it facilitates the use of the predictive model in order to decrease uncertainty. We present an implementation of the SDMCTS applied to the Cheat Game, a well-known card game, with partially observable (and often deceptive) actions. Results from experiments with 120 subjects playing a head-to-head Cheat Game against our SDMCTS agents suggest that SDMCTS performs well against humans, and its performance improves as the predictive model's accuracy increases. | cs.MA | cs | Combining Prediction of Human Decisions with ISMCTS in
Imperfect Information Games*
Moshe Bitan
Department of Computer Science
Bar-Ilan University, Israel
[email protected]
Sarit Kraus
Department of Computer Science
Bar-Ilan University, Israel
[email protected]
7
1
0
2
v
o
N
8
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
2
v
1
5
4
9
0
.
9
0
7
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
ABSTRACT
Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) has been extended to many imper-
fect information games. However, due to the added complexity that
uncertainty introduces, these adaptations have not reached the same
level of practical success as their perfect information counterparts.
In this paper we consider the development of agents that perform
well against humans in imperfect information games with partially
observable actions. We introduce the Semi-Determinized-MCTS
(SDMCTS), a variant of the Information Set MCTS algorithm (ISM-
CTS). More specifically, SDMCTS generates a predictive model of
the unobservable portion of the opponent's actions from historical be-
havioral data. Next, SDMCTS performs simulations on an instance
of the game where the unobservable portion of the opponent's ac-
tions are determined. Thereby, it facilitates the use of the predictive
model in order to decrease uncertainty. We present an implemen-
tation of the SDMCTS applied to the Cheat Game, a well-known
card game, with partially observable (and often deceptive) actions.
Results from experiments with 120 subjects playing a head-to-head
Cheat Game against our SDMCTS agents suggest that SDMCTS
performs well against humans, and its performance improves as the
predictive model's accuracy increases.
INTRODUCTION
1
Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) has had significant success in
perfect information games such as Scrabble and Hex [1, 31] and
most noticeably in computer Go [13, 14, 32]. In recent years, MCTS
was adapted by researchers [3] to solve imperfect information games.
However, due to the added complexity that uncertainty introduces,
these adaptations have not reached the same level of practical suc-
cess as their perfect information counterparts. This paper focuses on
developing agents that can play well against humans in imperfect in-
formation games by applying learning models to reduce uncertainty.
More specifically, we focus on predicting the unobservable portion
of the human opponent's actions and combining the prediction into
our novel MCTS adaptation.
One of the first popular extensions of MCTS to imperfect informa-
tion games is a MCTS variation where a perfect information search
is performed on a determinized instance of the game [2, 16, 31, 33].
That is, the search is performed on an instance of the game where
hidden information is revealed to the players, thereby transforming
the imperfect information game to a perfect information game. This
approach allows the deployment of a predictive model. However,
*This work was supported in part by the LAW-TRAIN project that has received funding
from the European Union Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant
agreement 653587 and by MAAFAT. In addition, a grant from the Ministry of Science
& Technology, Israel & the Japan Scienceand Technology Agency (jst), Japan
several problems have been reported when applying determiniza-
tion which prevent the convergence to an optimal strategy such as
Strategy Fusion as discussed later in section "Determinization" [26].
To address these problems, Information set MCTS, a new family
of MCTS adaptations, were developed [6, 18, 22]. ISMCTS and its
variants perform MCTS simulations directly on information sets. An
information set is a set of game states that are indistinguishable by
the player at a given stage of the game. However, ISMCTS assumes
that every game state in the information set has the same probability
of being the game state which is not always the case. Thus, it prevents
the use of a predictive model.
This paper proposes a method for the development of agents play-
ing against humans in imperfect information games and partially
observable actions. We introduce the Semi-Determinized-MCTS
(SDMCTS), a variant of the Information Set MCTS algorithm (ISM-
CTS) combined with a determinization technique to take advantage
of the benefits of both approaches. SDMCTS is designed to re-
duce uncertainty by utilizing a predictive model of the unobservable
portion of the opponent's actions. Similar to ISMCTS, SDMCTS
performs simulations directly on information sets with one important
distinction. The SDMCTS performs simulations on an instance of
the game where the unobservable portion of the opponent's actions
are determined. The opponent's actions are determined while keep-
ing the remaining unobservable information hidden (e.g. opponent's
cards). Thereby, it preserves the advantages of ISMCTS (i.e. reduce
Strategy Fusion) while facilitating the use of the predictive model
for decreasing uncertainty with regards to hidden actions.
We evaluate the SDMCTS in Cheat Game, a well-known card
game. The players' goal in Cheat Game (also known as Bullshit and
I Doubt It) is to discard the initially dealt cards. At each turn, a player
may discard several cards and declare their rank. However, the cards
are placed facedown and the player is allowed to lie about their rank.
Thereby, the action is only partially observable by the opponents.
For the development of the SDMCTS agents, a behavioural-based
predictive model of human player actions in the Cheat Game was
used. The predictive model was trained on data collected from 60
players playing human-vs-human games reaching 0.821 Area Un-
der the Curve (AUC). In the evaluation experiments, the SDMCTS
agents played head-to-head cheat games against 120 human sub-
jects. The results suggest that the SDMCTS agent performs well
against humans, reaching a win ratio of 88.97%. Furthermore, its
performances improve as the predictive model's accuracy increases.
To conclude, the main novelties of this paper are: First, we present
SDMCTS, an algorithm for combining prediction of human deci-
sions with ISMCTS. Second, we introduce the Cheat Game as a
test-bed for imperfect information games with partially observable
actions. In addition, we present a highly efficient SDMCTS agent
that performs well against humans and can run on a standard PC.
Furthermore, we present a behavioral based prediction model of hu-
man decisions in the Cheat Game with 0.821 AUC accuracy. Lastly,
experimental results demonstrate the skillful performance of the
SDMCTS approach.
2 BACKGROUND AND RELATED WORK
2.1 Extensive-Form Games
In this section a brief overview of the game tree representation and
its formal notation are presented. An extensive-form game is a tree-
based representation of a sequential interaction of multiple fully
rational players. The set of players is denoted by N = {1, ..., n}. In
addition, a special player commonly called Chance is denoted by
c which has a probability distribution over its actions. The set of
all possible game states is denoted by S. Each s ∈ S corresponds
to a tree node in the game tree representation. A reward function
R : S → ℜn maps the terminal states to the corresponding payoff
vector where R(s)i is player i's payoff. Each player's goal is to
maximize his payoff in the game. The function P : S → N ∪ {c}
returns the player that is allowed to act in that state. The set of all
available actions to player P(s) is denoted by A(s). Each action
a ∈ A(s) corresponds to an edge from the current state s to a
successor state. As mentioned above, in imperfect information games
the game state is not fully observable by the players. The Information
State ui ∈ Ui is the observable portion of a game state s for player
i. Thereby, the Information Function is defined as Ii
: S → Ui .
It is important to note that in cases where multiple game states are
indistinguishable by the player, the game states will be mapped to
the same information state. Therefore, the set of indistinguishable
game states that corresponds to an information state ui is denoted
by I−1(ui) = {s I(s) = ui}.
The behavioural strategy of player i, denoted by
π i(u) ∈ ∆(A(u)),∀u ∈ U i
, is a probability distribution over the set of available action A(ui).
Πi denotes the set set of all behavioural strategies of player i. Fur-
thermore, a strategy profile π = (π 1, ..., π n) is the set of all players'
strategies. π−i denotes all strategies in π except π i . The expected
payoff of player i where all players follow strategy profile π is de-
noted by Ri(π). A strategy π i is said to be best response if for a
given fixed strategy profile π−i , Ri(π−i ∪ π i) is optimal. A Nash
equilibrium is a strategy profile π such that for each player i ∈ N,
the strategy π i ∈ π is best response to π−i .
2.2 Monte Carlo Tree Search
MCTS [5] is a simulation-based search algorithm for finding opti-
mal strategies. The algorithm was designed for a high-dimensional
search space. Each simulated path through the game tree is selected
to optimize exploration in more auspicious regions of the search
space. One of the more interesting properties of MCTS is that it
guarantees to converge to optimal strategies for perfect-information
two-player zero-sum games [20]. MCTS is comprised of four main
components. The first component is a method for advancing the
game and is denoted by st +1 ← G(st , at). The second is a mecha-
nism for updating statistics for each visited node (i.e. game state).
The third component is an action selection method that is based on
statistics stored for visited tree nodes. The last component is the
rollout policy. The rollout policy is used to select actions when the
simulation encounters game states that are out of the scope of the
game tree. That is, a default strategy for selecting actions when there
is no tree node that corresponds to the game state in the search tree.
A detailed explanation of the Cheat Game MCTS representation is
presented later in the section The Cheat Game Agent.
For a given computational budget, MCTS performs multiple sim-
ulations. Each simulation starts at the initial game state and traverses
the game tree using the above action selection mechanisms. When a
simulation reaches a terminal state, the leaf node's payoff is prop-
agated back to all visited nodes and the algorithm updates their
statistics. For each game state st the algorithm stores the following
statistics: N(s) denotes the number of times node s has been visited.
N(s, a) denotes the number of times action a was chosen when visit-
ing node s. Lastly, Q(s, a) denotes the aggregated discounted payoff
for performing action a at state s.
2.3 Determinization
Many MCTS variations were extended to imperfect information
games [3]. One of the more popular approaches performs the search
on a determinized instance of the game [2, 16, 31, 33]. An imperfect
information game can be converted into a perfect information game
(i.e. a deterministic game) by making the game states fully observ-
able by all players and fixing the outcomes of stochastic events. A
determinized MCTS algorithm performs simulations on the deter-
ministic game with perfect information. In order to obtain a strategy
for the full imperfect information game, the algorithm samples mul-
tiple determinized states that correspond to the current information
state, and for each action uniformly averages its discounted reward
(i.e. Q(s, a)). However, determinization techniques are susceptible to
several problems which prevent its convergence to Nash-Equilibrium
[23]. One of the more commonly reported problems is strategy fu-
sion [10]. Strategy fusion occurs when performing simulations of a
determinized perfect information game which relies on the assump-
tion that a player can perform distinct actions on multiple game
states. However, due to imperfect information, these game states
may be indistinguishable by the player and the error will be propa-
gated and distort the discounted reward estimations in earlier rounds.
Information set MCTS [6] is a MCTS variation that was developed
to address this problem.
Information Set MCTS
2.4
Information set MCTS (ISMCTS) [6] is a MCTS variation that per-
forms simulations directly on trees of information sets. Each node in
the tree represents an information set from the point of view of the
player and the statistics stored accordingly. However, when perform-
ing an online search, the algorithm is vulnerable to Non-Locality.
Non-locality occurs due to optimal payoffs not being recursively
defined over subgames as in perfect information games. As a result,
guarantees normally provided by search algorithms built on subgame
decomposition no longer hold. Online Outcome Sampling (OOS)
[22] is a variant of Monte Carlo counterfactual regret minimization
(MCCFR) [21]. It is the first MCTS approach that addresses these
problems by performing each simulation from the root state. While
OOS guarantees convergence to Nash equilibrium over time in all
two-player zero-sum games, other MCTS variations may yield better
performance in certain situations. Smooth-UCT [18] is a variant of
the established Upper Confidence Bounds Applied to Trees (UCT)
algorithm [20]. Similar to fictitious play, Smooth-UCT's action selec-
tion mechanism is designed to mix a player's average policy during
self-play. Smooth-UCT requires the same information as UCT (i.e.
node statistics). However, Smooth-UCT uses the average strategy by
utilizing the N(u, a) value. More specifically, Smooth-UCT chooses
the average strategy with probability ηk and the standard UCT ac-
tion with probability 1 − ηk , where ηk is an iteration sequence with
lim
k→∞ ηk = γ > 0. Smooth-UCT converges much faster than OOS
to a sub-optimal strategy and was only outperformed by OOS after
a significant number of simulated episodes [18]. This suggests that
for games with time constraints, Smooth-UCT outperforms better
than OOS . For this reason, Smooth-UCT was selected as the online
MCTS algorithm in the experiments. It is important to note that
the present technique is independent of the online MCTS variation
and can be extended to any Online Information set MCTS variation.
The section Smooth-UCT Calibration explores in detail the method
for calibrating the Smooth-UCT parameters that were used for the
experiments.
2.5 Related Work on Predicting Human Decisions
While many games have an optimal strategy for playing against
fully rational opponents, empirical studies suggest that people rarely
converge to the sub-game perfect equilibrium [9, 11]. However,
in many settings, it is still possible to develop a general human
decision-making model for predicting human decisions using data
collected from other people [27–29]. On the other hand, generalizing
computational agents' decision-making without prior knowledge of
their computational model is significantly harder [8]. Therefore, an
integrative approach that incorporates prediction of a human oppo-
nent's decision-making may yield better game performance when
interacting with an opponent for the first time, especially when deal-
ing with uncertainty and deceptiveness. By applying prediction of
human decision-making the agent adapts its actions to the human
player and can better plan its future actions [7, 12, 24, 29]. Facial
expressions were used for predicting people's strategic decisions
in the Centipede-Game [25]. Key facial points were extracted from
video snippets of the players' faces and were used to train a classifier
to predict participants' decisions. [28] presented the Predictive and
Relevance based Heuristic agent (PRH), which can assist people in
argumentative discussions. The agent utilized a predictive model
with 76% accuracy of people's top three arguments in conjunction
with a heuristic model. [17] introduced neural-based models that
learn a policy and the behavior of the opponents. An encoded obser-
vation of the opponent's action is integrated into a deep Q-Network
(DQN). The presented methods outperform DQN in both a simulated
soccer game and a trivia game.
3 SEMI-DETERMINIZED MCTS
We introduce the Semi-Determinized MCTS (SDMCTS), a variant
of the Information Set MCTS algorithm (ISMCTS). SDMCTS uti-
lizes a predictive model of the unobservable portion of the human
opponent's actions. First, SDMCTS searches for an optimal strategy
as a response to the opponent's possible strategies in an instance of
the game where hidden actions are revealed to all players. Second,
SDMCTS uses the predictive model to estimate the expected reward
for each response action. More specifically, for a given computa-
tional budget, SDMCTS performs Monte Carlo simulations directly
on the information set of an instance of the game where only the
unobservable portion of the opponent's actions are determined. That
is, during the simulations, SDMCTS considers all actions to be pub-
lic information and are revealed to all players while the remaining
private information is kept hidden. Formally, let ui
k be the informa-
tion state for player i at round k of the game. We denote by ao
k−1 the
action performed by an opponent in the previous round k − 1 which
led to the information state ui
k−1 is not fully observable
by player i. Therefore, we define an alternative semi-determinized
k(ao
k−1) where the opponent's previous action is
information state ui
determined to be ao
k−1. During the search phase, SDMCTS performs
simulations on the semi-determinized information states, resulting
in estimates of Q( ui
k(ao
k−1), a) for performing response action a at
the information state ui
k where the opponent's previous action is
1.
determined to be ao
k . Note that ao
Once the search phase has been completed, the predictive model
is used for calculating the expected payoff for each of the current
player's response actions. The predictive model provides a prob-
ability distribution over the opponent's possible previous actions.
Formally, for a given information state ui , the predictive model esti-
mates P(ao ui), the probability that the opponent has performed
action ao in the previous round. The expected payoff Eu[ui , a] for
performing action a at information state ui is calculated by:
k−1
Eu[ui , a] =
(cid:16)P(ao ui) · Q(cid:0) ui(ao), a(cid:1)(cid:17)
ao
where Q( ui(ao), a) is the estimated payoff for performing re-
sponse action a at the semi-determinized information state ui(ao).
Lastly, the algorithm chooses the response action that maximizes
the expected payoff. Algorithm 1 presents a pseudo code of the pro-
posed method. In the algorithm, we denote by Qtr ee the estimated
payoff function that results from the SDMCTS simulations on the
semi-determinized instance of the game.
During the SEARCH, SDMCTS performs multiple ISMCTS sim-
ulations on the semi-determinized instance of the game. Algorithm 2
describes the standard ISMCTS simulation function. As described in
section 2.2, ISMCTS is comprised of the game simulator G and the
reward function R. In addition, OUT-OF-TREE keeps track of play-
ers who have left the scope of their search tree in the current iteration
(episode), i.e. the simulation has reached Information Set nodes that
were not explored before. When the simulation encounters a new
Information Set, one that was not visited in a/the previous episode,
the OUT-OF-TREE indicator is set to true and a new tree node is
created for the newly encountered Information Set. This operation is
performed by the EXPANDTREE function. The action selection and
node updating functions (i.e. SELECT and UPDATE) determine the
specific ISMCTS variant. The action selection function samples the
tree policy and chooses an action for the specified information set.
The update function is responsible for updating the tree nodes, i.e.
updating the information set statistics. The specific implementation
1The k and k − 1 notation are omitted in places where they can be deduced from the
context
Algorithm 1 Semi-Determinized ISMCTS
1: function SEARCH(ui )
2:
3:
4:
5:
s0 ∼ I−1( ui(ao))
SIMULATE(s0)
for each opponent's action ao do
while Within Computational Budget do
6:
7:
8:
end for
end while
return Qtr ee
end function
9: function GET BEST RESPONSE(ui )
10:
11:
12:
Qtr ee ← SEARCH(ui)
for each a ∈ A(ui) do
Eu[ui , a] =
(cid:16)P(ao ui) · Q(cid:0) ui(ao), a(cid:1)(cid:17)
ao
13:
return arg maxa∈A(ui) Eu[ui , a]
end function
of these functions is derived from the choice of the ISMCTS variant.
For the Cheat Game agent implementation which was used in the
experiments, the Smooth-UCT was used. The implementation of
the UPDATE and SELECT functions as well as the exact parame-
ters' values that were used for the experiments are presented later in
section 4.6.
Algorithm 2 ISMCTS Simulation
1: function ROLLOUT(s)
2:
3:
4:
a ∼ πr(s)
s′ ∼ G(s, a)
return SIMULATE(s′)
end function
5: function SIMULATE(s)
6:
return r ∼ R(s)
7:
if ISTERMINAL(s) then
end if
i = PLAY ER(s)
if OUT-OF-TREE(i) then
return ROLLOUT(s)
end if
ui = Ii(s)
if ui (cid:60) T i then
EXPANDTREE(T i , ui )
a ∼ πr(s)
OUT-OF-TREE(i) ← true
a = SELECT(ui)
else
end if
s′ ∼ G(s, a)
r ← SIMU LAT E(s′)
UPDATE(ui , a, r)
return r
end function
8:
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
15:
16:
17:
18:
19:
20:
21:
4 THE CHEAT GAME
The Cheat Game is an Imperfect Information Game with partially
unobservable actions. We use it for demonstration of our SDMCTS.
In addition, we believe it is an excellent game for studying Imperfect
Information scenarios and it is fun for people to play. We slightly
adapted the Cheat Game to fit playing online. In our version of the
Cheat Game, eight cards are dealt to each player at the onset of
the game. The first player is chosen randomly. Play proceeds in the
order of the deal. The objective of the game is to be the first player
to get rid of all of his cards. A turn consists of a player placing a
specific number (between one and four) of face-down cards in the
middle of the table and making a claim as to what those cards' rank
is. However, a player is permitted to deceive his opponent and lie
about the cards' rank; we call this claim a false claim. The first
claim of the game is chosen as the top card of the deck; subsequent
calls must be exactly one rank higher or one rank lower, with kings
being followed by aces. Lastly, if a player wishes to avoid making a
claim, he may Take a Card from the deck. Once a player has made a
claim, the opponent can challenge it by performing the Call-Cheat
action. If a claim is challenged, the entire stack of cards that were
placed onto the table are revealed and the claim is examined. If the
challenge was correct, the player who made the false claim must
take the entire stack of cards. However, if the challenger was wrong,
he must take the stack. The first player to empty their hand is the
winner. To further decrease the size of the search space, if the game
does not conclude after 100 rounds, the games ends and the winner
is the player who holds the lowest number of cards.
The Cheat Game is an imperfect information game where a player
cannot see his opponents' cards. In addition, as described above, the
actual rank of a claim is not revealed to the other participants. In
other words, the actions of a player are hidden and often deceptive.
This property of the game adds a level of uncertainty and increases
the complexity of finding a suitable strategy.
4.1 The Cheat Game Agent
The Predictive MCTS Cheat Game Agent (PMCA) is an instantiation
of the proposed method presented in the Section Semi-Determinized
MCTS. More specifically, the PMCA combines a variation of the
MCTS algorithm with a predictive model of human decisions. As
mentioned above, the chosen MCTS adaptation is the well-established
Smooth-UCT [18]. The predictive model was developed based on
a human behavioral data-set. Prior to developing the agent, a pre-
liminary experiment was conducted. 60 participants were asked to
play the Cheat Game in a two-player repeated human-vs-human
experiment.
4.2 The Cheat Game - Information State
As defined above, an information state ui is the visible portion of
the game state s to player i. In the Cheat Game, the player is granted
access to the following attributes of the game state. Clearly, the
player can view his own cards and his own actions. In addition,
the player can view the number of cards in the opponent's hand,
the facedown table cards, and the remaining cards in the shuffled
deck. Once a Call-Cheat action is performed, the last claim that
was made is examined. During the examination, all of the cards that
were placed facedown on the table are revealed to all of the players.
Therefore, a player can track cards that each player has collected
from the table.
4.3 The Cheat Game - Information State
Abstraction
An information state abstraction is a technique for significantly low-
ering the size of the state space. More specifically, an abstraction
aggregates similar information states, resulting in an alternative in-
formation space with a considerably smaller size [15, 19]. Formally,
an abstraction F = { f i
A : Ui → Uii ∈ N} is a set of functions
that maps the information state space Ui onto an information state
space Ui , where Ui ≫ Ui. While an abstraction is extremely
important for reducing the search space, it is not without flaws.
Aggregating similar information states prevents the players from dis-
tinguishing between the aggregated states and thus they may choose
a sub-optimal action. Therefore, it is important to choose a suitable
abstraction that both reduces state space and partially preserves its
strategic structure.
The abstraction calibration was planned carefully to balance be-
tween state space size and preserving the strategic structure of the
aggregated states. There is an inherent trade-off: as the search space
decreases, the probability of aggregating information states with
different strategies increases. Therefore, crucial attributes from the
full information state ui were selected based on their importance
when considering a strategy. Multiple sub-sets of attributes were
hand-picked by an experienced player and were tested extensively
against human players. The sub-set of attributes that performed best
was selected for the Cheat Game information state abstraction. It
is important to note that, as discussed above, during the search the
proposed method regards hidden actions as public information. That
is, the search is performed on the alternative information state where
claim actions are determinized, i.e. claims are considered as public
information and are revealed to all players. Therefore, the alterna-
tive information state contains public information about the nature
of the claim, i.e. whether the previous claim is a true claim or a
false claim. The information state abstraction is comprised of the
following attributes:
Description
The opponent's previous action.
Values
TrueClaim,
FalseClaim,
TakeCard,
CallCheat
True / False
ψ{1, ..., 52}
ψ{1, ..., 52}
ψ{1, ..., 52}
{1, ..., 100}
The remaining attributes require some additional explanation.
For the duration of the game, the agents keep track of which cards
were collected by the opponent when Call-Cheat was performed. In
#
1
2&
3
4
5
6
7
Can the player make a one card
higher/lower true claim?
The player's card count.
The opponent's card count.
Placed on table card count.
The round index.
Where ψ(x) =
x,
5,
6,
x ≤ 4
5 ≤ x ≤ 8
otherwise
this way, the agent can estimate which cards are currently held by
the opponent. In addition, the agents keep track of the opponent's
claims. Some of the abstraction's attributes are derived from these
estimations.
8 &
9
10
&
11
12
&
13
14
&
15
16
The estimated number of cards the
opponent has that are one rank
higher/lower from the last valid
claim.
A value indicating whether the cur-
rent player has made the same
higher/lower claim since the last
Call-Cheat move.
A value indicating whether the
opponent has made the same
higher/lower claim since the last
Call-Cheat move.
A value indicating whether the cur-
rent player was caught cheating on
a claim with one rank higher/lower
than the last claimed rank.
Did the opponent catch the player
cheating on any rank?
Where φ(x) =
(cid:40)
if x ≤ 2
otherwise
x,
3,
φ{1, ..., 4}
True / False
True / False
True / False
True / False
4.3.1 Satisfying Time Restrictions. The time duration for
producing an action for the agents was determined from the average
time it took the participants to respond when they played head-to-
head human vs human. This value was determined to be 25 seconds.
In order to create an agent that can produce a response in reasonable
time, the MCTS tree nodes were optimized. While a naive represen-
tation of the described attributes takes 15 bytes in size, we were able
to encode all of the attributes into a 32-bit uint structure without data
loss (see Figure 1). This encoding was done for two reasons. First,
the encoding ensures a low memory footprint. Second, the use of a
32-bit uint is extremely suitable for hash-mapping structures. For a
large enough heap, it can significantly reduce the conflict when hash
retrieval is called and thereby improves CPU usage. In particular,
for the same amount of time, we were able to achieve a 12 fold
improvement in the number of simulations that can be performed.
Figure 1: Optimization - 32-bit Encoding
4.4 The Cheat Game - Action Abstraction
For a given game state s, a player may perform the following actions.
If the opponent made a claim during the previous state, the player
may choose to accuse the opponent of "cheating", i.e. perform the
Call-Cheat action. Alternatively, a player may make his own claim.
As mentioned above, a claim can be either true or false. The player
may place up to four cards facedown on the table and make a claim
as to their rank. Lastly, if a player wishes to avoid making a claim,
he may Take a Card from the deck. Therefore, for a given game state
s, the number of actions a player may perform is:
4
(cid:19)
(cid:18)h
k
k =1
A(s) = 2 +
where h is the number of cards in the player's hand and k is the
number of cards he wishes to declare. The additional two actions
are for the Call-Cheat and Take a Card moves. Consequently, for
an average hand of eight cards, the branching factor will result in
164 unique actions. Combined with the 100 turn limit, the estimated
game tree may contain up to 10222 ≈ 164100 nodes. For this reason,
an action abstraction is introduced. A claim action is represented by
a tuple (γ , δ, k), where γ ∈ {hiдher , lower} denotes the direction of
the claim, δ ∈ {True, False} is a value indicating whether the claim
is true, and k is the number of cards that was declared. In return, the
branching factor is significantly reduced to a more computationally
manageable size, that is: A(s) = 2 + {(γ , δ, k)} = 18.
4.5 The Cheat Game - Rollout Policy
A range of unique heuristic based rollout policies were tested against
experienced human players. The rollout policy that performed best
against these experienced players was selected for the MCTS simu-
lations. The rollout policy, denoted by πr , was designed to mimic
the average strategic behavior of human players. To that end, the
human-vs-human data-set was used to extract a probability distri-
bution function (PDF) over the available actions. The probability
distribution function was combined with a set of heuristic rules
which were designed to handle special cases. The probabilities over
the set of action abstraction are presented in Figure 2. In cases
when one or more of the actions were inapplicable, the inapplicable
actions' probability values were distributed uniformly among the
remaining actions. For example, if the previous action was not a
claim then the player was not allowed to perform the Call-Cheat
action. As a result, the remaining valid actions' probabilities would
have increased by 0.006 = 0.105/17 each. Formally, let ui be an
information state and let Pr(a) be the fixed rollout probability for
choosing action a ∈ A(ui), the normalized rollout probability for
choosing a in information state ui is calculated by:
πr(a ui) ∼
Pr(a)
ai ∈A(ui) Pr(ai)
The special case heuristic was developed based on the expertise
of the human player. It is important to note that the heuristic rules
take precedence over the PDF. Therefore, if the current game state
satisfies any of the special case's conditions, the heuristic action
is performed and the PDF action is ignored. The set of rules was
designed to reduce the chance that the rollout policy would perform
a dominated strategy. If the opponent made a false claim, the rollout
policy would choose the Call-Cheat action for the following cases:
a) If the opponent has no more cards in his hand; b) If there are
more than eight cards on the table; c) If the opponent was caught
cheating more than eight times; d) If the opponent made the same
claim since the last time Call-Cheat was performed; e) If the current
player's cards contain a card with the same rank as the claim. f)
If the opponent was caught cheating on the same rank in previous
rounds.
Figure 2: Rollout Policy PDF over the action abstraction
4.6 Smooth-UCT Calibration
The Smooth-UCT mixes the average strategy with the Upper-Confidence
Bound (UCB) action selection mechanism. More specifically, Smooth-
UCT chooses with probability ηk the UCB action:
loдN(ui)
N(ui , a)
a = arдmaxaQ(ui , a) + c ·
(cid:115)
where c is the balancing factor between exploration and exploitation.
Alternatively, Smooth-UCT chooses with a probability of 1 − ηk the
average strategy:
.
a ∼ p, where ∀a ∈ A(ui) : p(a) ← N(ui , a)
N(ui)
(cid:17)−1(cid:19)
1 + d ·(cid:112)Nk
(cid:18)
γ , η ·(cid:16)
ηk = max
The ηk is an iteration k-adapted sequence defined as:
where γ , η and d are constants and Nk is the total visits to the corre-
sponding ui node. (The interested reader is referred to [18] for an
in-depth explanation of the parameters and their importance).
The η and γ parameters were manually calibrated and set to
η = 0.9, γ = 0.1. The d, c and payoff discount-factor parameters
were calibrated using a grid-search self-play tournament. Different
combinations of the parameters were competing in a head-to-head
tournament. Each game was comprised of 100 matches, the set of
parameters who won the majority of matches continued through
to the next level, while the loser was eliminated. The parameters'
settings were c = 17 + k, d = 0.001 + 0.005l and the discount-factor
= 0.97 + 0.005m where k, l, m ∈ {1, ..., 10}. The winning parameters
set, c = 0.0025, d = 0.0025 and Discount Factor = 0.995, was used
in the experiment.
Algorithm 3 describes the action selection mechanism and update
functions used in Smooth-UCT. It is important to note that Smooth-
UCT uses the same UPDATE function as standard UCT.
4.7 Predictive Model
The predictive model was devised to classify the opponent's ac-
tion type, i.e. true or f alse claim. As mentioned in Section The
Cheat Game Agent, a data-set of human-vs-human play of 60 par-
ticipants was collected in the preliminary experiment. The genders
Algorithm 3 Smooth-UCT - Select & Update
1: function SELECT(ui )
z ∼ U[0, 1]
2:
if z < ηk(ui) then
3:
(cid:114)
4:
5:
6:
7:
else
return arдmaxaQ(ui , a) + c ·
∀a ∈ A(ui) : p(a) ← N(ui,a)
N(ui)
return a ∼ p
loдN(ui)
N(ui,a)
end if
end function
8: function UPDATE(ui , a, r)
N(ui) ← N(ui) + 1
9:
N(ui , a) ← N(ui , a) + 1
10:
Q(ui , a) ← Q(ui , a) + r−Q(ui,a)
N(ui),a)
11:
end function
were distributed evenly with 51% males and 49% females with ages
varying between 18-42. In total, the data-set contains 1,275 true
claim samples and 1,157 f alse claim samples. The data-set was used
to manually extract a collection of features. Customarily, different
subsets of features were tested on a wide range of binary classi-
fiers ranging from Decision Trees through Support Vector Machine
(SVM) [4] to Deep Neural Network (DNN) [30]. The evaluation of
the model was based on a â AIJleave-one-sample-outâ AI cross valida-
tion. For each sample for player i, round t and match m, the classifier
was allowed to train on samples from all players excluding player i
and his opponent, as well as samples of player i and his opponent
that precede match m and round t. In order to avoid class imbal-
ance, oversampling was used in cases where the number of true and
f alse claim samples were significantly imbalanced. We were able to
achieve a good prediction rate with an Area Under the Curve (AUC)
of 0.821, T PR = 75.3%, T N R = 74.0% and G − Mean = 74.6% using
the Random Forest algorithm. The Deep Neural Network (DNN)
classifier received similar but slightly lower accuracy, however with
no significant difference. Figure 3a presents the Receiver Operat-
ing Characteristic (ROC) curves of the most accurate classifiers.
The final features collection contained 21 mostly statistical features.
The human player' behavioural changes were modeled using these
predictive model's features. The features contains information that
correspond to the number of rounds played. One of the more signifi-
cant features is the response duration. Another feature is the number
of times a player was caught cheating with respect to the number
of times he made a false claim until the last call cheat (i.e. #caught
/ #cheat). One more interesting feature is the number of times the
player took cards from the deck with respect to the number of rounds
played.
It is important to note that features2 were derived strictly from
data that is contained within the Information State.
5 EXPERIMENTS
Experiment were conducted in order to evaluate the effectiveness of
the proposed method. 120 participants from the US, aged 20-50 (46%
females and 54% males), were recruited using Amazon Mechanical
2For the complete feature list visit: https://goo.gl/VLy7NH
Turk. The participants were asked to play a two-player Cheat Game
for at least three matches but for no more than five matches. Prior
to the game, participants were presented with instructions followed
by a quiz which ensured that the rules were explained properly. The
participants received payment on a per match basis and an additional
payment for every match they won.
The objective of the experiment is to evaluate the effectiveness of
combining MCTS with a predictive model. To that end, participants
were randomly divided into three groups. Each group played against
a different instantiation of the proposed method (see Section Semi-
Determinized MCTS). As described above, the Smooth-UCT was
chosen as the MCTS algorithm. In the first group, the participants
played against a Smooth-UCT Cheat Game Agent (MGA) without a
predictive model. The agent gives equal probability to true and false
claims, i.e. P(ao = true claim ui) = P(ao = false claim ui) = 0.5
where ui is an information state for player i where the previous
opponent's action, ao, is a claim action. Naturally, in information
states where the opponent's previous action is not a claim (i.e. Take-
Card or CallCheat) these probabilities are set to zero. The second
group played against the Predictive Smooth-UCT Cheat Game Agent
(PMGA) that incorporates the predictive model from the Predictive
Model section. As described above, the predictive model was trained
on data collected from a preliminary experiment were the partici-
pants played human-vs-human cheat game. It is important to note the
preliminary experiment's subjects did not participate in the agents'
evaluation experiments. In order to further demonstrate the effec-
tiveness of combining a predictive model with MCTS, participants
in the third group played against the FPMGA agent, which had an
unfair advantage. The FPMGA agent was allowed to peek into his
opponent's real claim. Therefore, participants in the third group were
compensated due to this unfair advantage. While the FPMGA agent
was able to predicate the opponent's claim with perfect precision
(i.e. 100% prediction rate), it was restricted to a prediction rate of
85%. The 85% prediction rate was chosen as a plausible prediction
rate that can be achieved when predicting human decisions. A higher
prediction rate (above 85%) is extremely difficult to obtain when in-
teracting with people. This is in part because of the inherent noise in
the human decision-making process. For example, the same person
may choose a different strategy in the same exact game state. For the
experiments, we hypothesize that the FPMGA agent will outperform
the PMGA agent and that both predictive agents will outperform the
non-predictive agent, MGA.
5.1 Experimental Results
To analyze the results, one-way ANOVA was conducted to compare
the three conditions (p < .05). The exact p-value and f -ratio can
be observed in the figures. As can be seen in Figure 3, both the
predictive agent (PMGA) and the pseudo predictive agent (FPMGA)
performed significantly better than the non-predictive agent (MGA).
Furthermore, FPMGA performed significantly better than PMGA.
Figure 3b presents the percentage of won matches by the agents (i.e.
won/played). This can be explained by the successful call cheat ratio
that can be viewed in Figure 3c. The results suggest that by com-
bining the predictive model with the Smooth-UCT, the agents were
able to reduce the uncertainty that was derived from hidden action.
Thereby, the predictive agents were able to choose better response
(a) ROC Curves
(b) Agents' matches win ratio
(c) Call Cheat Success Rate
(d) Matches' Avg. Rounds
Figure 3: Predictive Model & Experimental results.
6 CONCLUSION
We have presented an algorithm for the development of agents that
performs well against human in Imperfect Information Games with
Partially Observable Actions. More specifically, we have introduced
Semi-Determinized MCTS (SDMCTS), an ISMCTS algorithm that
combines a predictive model of the opponent's actions and an infor-
mation set MCTS variant. The method builds on existing ISMCTS
adaptations and determinization techniques, and takes advantage
of the benefits of both approaches. We have presented the Cheat
Game as an indicative example of the effectiveness of the presented
techniques. In addition, a predictive model was conferred and pro-
duced good accuracy for predicting human strategic decision-making
in the Cheat Game. We have presented the MGA, PMGA and FP-
MGA agents which applied the SDMCTS algorithm to the Cheat
Game. The SDMCTS agents combined the predictive model with
the Smooth-UCT, a ISMCTS variation, to yield skillful performance
when used in a head-to-head game with human opponents. The
results of an extensive experiment with 120 participants were pre-
sented. The participants played repeated head-to-head games against
the MGA, PMGA and FPMGA agents. The results suggest that the
combination of a predictive model with MCTS can be used to im-
prove game performance against humans. Furthermore, the agents'
performance improved as the predictive model's accuracy increases.
For future work, we intend to combine an additional predictive
model of the opponent's response strategy in the Cheat Game. More
specifically, we will develop a predictive model that estimates the
probability that the opponent will Call Cheat at a claim. In addition,
we intend to implement the SDMCTS algorithm for two-player poker
and develop a predictive model that estimates the strength of the
opponent's hand compared to ours. Lastly, we intend to implement
our method on Phantom games.
actions to deceptive claims. Figure 3d can further demonstrate the
improvement of game performance. The average number of rounds it
took the predictive agents to conclude a match is significantly lower
than the non-predictive agent. Interestingly, the average number of
rounds it took the FPMGA to conclude a match is higher than the
PMGA, despite FPMGA having a more accurate prediction rate. We
hypothesize that this is due to fact that the FPMGA performs the
call cheat action more than the PMGA and MGA. This prolongs the
number of rounds needed to reach a terminal state. However, the
MCTS's discount factor can be calibrated in order to incentivize the
agents to conclude the games faster.
Another measure for play-dominance is the average difference be-
tween the cards held by the agent and the humans. The PMGA's and
FPMGA's average card difference (−3.51 and −4.56, respectively)
was significantly lower than MGA's (−2.89), with an f -ratio of 6.06
and a p-value of .002. The importance of the statistically significant
results is enhanced when considering the low number of matches in
the experiments.
In addition to the statistically significant results, we offer as a
discussion the human participants' behavioral statistics. It seems
that people played differently against the different agents. Unfortu-
nately, statistical significance of such behaviour was not obtained.
We hypothesize that this is because of the inherent noise in human
behavior. For example, people who played against the predictive
agents demonstrate a reduction in performing false claims. More
specifically, 40.4% and 42.4% of all people's claims were false when
played against FPMGA and PMGA, respectively, while people who
played against MGA lied more with a 44.8% false claim ratio. This
can be explained by the fact that people tend to lie less when there
is a high chance of being caught. On the other hand, people who
played against MGA took less cards from the deck, i.e. chose to
Take-Card for 23.9% of the moves, while people who played against
the FPMGA and PMGA performed the Take-Card action in 19.6%
and 20.8% of moves, respectively. This is unexpected, as one would
expect people to take a card from the deck in order to avoid making
a false claim. Another important observation is that people who
played against MGA perform better in later matches, that is, people
won 13% of the first two matches and 28% of the last two matches.
However, people who played against PMGA and FPMGA performed
in a similar fashion across all matches, contributing to the overall
success of the prediction-based methods.
[29] A Rosenfeld, I Zuckerman, A Azaria, and S Kraus. 2012. Combining psychologi-
cal models with machine learning to better predict peopleâ A ´Zs decisions. Synthese
189, 1 (2012), 81–93.
[30] J Schmidhuber. 2015. Deep learning in neural networks: An overview. Neural
[31] B Sheppard. 2002. World-championship-caliber Scrabble. Artificial Intelligence
networks 61 (2015), 85–117.
134, 1-2 (2002), 241–275.
[32] D Silver, A Huang, C J Maddison, A Guez, L Sifre, G Van Den Driessche, J
Schrittwieser, I Antonoglou, V Panneershelvam, M Lanctot, et al. 2016. Mastering
the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature 529, 7587
(2016), 484–489.
[33] N R Sturtevant. 2008. An analysis of UCT in multi-player games. In International
Conference on Computers and Games. Springer, 37–49.
REFERENCES
[1] B Arneson, R B Hayward, and P Henderson. 2010. Monte Carlo tree search in
Hex. IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games 2, 4
(2010), 251–258.
[2] Y Bjornsson and H Finnsson. 2009. Cadiaplayer: A simulation-based general
game player. IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games
1, 1 (2009), 4–15.
[3] C. B Browne, E. Powley, D. Whitehouse, S. M. Lucas, P. I. Cowling, P. Rohlfsha-
gen, S. Tavener, D. Perez, S. Samothrakis, and S. Colton. 2012. A survey of monte
carlo tree search methods. IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and
AI in games 4, 1 (2012), 1–43.
[4] C Cortes and V Vapnik. 1995. Support vector machine. Machine learning 20, 3
(1995), 273–297.
[5] R Coulom. 2006. Efficient selectivity and backup operators in Monte-Carlo tree
search. In International Conference on Computers and Games. Springer, 72–83.
[6] Peter I Cowling, Edward J Powley, and Daniel Whitehouse. 2012. Information set
monte carlo tree search. IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI
in Games 4, 2 (2012), 120–143.
[7] A Davidson, D Billings, J Schaeffer, and D Szafron. 2000.
Improved oppo-
nent modeling in poker. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence,
ICAIâ A ´Z00. 1467–1473.
[8] Yiannis Demiris. 2007. Prediction of intent in robotics and multi-agent systems.
Cognitive processing 8, 3 (2007), 151–158.
[9] Ido Erev and Alvin E Roth. 1998. Predicting how people play games: Rein-
forcement learning in experimental games with unique, mixed strategy equilibria.
American economic review (1998), 848–881.
[10] I Frank, D Basin, and H Matsubara. 1998. Finding optimal strategies for imperfect
information games. In AAAI/IAAI. 500–507.
[11] Yaâ A ´Zakov Gal, Sarit Kraus, Michele Gelfand, Hilal Khashan, and Elizabeth
Salmon. 2011. An adaptive agent for negotiating with people in different cultures.
ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST) 3, 1 (2011), 8.
[12] Yaâ A ´Zakov Gal, Avi Pfeffer, Francesca Marzo, and Barbara J Grosz. 2004. Learn-
ing social preferences in games. In Proceedings of the National Conference on
Artificial Intelligence. Menlo Park, CA; Cambridge, MA; London; AAAI Press;
MIT Press; 1999, 226–231.
[13] S Gelly, L Kocsis, M Schoenauer, M Sebag, D Silver, C Szepesvári, and O
Teytaud. 2012. The grand challenge of computer Go: Monte Carlo tree search and
extensions. Commun. ACM 55, 3 (2012), 106–113.
[14] S Gelly, Y Wang, O Teytaud, M Uct Patterns, and P Tao. 2006. Modification of
UCT with patterns in Monte-Carlo Go. (2006).
[15] A. Gilpin. 2009. Algorithms for abstracting and solving imperfect information
games. Carnegie Mellon University.
[16] M L Ginsberg. 2001. GIB: Imperfect information in a computationally challenging
game. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 14 (2001), 303–358.
[17] H He, J Boyd-Graber, K Kwok, and H Daumé III. 2016. Opponent Modeling in
Deep Reinforcement Learning. In Proceedings of The 33rd International Confer-
ence on Machine Learning. 1804–1813.
[18] J Heinrich and D Silver. 2015. Smooth UCT Search in Computer Poker.. In IJCAI.
554–560.
[19] M B Johanson. 2016. Robust Strategies and Counter-Strategies: From Superhuman
to Optimal Play. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Alberta.
[20] L Kocsis and C Szepesvári. 2006. Bandit based monte-carlo planning. In European
conference on machine learning. Springer, 282–293.
[21] M Lanctot, K Waugh, M Zinkevich, and M Bowling. 2009. Monte Carlo sampling
for regret minimization in extensive games. In Advances in neural information
processing systems. 1078–1086.
[22] V. Lis`y, M. Lanctot, and M. Bowling. 2015. Online monte carlo counterfactual
regret minimization for search in imperfect information games. In Proceedings of
the 2015 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems.
International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 27–36.
[23] J R Long, N R Sturtevant, M Buro, and T Furtak. 2010. Understanding the Success
of Perfect Information Monte Carlo Sampling in Game Tree Search.. In AAAI.
[24] S Markovitch and R Reger. 2005. Learning and exploiting relative weaknesses
of opponent agents. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 10, 2 (2005),
103–130.
[25] N. Peled, M. Bitan, J. Keshet, and S. Kraus. 2013. Predicting Human Strategic
Decisions Using Facial Expressions.. In IJCAI.
[26] M Ponsen, S De Jong, and M Lanctot. 2011. Computing approximate nash equi-
libria and robust best-responses using sampling. Journal of Artificial Intelligence
Research 42 (2011), 575–605.
[27] Avi Rosenfeld, Zevi Bareket, Claudia V Goldman, David J LeBlanc, and Omer
Tsimhoni. 2015. Learning driversâ A ´Z behavior to improve adaptive cruise control.
Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems 19, 1 (2015), 18–31.
[28] Ariel Rosenfeld and Sarit Kraus. 2016. Providing arguments in discussions on the
basis of the prediction of human argumentative behavior. ACM Transactions on
Interactive Intelligent Systems (TiiS) 6, 4 (2016), 30.
|
0801.1630 | 3 | 0801 | 2008-04-08T21:39:09 | Computational Solutions for Today's Navy | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.GL"
] | New methods are being employed to meet the Navy's changing software-development environment. | cs.MA | cs | 30 ScientificComputing.com March 2008
Computational Solutions for
Today's Navy
New methods are being employed to meet the Navy's changing software-
development environment.
▶ Frank W. Bentrem, Ph.D., John T.
Sample, Ph.D., and Michael M.
Harris
T
he Naval Research Labor-
atory (NRL) is the corpor-
ate laboratory for the
United States Navy. Part of the
mission of NRL is to provide
“broadly based applied research
and advanced technology develop-
ment programs in response to
identified and anticipated Navy
and Marine Corps needs”. Advan-
cing the state-of-the-art in sci-
entific computation is important in
both applied research and techno-
logy development. In this article,
we relate current computational
trends in naval technologies as
well as the trends we anticipate
over the next few years. We also
present solutions for some of the
current and coming challenges we
face.
Naval operations can benefit
greatly from a highly accurate and
timely knowledge of the environ-
ment. Specifically, mine-hunting
operations require knowledge of
the seafloor composition and
oceanographic conditions which
include the temperature, density,
water clarity, and depth of the wa-
ter, the speed of ocean currents,
and wave heights. Naval person-
nel use a combination of historic-
al, real-time, and predicted data
about these conditions.
Sea-based computing
Sea basing refers to a major
thrust in future naval capabilit-
ies from the Office of Naval Re-
search where “logistics, ship-
ping, and at-sea transfer tech-
nologies support joint opera-
tional independence”. This ap-
plies equally well to environ-
tions as opposed to collecting and
processing data at centralized fa-
cilities. Contributing to this shift
is the development and manufac-
turing of affordable and compact
(yet powerful) workstations. Since
computers meeting both budget
and space constraints are now
widely available, these machines
may be installed in the ship or
other vehicle along with the ne-
OLD WAY of doing business: Computing power is located at shore-based
production facilities that determine and distribute the "best" environment.
mental data processing. Indeed,
in recent years, we have no-
ticed an increasing shift to-
wards computationally intensive
data processing in the field,
fleet, and during survey opera-
cessary software. In this way,
rather than depending on the reli-
ability and data-transfer rates of
the communication links, operat-
ors can use onboard data pro-
cessing to make real-time de-
31 ScientificComputing.com March 2008
cisions. While not exactly a new
method, defense organizations are
increasingly processing data in
the field or at sea.
The most important demands
on computing systems resulting
from the sea-based computing
model are twofold--portability and
efficiency. While software devel-
opment targets usability in the
field, expert analysts must also be
able to use the same software in
their office spaces, either for fur-
ther analysis or to process
archived data, often with a differ-
ent platform. Cross-platform com-
puter languages such as C++ with
sea requires large amounts of
data to be analyzed efficiently,
in fact, in real-time. Modern
compiled languages (e.g. C, C+
+, Fortran 95) are well suited
for speedy computations,
however, good software design
is the most important factor in
program efficiency.
Through-the-Sensor techno-
logy
In addition to sea-based com-
puting, there is a definite trend
towards techniques that allow
environmental data to be ex-
tracted from tactical fleet
for scientific purposes.
Software aids are used to help
make tactical decisions by military
operators. These decision aids
use environmental inputs, and
then output optimal methods for
finding targets. Actual
environmental (not historical)
data is needed to yield accurate
answers.
Through-the-Sensor (TTS)
techniques use tactical sensors to
acquire environmental informa-
tion in situ. This new information
is used to refresh historical hold-
ings. Using TTS data, decision
aids can provide answers based
NEW WAY of doing business: Computing power is located at sea and ashore. "Best" environment is determined on-scene
using new in situ data to refresh historical data.
Qt (Trolltech) or Java (Sun Mi-
crosystems) are especially useful
for these applications. Not only
must computing solutions be port-
able, processing in the field or at
sensors1. This requires com-
puter systems to have the flex-
ibility to acquire and process
data from combat sensors
rather than sensors designed
on actual versus historical condi-
tions. The challenge is to collect,
process, fuse, and disseminate
TTS data in near real-time. The
benefit is lowered operational risk
32 ScientificComputing.com March 2008
and accurate time lines based on
actual conditions.
Recent technological solutions
NRL and the Naval Oceano-
graphic Office have recently de-
veloped the Environmental Post
Mission Analysis (EPMA) system
to manage the integration of these
types of data. The EPMA collects
data from tactical sidescan sonars
(Through-the-Sensor technology),
supercomputer generated numer-
ical models, and historical/clima-
tological databases. It uses a vari-
ety of fusion algorithms to merge
those sources into a single best
view of the naval environment.
The EPMA is developed in C++
with Qt and is used on Windows,
Linux, and UNIX platforms; all of
which appear both at various
Navy installations and on Naval
ships (sea-based technology).
Another recent example of the
need for sea-based technology is
the requirement for sediment
identification at the ocean floor
during naval oceanographic sur-
veys. In the past, locations for nu-
merous sediment core samples
were chosen prior to embarking
on a survey. NRL has since de-
veloped SediMap®2,3 to enable the
mapping of sediments during the
survey itself. SediMap® uses the
Java Runtime Environment for
the capability of executing on a
number of different platforms.
To maximize efficiency, a num-
ber of tests were conducted to
determine the optimal conver-
gence rate for sediment-size es-
timates without sacrificing ac-
curacy. The software runs in
real-time as data is collected
and may either be installed on
the onboard computer or simply
run off the CD.
Further examples of
Through-the-Sensor data ac-
quisition are the extraction of
bathymetry and surficial sea-
floor sediment types from the
UQN-4 fathometer on mine
counter-measures (MCM) ships,
the BQN-17 submarine fatho-
meter, and the AN/AQS-20A
mine-hunting system (which
also yields multibeam bathy-
metry). These data are needed
in anti-submarine and mine-
hunting decision aids to determ-
ine tactics.
Conclusions
To better utilize large quant-
ities of environmental data, the
Navy is moving towards sea-
based computing, which allows
decisions to be made in real-
time at sea. Also, Through-the-
Sensor technology is being de-
veloped for existing/future fleet
combat sensors to be used in tac-
tical decision aids. These ad-
vances will help the US Navy
maintain sea supremacy in today's
fast-paced war-fighting environ-
ment.
References
1.Avera WE, Harris MM, Walter DJ, Bibee
LD, Lambert DN. Through-the-sensors
concepts to refresh the environmental
picture. NRL Review 2003;91-92.
2.Bentrem FW, Sample J, Kalcic MT,
Duncan ME. High-Frequency Acoustic
Sediment Classification in Shallow Water.
Proceedings of MTS/IEEE Oceans 2002
Conference 2002 Oct;1:7-11.
3.Bentrem FW, Avera WE, Sample J. Estim-
ating surface sediments using multibeam
sonar. Sea Technology 2006 Jun;47(6):
37-40.
Frank W. Bentrem, Ph.D. is a
research physicist, John T.
Sample, Ph.D. is a computer sci-
entist, and Michael M. Harris is
the branch head for Mapping,
Charting, and Geodesy, all three
authors with the Marine
Geosciences Division at the Naval
Research Laboratory. They may
be reached at frank.bentrem@n-
rlssc.navy.mil.
|
1201.6322 | 1 | 1201 | 2012-01-30T19:02:36 | The Cooperative Cleaners Problem in Stochastic Dynamic Environments | [
"cs.MA"
] | In this paper we study the strengths and limitations of collaborative teams of simple agents. In particular, we discuss the efficient use of "ant robots" for covering a connected region on the $Z^{2}$ grid, whose area is unknown in advance and which expands stochastically. Specifically, we discuss the problem where an initial connected region of $S_0$ boundary tiles expand outward with probability $p$ at every time step. On this grid region a group of $k$ limited and simple agents operate, in order to clean the unmapped and dynamically expanding region. A preliminary version of this problem was discussed in [1],[2] involving a deterministic expansion of a region in the grid.In this work we extend the model and examine cases where the spread of the region is done stochastically, where each tile has some probability $p$ to expand, at every time step. For this extended model we obtain an analytic probabilistic lower bounds for the minimal number of agents and minimal time required to enable a collaborative coverage of the expanding region, regardless of the algorithm used and the robots' hardware and software specifications. In addition, we present an impossibility result, for a variety of regions that would be impossible to completely clean, regardless of the algorithm used. Finally, we validate the analytic bounds using extensive empirical computer simulation results. | cs.MA | cs |
The Cooperative Cleaners Problem in Stochastic Dynamic Environments
Eyal Regev [1], Yaniv Altshuler [2], Alfred M.Bruckstein [1]
[1]
Technion -- IIT
{regeve,freddy}@cs.technion.ac.il
[2]
MIT Media Lab
[email protected]
In this paper we study the strengths and limitations of collaborative teams of simple agents. In
particular, we discuss the efficient use of "ant robots" for covering a connected region on the Z2
grid, whose area is unknown in advance and which expands stochastically. Specifically, we discuss
the problem where an initial connected region of S0 boundary tiles expand outward with probability
p at every time step. On this grid region a group of k limited and simple agents operate, in order
to clean the unmapped and dynamically expanding region. A preliminary version of this problem
was discussed in [1, 2], involving a deterministic expansion of a region in the grid.In this work we
extend the model and examine cases where the spread of the region is done stochastically, where
each tile has some probability p to expand, at every time step. For this extended model we obtain
an analytic probabilistic lower bounds for the minimal number of agents and minimal time required
to enable a collaborative coverage of the expanding region, regardless of the algorithm used and the
robots hardware and software specifications. In addition, we present an impossibility result, for a
variety of regions that would be impossible to completely clean, regardless of the algorithm used.
Finally, we validate the analytic bounds using extensive empirical computer simulation results.
I.
INTRODUCTION
In this work we discuss in this work is the Cooperative Cleaners problem -- a problem assuming a regular grid
of connected rooms (pixels), some of which are 'dirty' and the 'dirty' pixels forming a connected region of the grid.
On this dirty grid region several agents operate, each having the ability to 'clean' the place (the 'room', 'tile', 'pixel'
or 'square') it is located in. We examine problems in which the agents work in stochastic dynamic environments --
where probabilistic changes in the environment may take place and are independent of, and certainly not caused
by, the agents' activity.
In the spirit of [3] we consider simple robots with only a bounded amount of memory
(i.e. finite-state-machines).
The static variant of this problem was introduced in [4], where a cleaning protocol ensuring that a decentralized
group of agents will jointly clean any given (and a-priori unknown) dirty region. The protocol's performance, in terms
of cleaning time was fully analyzed and also demonstrated experimentally.
A dynamic generalization of the problem was later presented in [2], in which a deterministic expansion of the
environment is assumed, simulating the spreading of a contamination (or a spreading "danger" zone or fire). Once
again, the goal of the agents is to clean the spreading contamination in as efficiently as possible.
In this work we modify the 'dirty' region expansion model and add stochastic features to the spreadings of the
region's cells. We formally define and analyze the Cooperative Cleaning problem, this time under this stochastic
generalization.
We focus on a variant of the Cooperative Cleaning problem, where the tiles have some probability to be contaminated
by their neighbors' contamination. This version of the problem has applications in the "real" world and in the computer
network environments as well. For instance, one of the applications can be a distributed anti-virus software trying to
overcome an epidemic malicious software attacking a network of computers. In this case, each infected computer has
some probability to infect computers connected to it.
A more general paradigm of the cleaning problem is when the transformation of the contaminated area from one
state to another is described in the form of some pre-defined function. For instance, following the previous example,
we can say that the sub-network affected by the virus, is spreading by a certain rule. We can say that a computer
will be infected by a virus with a certain probability, which depends on the number of the neighboring computers
already infected. By defining rules for the contamination's spreading and cleaning, we can think of to this problem
as a kind of Conway's "Game of Life", where each cell in the game's grid spreads its "seed" to neighboring cells (or
alternatively, "dies") according to some basic rules.
While the problem posed in [2], as well as the analysis methods used and the correctness proofs, were all deter-
ministic, it is interesting to examine the stochastic variant of such algorithms. In this work we analyze and derive a
lower bound on the expected cleaning time for k agents running a cleaning protocol under a model, where every tile
2
in the neighborhood of the affected region may become contaminated at every time step with some probability, the
contamination coming from its dirty neighbors.
II. ORGANIZATION
The main contributions of this paper are a bound on the contaminated region's size and a bound on the cleaning
time which is presented in Section V. We also present a method which bounds the cleaning time for a given desired
probability. We then provide an impossibility result for the problem raised in Section VI. The rest of paper is organized
as followed: In Section III we survey some of the related works. In Section IV we formalize the problem, giving the
basic definitions needed for the later analysis, in Section VII we present some of the experimental results and compare
them to the analytic bounds and concluding in Section VIII.
III. RELATED WORK
Significant research effort is invested in the design and simulation of multi-agent robotics and intelligent swarm
systems (see e.g. [5 -- 10]).
In general, most of the techniques used for the distributed coverage of some region are based on some sort of
cellular decomposition. For example, in [11] the area to be covered is divided between the agents based on their
relative locations. In [12] a different decomposition method is being used, which is analytically shown to guarantee a
complete coverage of the area. [13] discusses two methods for cooperative coverage (one probabilistic and the other
based on an exact cellular decomposition).
While some existing works concerning distributed (and decentralized) coverage present analytic proofs for the ability
of the system to complete the task (for example, in [12 -- 14]), most of them lack analytic bounds for the coverage time
(and often extensive amounts of empirical results on this are made available by extensive simulations). Although a
proof for the coverage completion is an essential element in the design of a multi-agent system, analytic indicators for
its efficiency are in our opinion of great importance. We provide such results, as bounds for the cleaning time of the
agents, in Section V.
An interesting work to mention in this context is that of Koenig and his collaborators [15, 16], where a swarm of
ant-like robots is used for repeatedly covering an unknown area, using a real time search method called node counting.
By using this method, the robots are shown to be able to efficiently perform a coverage mission, and analytic bounds
for the coverage time are discussed.
Another work discussing a decentralized coverage of terrains is presented in [17]. This work examines domains with
non-uniform traversability. Completion times are given for the proposed algorithm, which is a generalization of the
forest search algorithm. In this work, though, the region to be searched is assumed to be known in advance - a crucial
assumption for the search algorithm, which relies on a cell-decomposition procedure.
Vertex-Ant-Walk, a variation of the node counting algorithm is presented in [8] and is shown to achieve a coverage
time of O(nδG), where δG is the graph's diameter, which is based on a previous work in which a cover time of
O(n2δG) was demonstrated [18]. Another work called Exploration as Graph Construction, provides a coverage of
degree bounded graphs in O(n2) time, is described in [19]. Here a group of ant robots with a limited capability
explores an unknown graph using special "markers".
Similar works concerning multi agents systems may be found in [11 -- 14, 20 -- 25]).
The Cooperative Cleaning problem is also strongly related to the problem of distributed search after mobile and
evading target(s) [26 -- 29] or the problems discussed under the names of "Cops and Robbers" or "Lions and Men"
pursuits [30 -- 35].
IV. DEFINITIONS
In our work we will use some of the basic notations and definitions, that were used in [2], which we shell briefly
review. As in the above mentioned previous works on this problem, we shall assume that the time is discrete.
Definition 1. Let an undirected graph G(V, E) describe the two dimensional integer grid Z2, whose vertices (or
" tiles") have a binary property called " contamination". Let contt(v) denote the contamination state of the tile v at
time t, taking either the value " on" (for "dirty" or "contaminated") or " off" (for "clean").
3
For two vertices v, u ∈ V , the edge (v, u) may belong to E at time t only if both of the following hold : a) v and u
are 4−N eighbors in G. b) contt(v) = contt(u) = on. This however is a necessary but not a sufficient condition as we
elaborate below.
The edges of E represent the connectivity of the contaminated region. At t = 0 all the contaminated tiles are
connected, namely :
(v, u) ∈ E0 ⇐⇒ (v, u are 4−N eighbors in G) ∧ (cont0(v) = cont0(u) = on)
Edges may be added to E only as a result of a contamination spread and can be removed only while contaminated
tiles are cleaned by the agents.
Definition 2. Let Ft(VFt , Et) be the contaminated sub-graph of G at time t, i.e. :
VFt = {v ∈ G contt(v) = on}
We assume that F0 is a single simply-connected component (the actions of the agents will be so designed that this
property will be preserved).
Definition 3. Let ∂F denote the boundary of F . A tile is on the boundary if and only if at least one of its 8−N eighbors
is not in F , meaning :
∂F = {v v ∈ F ∧ 8−N eighbors(v) ∩ (G \ F ) 6= ∅}
Definition 4. Let St denote the size of the dirty region F at time t, namely the number of grid points (or tiles) in
Ft.
Let a group of k agents that can move on the grid G (moving from a tile to its neighbor in one time step) be placed
at time t0 on F0, at some point p0 ∈ VFt .
Definition 5. Let us denote by ∆Ft the potential boundary, which is the maximal number of tiles which might be
added to Ft by spreading all the tiles of ∂Ft.
∆Ft ≡ {v : ∃u ∈ ∂Ft and v ∈ 4−N eighbors(u) and v /∈ Ft}
As we are interested in the stochastic generalization of the dynamic cooperative cleaners model, we will assume
that each tile in ∆Ft might be contaminated with some probability p. In the model we will analyze later, we assume
that the status variables of the tiles of ∆Ft are independent from one another, and between time steps.
Definition 6. Let us denote by Φn (v) the surrounding neighborhood of a tile v, as the set of all the reachable tiles
u from v within n steps on the grid (namely, the "digital sphere" or radius n around v). In this work we assume 4-
connectivity among the region cells -- namely, two tiles are considered as neighbors within one step iff the Manhattan
distance between them is exactly 1.
The spreading policy, Ξ (v, φ, t), controls the contamination status of v at time t + 1, as a function of the contami-
nation status of its neighbors in its n-th digital sphere, at time t. Notice the Ξ (v, φ, t) can be also non deterministic.
Definition 7. Let us denote by Ξ (v, φ, t) the spreading policy of v as follows:
Ξ (v, φ, t) : (V, {On, Off}α , N) → {On, Off}
Where α ≡ Φn (v), V denotes the vertices of the grid, {On, Off}α denotes the contamination status of the members
of Φn (v), at time t (for t ∈ N ).
A basic example of using the previous definition of Ξ () is the case of the deterministic model, where at every d
time-steps the contamination spreads from all tiles in ∂Ft to all the tiles in δFt. This model can be defined using the
Ξ function, as follows:
For every tile v we first define Φn (v) where n equals to 1 and assuming 4-connectivity. Then Ξ (v, φ, t) , for any
time-step t will be defined as follows:
Ξ (v, φ, t) =(cid:26) On
Off
if t mod d = 0 and v ∈ ∆Ft
Otherwise
Notice that due to the fact that we are assuming that v is in ∆Ft, its surrounding neighborhood contains at least one
tile with contamination status of On.
4
An interesting particular case of the general Ξ() function is the simple uniform probabilistic spread. In this scenario,
a tile in V ∈ ∆Ft becomes contaminated with some predefined probability p, if and only if at least one of its n-th
neighbors are contaminated at time step t. Using the Ξ() function and the probability p, this can be formalized as
follows :
For every tile v we first define Φn (v) where n equals to 1 and assuming 4-connectivity.
Ξ (v, φ, t) =(cid:26) On
Off
with probability of p if v ∈ ∆Ft
Otherwise
This model can naturally also be defined simply as :
In our work we will focus on this model, while deriving the analytic bounds for the cleaning time.
∀t ∈ N, ∀v ∈ ∆Ft, P rob (contt+1(v) = On) = p
V. LOWER BOUND
A. Direct Bound
In this section we form a lower bound on the cleaning time of any cleaning protocol preformed by k agents. We
start by setting a bound on the contaminated region's size at each time step, St. As we are interested in minimizing
the cleaning time we should also minimize the contaminated region's area. Therefore we are interested in the minimal
size of it, which achieved when the region's shape is sphere [2]. In our model each tile in the potential boundary, ∆Ft,
has the same probability p to be contaminated in the next time step. The whole probabilistic process in each time
step is Binomial Distributed, under the assumption that the spreading of each tile at any time step is independent
from the spreadings of other tiles or from the spreadings of the same tile at different time steps.
As we are interested in the lower bound of the contaminated region's size we will assume that the expected number
of newly added tiles to the contaminated region is minimal, which occurs when the region's shape forms a digital
sphere (as presented in [36]). Then we can compute the expectation of this process for a specific time step t. Therefore,
the size of the potential boundary is ∆Ft = 2√2 · St − 1 as shown in [36, 37].
Definition 8. Let us denote by Xt the random variable of the actual number of added tiles to the contaminated region
at time step t.
Assuming the independence of tiles' contamination spreadings and given St, Xt is Binomial Distributed, XtSt ∼
B (∆Ft, p), where each tile in the potential boundary has the same probability p to be contaminated. Therefore, we
can say that the expectation of Xt given St is µ = E (XtSt) = p · ∆Ft.
Notice that occasionally the number of new tiles added to the contaminated region may be below µ. As we are
interested in a lower bound, we should take some µ′ < µ such that: P r[Xt < µ′St] < ǫ, meaning that the probability
that the number of the newly added tiles to the contaminated region is smaller than µ′ is extremely small (tends to
0).
In order to bound Xt by some µ′ we shall use the Chernoff Bound , where δ is the desired distance from the
expectation, as follows :
P r [Xt < (1 − δ)µSt] < e−
δ2µ
2
Definition 9. Let us denote by qt the probability that at time step t, the size of the added tiles to the contaminated
region is not lower than µ′ = (1 − δ)µ and it can be written as follows :
qt = (1 − P r [Xt < (1 − δ)µSt])
Theorem 1. Using any cleaning protocol, the area of the contaminated region at time step t can be recursively lower
bounded, as follows :
P rhSt+1 ≥ St − k +j2 · (1 − δ) p ·p2 · (St − k) − 1kSti ≥ qt
Proof. Notice that a lower bound for the contaminated region's size can be obtained by assuming that the agents are
working with maximal efficiency, meaning that each time step every agent cleans exactly one tile.
In each step, the agents clean another portion of k tiles, but the remaining contaminated tiles spread their contam-
ination to their 4−N eighbors and cause new tiles to be contaminated.
Definition 8 we can express St+1 as follows :
Lets us denote by the random variable St+1 the number of contaminated tiles in the next time step. Using
St+1 = St − k + Xt
5
Lets first bound the number of the added tiles using the Chernoff Bound . As Xt given St is Binomial Distributed,
XtSt ∼ B (∆Ft, p) and µ = E (XtSt) = p · ∆Ft. Using Chernoff Bound we know that:
2 ⇒ P r [Xt < (1 − δ)p · ∆FtSt] < e−
P r [Xt < (1 − δ)µSt] < e−
δ2 ·p·∆Ft
δ2 µ
2
Assigning Xt = St+1 − St + k from former definition of St+1, we get:
P r [St+1 − St + k < (1 − δ)p · ∆FtSt] < e−
δ2 ·p·∆Ft
2
As we are interested in the minimal number of tiles which can become contaminated at this stage. The minimal
number of 4− N eighbors of any number of tiles is achieved when the tiles are organized in the shape of a "digital
sphere" (see [36, 37]) - i.e. the potential boundary is ∆Ft = 2p2 · (St − k) − 1. Assigning ∆Ft value:
δ2 ·p·2√2·(St −k)−1
P rhSt+1 < St − k + (1 − δ)p · 2p2 · (St − k) − 1Sti < e−
2
As we are interested in the complementary event and using Definition 9
P rhSt+1 ≥ St − k + (1 − δ)p · 2p2 · (St − k) − 1Sti ≥ 1 − e−
As the number of tiles must be an integer value, we use (cid:4)(1 − δ) · p · 2√2 · St − 1(cid:5) to be on the safe side. Using
inequality 1 we get :
δ2 ·p·2√2·(St −k)−1
2
= qt
(1)
P rhSt+1 ≥ St − k +j2 · (1 − δ) p ·p2 · (St − k) − 1kSti ≥ qt
Notice that as illustrated in Figure 1(a), which demonstrates the bound presented in Theorem 1, as δ decreases the
produced bound for the stochastic model is closer to the bound of the deterministic model, for d = 1
p .
Definition 10. Let us denote by Qt the bound probability that the contaminated region's size at time step t will be
[at least] St. Qt can be expressed as follows :
Qt =
qi
t
Yi=0
Notice that for bounding the area of the region at time step t using Theorem 1 and Definition 10, the bound, which
will be achieved, will be in probability Qt. We want to have Qt sufficiently high.
We shall assume, for the sake of analysis, that the dynamic value of the area, St, is always kept not less than some
holds :
S < S0 − k +j2 · (1 − δ) p ·p2 · (S0 − k) − 1k (as we want S1 to be bigger or equal to S). Then the next Lemma
Lemma 1. For any T ≥ 1, if for all 1 ≤ t ≤ T the contaminated region's size St is always kept not less than some
S < S0 − k +j2 · (1 − δ) p ·p2 · (S0 − k) − 1k then :
Proof. We will prove this Lemma by induction on T.
QT ≥ QT = qT =(cid:16)1 − e−δ2
T
·p·2√2·( S−k)−1(cid:17)
6
δ = 0.01
δ = 0.1
δ = 0.2
δ = 0.3
δ = 0.5
d = 3
Qt ≈ 0.0001
Qt = 0.0058
Qt = 0.9167
Qt = 1
Qt ≈ 0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
t
x 104
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
t
S
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
(a)A lower bound for the contaminated region St, the area at time t,
for various values of δ
x 104
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
t
S
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
k=150
k=160
k=170
k=180
k=190
Qt = 0.9958
Qt = 0.9952
Qt = 0.9960
Qt = 0.9963
Qt = 0.9967
100
200
300
t
400
500
600
(b)A lower bound for the contaminated region St, the area at time t,
for various number of agents k
FIG. 1: An illustration of the bound presented in Theorem 1. In (a) we can see the deterministic model (the Zig-Zag line)
with spread each 3 time steps (d = 3) compare to the stochastic model with p = 1/3 and δ ∈ [0.01, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.5] where both
models have k = 150 and start with S0 = 20000. In (b) we have the lower bound for S0 = 20000, p = 0.5 and δ = 0.3 for
different number of agents k ∈ [150, 160, 170, 180, 190].
• Base step: For T = 1, we can write the probabilities Q1 and Q1 as follows :
Q1 = q1 ≥ 1 − e−δ2
·p·2√2·(S1−k)−1
As we assume that St ≥ S than it is not hard to see that Q1 ≥ Q1.
Q1 = q ≥ 1 − e−δ2
·p·2√2·( S−k)−1
• Induction hypothesis: We assume that for all T ≤ T ′ holds QT ≥ QT .
• Induction step: We will prove that for T = T ′ + 1 holds QT ≥ QT . From definition 10 we can write the
probability QT as follows :
By the induction hypothesis we know that for all T ≤ T ′ holds QT ≥ QT than we can rewrite QT ′+1 and also
writing QT for T = T ′ + 1 we get that :
QT = QT ′+1 = QT ′ · qT ′+1
7
QT = QT ′+1 ≥ QT ′ · qT ′+1
QT = QT ′+1 = QT ′ · q
As we want to compare these probabilities and to prove that QT ≥ QT all we need to show is that qT ′+1 ≥ q.
As we assume that for all 1 ≤ t ≤ T ′ + 1 holds that St ≥ S and particularly for t = T ′ + 1, than it is not hard
to see that qT ′+1 ≥ q and therefore QT ≥ QT .
Theorem 2. For any contaminated region of size S0, using any cleaning protocol, the probability that S τδ , the
contaminated area at time step t = τδ, is greater or equal to some S < S0 − k +j2 · (1 − δ) p ·p2 · (S0 − k) − 1k can
be lower bounded, as follows :
P rhS τδ ≥ Si ≥(cid:16)1 − e−δ2
τδ , r ·(cid:16) S − k − 1
2(cid:17) −q ·(cid:0)S0 − k − 1
τδ
·p·2√2·( S−k)−1(cid:17)
2(cid:1) + ln q·( S−k− 1
q·(S0−k− 1
k
2
2
2 )− k
2 )− k
2!
where :
and
, 2(1 − δ)2 · p2
Proof. Observe that by denoting yt , St Theorem 1 can be written as :
Searching for the minimal area we can look at the equation :
yt+1 − yt ≥j2 · (1 − δ) · pp2 · (yt − k) − 1k − k
yt+1 − yt =j2 · (1 − δ) · pp2 · (yt − k) − 1k − k
By dividing both sides by ∆t = 1 we obtain :
yt+1 − yt , y′ =$s(1 − δ)2 · p2 · 8(cid:20)y −(cid:18)k +
1
2(cid:19)(cid:21)% − k
(2)
Notice that the values of y′, the derivative of the change in the region's size, might be positive (stating an increase
in the area), negative (stating a decrease in the area), or complex numbers (stating that the area is smaller than k,
and will therefore be cleaned before the next time step).
Let us denote x2 , (1 − δ)2 · p2 · 8(cid:2)y −(cid:0)k + 1
we see that :
2(cid:1)(cid:3). After calculating the derivative of both sides of this expression
2x · x′ = (1 − δ)2 · p2 · 8y′
and after using the definition of y′ of Equation 2 we see that :
dx
dt
2x ·
= 2x · x′ = (1 − δ)2 · p2 · 8 $s(1 − δ)2 · p2 · 8(cid:20)y −(cid:18)k +
1
2(cid:19)(cid:21)% − k!
From Equation 3 a definition of dt can be extracted :
≤ (1 − δ)2 · p2 · 8 (x − k)
8
(3)
dt ≥
≥
1
8 · (1 − δ)2 · p2 ·
4(1 − δ)2 · p2 ·
1
dx
2x
x − k
x − k + k
x − k
dx ≥
1
4(1 − δ)2 · p2 (cid:18)1 +
k
x − k(cid:19) dx
The value of x can be achieved by integrating the previous expression as follows (notice that we are interested in
the equality of the two expressions) :
After the integration we can see that :
Z t
t0
dt =Z x
and after assigning t0 = 0 :
=
t
t0
i(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
1
k
x0
x − k(cid:19) dx
4(1 − δ)2 · p2 (cid:18)1 +
4(1 − δ)2 · p2 (x + k ln (x − k))(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
x0
1
x
4(1 − δ)2 · p2 · t = x − x0 + k ln
x − k
x0 − k
Returning back to y and using definition we get :
· t =s(cid:18)y − k −
1
2(cid:19) −s(cid:18)y0 − k −
Returning to the original size variable St, we see that :
1
2(cid:19) + ln
q(cid:0)y − k − 1
q(cid:0)y0 − k − 1
2(cid:1) − k
2(cid:1) − k
2
2
k
2
· t =s(cid:18)St − k −
1
2(cid:19) −s(cid:18)S0 − k −
1
2(cid:19) + ln
q(cid:0)St − k − 1
q(cid:0)S0 − k − 1
2(cid:1) − k
2(cid:1) − k
2
2
k
2
(4)
Defining that τδ = t and combining EQ. 4 with Lemma 1 knowing that St′ ≥ S for all 1 ≤ t′ ≤ τδ we get the
following inequality:
where :
and
P rhS τδ ≥ Si ≥(cid:16)1 − e−δ2
τδ , r ·(cid:16) S − k − 1
2(cid:17) −q ·(cid:0)S0 − k − 1
τδ
·p·2√2·( S−k)−1(cid:17)
2(cid:1) + ln q·( S−k−
q·(S0−k− 1
1
k
2
k
2
2 )−
2 )− k
2!
, 2(1 − δ)2 · p2
800
700
600
500
t
400
300
200
100
0
0
9
± = 0.27
± = 0.3
± = 0.4
± = 0.5
± = 0.6
± = 0.7
0.5
1
S
1.5
2
x 104
(a)The bound on t for various values of δ as a function of S
600
500
400
t
300
200
100
0
0
k = 150
k = 160
k = 170
k = 180
k = 190
0.5
1
S
1.5
2
x 104
(b)The bound on t for various number of agents k as a function of S
FIG. 2: An illustration of the bound presented in Theorem 2 of the cleaning time t in order to reach S. In (a) we can see
the bound on the cleaning time where p = 0.5 and δ ∈ [0.27, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7] where the cleaning done by k = 150 agents
and starting with S0 = 20000. In (b) we have the lower bound on the cleaning time for S0 = 20000, p = 0.5 and δ = 0.3 for
different number of agents k ∈ [150, 160, 170, 180, 190].
In Theorem 2 we can guarantee with high probability of Qτδ that the contamination region's size will not be lower
than S - namely for any time step t > τδ the probability P r[St ≥ S] is getting lower and therefore the probability
that the agents will succeed in cleaning the contaminated area is increasing. We are showing that by choosing small
enough S so we know that the agents will succeed in cleaning the rest of the 'dirty' region, we will be able to guarantee
with high probability the whole cleaning of the 'dirty' region. For example, choosing S to be in o(k) will assure that
for St ≤ S ≤ c · k for some small constant c, the rest of the contaminated region will be cleaned in at most c time
steps by the k cleaning agents.
An illustration of the bound on the cleaning time, as presented in Theorem 2, is shown in Figure 2 and the
10
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
t
Q
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0
δ = 0.4
δ = 0.3
δ = 0.25
δ = 0.2
0.5
1
S
1.5
2
x 104
(a)The bound probability Qt as a function of S for various δ values
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
t
Q
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0
p = 0.6
p = 0.5
p = 0.4
p = 0.3
p = 0.2
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
S
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
x 104
(b)The bound probability Qt as a function of S for various p values
FIG. 3: An illustration of the probability produced by the bound presented in Theorem 2.
In (a) we can see the bound
probability Qt for initial region's size S0 = 20000, spreading probability p = 0.5 and number of agents k = 150 for the following
of values of δ ∈ [0.4, 0.3, 0.25, 0.2]. In (b) we can see Qt for S0 = 20000, δ = 0.3 and k = 150 for the following of values of
p ∈ [0.6, 0.5, 0.4, 0.3]
corresponding bound probability in Figure 3. Notice that as S and δ increase the cleaning time decreases.
B. Using The Bound
In Theorem 2 we presented a bound which guarantees that the contaminated region's size will not be smaller than
some predefined size S with the bound probability, Qt. We suggest a method which make this bound useful when
one willing to be guaranteed of successfully cleaning of the contaminated area with some desired probability Qt in a
11
certain model, where the initial contaminated region's size is S0, each one of the tiles in the surrounding neighborhood
of the contaminated area has a probability p to be contaminated by each one of its neighbors's contamination spreads
and with k cleaning agents.
Notice that the only free variables left in the bound are the analysis parameters δ and S. We should also notice
the fact that as δ decreases the "usefulness" of the bound decreases (see Figure 3) because when δ is closer to 0, the
model tern to the deterministic variant of the cooperative cleaning problem. In this variant of the problem the bound,
as presented in Theorem 2, will "predict" that the contamination will spread exactly by the potential boundary mean
in every step (as shown in V A). Furthermore, as δ increases, although the "usefulness" of the bound increases, the
predicted bound is the naive one, where at each step there are no spreads and all the k agents clean perfectly - i.e.
the size of the contaminated region at time step t will be exactly St = S0 − t · k (which can be guaranteed in high
probability).
We suggest the following method, in order to eliminate the need to identify the analysis parameters. Once someone
willing to use this bound he should provide the desired bound probability - Qt and the parameter of the model. Then
for each value of δ in the range of [0, 1] he should find the corresponding value of the minimal S which satisfies the
inequality P rhSt ≥ Si ≥ Qt as illustrated in Figure 4. As δ ∈ R - i.e. a real number, once using this method we
should choose the granularity of δ for which calculate the appropriate S.
Notice that there can be exists some minimal value of δ = δM IN , where for any value of δ < δM IN there is no
solution for the bound inequality. Also notice that there can be exists some maximal value of δ = δM AX , where for
any value of δ > δM IN the corresponding S is the same as for δM AX .
Furthermore, for each pair of values of δ and S there exists its corresponding cleaning precess of k agents with initial
region's size S0 as demonstrated in Figure 4(b). Each curve bounds the cleaning process from S0 to the applicable S.
As we are interested in finding the tightest bound, looking at the frontier of the bounds, as shown in Figure 4(b), we
can combine the relevant curves to one comprehensive bound. This bounds integrates the bound for a specific range
of j values of δ ∈(cid:2)δi1 , δi2 , ..., δij(cid:3), where for each time step t we choose the maximal St as illustrated in Figure 5(a).
Notice that the combined bound is independent of the selection of values for analysis parameters δ and s. Also we
can notice that this bound limits the contaminated region's size to some minimal SM IN where we almost certain that
the agents will succeed in terminating the cleaning process successfully.
Notice that the inequality in Theorem 2 bounds the probability that the contaminated region's size at time step t
will not be smaller than S , therefore, an increase in the spreadings probability causes to an increase in the expected
contaminated region's size and thus increases the probability (q)t (as demonstrated in Figure 3(b)).
Notice that as illustrated in Figure 5(b), as the number of agents increases the probabilistic and the deterministic
bounds are more similar. This result is not surprising considering the method we presented. In our method, in order
to make the bound tighter, we favor the lower values of δ. As the number of agents increases the bound can be
guaranteed in the desired probability with lower values of δ and as δ decreases the model becomes more similar to
the deterministic one.
C. Parameters Selection
One of the problems of the bound as brought in Section V A is the nature of the probabilistic bounds to decay
to 0 (as shown in Figure 3), which caused due to the fact that the bound probability Qt is a product of each step's
probability, qt, and because as t increase Qt decreases. One of the reasons which explains this problem is a bad
in the bound for the cleaning time (Eq. 4 a selection of too small S will lead to fast
selection of parameters - e.g.
decay in the probability. Furthermore, there exist trade-offs, when selecting the parameters' values, between the
bound results and the the probability which guarantees its likelihood (e.g. see Figure 7).
One way to avoid this problem is by selecting S as big as possible, as in Figures 3and 7. As S increases the
probability of each time step, qt, increases and so the total probability Qt. Another technique for eliminating this
problem is by "wrapping" number of time steps into one, thus artificially decreasing the time and therefore decreasing
the power of qt in Qt (in Lemma 1).
Another example of the trade-off in choosing the parameters can be shown in Figure 3(b) where Qt is illustrated
for various values of the probability p. Interestingly, as p decreases our confidence in the bound result is decreasing
although we know that the the agents preforming the cleaning protocol have a better chance to successfully complete
their work.
12
Qt = 0.95
Qt = 0.90
Qt = 0.85
18000
16000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
S
0
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0.6
δ
(a) S as a function of δ for various bound probability Qt values
x 104
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
t
S
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
100
200
300
t
400
500
600
(b)The region's size St for various values of < Qt, S > pairs
FIG. 4: Figure (a) is an illustration of S as a function of δ using the bound presented in Theorem 2 for the following model
parameters -- S0 = 20000, p = 0.1 and k = 50 for various values of Qt. Figure (b) is an illustration of the cleaning process for
various pairs of values of S and δ as shown in Figure (a) for the same model parameters with Qt = 0.95.
VI.
IMPOSSIBILITY RESULT
While the theoretical lower bound presented in Section V can decrease the uncertainty whether a solution for the
cleaning problem with certain number of agents exists, one might be interested in the opposite question, namely -- how
can we guarantee that a group of agents will not be able to successfully accomplish the cleaning work (regardless of
the cleaning protocol being used or the contaminated region's properties e.g. its shape and spreading probability). A
first impossibility result for the deterministic case of the Cooperative Cleaners problem was published in [24]), where
an initial size that is impossible to clean (using any protocol) was demonstrated. In this paper, we extend this result
in order to be applicable for stochastically expending domains as well. Consequently, we will set the impossibility
13
x 104
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
t
S
1
S0/k
Qt = 0.85
Qt = 0.90
Qt = 0.95
Deterministic(d = 10)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
t
600
700
800
900
1000
(a)The combined bounds for various values of the bound probability
Qt
b
o
r
p
t
t
s
d
t
1.15
1.1
1.05
1
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
k
(b)The ratio between the bounds as function of the number of agents k
FIG. 5: Figure (a) An illustration of the combined bound for the bounds as shown in Figures 4(a) and 4(b) for the same model
parameters -- S0 = 20000, p = 0.1 and k = 50 for various values of Qt compared to the deterministic model with d = 10 and
to the naive bound S0/k. Figure (b) compare the deterministic bound and the probabilistic bound as a function of the desired
guaranteeing probability - Qt for various contaminated region's sizes and number of cleaning agents.
result with probabilistic restrictions as follows :
Theorem 3. Using any cleaning protocol, k agents cleaning a contaminated region , where each tile in the potential
boundary may be contaminate by already contaminated neighboring tiles with some probability p in each time step,
will not be able to cleat this contaminated region if :
S0 >(cid:22) k2
8 · p2 + k +
1
2(cid:23)
14
k = 50
k = 70
k = 90
k = 110
k = 130
k = 150
k = 170
k = 190
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Qt
b
o
r
p
t
t
e
d
t
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0
(a)The ratio between the bounds as function of the bound probability
Qt for various number of agents k
b
o
r
p
t
t
s
d
t
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0
s0 = 5000
s0 = 8000
s0 = 11000
s0 = 14000
s0 = 17000
s0 = 20000
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Qt
(b)The ratio between the bounds as function of the bound probability
Qt for various values of initial region's size S0
FIG. 6:
guaranteeing probability - Qt for various contaminated region's sizes and number of cleaning agents.
Figures (b) and (a) compare the deterministic bound and the probabilistic bound as a function of the desired
with the probability Qt for any time step t - i.e. :
∀tP r [St ≥ S0] = Qt
Proof. Firstly, we shell require that the contaminated region's size increases between each time step, guaranteeing us
that the contaminated region's size will keep on growing, and thus impossible to be cleaned. Therefore we want that
in each time step t the size of the contaminated region will be bigger than the previous one - i.e. :
St+1 − St > 0
15
p = 0.4
p = 0.3
p = 0.2
p = 0.1
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
δ
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
t
Q
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0
(a)The bound probability Qt as a function of δ for various p values
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
t
Q
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0
k = 150
k = 250
k = 350
k = 450
k = 550
k = 650
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
δ
(b)The bound probability Qt as a function of δ for various numbers of
agents
FIG. 7: Parameters selection. In (a) we can see Qt for S0 = 20000 and k = 150 for the following of values of p ∈ [0.4, 0.3, 0.2, 0.1].
In (b) we can see Qt for S0 = 20000 and p = 0.4 for the following of values of k ∈ [150, 250, 350, 450, 550, 650]
Using Theorem 1 we know that :
and therefore we shell require that :
St+1 ≥ St − k +j2 · (1 − δ) p ·p2 · (St − k) − 1k
j2 · (1 − δ) p ·p2 · (St − k) − 1k − k > 0
16
Choosing, without loss of generality, t = 0 and after some arithmetics, we see that :
S0 >$
k2
8 (1 − δ)2 p2
+ k +
1
2%
As S0 as a function of δ is monotonically increasing and tends to infinity as δ tends to 1, we can lower bound S0 with
δ = 0, therefore :
We would like this process to continue for t time steps, thus applying the same method for all time steps and using
Def. 10, we get that :
S0 >(cid:22) k2
8 · p2 + k +
1
2(cid:23)
(5)
.
∀tP r [St ≥ S0] = Qt
Notice that Theorem 3 produces two results - the first one is the minimal initial region's size S0 which guarantees
that the cleaning agents will not be able to successfully accomplish the cleaning process and second one is the
corresponding probability Qt in which this S0 can be guaranteed. Also notice that in order to evaluate Qt, one should
use the appropriate S0 and δ.
Interestingly, the results demonstrated in Figure. 8 of the impossibility result as presented in Theorem 3, as the
number of cleaning agents increases the probability which we can guarantee the minimal initial region's size S0 also
increases - in other words, although as the number of agents increases, the corresponding minimal initial region's size
also increases and the probability in which we can guarantee that the agents will not be able to successfully clean the
region increases as well.
VII. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
In previous work [2] a cleaning protocol for a group of K agents collaboratively cleaning an expending region was
developed, called SWEEP . The performance of the algorithm was analyzed in [2], both analytically and experimen-
tally. We had implemented the algorithm for a revised environment - where stochastic changes take place, as defined
throughout this paper. We have conducted an extensive observational analysis of the performance of this algorithm.
Exhaustive simulations were carried out, examining the cleaning activity of the protocol for various combinations of
parameters -- namely, number of agents, spreading probability (or spreading time in the deterministic model) and
geometric features of the contaminated region. All the results were averaged over at least 1000 deferent runnings
in order to get a statistical significance. In the deterministic model we average the results over the all the possible
starting positions of the agents. Notice that, in order to minimize the running time, all running were stopped after
some significant time and we consider these runnings as failure -- i.e. these results are not included in the average
calculation and not counted in the success percentage.
Some of the experimental results are presented in Figure 9 comparing the probabilistic model and the deterministic
model over three deferent shapes (circle, square and cross) with range of number of agents. Notice the interesting
phenomenon, where adding more agents may cause to an increase in the cleaning time due to the delay caused by the
agents synchronization in the SWEEP protocol.
VIII. CONCLUSIONS
In this work we set the foundations of the stochastic model for the Cooperative Cleaning problem and introduce, for
the first time, the basic definitions describe this problem. We present two lower bounds on the contaminated region's
size and on the cleaning time under the limitation of this probabilistic model and demonstrate an impossibility result
on the number of agents which are essential for a successful completion cleaning a contaminated region.
One of the ways these results could be further enhanced would involve analyzing the transition process between
several possible "states" of the system, as a Markov process. Once analyzing the process as a Markov's Chain, we
can get the stationary distribution of the process i.e. the probability to get to each one of the ending states (totally
clean or impossible to clean).
x 105
4
3.5
3
2.5
0
S
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
17
p = 0.1
p = 0.2
p = 0.3
p = 0.4
10
20
30
k
40
50
60
(a)The minimal initial region's size S0 as a function of the number of
agents k for various probabilities.
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
t
Q
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0
p = 0.1
p = 0.2
p = 0.3
p = 0.4
10
20
30
k
40
50
60
(b)The guaranteed probability Qt as a function of the number of
agents k for various probabilities.
FIG. 8: An illustration of the impossibility result as presented in Theorem 3. In (a) we can see the minimal initial region's
size S0 for number of agents k = [1..60] and spreading probability p = [0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4]. In (b) we can see the corresponding
probability Qt.
It is also interesting to mention the similarity of this work to recent works done in the field of influence models in
social networks. For example, in [38] the authors demonstrate that a probabilistic local rule can efficiently simulate
the spread of ideas in a social network. Combining this result with our work can generate a unique approach for
18
p = 0.02
p = 0.02
p = 0.02
d = 50
d = 50
d = 50
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
S
S
E
C
C
U
S
t
0
10
20
30
50
60
70
40
k
(a)Average TSU CCESS as a function of the number of agents k
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
)
%
(
e
g
a
t
n
e
c
r
e
P
p = 0.02
p = 0.02
p = 0.02
0
10
20
30
50
60
70
40
k
(b)Success percentage as a function of the number of agents k
FIG. 9: Experimental results for various number of agents for spheric and squared contaminated region with starting size
S0 = 500 and with spreading probability of p = 0.02 (notice that all the running were stopped after 3000 time steps). In (a)
can see the results compared to the deterministic model results (with d = 1
p and in (b) the success percentage
analyzing dynamics of information flow in social networks.
[1] Y. Altshuler, A. Bruckstein, and I. Wagner, in IEEE Swarm Intelligence Symposium (2005), pp. 209 -- 216.
[2] Y. Altshuler, I. Wagner, V. Yanovski, and A. Bruckstein, International Journal of Robotics Research (2010).
[3] V. Braitenberg, Vehicles (MIT Press, 1984).
[4] I. A. Wagner, Y. Altshuler, V. Yanovski, and A. M. Bruckstein, Int. J. Rob. Res. 27, 127 (2008), ISSN 0278-3649.
[5] S. Mastellone, D. Stipanovi, C. Graunke, K. Intlekofer, and M. Spong, The International Journal of Robotics Research 27,
19
107 (2008).
[6] S. DeLoach and M. Kumar, Intelligence Integration in Distributed Knowledge Management (Idea Group Inc (IGI), 2008),
chap. Multi-Agent Systems Engineering: An Overview and Case Study, pp. 207 -- 224.
[7] G. Chalkiadakis, E. Markakis, and C. Boutilier, in AAMAS '07: Proceedings of the 6th international joint conference on
Autonomous agents and multiagent systems (ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2007), pp. 1 -- 8.
[8] I. Wagner, M. Lindenbaum, and A. Bruckstein, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 24, 211 (1998).
[9] R. Arkin and T. Balch, AI and Mobile Robots (1998).
[10] I. Wagner and A. Bruckstein, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, Special Issue on Ant Robotics 31, 1
(2001).
[11] I. Rekleitisy, V. Lee-Shuey, A. P. Newz, and H. Choset, in IEEE Intl. Conf. on Robotics and Automation (2004).
[12] Z. Butler, A. Rizzi, and R. Hollis, in Proceedings of the Workshop on the Algorithmic Foundations of Robotics (2001).
[13] E. Acar, Y. Zhang, H. Choset, M. Schervish, A. Costa, R. Melamud, D. Lean, and A. Gravelin, in International Conference
on Field and Service Robotics (2001), pp. 161 -- 168.
[14] M. Batalin and G. Sukhatme, in 6th International Symposium on Distributed Autonomous Robotics Systems (2002).
[15] J. Svennebring and S. Koenig, Autonomous Robots 16, 313 (2004).
[16] S. Koenig and Y. Liu, in AGENTS'01 (2001).
[17] X. Zheng and S. Koenig, in In Proc. of the IEEE Intl. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Sys. (IROS) (2007), pp. 3757 -- 3764.
[18] S. B. Thrun., Technical Report, Carnegie Mellon University (1992).
[19] G. Dudek, M. Jenkin, E. Milios, and D. Wilkes, IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation 7, 859 (1991).
[20] W. Kerr and D. Spears, in Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2005) (2005), pp. 2905 -- 2910.
[21] M. Polycarpou, Y. Yang, and K. Passino, in IEEE International Symposium on Intelligent Control (2001), pp. 1 -- 6.
[22] K. Passino, M. Polycarpou, D. Jacques, M. Pachter, Y. Liu, Y. Yang, M. Flint, and M. Baum, Cooperative Control for
Autonomous Air Vehicles (Kluwer Academic, Boston, 2002), chap. Cooperative Control and Optimization.
[23] R. Bejar, B. Krishnamachari, C. Gomes, and B. Selman, in Proceedings of the IJCAI-01 Workshop on Distributed Constraint
Reasoning (2001).
[24] Y. Altshuler and A. Bruckstein, Theor. Comput. Sci. 412, 4661 (2011).
[25] T. Min and H. Yin, in IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (1998), pp. 380 -- 385.
[26] S. Koenig, M. Likhachev, and X. Sun, in AAMAS '07: Proceedings of the 6th international joint conference on Autonomous
agents and multiagent systems (ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2007), pp. 1 -- 8, ISBN 978-81-904262-7-5.
[27] R. Borie, C. Tovey, and S. Koenig, In Proc. of the Intl. Joint Conf. on AI (IJCAI) pp. 59 -- 66 (2009).
[28] Y. Altshuler, V. Yanovsky, A. Bruckstein, and I. Wagner, ROBOTICA 26, 551 (2008).
[29] Y. Altshuler, V. Yanovski, I. Wagner, and A. Bruckstein, in Second International Conference on Informatics in Control,
Automation and Robotics (ICINCO), the First International Workshop on Multi-Agent Robotic Systems (MARS) (2005),
pp. 165 -- 170.
[30] R. Isaacs, Differential Games: A Mathematical Theory with Applications to Warfare and Pursuit, Control and Optimization
(John Wiley and Sons, Reprinted by Dover Publications 1999, 1965).
[31] L. Alonso, A. S. Goldstein, and E. M. Reingold, Research Report RR-1700, INRIA (1992), Projet PSYCHO ERGO.
[32] V. Isler, S. Kannan, and S. Khanna, SIAM Journal of Discrete Mathematics 20, 26 (2006).
[33] A. Goldstein and E. Reingold, Theoretical Computer Science 143, 93 (1995).
[34] J. Flynn, SIAM Journal of Control 12, 581 (1974).
[35] F. Berger, A. Gilbers, A. Grne,
and R. Klein, Algorithms 2,
ISSN 1999-4893, URL
1069
(2009),
http://www.mdpi.com/1999-4893/2/3/1069.
[36] Y. Altshuler, V. Yanovski, D. Vainsencher, I. Wagner, and A. Bruckstein, in The 13th International Conference on Discrete
Geometry for Computer Imagery (DGCI2006) (2006), pp. 17 -- 28.
[37] D. Vainsencher and A. Bruckstein, Theor. Comput. Sci. 406, 146 (2008), ISSN 0304-3975.
[38] W. Pan, N. Aharony, and A. Pentland, in Proceedings of the 25th Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) (2011), pp.
821 -- 827.
|
1708.03080 | 2 | 1708 | 2017-08-13T23:52:53 | A Simple and Realistic Pedestrian Model for Crowd Simulation and Application | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI",
"nlin.CG"
] | The simulation of pedestrian crowd that reflects reality is a major challenge for researches. Several crowd simulation models have been proposed such as cellular automata model, agent-based model, fluid dynamic model, etc. It is important to note that agent-based model is able, over others approaches, to provide a natural description of the system and then to capture complex human behaviors. In this paper, we propose a multi-agent simulation model in which pedestrian positions are updated at discrete time intervals. It takes into account the major normal conditions of a simple pedestrian situated in a crowd such as preferences, realistic perception of environment, etc. Our objective is to simulate the pedestrian crowd realistically towards a simulation of believable pedestrian behaviors. Typical pedestrian phenomena, including the unidirectional and bidirectional movement in a corridor as well as the flow through bottleneck, are simulated. The conducted simulations show that our model is able to produce realistic pedestrian behaviors. The obtained fundamental diagram and flow rate at bottleneck agree very well with classic conclusions and empirical study results. It is hoped that the idea of this study may be helpful in promoting the modeling and simulation of pedestrian crowd in a simple way. | cs.MA | cs |
1
A Simple and Realistic Pedestrian Model
for Crowd Simulation and Application
Wonho Kang and Youngnam Han
Abstract-The simulation of pedestrian crowd that reflects reality is a major challenge for researches. Several crowd simulation
models have been proposed such as cellular automata model, agent-based model, fluid dynamic model, etc. It is important to note that
agent-based model is able, over others approaches, to provide a natural description of the system and then to capture complex human
behaviors.
In this paper, we propose a multi-agent simulation model in which pedestrian positions are updated at discrete time intervals. It takes
into account the major normal conditions of a simple pedestrian situated in a crowd such as preferences, realistic perception of
environment, etc. Our objective is to simulate the pedestrian crowd realistically towards a simulation of believable pedestrian behaviors.
Typical pedestrian phenomena, including the unidirectional and bidirectional movement in a corridor as well as the flow through
bottleneck, are simulated. The conducted simulations show that our model is able to produce realistic pedestrian behaviors. The
obtained fundamental diagram and flow rate at bottleneck agree very well with classic conclusions and empirical study results. It is
hoped that the idea of this study may be helpful in promoting the modeling and simulation of pedestrian crowd in a simple way.
Keywords-Microscopic multi-agent model, pedestrian crowd simulation, semicontinuous pedestrian model.
✦
1 INTRODUCTION
P EDESTRIAN crowd is a phenomenon that can be ob-
served in several situations such as in the street, in-
tersection, square, etc. A number of researchers have been
interested in studying this phenomenon. In fact, when the
density of the crowd is high, several accidents and dis-
asters could occur. More the crowd becomes dense, more
the situation is dangerous. Therefore, researchers face an
increasing challenge to find solutions that seriously improve
pedestrian management and safety during crowd. In such a
context, simulation is an appropriate tool. It could be really
interesting to be able to simulate pedestrian movements in
such environments.
For this purpose, several crowd simulation models have
been proposed. These models are generally classified into
two categories [1]: macroscopic models that include regres-
sion models and flow dynamic models, and microscopic
models including cellular automata models and agent-based
models. Each model can be specifically categorized into
continuous, discrete, and semicontinuous according to the
space and time of the system. The macroscopic approaches
simulate the behavior of the crowd as a whole and do
not consider individual features. However, the microscopic
approaches are interested in the behaviors, actions, and
decisions of each pedestrian as well as interactions with
others [2]. Therefore, the microscopic models allow us to
obtain more realistic results of simulation. This is why we
will focus only on microscopic models and more specifically
on agent-based models. In fact, the agent-based models are
able, over others approaches, to be flexible, to provide a
natural description of the system, and to capture complex
• W. Kang and Y. Han are with the Department of Electrical Engineering,
Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), Daejeon,
Korea, e-mail: {wonhoz, ynhan}@kaist.ac.kr.
Manuscript written August 9, 2014; released August 9, 2017.
human behaviors [3].
In this paper, a semicontinuous pedestrian model is
developed in which the space occupied by pedestrians is
continuously evolving, but time is measured by intervals.
It is worth noting that each pedestrian in the proposed
model is regarded as a self-adapted agent, and the move-
ment is implemented in a utility maximization approach
by considering various human factors. The model is able
to calculate normal pedestrian distributions in space and
pedestrian movements at normal step frequencies over time.
The goal of our work is to model realistic pedestrian crowd
by simulating realistic pedestrian behaviors. Face this chal-
lenge; we need to carefully study human nature such as
preferences, realistic perception of environment, etc. Rules
governing the selection of step size and moving direction
guarantee that the model can be used to accurately compute
the distance and speed of pedestrian movement. In the
model, pedestrians are not treated as particles, and the sizes
of their bodies are considered. The model is thus suitable
for simulating the movements of dense crowds.
The rest of our paper is as follows: section 2 describes
related works. In section 3, we propose our system model
which takes into account the various human nature factors.
Section 4 presents our simulations and a discussion of the
work. Finally, we conclude the paper and give perspectives
in section 5.
2 RELATED WORKS
There are several crowd simulation models which can be
classified into two categories: macroscopic models and mi-
croscopic models. Macroscopic approaches include regres-
sion models [4] and flow dynamic models [5], [6]. Micro-
scopic approaches include cellular automata models [7],
[8], [9] and agent-based models [3], [10], [11], [12], [13],
(cid:818) Environment Description
(cid:818) Agent Properties
Pedestrian Movement
Step Size
Direction
Walking
Probablity
(cid:818) Position Update
- Collision Avoidance
- Pedestrian Preference
2
probability, which are used to update the position of a
pedestrian. In the model, a rule of determining step size
and movement direction has been used to avoid pedestrian
overlapping each other, and the design of the pedestrian
behavior is based on the perception of the environment. This
combination has allowed us to obtain a simple and realistic
pedestrian model for crowd simulation. In our model, each
pedestrian is represented by an agent, who is required to
move step by step toward the goal while adjusting the step
size and moving direction according to the environment and
avoiding collisions with other pedestrians and obstacles.
The ith pedestrian agent at time t is characterized by:
Fig. 1. Architecture of system model in overview.
•
Step size: The actual step size of an agent is defined
as αli,t with step scale factor α and desired step size
[14]. The macroscopic approaches simulate the behavior
of the crowd as a whole. In fact, macroscopic models do
not consider individual features such as physical abilities,
direction of movement, and individual positioning [15]. This
causes a lack of realism. On the other hand, the microscopic
approaches are interested in the behaviors, actions, and
decisions of each pedestrian as well as interactions with
others [2]. Therefore, the microscopic models allow us to
obtain more realistic outputs of simulation. For this reason,
in our work, we adopt a microscopic approach. Among
the specific categories of the microscopic systems, we focus
on semicontinuous multi-agent model in which pedestrian
space is continuous, and pedestrian positions are updated
at discrete time intervals. In the following, we describe the
major microscopic models.
2.1 Cellular Automata Model
A cellular automaton [7], [8], [9] is a collection of cells on
a grid. Each cell contains a state chosen among a finite set
and can change over time. The pedestrian transitions from
one state to another consist firstly on the awareness of the
environment and secondly on the possibility to move to
the state of its neighboring cells. Finally, the transitions of
states are executed. The change of cell state is based on a
set of rules that are applied simultaneously to all grid cells,
producing a new generation of cells which depends entirely
on the previous generation.
Cellular automata model is a simple and fast implemen-
tation, but criticized for lacking realism. In fact, this model
limits the pedestrian spatial movement like a checkerboard.
Another limitation of cellular automata is the difficulty
to model changing pedestrian velocities and to simulate
heterogeneous pedestrian behaviors.
3 SYSTEM MODEL
Our system is based on a semicontinuous microscopic ap-
proach and particularly in a multi-agent architecture, in
which each pedestrian moves a certain step size in the
moving direction at each discrete time instant. The overview
of system architecture is displayed in Fig. 1. The description
on the environment and the properties of the agents are
required as inputs for the system. The pedestrian move-
ment is represented as step size, direction, and walking
• Direction: The possible moving direction is described
by θi,t + φ with direction shift factor φ and desired
of li,t ∼ N (cid:16)µl,i, σ2
l,i(cid:17).
direction of θi,t ∼ N (cid:16)µθ,i, σ2
θ,i(cid:17).
• Position: The environment of our system is indexed
by a Cartesian coordinate system as s = (x, y) , x, y ∈
R. Thus, a position is defined as the pair of coor-
dinates si,t = (xi,t, yi,t) in the Cartesian coordinate
system.
Each agent has its own autonomous behavior. Indeed, the
behavior of a pedestrian agent is divided into three phases:
strategic phase, tactical phase, and operational phase.
3.1 Strategic Phase
At each time step t, we consider that a pedestrian agent
moves through a given environment, which represents for
street, intersection, square, etc. Being in the environment,
the agent has to follow a well defined direction. The agent
objective is to move away by minimizing interactions with
other pedestrians and maximizing its utility. In other words,
the aim of each agent is to walk at the desired step size and
direction, minimizing time travel.
Strategic phase defines the global plan of a pedestrian
agent. In fact, the global plan is the set of step size and
moving direction that the pedestrian has to take in each time
interval. This set of step size and moving direction allows
the pedestrian agent to reach its final goal. At the present,
the strategic plan is given to each pedestrian agent in the
beginning of a simulation. In our work, we focus more on
the tactical and the operational phases as follows.
3.2 Tactical Phase
The tactical phase represents searches for possible positions
to move. These searches are taken at each instant t after the
global plan is set up. The searches taken are based on the
position update function, which is detailed in the following.
If the ith pedestrian determines moving direction θi,t, it
will try to move a step size li,t in that direction. Due to
other pedestrians or obstacles, there could be the case that
movement to the desired position seems to be difficult. For
this kind of cases, step scale factor α and direction shift
factor φ are needed to be considered. Here, the position
update function is formulated as
f (α, φ) = αli,t (sin (θi,t + φ) , cos (θi,t + φ)) wi,t
(1)
Candidate
Position
Desired
Position
Others /
Obstacles
ts ¢
,j
i ts +i t, 1, 1
s , 1, 1
, 1
i ts +
, 1
ijb>
,j ts
f
i tla
,
Wall
,i tq
i tS +
, 1
Next
Position
Current
Position
3
Next
Position
Others /
Obstacles
i ts (cid:14)
, 1
Candidate
Position
,j ts
ij(cid:92)
ijb
ij(cid:92)(cid:39)ijd
i tS (cid:14)
, 1
body
tS
rear
tS
Current
Position
,i ts
,i tl
,i ts
,i tl
Fig. 2. Pedestrian movement dynamics.
Fig. 3. Collision avoidance with other members in the crowd.
where the walking state factor wi,t is defined as
wi,t =(1, with pwalk
0, with 1 − pwalk
i,t
i,t
(2)
with the walking probability of 0 ≤ pwalk
i,t ≤ 1. Through this
position update function, the position update process from
time t to t + 1 can be derived as
si,t+1 = si,t + f (α, φ)
(3)
where si,t and si,t+1 are the current and the next positions
of the ith pedestrian. The corresponding set of candidate
movement position Si,t+1 can be expressed as
Si,t+1 = {si,t+1 : α ∈ A, φ ∈ Φ}
(4)
where A = {α : 0 ≤ α ≤ 1} and Φ = {φ : −φτ ≤ φ ≤ φτ }.
Here we set the constraint φτ < π
2 since pedestrians do
not choose to move in the opposite direction to the main
crowd flow, even if the direct way subsequently chosen is
crowded [16]. The current position and candidate position
set of a pedestrian are shown in Fig. 2, for example. In the
figure, the ith pedestrian, which is denoted by the blue
circle, is moving in the desired position si,t+1 from the
current position si,t. The candidate position set is depicted
as shaded area with sky-blue, in which pedestrian can move
or remain stationary. The pedestrians in our system are
represented by circles because circles will greatly benefit
from geometrical calculation in programming.
3.3 Operational Phase
The operational phase describes decisions taken by pedes-
trian agent to reach the goal at each time t after tactical
phase. In the operational phase, the pedestrian agent deter-
mines the step size and moving direction suited to avoid
people and obstacles. The decisions taken are based on the
perception of the environment where the pedestrian agent
is situated. These criteria of decisions are detailed in the
following.
3.3.1 Collision Avoidance
In reality, each pedestrian occupies a certain space area.
Thus, avoiding pedestrian overlapping is needed to be
considered in microscopic pedestrian models. By the over-
lapping, we mean pedestrians are not allowed to either walk
through each other or share the same space. This assumes
that the movement of a pedestrian is affected by other
pedestrians and obstacles in the surrounding environment.
Here, one rule of collision avoidance, which is used to
avoid pedestrian overlapping, is proposed. In order to avoid
collisions, the positions of other members in the crowd and
those of obstacles should be excluded from the candidate
position set. The positions of other people in the collision
with the ith pedestrian at time t can be expressed as
Speople
t
= {sj,t : si,t − sj,t < li,t + bij, ∀j 6= i}
(5)
2
where bij = bi+bj
from the ith and j th pedestrians' body
sizes of bi and bj, respectively. The body size means the
diameter of a pedestrian, which makes certain distances
among pedestrians and obstacles. The collision positions by
other members in the crowd can be specifically divided into
the two parts: body and rear. The positions in collision with
the bodies can be described by
Sbody
t
=ns : s − sj,t ≤ bij, sj,t ∈ Speople
t
o ,
and the positions in the rear of bodies can be explained by
Srear
t
=ns : s − si,t > dij cos ∆ψij ,
ψij − ∆ψij ≤ atan2 (∆xi, ∆yi) ≤ ψij + ∆ψij ,
∆xi = x − xi, ∆yi = y − yi,
(6)
(7)
dij ∈ D, ψij ∈ Ψ, ∆ψij ∈ ∆Ψo
where the corresponding sets of distances, directions, and
angular differences are
D =ndij : dij = sj,t − si,t , sj,t ∈ Speople
Ψ =nψij : ψij = atan2 (∆xji, ∆yji),
t
o ,
∆xji = xj − xi, ∆yji = yj − yi, sj,t ∈ Speople
t
and
∆Ψ =(cid:26)∆ψij : ∆ψij = sin−1 bij
dij
, dij ∈ D(cid:27) ,
(8)
o , (9)
(10)
respectively. The function atan2 (x, y) is defined in mathe-
matical term as
atan2 (x, y) = 2tan−1
x
px2 + y2 + y! .
(11)
The resultant collision positions by other people can be
defined as the union of two sets as Sother
. The
process of above collision avoidance with other members in
the crowd is elaborated in Fig. 3. The collision positions by
obstacles and walls can be derived in a similar manner.
=Sbody
∪Srear
t
t
t
t
]
r
e
e
m
[
As a result, the positions incurring collisions can be
represented by
h
t
r
o
N
Scol
t = Sother
t
∪ Sobstacle ∪ Swall,
(12)
and the candidate position set with collision avoidance is
accomplished through the set difference as
4
Position
Direction
Body Space
ROI
(cid:237)8
(cid:237)6
(cid:237)4
(cid:237)2
0
2
4
6
8
10
East [meter]
5
0
(cid:237)5
(cid:237)10
Si,t+1 = Si,t+1 \ Scol
=ns ∈ Si,t+1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
s /∈ Scolo
=nsi,t+1 : α ∈ A, φ ∈ Φo
(12a)
(12b)
(12c)
where A and Φ are corresponding modified sets of α and
φ, respectively. In this way, the overlapping positions with
other pedestrians and obstacles can be eliminated in the
candidate position set.
3.3.2 Pedestrian Preference
To have a realistic simulation of a crowd, we must under-
stand the behavior of a pedestrian which has preferences
for choosing the way of walking. A pedestrian normally
chooses the fastest way to achieve its goal. In other words,
if there are many possibilities, the pedestrian chooses the
straightest way, with the minimum of changing direction,
the most attractive and the less noisy. This is called "law of
minimal change" [17]. Besides, a pedestrian typically prefers
not to take detours.
Generally, individuals move according to the principle
of "least effort" [2]. They choose the most familiar and the
easiest one to achieve their goals. They aim to minimize
time and costs by avoiding congestion and by maximizing
their step size. If there is enough time to achieve the goal, a
pedestrian chooses to walk at individually desired step size,
corresponding to its most comfortable walking speed which
is called "least energy-consuming" [2].
Here, one rule of determining pedestrian step size and
moving direction is proposed, which is used to maximize
pedestrian utility. At each time step t, the positions of
all pedestrians are updated synchronously. The process of
selecting the position to move in the candidate position set
avoiding collision is formulated as
si,t+1 = si,t + f(cid:16) α, φ(cid:17)
(13)
where α and φ are the step scale factor and direction shift
factor maximizing following utility function,
Fig. 4. Corridor scenario setup.
when a pedestrian closes to other ones or obstacles very
much in movement direction.
Through the collision avoidance and pedestrian pref-
erence, pedestrians do not overlap each other after the
position update at each time interval, although they could
move a very small step size, even close to zero. In other
words, their further close at the next time step is prevented,
and the overlapping among them could be avoided.
In our model, the maximum movement range of a
pedestrian in each time instant is limited, and hence the
other pedestrians and obstacles in the range only affect the
movement position of the pedestrian. It is very essential to
say that in a crowd situation, generally, the pedestrian is not
spontaneous regarding his behavioral strategy. This is why,
the pedestrian tries to have the optimal behaviors avoiding
the collision with the people around and follows the person
in front [2].
4 SIMULATION RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
We perform Matlab simulations using the proposed model
under two scenarios, i.e., corridor and bottleneck. In the last
decades, by means of experiment or modeling, researchers
have carried out a large number of studies that focus on
pedestrian behavior and movement characteristic, and they
have obtained many landmark achievements. For example,
the fundamental diagram and the flow rate at bottleneck are
considered as the main microscopic observables that char-
acterize pedestrian dynamics in normal state [18], [19], [20],
[21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27]. To validate the proposed
model in this paper, several simulations are conducted, and
then simulation results will be compared with some classic
conclusions and published empirical data provided by other
literature.
4.1 Fundamental Diagram
(cid:16) α, φ(cid:17) = argmax
α∈ A,φ∈ Φ(cid:20)wαα + wφ(cid:18)1 −
φ
φτ (cid:19)(cid:21)
(14)
with the weighting factors 0 ≤ wα ≤ 1 and 0 ≤ wφ ≤ 1 on step
scale and direction shift, respectively. The weighting factors,
wα + wφ = 1, describe the rate of pedestrian preference on
maximizing step size and minimizing direction change. The
resultant next position to move is shown as a circle with
dark blue in Fig. 2 and Fig. 3, for example. In this way, the
repulsive actions imposed by surroundings will be strong
As shown in Fig. 4, we conduct a simulation in a corridor
(20m × 5m) where each unidirectional pedestrian moves
according to the proposed system. Several studies have
investigated the fundamental diagram [18], [19], [20], [21],
[22], [23] and suggest that the density-speed relation and the
density-flow relation are two of the most important bench-
mark tests for crowd simulation. Hence, we validate our
model from the viewpoint of the density-speed relation. In
general, different density and velocity calculation methods
can be used for pedestrian model [28]. These methods are
Time = 0 [sec]
Time = 20 [sec]
5
Position
Direction
Body Space
Door
(cid:237)3
(cid:237)2
(cid:237)1
0
1
2
3
East [meter]
Trajectory
Walking Trace
Start Point
End Point
Door
Weidmann
Mori and Tsukaguchi
Hakin and Wright
Proposed
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
]
s
/
m
[
v
y
t
i
c
o
e
V
l
0
0
1
2
3
Density ρ[1/m2]
4
5
6
7
Position
Direction
Body Space
Door
(cid:237)3
(cid:237)2
(cid:237)1
0
1
2
3
East [meter]
Time = 40 [sec]
Position
Direction
Body Space
Door
t
]
r
e
e
m
[
h
t
r
o
N
]
r
e
t
e
m
[
h
t
r
o
N
3
2
1
0
(cid:237)1
(cid:237)2
(cid:237)3
3
2
1
0
(cid:237)1
(cid:237)2
(cid:237)3
t
]
r
e
e
m
[
h
t
r
o
N
]
r
e
t
e
m
[
h
t
r
o
N
3
2
1
0
(cid:237)1
(cid:237)2
(cid:237)3
3
2
1
0
(cid:237)1
(cid:237)2
(cid:237)3
(cid:237)3
(cid:237)2
(cid:237)1
0
1
2
3
(cid:237)3
(cid:237)2
(cid:237)1
0
1
2
3
East [meter]
East [meter]
Fig. 5. Fundamental diagram that shows the density-velocity relation-
ship.
Fig. 6. Room with door scenario setup.
basically consistent with on another. In this paper, a square
area (2m × 2m) is selected as the region of interest (ROI)
to extract the data as in Fig. 4. In other words, only the
data on pedestrian movement in the ROI are considered.
When a pedestrian on one of the two walkways moves in
the desired direction and arrives at the exit boundary, then
that pedestrian is removed from the walkway. At each time
instant, the velocity of a pedestrian is calculated by dividing
the step size by the incremental time interval. We iterate
simulations ten times at each density and obtain the density-
speed relation within ROI, as shown in Fig. 5 (the red dots).
Compared with other experimental data of unidirec-
tional flow [18], [19], [20] it is clear that the simulation result
has the same tendency with other density-speed relations.
Moreover, the fundamental diagram obtained from our
model is very close to that given by Weidmann [18]. It is in-
deed difficult to choose a standard fundamental diagram to
evaluate our fundamental diagram. Many researchers have
provided the fundamental diagrams deriving from their
own experiments where the underlying data of Weidmann's
fundamental diagram are based on the literature research
of 25 publications, including field studies and experiment
research. Compared with other researchers' fundamental
diagram, Weidmann's fundamental diagram may be more
comprehensive, and therefore, we compared our diagram
with Weidmann's diagram rather than with other diagrams.
4.2 Flow Rate at Bottleneck
]
s
/
1
[
J
t
e
a
R
w
o
F
l
Kretz et al.
Seyfried et al.
Mueller et al.
Proposed
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.4
Bottleneck Width d[m]
1.2
1.6
1.8
2
Fig. 7. Flow rate at bottleneck.
pedestrian density is set to full capacity to guarantee that
the maximum flow rate can be reached at the door.
The maximum flow rates at bottleneck under different
door widths are compared with field observation results
in Fig. 7 (the red circles). Three different research results
are cited here for this purpose, including the laboratory
observation data collected by Kretz et al. [24], Seyfried et
al. [25], [26], and Muller et al. [27]. The simulation results
show consistency with many empirical data provided by
other literature, which verifies that the proposed model is
applicable to study unidirectional pedestrian model.
Flow rate in persons per second or the specific flow rate in
persons per second per meter at the position of bottleneck
is one of the most important parameters for planning and
designing facilities, such as a door. Various published field
survey results on flow rate were collected from different
scenarios. Most of these results suggest that flow rate is
nearly in a linear relationship with the width of the bot-
tleneck. In this paper, the pedestrian movement from the
room through the door with changeable width at the right
boundary is studied as in Fig. 6. The width of the door
is tested with different values from 0.5m to 2.0m, and the
5 CONCLUSION
Pedestrian crowd is a complex phenomena in which several
dangerous accident can occur, especially in dense situa-
tions. An appropriate solution to this problem is to test
the phenomena through the simulation of pedestrian crowd.
This solution could be useful only if the simulation model
produces realistic pedestrian crowd situations.
For this reason, we present a simple and realistic pedes-
trian simulation model which is based on multi-agent sys-
tems and that includes the major human factors. Agents
move a step toward the direction calculated by a utility
maximization approach in which various factors that in-
fluence pedestrian movement are considered. The system
was validated by modeling several basic pedestrian crowd
phenomena and comparing the simulation results with pub-
lished empirical data. The conducted simulations show that
the model is consistent with the classic conclusions and
published empirical data provided by other literature, and
thus it provides realistic simulated pedestrian behaviors.
Here, we have concentrated our work only in the behavior
of normative personality. We can improve our model by
considering different individual personalities.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research was done in 2014, but has not been yet pub-
lished due to some personal reasons. We decided to release
this research to be opened to public accesss now in 2017.
REFERENCES
[1] O. Beltaief, S. El Hadouaj, and K. Ghedira, "Multi-agent simula-
tion model of pedestrians crowd based on psychological theories,"
in Logistics (LOGISTIQUA), 2011 4th International Conference on.
IEEE, 2011, pp. 150–156.
[2] R. Challenger, C. Clegg, and M. Robinson, "Understanding crowd
behaviours," UK Cabinet office. Crown, 2009.
[3] E. Bonabeau, "Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for
simulating human systems," Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 99, no. Suppl 3, pp.
7280–7287, 2002.
J. S. Milazzo, N. M. Rouphail, J. E. Hummer, and D. P. Allen,
"Effect of pedestrians on capacity of signalized intersections,"
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research
Board, vol. 1646, no. 1, pp. 37–46, 1998.
[4]
[5] D. Helbing, "A fluid dynamic model for the movement of pedes-
trians," arXiv preprint cond-mat/9805213, 1998.
[6] R. L. Hughes, "The flow of human crowds," Annual review of fluid
[7]
mechanics, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 169–182, 2003.
S. Wolfram, "Cellular automata as models of complexity," Nature,
vol. 311, no. 5985, pp. 419–424, 1984.
[8] K. Nagel and M. Schreckenberg, "A cellular automaton model for
freeway traffic," Journal de physique I, vol. 2, no. 12, pp. 2221–2229,
1992.
[9] C. Burstedde, K. Klauck, A. Schadschneider, and J. Zittartz, "Sim-
ulation of pedestrian dynamics using a two-dimensional cellular
automaton," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications,
vol. 295, no. 3, pp. 507–525, 2001.
[10] N. Gilbert, Agent-based models. Sage, 2008, no. 153.
6
[11] X. Pan, C. S. Han, K. Dauber, and K. H. Law, "A multi-agent based
framework for the simulation of human and social behaviors
during emergency evacuations," Ai & Society, vol. 22, no. 2, pp.
113–132, 2007.
[12] G. Antonini, M. Bierlaire, and M. Weber, "Discrete choice models
of pedestrian walking behavior," Transportation Research Part B:
Methodological, vol. 40, no. 8, pp. 667–687, 2006.
[13] N. Pelechano, J. M. Allbeck, and N. I. Badler, "Controlling indi-
vidual agents in high-density crowd simulation," in Proceedings
of the 2007 ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics symposium on Computer
animation. Eurographics Association, 2007, pp. 99–108.
[14] C. M. Macal and M. J. North, "Agent-based modeling and sim-
ulation," in Winter Simulation Conference. Winter Simulation
Conference, 2009, pp. 86–98.
[15] G. K. Still, "Crowd dynamics," Ph.D. dissertation, University of
Warwick, 2000.
[16] D. Helbing, P. Molnar, I. J. Farkas, and K. Bolay, "Self-organizing
pedestrian movement," Environment and planning B, vol. 28, no. 3,
pp. 361–384, 2001.
[17] K. Nishinari, K. Sugawara, T. Kazama, A. Schadschneider, and
D. Chowdhury, "Modelling of self-driven particles: Foraging ants
and pedestrians," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applica-
tions, vol. 372, no. 1, pp. 132–141, 2006.
[18] U. Weidmann, "Transporttechnik der fussganger," 1992.
[19] M. M ¯ori and H. Tsukaguchi, "A new method for evaluation of
level of service in pedestrian facilities," Transportation Research Part
A: General, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 223–234, 1987.
[20] B. Hankin and R. Wright, "Passenger flow in subways," OR, pp.
81–88, 1958.
[21] A. Seyfried, B. Steffen, W. Klingsch, and M. Boltes, "The fun-
damental diagram of pedestrian movement revisited," Journal of
Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, vol. 2005, no. 10, p.
P10002, 2005.
[22] D. Helbing, A. Johansson, and H. Z. Al-Abideen, "Dynamics of
crowd disasters: An empirical study," Physical review E, vol. 75,
no. 4, p. 046109, 2007.
[23] H. E. Nelson and F. W. Mowrer, "Emergency movement," The
SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering, vol. 3, pp. 367–80,
2002.
[24] T. Kretz, A. Gr unebohm, and M. Schreckenberg, "Experimental
study of pedestrian flow through a bottleneck," Journal of Statistical
Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, vol. 2006, no. 10, p. P10014, 2006.
[25] A. Seyfried, O. Passon, B. Steffen, M. Boltes, T. Rupprecht, and
W. Klingsch, "New insights into pedestrian flow through bottle-
necks," Transportation Science, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 395–406, 2009.
[26] A. Seyfried, M. Boltes, J. Kahler, W. Klingsch, A. Portz, T. Rup-
precht, A. Schadschneider, B. Steffen, and A. Winkens, "Enhanced
empirical data for the fundamental diagram and the flow through
bottlenecks," in Pedestrian and Evacuation Dynamics 2008. Springer,
2010, pp. 145–156.
[27] K. M uller, "Zur gestaltung und bemessung von fluchtwegen f ur
die evakuierung von personen aus bauwerken auf der grundlage
von modellversuchen," 1981.
[28] J. Zhang, W. Klingsch, A. Schadschneider, and A. Seyfried, "Tran-
sitions in pedestrian fundamental diagrams of straight corridors
and t-junctions," Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experi-
ment, vol. 2011, no. 06, p. P06004, 2011.
|
0912.4637 | 1 | 0912 | 2009-12-23T13:23:58 | Local and Global Trust Based on the Concept of Promises | [
"cs.MA"
] | We use the notion of a promise to define local trust between agents possessing autonomous decision-making. An agent is trustworthy if it is expected that it will keep a promise. This definition satisfies most commonplace meanings of trust. Reputation is then an estimation of this expectation value that is passed on from agent to agent.
Our definition distinguishes types of trust, for different behaviours, and decouples the concept of agent reliability from the behaviour on which the judgement is based. We show, however, that trust is fundamentally heuristic, as it provides insufficient information for agents to make a rational judgement. A global trustworthiness, or community trust can be defined by a proportional, self-consistent voting process, as a weighted eigenvector-centrality function of the promise theoretical graph. | cs.MA | cs |
Local and Global Trust Based on the Concept of Promises
Jan Bergstra1, Mark Burgess2
1 Informatics Institute, Science park 904, 1098 XH, the Netherlands, Email: [email protected]
2 Department of Computing, Oslo University College, Norway, Email: [email protected]
20th September 2006, minor edits 23 December 2009
Abstract We use the notion of a promise to define local trust between agents possessing
autonomous decision-making. An agent is trustworthy if it is expected that it will keep a
promise. This definition satisfies most commonplace meanings of trust. Reputation is then
an estimation of this expectation value that is passed on from agent to agent.
Our definition distinguishes types of trust, for different behaviours, and decouples the
concept of agent reliability from the behaviour on which the judgement is based. We show,
however, that trust is fundamentally heuristic, as it provides insufficient information for
agents to make a rational judgement. A global trustworthiness, or community trust can
be defined by a proportional, self-consistent voting process, as a weighted eigenvector-
centrality function of the promise theoretical graph.
1 Introduction
I don’t trust him. We’re friends.
–Bertolt Brecht
The decision to trust someone is a policy decision. Although the decision can be made
ad hoc, our common understanding of trust is that it is based on a gathering of experience,
i.e. a process of learning about the behaviour and reputation of someone in a variety of
scenarios. Our particular policy might weight certain sources and behaviours more heavily
than others and no one can tell us what is the right thing to do. Hence trust is intimately
connected with personal autonomy.
In this paper, we define trust in the spirit of this personal autonomy, by basing it directly
on the concept of how reliably a promise is kept. A promise is also an autonomously made
declaration of behaviour, that is highly individual, moreover it carries with it the notion of a
theme (what the promise is about)[1]. By combining promises with reliability, we thus have
a natural definition of trust that satisfies well-understood rules for revising both the logical
aspects of policy and the statistical observations made about agents’ behaviours. We show
that this viewpoint satisfies the desirable properties for use in computer security schemes.
Note that our aim in this work is not to design a technology for building trust, but rather to
analyse the precepts for what trust actually means to users.
The plan for this paper is as follows (see fig. 1), We discuss the notion of trust from
a pragmatic and philosophical point of view in order to settle on what properties trust
should have. We show that common expressions of trust are often ambiguous, but that we
can resolve this ambiguity by defining agent trust as the expectation of keeping a given
2
Jan Bergstra, Mark Burgess
promise. Using the graphical notions of promises, we can then establish a notion of global
trust in certain cases.
1.1 Trust
The concept of trust is both well known and widely used in all kinds of human interactions.
Trust is something that humans hold both for one another or sometimes for inanimate ob-
jects (“I trust my computer to give the right answer”). In computer systems, the concept of
trust is especially used in connection with security. In risk analysis one considers a secure
system to be one in which every possible risk has either been eliminated or accepted as a
matter of policy. Trust is therefore linked to the concept of policy in a fundamental way.
Trust is also discussed in the case of network security protocols, for instance, in the case
where keys are exchanged. The classic dilemma of key distribution is that there is often a
high level of uncertainty in knowing the true originator of a secure identifier (cryptographic
key). One therefore hopes for the best and, beyond a certain threshold of evidence “trusts”
the assumption of ownership. Several protocols claim to manage such trust issues, but what
does this really mean?
In spite of the reverence in which the concept is held, there is no widely accepted tech-
nical definition of trust. This has long be a hindrance to the discussion and understanding of
the concept. The Wikepedia defines: “Trust is the belief in the good character of one party,
they are believed to seek to fulfil policies, ethical codes, law and their previous promises.”
In this paper, we would like to address the deficiencies of discussions of trust by introduc-
ing a meta-model for understanding trust. Our model can be used to explain and describe
common trust models like “trusted third parties” and the “web of trust”.
1.2 Promises – autonomous claims
Trust is an evaluation that can only be made by an individual. No one can force someone to
trust someone else in a given situation. This basic fact tells us something important about
how trust should be defined.
Recently, one of us has introduced a description of autonomous behaviour in which
individual agents are entirely responsible for their own decisions[2,3,4,5]. Promise theory
is a graphical model of policy. The basic responsibility of an agent to be true to its own
assertions is an important step towards a way of describing trust.
Promise theory is useful in this regard because all agents are automatically responsible
for their own behaviour and only their own behaviour. Responsibility is not automatically
transitive between autonomous agents: it has to be arranged through explicit agreement be-
tween agents in a controlled way; hence one avoids problems such as hidden responsibility
that make the question of whether to trust an individual agent complex.
In this paper, we argue that the concept of trust can be defined straightforwardly as a
valuation of a promise – specifically the expectation of autonomous behaviour. When we
say that we trust something, we are directing this towards the instigator of some promise,
whether implicit or explicit. Moreover reputation is simply what happens to trust as it is
communicated about a network, i.e. it is a ‘rumour’ that spreads epidemically throughout
a network along different paths, and hence develops into a path-dependent estimate of
trustworthiness.
The matter of evidence-gathering, in order to justify the expectation value of keeping
a promise is subtle, and so we shall discuss this in some detail. We argue that there is in-
sufficient information in the notions of trust or reputation to make a reliable estimate of
trustworthiness. Thus trust is an inherently ambiguous concept; each valuation of trustwor-
thiness is, in essence, an essentially ad hoc policy.
Local and Global Trust Based on the Concept of Promises
3
Underlying promises
Evidence
Belief
Frequentist
Expectation
Bayesian
Decision
Local trust
Eigenvector centrality
Global trust
Fig. 1 The chain of trust from verifiable promises to local trust by an agent, to global or community
trust which we interpret as reputation.
2 Prior work
There is an extensive literature on trust in computer science[6,7,8,9,10,11]. Much of it is
concerned with generating protocols for the purpose of determining the validity of public
keys and other identity tokens, or criticizing these mechanistic views in a wider security
perspective. Here we are mainly concerned with general ideas about trust and reputation.
We find the recent work of Kluwer and Waaler to be of interest from the viewpoint of
logic[12,13]. These authors present a natural reasoning system about trust which includes
the notion of ordering by levels of trustworthiness.
The work that seems closest to ours may be found in ref. [14] and ref. [15]. Here the
authors distinguish between trust and reputation and provide an epidemic-like procedure
for valuating the trust based on some inference rules and numerical measures that are es-
sentially reliabilities. The calculation is hence mainly appropriate for a frequentist interpre-
tation of probability. The authors in ref. [14] are unable to distinguish trust about different
issues, or relate these in their model. In ref. [15], an attempt is made at motivating trust
types but the underlying properties of these types is not completely clear.
In our proposal:
1. We allow for multiple sources (types) for which trust and reputation are valuated.
2. Our combinatorics are based on logic and on Bayesian probability estimates, which are
more appropriate estimators for the small amounts of experience involved.
4
Jan Bergstra, Mark Burgess
Other work which we find valuable includes social viewpoints of trust (see ref. [16] for
a review). This work brings in the matter of human value judgements, which we feel is an
important issue in any definition of trust, since it is humans who make the final decisions
in practice. From a sociological viewpoint, there are many forms of currency on which to
build trust. Some of these are based on the outcomes of stand-offs such as economic games,
bargaining situations and so on[17]. Promises have already been shown to incorporate these
considerations neatly within their framework[4].
3 Common usage of trust and reputation
As with most words, the English word ‘trust’ has a number of related meanings which are
worth documenting for reference and comparison.
– Trust implies a confidence or faith character: e.g. one “trusts in friends and family”.
– It might be based on an assessment of reliability: e.g. “A trustworthy employee”
– A related, but not identical meaning has to do with presumed safety. It also means to
permit something without fear. “I trust the user to access the system without stealing.”
Such trust can be betrayed.
This is different because the feeling of safety is not a rationally determined quantity,
whereas reliability is observable and measurable. Thus there is both a rational and an
irrational aspect to trust.
– A final meaning of trust is the expression of hope, i.e. and expectation or wish: ”I trust
you will behave better from now on”;
Trust is therefore about the suspension of disbelief. It involves a feeling of benevolence,
or competence on the part of the trustee.
Trust of this kind expresses an acceptance of risk, e.g. a jewelry store trusts that passers-
by will not smash a plate glass window very often to steal displayed goods, but rather
trusts that the windows will improve sales. There could therefore be an economic deci-
sion involved in risk-taking.
Reputation is a related notion to trust. We understand this to mean a received judge-
ment, i.e. an evaluation of an agent’s reliability based on hearsay. Reputation spreads like
an epidemic process, but it is potentially modified on each transmission. Thus, from a
given source, several reputations might emerge by following different pathways (histories)
through a network.
4 A typed definition of trust
An agent that is known to keep its promises is considered trustworthy by any normal defi-
nition of trust i.e. the agent would be reliable and predictable such that one could put aside
one’s doubts about whether it might fail to live up to its assertions.
It seems natural then to associate trust with one agent’s expectation of the performance
of another agent in implementing its promises. This could seem like an unnecessarily nar-
row definition, but it turns out to be more general than one might expect. What about trust in
matters that have not yet occurred? Clearly, trust could be formulated about a future poten-
tial promise. i.e. a promise does not have been made for us to evaluate its likely reliability.
The usefulness of promises is that they encapsulate the relevant information to categorise
intentions and actions.
Proposal 1 (Trust) Trust can be defined as an agent’s expectation that a promise will be
kept. It is thus a probability lying between 0 and 1.
We shall define “an agent’s expectation” in detail below, and we shall additionally give
meaning to the concepts of when an agent is deemed to be trustworthy or trusting which
Local and Global Trust Based on the Concept of Promises
5
are global concepts, different from merely trusted. This proposal has a number of posi-
tive qualities. To begin with it separates the experiential aspect of trust from the nature
of the actions on which it is based. Thus in terms of philosophy of science, it makes a
clean distinction between empirical knowledge (expectation) and theoretical knowledge (a
promise).
Our definition is specific. The concept of trust, as normally applied in computer science
is rather universal and non-specific: either one trusts another agent or one does not; how-
ever, it is seldom that we trust or distrust anyone or anything so completely. Our definition
is a typed definition, i.e. we gauge trust separately for each individual kind of promise –
and this is where promises provide a convenient notation and conceptual stepping stone.
We assume that promises are a more fundamental notion than trust.
According to our definition, trust is a reliability rating made by some agent that is able
to observe two agents involved in a promise. We hesitate to call this a reliability measure:
for reasons that we shall make clear, there is normally insufficient evidence on which to
base a proper reliability estimate, in the sense of reliability theory[18].
A reputation is little more than a rumour that spreads epidemically throughout a net-
work. Common ideas about reputation include.
– “A general opinion of someone.”
– “A measure of someone’s standing in the community.”
Reputation is not necessarily related to trustworthiness. One could have a reputation based
on how much money an agent spends, or how much fuel it uses. What characterizes a
reputation, as opposed to a personal observation or evaluation, is that it is passed on. One
does not observe the characteristic first hand.
Proposal 2 (Reputation) Reputation can be defined as a valuation of some agent’s past
or expected behaviour that is communicated to another agent.
We clarify and develop these basic proposals in the remainder of the paper. In particular
trust will be revisited in more detail in section 8.
4.1 Promises
To base our notion of trust on promises, we review the basic concepts from promise theory.
Promises are closely linked to the idea of policy, or declarations of autonomous decision-
making. Indeed, we define policy to be simply a set of promises, since one can always
phrase decisions about how to respond to future events and scenarios as promises about
what one will do.
Consider a general set of N agents Ai, where i = 1, . . . , N. We denote agents by
capital Roman letters, and shall often use nicknames S for promise-sender or giver, R for
promise receiver and T for third parties, to assist the discussion.
Definition 1 (Promise) A promise is an autonomous specification of unobserved or in-
tended behaviour. It involves a promiser and one or more promisees to whom the promise
is directed. The scope of the promise is the set of agents who have knowledge of the promise
that has been made. Each promise contains a promise body b that describes the content of
the promise. We denote a promise from agent S to an agent R, with body b by:
S π:b−→ R
(1)
The body b of every promise contains a type t(b) and often an additional constraint. Promise
types distinguish the qualitative differences between promises, and additional constraint
attributes distinguish the quantitative differences. For each promise body b, there is another
promise body ¬b which represents the negation of b. We shall assume that t(¬b) = t(b)
6
Jan Bergstra, Mark Burgess
and that ¬¬b = b. The negation of b refers to the deliberate act of not performing b, or what
ever is the complementary action of type t(b).
Promises fall into two basic complementary kinds, which we can think of as promises
for giving and taking, or service and usage. A promised exchange of some service s requires
one of each kind:
A1
π:s−→ A2 or A1
A2
π:U(s)
−→ A1 or A2
π:+s−→ A2
π:−s−→ A1
(2)
Exclusive promises are those which cannot physically be realized at the same time. This
does not mean that incompatible promises cannot be made, it means that they are meaning-
less and could lead to problems for the agent.
Definition 2 (Incompatible promises #) When two promises originating from an agent
are incompatible, they cannot be realized physically at the same time. We write
A1
π:b1−→ A2 # A1
π:b2−→ A3
(3)
If A2 = A3, we may omit the agents and write b1#b2.
It would probably be unwise for an agent to trust another agent that made simultaneous,
incompatible promises. Of course this is a policy decision for each individual agent to
make.
Breaking a promise is not the same as not keeping a promise. It is an explicit contra-
diction. Again, confidence in an agent’s promise-keeping ability is reduced when it makes
contradictory promises.
Definition 3 (Promise conflict) Two or more promises to an agent are in conflict if at least
one promise is contradicted by another. We define a conflict as the promising of exclusive
promises
A1
π:b1−→ A2, A1
π:b2−→ A2 with b1#b2
(4)
Clearly promising b and ¬b would be excluded.
4.2 Composition of parallel promises
We can compose trivial bundles of promises between a single pair of agents by union. Using
proof notation:
π:b1−→ b, a
a
π:b2−→ b, . . . a
π:b1∪b2∪...bN
−→ b
a
π:bN−→ b,
(5)
where the non-overlap of independent type regions is not necessarily assumed, but helps to
make sense of this (the definition should still work even if the types overlap). The compo-
sition of promises in a serial fashion is non-trivial and only has meaning in a minority of
cases, where autonomy is relinquished.
A promise made conditionally on a Boolean condition C, known to the promising agent
is written:
Definition 4 (Conditional promise) A conditional promise is written:
A1
π:bC
−→ A2
(6)
i.e. A1 promises b to A2 if the condition C is true.
Local and Global Trust Based on the Concept of Promises
7
Note that a condition can also be the subject of a promise. We write
(7)
for the promise from A1 to A2 to ensure that the condition C holds. Now the combination
of a conditional promise and the promise of the condition holding leads to an unconditional
promise as follows:
A1
π:T(C)
−→ A2
A1
π:bC
−→ A2, A1
π:T(C)
−→ A2
A1
π:b−→ A2
(8)
A promise is not truly a promise unless the truth of the condition is also promised.
4.3 General notation for promises
The following notation for promises has been designed to be clear and pragmatic, avoiding
potential recursion difficulties of promises about promises. We begin with the kind of basic
promise from one agent to another and then generalize this:
1. The preferred form of a promise (first kind) is written.
This is a local and autonomously made promise. This is equivalent to the more general
notation:
S π:b−→ R
(9)
S[S] π:b−→ R[R].
i.e. S promises b to R.
2. A promise of the second kind allows obligation:
S[T ] π:b−→ R
(10)
(11)
i.e. S promises R that it will oblige T to act as if it had promised b to R. If T is
autonomous, this is forbidden and has no influence on T .
3. A promise of the third kind allows indirection.
S π:b−→ R[T ]
(12)
i.e. S promises to R that S will do b for T .
4. The most general form of a promise:
(13)
i.e. S promises D that b will act as if it had promised b to U . If T is autonomous, this
is forbidden and has no influence of T .
S[T ] π:b−→ D[U ]
We have potentially a need for all of these variants.
Example 1 Promises about policy in which one does not inform the promise recipient (e.g.
the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) policy) may be written:
S π:b−→ S[R]
(14)
i.e. S makes a promise only to itself to honour b toward R (e.g. suppose b is a promise to
use packet-data received). This is the case, for instance, in the processing of Access Control
Lists by most network devices: the sender of data has no a priori idea of whether the device
will accept it.
Most of the promises we shall consider in the definition of trust will be of the form
i.e. a neighbouring agent promises us that it will do something for some third party (where
the third party might also be us).
A2
π:b−→ A1[A3]
(15)
8
Jan Bergstra, Mark Burgess
4.4 A general expression for trust
Trust is somehow complementary to the idea of a service promise. This is suggested by
the intuition that a promise to use a service implies a measure of trust on the part of the
receiver. We consider trust a directed relationship from a truster to a trustee. Moreover, it
is a judgement or valuation of a promise performed entirely by the truster.
We need a notation to represent this, similar to that for promises. In the spirit of the
promise notation, we write the general case as:
S[T ] τ :b−→ R[U ]
(16)
meaning that S trusts R to ensure that T keeps a promise of b to U .
In most cases, this is too much generality. In a world of autonomous agents, no agent
would expect agent S to be able to ensure anything about agent T ’s behaviour. The more
common case is therefore with only three parties
A1[A2] τ :b−→ A2[A3]
(17)
i.e. agent A1 trusts agent A2 to keep its promise towards some third-party agent A3. Indeed,
in most cases A3 might also be identified with A1:
A1[A2] τ :b−→ A2[A1]
which, in turn, can be simplified to
A1
τ :b−→ A2.
(18)
(19)
In this case, trust is seen to be a dual concept to that of a promise. If we use the notation
of ref. [4], then we can write trust as one possible valuation v : π → [0, 1] by A1 of the
promise made by A2 to it:
A1[A2] τ :b−→ A2[A1] ↔ v1(A2
π:b−→ A1)
(20)
This is then a valuation on a par with economic valuations of how much a promise is worth
to an agent[4]. The recipient of a promise can only make such a valuation if it knows that
the promise has been made.
Proposal 3 Trust of an agent S by another agent R can exist if agent R is informed that
agent S has made a promise to it in the past, or if the recipient of the promise R is able to
infer by indirect means that S has made such a promise.
Thus any agent can formulate a trust policy towards any other agent. The only remaining
question is, on what basis should such a judgement be made?
Our contention is that the most natural valuation to attach to trust is an agent’s estimate
of the expectation value that the promise will be kept, i.e. an estimate of the reliability of
the agent’s promise.
A1[A2] τ :b−→ A2[A1]
P
≡ E1(A2
π:b−→ A1)
(21)
where P
≡ means ‘is defined by policy as’, and the expectation value ER(·), for agent R
has yet to be defined (see Appendix A for these details). We note the essential difficulty:
that such valuations of reliability are not unique. They are, in fact, entirely subjective and
cannot be evaluated without ad hoc choices of a number of free parameters. We return to
this point below.
Local and Global Trust Based on the Concept of Promises
9
5 Cases: The underlying promises for trust idioms
To ensure that our definition of trust is both intuitive and general, we present a number of
‘use-cases’ below and use these to reveal, in each case, the expectation of a promise that
underlies the trust. In each case, we write the declarations of trust, in notation, in words, and
as an expectation value of an underlying promise. In some cases, the expressions of trust
are ambiguous and support several interpretations which can only be resolved by going to
a deeper explanation in terms of promises.
– I trust my computer to give the right answer. This could literally mean that one trusts
the computer, as a potentially unreliable piece of hardware:
Me τ :answer−→ Computer
P
≡ EMe(Computer π:answer−→ Me)
(22)
i.e. I expect that the computer will keep its (implicit) promise to furnish me with the
correct answer.
However, there is another interpretation. We might actually (even subconsciously) mean
that we trust the company that produces the software (the vendor) to make the computer
deliver the right answer when asked, i.e. I expect the promise by the vendor to me, to
make the computer give me the right answer, will be kept.
[Me][Computer] τ :answer−→ [Vendor][Me]
P
≡ EMe(cid:16)[Vendor][Computer] π:Answer−→ [Me][Me](cid:17)
(23)
In either case, the relationship between the promise, the expectation and the trust is the
same.
– I trust the identity of a person (e.g. by presence, public key or signature).
This is one of the classic problems of security systems, and we find that the simple
statement hides a muddle of possibilities. It has many possible interpretations; however,
in each case we obtain clarity by expressing these in terms of promises.
Me τ :Authentic
−→ Signature
P
≡ EMe(Signature π:Authentic
−→ Me)
(24)
In this version, we place trust in the implicit promise that a credential makes of being
an authentic mark of identity. This is a simple statement, but we can be sceptical of the
ability of a signature to make any kind of promise.
Me[Signature] τ :Authentic
−→ Certifier[Me]
P
≡ EMe(Certifier[Signature] π:Authentic
−→ Me)
(25)
i.e. I trust a Certifying Agency to ensure that the implicit promise made by the credential
to represent someone is kept. Or I expect the certifying agency (possibly the originator
of the signature himself) to keep a promise to me to ensure that the signature’s promise
to me is kept (e.g. the technology is tamper-proof).
Yet a third interpretation is that the trust of the key is based on the promise to verify its
authenticity, on demand. This is the common understanding of the “trusted third party”.
Me
τ :verify key
−→ Certifier
i.e. I trust that the key has been authorized and is verifiable by the named Certifica-
tion Agency. This last case avoids the problem of why one should trust the Certifying
Agency, since it refers only to the verification service itself.
P
≡ EMe(cid:16)Certifier
π:verify key
−→ Me(cid:17)
(26)
10
Jan Bergstra, Mark Burgess
– A similar problem is encountered with currency denominations, e.g. pound notes, dol-
lars, or Euros. These tokens are clearly not valuable in and of themselves; rather they
represent value. Indeed, on British Pound notes, the words “I promise to pay the bearer
on demand the sum of ... X pounds” is still found, with the printed signature of the
Chief Cashier. Indeed, the treasury will, if pressed, redeem the value of these paper
notes in gold. Thus trust in a ten pound note may be expressed in a number of ways.
We trust the note to be legal tender: i.e.
Me
τ :legal
−→ Note
P
≡ EMe(cid:18)Cashier
π:goldnote
−→ Me(cid:19)
(27)
we expect that the chief cashier will remunerate us in gold on presenting the note.
Alternatively, we assume that others will promise to accept the note as money in the
United Kingdom (UK):
Me
τ :legal
−→ Note
P
≡ EMe(cid:18)S
π:U(note)
−→ Me(cid:19) , S ∈ U K
(28)
Interestingly neither dollars nor Euros make any much promise. Rather, the dollar bill
merely claims “In God we trust”.
– Trust in family and friends.
This case is interesting, since it is so unspecific that it could be assigned almost any
meaning. Indeed, each agent is free to define its meaning autonomously. For some set
of one or more promises P ∗,
Me τ :P ∗
−→ {Family}
P
≡ EMe [i∈∗
{Family}
π:Pi−→ Ai!
(29)
i.e. for some arbitrary set of promises, we form an expectation about the likelihood that
family and friends would keep their respective promises to the respective promisees.
These promises might, in fact, be hypothetical and the evaluations mere beliefs. On
the other hand, we might possess actual knowledge of these transactions, and base
judgement on the word of one of these family/friend members to keep their promises
to the third parties:
Me τ :P ∗
−→ {Family}
P
≡ EMe [i∈∗
{Family}
π:Pi−→ Me[Ai]!
(30)
– A trustworthy employee.
In this case, one bases trustworthiness is based more on a history of delivering on
promises made in the context of work, e.g.:
Boss τ :Deliver−→ Employee
P
≡ EBoss(Employee π:Deliver−→ Boss)
(31)
– I trust the user to access the system without stealing.
Here the promise is not to steal. The promise does not have to have been made explicitly.
Indeed, in civil society this is codified into law, and hence all agents implicitly promise
this by participating in that society.
– “I trust you will behave better from now on!”
This can be understood in two ways. In the first interpretation, this is not so much
an evaluation of trust as it is a challenge (or even warning) to the agent to do better.
Alternatively, it can be taken literally as an expression of belief that the agent really
will do better. In the latter case, it is:
Me τ :Do better
−→ You
P
≡ EMe(cid:16)You π:Do better
−→ Me(cid:17)
(32)
Local and Global Trust Based on the Concept of Promises
11
6 Expectations of ensembles and compositions of promises
We are not done with policy’s intrusion into the definition of expectation. Since promises
can be composed according to straightforward rules, we must be able to compute two dis-
tinct things:
1. The expectation of a composition of promises that coexist.
2. The composition of expectations from different ensembles.
The difference between these is analogous to the difference between the combinations of
experimental data into ensembles for computing probabilities, and the composition of dif-
ferent probable inputs in fault trees (with AN D, OR, XOR, etc).
We have already discussed the composition of data sets into ensembles, the effect this
has on probabilities, and how this is expressed in terms of the basic expectation values in
section A.1
We shall have need to define the meaning of the following in order to determine the
trust deriving from compound promises:
1. The expectation of incompatible promises.
2. The expectation of a composition of parallel promises between a pair of agents.
3. The expectation of a composition of serial promises between a chain of agents.
6.1 Parallel promise (bundle) expectation
When promises are made in parallel, the question arises as to how much to trust them as
a bundle. Should one ever base one’s trust on a complete package or bundle of promises?
This is a subjective judgement based on whether certain promises are related in the view of
the promisee. If one makes an expectation valuation for each promise individually, does it
make sense to combine them as probabilities, e.g. in the manner of a fault tree[19,18]. One
is used to the probability composition rules for binary logic of independent events.
– (AN D): If the promisee is dependent on several mutually reinforcing promises, then
AN D semantics are a reasonable assumption. In a security situation, this might be
reasonable. The multiplicative combination rule means that each additional promise
that must be in place reduces the total trust that the promiser will keep all of its promises
proportionally.
– (OR) Here one says that if one or more promises are kept, then trustworthiness is
reinforced. This is an optimistic policy which seems to suggest that the promisee is
understanding about the promiser’s potential difficulties in keeping a promise. This
cannot be applied to incompatible promises.
– (XOR): An alternative scenario is to have a number of promises that are alternatives
for one another. For instance, mutually exclusive conditional promises that behave like
a switch: e.g.
π:xy
−→ R
π:x′¬y
−→ R,
S
S
(33)
i.e. S promises x to R, iff y, else it promises x′.
– (RANKED) If the promises are ranked in their importance to the recipient, then the
measure of trust associated with the package is best judged by weighting the importance
appropriately. Referring to the discussion in section A.1, this admits a general convex
combination of contributions for ranking an OR (see below).
Let us consider how these are represented as functions.
π:bi−→ R(cid:17)(cid:17)
π:bi−→ R(cid:17) ± O(E2)
π:bi−→ R(cid:17)(cid:17)
π:bi−→ R(cid:17) ± O(E2).
≃Xi
ER(cid:16)S
≃Xi
ER(cid:16)S
F XOR
R
(cid:16)S
π:b∗
−→ R(cid:17) ≃ 1 −Yi (cid:16)1 − ER(cid:16)S
(36)
(37)
(38)
12
Jan Bergstra, Mark Burgess
Definition 5 (Expectation of a promise bundle) Let S (sender) and R (recipient) be agents
that make a number of promises in parallel, the composition of a bundle of parallel promises
S π:b∗
−→ R is a function FR of the expectations of the individual promises:
ER(cid:16)S π:b∗
−→ R(cid:17) P
≡ FR(cid:16)ER(cid:16)S
π:b1−→ R(cid:17) , ER(cid:16)S
π:b2−→ R(cid:17) , . . .(cid:17)
The function FR is a mapping from N promise expectations to a new expectation value:
(34)
FR : [0, 1]N → [0, 1]
(35)
Several such functions are known from reliability theory, e.g. in fault tree analysis (see for
instance ref. [18]). Examples include,
F AND
R
ER(cid:16)S
π:bi−→ R(cid:17)
(cid:16)S π:b∗
−→ R(cid:17) =Yi
−→ R(cid:17) = 1 −Yi (cid:16)1 − ER(cid:16)S
R (cid:16)S π:b∗
F OR
where O(E2) denotes terms or the order of the probability squared, which are small. A
further possibility is to take a weighted mean of the promise estimates. This better supports
the view in section A.1 about different sizes ensembles and their relative weights. There
might be additional (irrational) reasons for giving priority to certain promises, e.g. leniency
with respect to a difficult promise.
To combine the different possibilities (analogously to fault trees) one could first re-
duce products of AN D promises into sub-bundles, then recombine these using a weighted
estimate.
F RAN KED
R
P
≡Xi
αiER(cid:16)S
π:bi−→ R(cid:17)
(39)
αi = 1
Xi
Note that, due to the reasoning of probability theory, the expectation of something AND
something else is less than the probability of either. This might be seen as pessimistic as
far as trust is concerned. We have to make a policy decision about whether or not to place
any weight on the combined expectation of a bundle of promises, or whether to decide to
only allow individual expectations.
For example, suppose an agent makes two contradictory promises about services levels,
e.g. promise to respond in 4ms and promise to respond in 5ms.
S π:4−→ R
S π:5−→ R
(40)
Formally, this is a conflict, since both promises cannot be true at the same time. The trust
in each individual promise can be estimated independently for the two promises. The agent
reliability expectations of delivering “4” or “5” units of service are:
R τ :4−→ S = ER(4) = p(4) = 0.1
R
τ :5
−→ S = ER(5) = p(5) = 0.2
(41)
(42)
Local and Global Trust Based on the Concept of Promises
13
Then we can consider what the expectation of the combination of promises is. If the agent
S makes both promises simultaneously, the expectation of the combined promises will be:
ER(4 XOR 5) ≃
(e4 ER(4) + e5 ER(5))
(e4 + e5)
(43)
where e4 is our estimate of likelihood the agent can deliver “4” and e5 is the estimate
of likelihood of delivering “5”. These beliefs can be based on many potential sources of
information, chosen as a matter of policy; one possibility is to simply identify e4
and e5
P
≡ ER(5). Thus a simple policy solution could be to take
P
≡ ER(4)
ER(4 OR 5)
P
≡
ER(4)2 + ER(5)5
ER(4) + ER(5)
= 0.17
(44)
i.e. in general a sum of squares.
6.2 Incompatible promise expectation
For incompatible promises we must have at least complementary behaviour (NOT):
EA(S π:¬b−→ R) = 1 − EA(S π:b−→ R)
FR(ER(S π:¬b−→ R)) = 1 − FR(ER(S π:b−→ R))
(45)
Ideally incompatible promises would not be made, without conditionals to select only one
of the alternatives.
In the case of AN D it is necessary already to resolve the ambiguity in the meaning
of the combination of incompatible promises. It is by definition a logical impossibility for
incompatible promises to be kept. Thus, while we cannot prevent an agent from promising
such nonsense, our expectation of the combination ought to be zero.
Definition 6 (Expectation of incompatible promises with AN D) The expectation of in-
compatible promises,
π:b1−→ A2 AN D A1
FR(cid:16)A1
is defined to be zero for any rational agent.
π:b2−→ A2(cid:17) ≡ 0 when b1#b2
Hence, in the example above,
ER(4 AN D 5) = 0.
6.3 Serial promise expectation and transitivity of trust
(46)
(47)
Several systems base their operation on the idea that trust is to some extent transitive. “The
Web of Trust” notion in public key management idea proposes that trust can be conferred
transitively. This is not a property of promises, so it is of interest to consider how this
works. In other words, if A1 trusts A2 to do b, and A2 trusts A3 to do b, then A1 will often
trust A3 to do b. Here b is generally taken to be “reveal one’s true identity”. This notion
does not fit well with a promise theory interpretation of trust because it is type-unspecific.
This is easy to see by noting that
A1
π:b−→ A2, A2
π:b−→ A3 6⇒ A1
π:b−→ A3
(48)
i.e. if A1 makes a promise of b to A2 and A2 makes the same promise to A3, it does not
follow that A1 has made any promise to A3.
14
Jan Bergstra, Mark Burgess
An unspecific trust model might conform to the following property:
(i) (A1 Trusts A2), (A2 Trusts A3) ⇒ A1 Trusts A3
(49)
In terms of promises, we would interpret this to mean that, if A1 trusts A2 (to keep promises
to A1) and A2 trusts A3 (to keep promises to A2) then A1 should trust A3 to keep promises
to A1. This is far from being a rational policy, since there is no evidence passed on about
the reliability of agents. A less problematic alternative is:
(ii) (A1
τ :inform−→ A2), (A2
(50)
If A1 trusts A2 (to inform it about its relations with A3) and A2 trusts A3 (to keep its
promise of b to A2), then A1 trusts that A3 is trustworthy in its promise of b to A2.
τ :b−→ A3) ⇒ A1[A3] τ :b−→ A3[A2]
The matter of serial promises is one of diverging complication. We make some brief
notes about the problems associated with serial promises, and leave the potentially exten-
sive details for elsewhere. The problems with trusting a distributed collection of promises
are
1. Promises are not common knowledge, so we do not have all the information.
2. Promises are not transitive.
Knowledge about the promises and the local evaluations by the agents can only be
guaranteed by making chains of promises between the agents to share this knowledge.
A1
A1
π:tell rep
−→ A2
π:tell rep
−→
π:U(tell rep)
←−
A2
π:U(tell rep)
←−
A3
A3
(51)
In order to pass on the necessary information about trust to a third party, it must be re-
layed. Expectation of a chain of promises depends on a chain of such trust and Use(trust)
promises. However, each agent in the chain agrees only to trust the previous agent. There
is no automatic agreement to trust the previous members. If one were to make an explicit
promise to trust each agent’s information about trust, this would require a promise graph
like the one in fig. 2. In order to remove the ambiguity of the trust promises, we must use a
A
B
C
D
Fig. 2 A chain of trust promises to transfer some valuation of trust in one direction (only), from node
a to each agent up to node d. This method is unreliable because nodes b and c are under no obligation
to pass on the correct value. Note that these are promise arrows, not trust arrows.
This is clearly a fragile and somewhat complicated structure. An alternative approach is to avoid
chains of greater length than one, and also eliminate the extraneous and essentially impotent promises
from the chain, as in fig. 3. However, this leads us merely back to the notion of a centralization, either
in the form of a trusted party for all agents, or as a complete peer-to-peer graph.
different promise type for trust about each agent in the graph. i.e. the trust passed on from
agent a must retain this label in being transferred. However, here one has a paradox: if
an agent is potentially unreliable, then it can easily lie about this information. Such serial
chains are, in general fraught with uncertainty, thus agents might well choose, as a matter
of policy, to disregard reputations.
Local and Global Trust Based on the Concept of Promises
15
A
D
C
B
Fig. 3 A more reliable approach of passing on the trust node a holds on to nodes b, c and d.
7 Reputation
We have defined a reputation to be simply a valuation of something (not necessarily a
promise) received by an agent about some other agent. A natural basis for reputation (and
one that is used on ‘reputation systems’ in computing) is the valuation of trustworthiness.
Here we consider the effect that such transmission of information has on the local trust
within a network of agents.
7.1 Borrowed trust
Suppose that and agent T trusts an agent S to keep its promise to R with probability
ET (cid:16)S π:b−→ R(cid:17), and suppose that this agent T promises to transmit this as S’s reputation
to another agent U . U ’s estimate of the trustworthiness of T ’s communication is
τ :reputation
−→ T
U
P
≡ EU(cid:16)T
π:reputation
−→ U(cid:17)
(52)
Can we say what U ’s expectation for the reliability of the original promise a π:b−→ c should
be? In spite of the fact that probabilities for independent events combine by multiplication,
it would be presumptuous to claim that
EU(cid:16)S π:b−→ R(cid:17) = EU(cid:16)T
π:reputation
−→ U(cid:17) ET (cid:16)S π:b−→ R(cid:17) ,
(53)
worthiness and reliability of the source.
since U does not have any direct knowledge of ET (cid:16)S π:b−→ R(cid:17), he must evaluate the trust-
−→ R(cid:17),
Suppose we denote the communicated value of ET (cid:16)S
then one could conceivably (and as a matter of rational policy) choose to define
π:b
−→ R(cid:17) by EU←T (cid:16)S
π:b
EU(cid:16)S π:b−→ R(cid:17) P
≡ EU(cid:16)T
π:reputation
−→ U(cid:17) EU←T (cid:16)S π:b−→ R(cid:17) .
(54)
With this notation, we can conceivably follow historical paths through a network of promises.
However, it is important to see that no agent is obliged to make such a policy. Thus
trust and reputation do not propagate in a faithfully recursive manner. There is, moreover,
in the absence of complete and accurate common knowledge by all agents, an impossibility
of eliminating the unknowns in defining the expectation values.
16
7.2 Promised trust
Jan Bergstra, Mark Burgess
Trust is an evaluation that is private to an agent. This evaluation can be passed on in the
form of a communication (leading to reputation), or it can be passed on as a promise to
trust.
– S promises R that S will trust R: S π:τ =0.6−→ R.
– S promises R that S will trust T : S π:τ =0.6−→ R[T ].
Why would anyone promise a party (R) to trust T without telling R? One reason is that
there might be strategic bargaining advantages to doing this[20].
7.3 Updating trust with reputation
An agent can use the reputation of another agent as a sample of evidence by which to judge
its trustworthiness. It can then attach a certain weight to this information according to its
belief, in order to update its own trust. The weighted addition modifies the old trust value
T with the new reputation data R.
E 7→
wnewR + woldT
wnew + wold
(55)
This is indistinguishable from a Bayesian update.
8 Global Measures of Trust
Which are the most trusted agents in a network? Trust has so far been measured at the
location of each individual agent. The valuation is private. A trust valuation becomes an
agent’s reputation when the valuation is passed on to others. The passing-on includes a
revisional belief process too; this is also a Bayesian posterior probability update process,
just like the case of basing trust on different ensembles in section A.1.
Let us postulate the existence of a vector of received trusts that is available to any
particular agent. The agent is then able to combine this information to work out a global
measure, which we can call community trust. This is analogous to the graphical security
model in [21].
The trust matrix T is defined as follows. The (A, B)-th element of the matrix
TAB(b) ≡ EA(B
π:b
−→ ∗)
(56)
is A’s trust in B with respect to all promises of type b.
Definition 7 (Community trust (Trustworthiness and trustingness)) The global or com-
munity trust is defined by the principal eigenvectors of T and T T. Since this is a transmitted
quantity by definition it is a reputation.
The global reputations for being trustworthy W are defined by the normalized compo-
nents of the principal eigenvector of the transpose matrix:
TBAWB = λWA.
(57)
The global reputations for being most trusting S are defined by the normalized compo-
nents of the principal eigenvector
TABSB = λSA.
(58)
Local and Global Trust Based on the Concept of Promises
17
An agent is said to be trusting if it assigns a high probability of keeping its promises to
those agents that it trusts. An agent is said to be trustworthy if other agents assign it a high
probability of keeping promises to it.
Observe that, in the absence of labels about specific agent relationships, the concepts of
trustworthiness and trustingness for an agent A are properties of the global trust graph that
has A as a source, and not of an individual agent, since they are derived from relationships
and by voting.
We can easily show that this has the property of a proportional vote. Let vi denote a
vector for the trust ranking, or connectedness of the trust graph, of each node i. Then, the
trustworthiness of node i is proportional to the sum of the votes from all of i’s nearest
neighbours, weighted according to their trustworthiness (i.e. it is just the sum of their trust
valuations):
vi ∝ Xj=neighbours of i
vj .
This may be more compactly written as
vi = (const) ×Xj
Tijvj ,
(59)
(60)
where T is the trust graph adjacency matrix, whose entries Tij are 1 if i is a neighbour of
j, and 0 otherwise. We can rewrite eqn. (60) as
T v = λv .
(61)
Now one sees that the vector is actually an eigenvector of the trust matrix T . If T is an
N × N matrix, it has N eigenvectors (one for each node in the network), and correspond-
ingly many eigenvalues. The eigenvalue of interest is the principal eigenvector, i.e. that
with highest eigenvalue, since this is the only one that results from summing all of the pos-
sible pathways with a positive sign. The components of the principal eigenvector rank how
self-consistently ‘central’ a node is in the graph. Note that only ratios vi/vj of the com-
ponents are meaningfully determined. This is because the lengths v = pPi vivi of the
eigenvectors are not determined by the eigenvector equation. We normalize them here by
setting the highest component to 1. This form of well-connectedness is termed ’eigenvec-
tor centrality’ [22] in the field of social network analysis, where several other definitions of
centrality exist.
8
6
5
7
4
3
1
2
Fig. 4 An example trust graph. For simplicity all trust arrows are assumed of the same type, e.g. trust
in the promise to pay bills. Dashed lines are lines which will be removed in the second example.
18
Jan Bergstra, Mark Burgess
Note this does not assume any transitivity of trust, it says simply: each agent’s trust
worthiness is equal the sum of all the other agents’ trust measures (as if they are voting),
weighted so that the most trustworthy agents’ opinions are weighted proportionally highest.
It is a proportional representation vote by the agents about one another.
8.1 Example of global trust
Consider a number of promises of a single type, e.g. agents promise to pay their bills in
various service interactions. Each payee then rates its expectation of the payer and makes
this information globally available as a public measure of its local trust. Referring to fig. 4,
we assume the following local trusts:
τ :pay
−→ 6 = 0.2
τ :pay
−→ 6 = 0.3
τ :pay
−→ 7 = 0.1
τ :pay
−→ 7 = 0.1
τ :pay
−→ 7 = 0.1
τ :pay
−→ 7 = 0.6
τ :pay
−→ 6 = 0.5
τ :pay
−→ 8 = 0.8
τ :pay
−→ 6 = 0.2
τ :pay
−→ 8 = 0.8
τ :pay
−→ 7 = 0.3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
6
8
7
8
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.8
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.8
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.0
The trust matrix is thus
T =
Note that the bars delineate the dashed lines which will be removed in the second exam-
ple. The normalized right eigenvector S8 represents how trusting the agents are. The left
eigenvector W8 (or the eigenvector of the transpose matrix) represents the global trustwor-
thiness:
(62)
(63)
(64)
S8 =
, W8 =
0.21
0.31
0.10
0.10
0.10
1.00
0.94
0.50
0
0
0
0
0
0.55
0.65
1.00
Thus, agent 8 is the most trustworthy. Agents 1 to 5 are not trustworthy at all in this sce-
nario, since we have not rated any promises made by them. Agent 6 is the most trusting
of all, since it gives a large amount of trust to agent 8. Thus, these two agents colour the
global picture of trust significantly through their behaviours.
Local and Global Trust Based on the Concept of Promises
19
We note that the agents with zero trust ratings are all recipients of promises; they do not
make any promises of their own. These are suppliers of whatever service or good is being
sold; they do not promise payments to anyone, hence no one needs to trust them to pay
their bills. The reader might find this artificial: these agents might make it their policy to
trust the agents even though they have made no promise. In this case, we must ask whether
the trust would be of the same type or not: i.e. would the buyers trust the suppliers to pay
their bills, or would their trust be based on a different promise, e.g. the promise to provide
quality goods.
By contrast, the agents who are not trusted are somewhat trusting by virtue of receiving
such promises of payment.
Suppose we eliminate agent number 8 (by removing the dashed lines in the figure), let
us see how the ranking changes when we delete this important agent. Now agent 6 still
remains the most trusting, but agent 7 becomes the most trusted, once again mainly due to
agent 6’s contribution.
S7 =
, W7 =
(65)
0.37
0.55
0.17
0.17
0.17
1.00
0.92
0
0
0
0
0
0.91
1.00
We can note that the symmetries of the graph are represented in the eigenvector in a natural
way.
8.2 Boundaries and allegiances
Canright and Monsen have defined regions of a graph, based on the structures that arise nat-
urally from eigenvector centrality[23]. This has been further developed for directed graphs
in ref. [24]. Trust is sometimes associated with maintaining certain boundaries or alle-
giances. The global trust model proposed above falls into a natural landscape based on the
graph, that is characterized by local maxima. Agents cluster naturally into distinct hills of
mutual trust, separated by valleys of more tenuous trust, in the centrality function.
This characterization is a useful way of identifying a community structure. Humans
are not very good at understanding boundaries: they understand identities. e.g. a company
name, but where is the real boundary of the company or computer system? Its tendrils
of influence might be farther or closer than one imagines. The topology of underlying
promises offers a quantifiable answer to this question. Such allegiances can be compared
to the notion of a coalition in game theory[25,26].
9 Trust architectures
Trust is closely associated with information dissemination. There are essentially only two
distinct models for achieving information distribution: centralization and ad hoc epidemic
flooding. Alternatively one might call them, central-server versus peer-to-peer.
Two so-called trust models are used in contemporary technologies today, reflecting
these approaches: the Trusted Third Party model (e.g. X.509 certificates, TLS, or Kerberos)
and the Web of Trust (as made famous by the Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) system due to Phil
Zimmerman and its subsequent clones). Let us consider how these models are represented
in terms of our promise model.
20
Jan Bergstra, Mark Burgess
9.1 Trusted Third Parties
The centralized solution to “trust management” is the certificate authority model, intro-
duced as part of the X.509 standard and modified for a variety of other systems (See fig.
5)[27,28,29]. In this model, a central authority has the final word on identity confirmation
and often acts as a broker between parties, verifying identities for both sides.
The authority promises (often implicitly) to all agents the legitimacy of each agent’s
identity (hopefully implying that it verifies this somehow). Moreover, for each consulta-
tion the authority promises that it will truthfully verify an identity credential (public key)
that is presented to it. The clients and users of this service promise that they will use this
confirmation. Thus, in the basic interaction, the promises being made here are:
π:Legitimate
−→
Authority
Authority π:Verification
π:U(Verification)
−→
User
−→
User
User
Authority
(66)
(67)
(68)
To make sense of trust, we look for expectations of the promises being kept.
1. The users expect that the authority is legitimate, hence they trust its promise of legiti-
macy.
2. The users expect that the authority verifies identity correctly, hence they trust its promise
of verification and therefore use it.
Users do not necessarily have to be registered themselves with the authority in order to use
its services, so it is not strictly necessary for the authority to trust the user. However, in
registering as a client a user also promises its correct identity, and the authority promises
to use this.
User
π:Identity
−→ Authority
Authority
π:U(Identity)
−→ User
(69)
(70)
One can always discuss the evidence by which users would trust the authority (or third
party). Since information is simply brokered by the authority, the only right it has to legit-
imacy is by virtue of a reputation. Thus expectation 1. above is based, in general, on the
rumours that an agent has heard.
CERT AUTH
Users/clients
Fig. 5 The Trusted Third Party, e.g. TLS or Kerberos. A special agent is appointed in the network
as the custodian of identity. All other agents are expected to trust this. The special agent promises to
verify the authenticity of an object that is shared by the agents. In return for this service, the agents
pay the special agent.
Most of the trust is from users to the authority, thus there is a clear subordination of
agents in this model. This is the nature or centralization.
Local and Global Trust Based on the Concept of Promises
21
9.2 Web of Trust
Scepticism in centralized solutions (distrust perhaps) led to the invention of the epidemic
trust model, known as the Web of Trust (see fig. 6)[30]. In this model, each individual agent
is responsible for its own decisions about trust. Agents confirm their belief in credentials
by signing one another’s credentials. Hence if I trust A and A has signed B’s key then I am
more likely to trust B.
As a management approximation, users are asked to make a judgement about a key
from one of four categories: i) definitely trustworthy, ii) somewhat trustworthy, iii) un-
trustworthy, iv) don’t know.
An agent then compares these received valuations to a threshold value to decide whether
or not a credential is trustworthy to it.
The promises are between the owner of the credential and a random agent:
Owner
π:Identity
−→
Agent
Agent
π:U(Identity)
−→
Owner
Agent
π:Signature
−→
Owner
Owner
π:U(Signature)
−→
Agent
(71)
(72)
(73)
(74)
The owner must first promise its identity to an agent it meets. The agent must promise to
believe and use this identity credential. The agent then promises to support the credential
by signing it, which implies a promise (petition) to all subsequent agents. Finally, the owner
can promise to use the signature or reject it. Trust enters here in the following ways:
1. The agent expects that the identity of the owner is correct and trusts it. This leads to a
Use promise.
2. The Owner expects that the promise of support is legitimate and trusts it. This leads to
a Use promise.
What is interesting about this model is that it is much more symmetrical than the central-
ized scheme. It has certain qualities that remind us of our definition of global trust in section
8. However, it is not equivalent to our model, since the very nature of the web of trust is
dictated by the transactions in the model, which are automatically bilateral (ours need not
be). Moreover, the information is passed on in a peer to peer way, where as our global ide-
alization makes trust valuations common knowledge (global reputations). In some respects,
the web of trust is a pragmatic approximation to the idealized notion of trust in section 8.
The main differences are:
– In the Web of trust, a limited number of expectation values is allowed and the user does
not control these, i.e. there are few policy choices for agent expectation allowed.
– An agent does not see a complete trust or promise graph. It sees only the local cluster
to which it is connected. This is sufficient to compute a global trust for that component
of the graph.
– The Web of Trust graph is always bilateral, with arrows moving in both directions, thus
no one is untrusted, or un-trusting.
– The information to construct a fully self-consistent measure of trust is not available in
the system. Hence there is no clear measure of who is more trustworthy in the web of
trust.
Some of these limitations could no doubt be removed. A Bayesian approach could
naturally lead to a better approximation. However, a basic flaw in these implementation
mechanisms is the need to trust of the mediating software itself. Since, as we have shown,
trust is not necessarily transitive, one ends up in most cases trusting the software that is
supposed to implement the trust management rather than the parties themselves.
22
Jan Bergstra, Mark Burgess
sign
sign
Fig. 6 In a web of trust an agent signals a promise to all other agents that it has trusted the authen-
ticity of the originator’s identity. As a key is passed around (second figure) agents can promise its
authenticity by signing it or not.
10 Conclusions
The concept of promises provides a foundation that has been unclear in discussions of trust.
It allows us to decouple the probabilistic aspect from the network aspect of policy relation-
ships, without introducing instantaneous events. It provides (we claim) a natural language
for specific policies, extended over time. Promises have types and denote information flow
which in turn allows us to discuss what is trusted and by whom. We believe the use of
promises to be superor to a definition based on actions, since the localization of actions as
space-time events makes trust ill-defined if the action has either not yet been executed or
after it has been executed.
Promises allow us to relate trust and trust-reputation in a generic way, and suggest an
algorithm from which to derive global network properties, based on social network theory.
This is a significant improvement over previous models. Reputation is not uniquely coupled
to trust, of course – it can be related to many different valuations of promised behaviour,
including wealth, kindness etc.
We show how bundles of promises can be combined using the rules for probabilistic
events (similar to fault tree analysis) and we model the two main trust architectures easily.
The PGP Web of Trust as well as the Trusted Third Party can be explained as a special case
the global trust models derived here; however standard tools do not permit users to see the
entire web, or measure relative trust-worthiness in a community using these implementa-
tions.
In future work there is the possibility to use this notion of trust in explicit systems.
The Unix configuration system cfengine[31] uses the notion of promises and agent auton-
omy to implement a policy based management system. The trustworthiness of hosts with
respect to certain different behaviours can be measured directly by neighbouring agents to
whom promises are made. More generally, if one has a monitoring system that one believes
trustworthy to begin with, it is possible to observe whether an agent stops keeping its own
promises about security issues. This might be a signal to reevaluate one’s expectation that
the system is trustworthy. These tests have been partially imeplemented in cfengine and are
presently being tested.
Trust is merely an expression of policy and it is therefore fundamentally ad hoc. Promises
reveal the underlying motives for trust and whether they are rationally or irrationally formed.
Local and Global Trust Based on the Concept of Promises
23
Acknowledgement. We are grateful to Jurgen Schonwalder for his hospitality at the
International University of Bremen in the summer of 2006, where most of this work was
done. This work is supported in part by the EC IST-EMANICS Network of Excellence
(#26854).
References
1. J. Bergstra and M. Burgess. A static theory of promises. Technical report, arXiv:0810.3294v1,
2008.
2. Mark Burgess. An approach to understanding policy based on autonomy and voluntary co-
In IFIP/IEEE 16th international workshop on distributed systems operations and
operation.
management (DSOM), in LNCS 3775, pages 97–108, 2005.
3. M. Burgess and S. Fagernes. Pervasive computing management: A model of network policy with
local autonomy. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, page (submitted).
4. M. Burgess and S. Fagernes. Voluntary economic cooperation in policy based management.
IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, page (submitted).
5. M. Burgess and S. Fagernes. Autonomic pervasive computing: A smart mall scenario using
promise theory. Proceedings of the 1st IEEE International Workshop on Modelling Autonomic
Communications Environments (MACE); Multicon verlag 2006. ISBN 3-930736-05-5, pages
133–160, 2006.
6. L. LaPadula. A rule-set approach to formal modelling of a trusted computer system. Computing
systems (University of California Press: Berkeley, CA), 7:113, 1994.
7. M.D. McIlroy. Virology 101. Computing systems (University of California Press: Berkeley, CA),
2:173, 1989.
8. I.S. Winkler. The non-technical threat to computing systems. Computing systems (MIT Press:
Cambridge MA), 9:3, 1996.
9. M. Patton and A. Jøsang. Technologies for trust in electronic commerce. Electronic Commerce
Research Journal, 4:9–21, 2004.
10. Audun Jøsang, Claudia Keser, and Theo Dimitrakos. Can we manage trust? In Proceedings of
the Third International Conference on Trust Management (iTrust), Versailes, 2005.
11. T. Dong Huynh, Nicholas R. Jennings, and Nigel R. Shadbolt. Developing an integrated trust and
reputation model for open multi-agent systems. In Rino Falcone, Suzanne Barber, Jordi Sabater,
and Munindar Singh, editors, AAMAS-04 Workshop on Trust in Agent Societies, 2004.
12. J. Kluwer and A. Waaler. Trustworthiness by default, 2005.
13. J. Kluwer and A. Waaler. Relative trustworthiness. In Formal Aspects in Security and Trust:
Third International Workshop, FAST 2005, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, July 18-19, 2005, Revised
Selected Papers, Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3866, pages 158–170, 2006.
14. T. Beth, M. Borcherding, and B. Klein. Valuation of trust in open networks. In Proceedings
of the European Symposium on Research in Computer Security (ESORICS), LNCS, volume 875,
pages 3–18. Springer, 1994.
15. Audun Jøsang and Simon Pope. Semantic constraints for trust transitivity.
In APCCM ’05:
Proceedings of the 2nd Asia-Pacific conference on Conceptual modelling, pages 59–68, Dar-
linghurst, Australia, Australia, 2005. Australian Computer Society, Inc.
16. D. Fahrenholtz and A. Bartelt. Towards a sociological view of trust in computer science.
In
Proceedings of the Eighth Research Symposium on Emerging Electronic Markets (RSEEM 01),
page 10, 2001.
17. R. Axelrod. The Evolution of Co-operation. Penguin Books, 1990 (1984).
18. A. Høyland and M. Rausand. System Reliability Theory: Models and Statistical Methods. J.
Wiley & Sons, New York, 1994.
19. M. Burgess. Analytical Network and System Administration — Managing Human-Computer
Systems. J. Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 2004.
20. The Strategy of Conflict. Harvard Univesity Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1960.
21. M. Burgess, G. Canright, and K. Engø. A graph theoretical model of computer security: from
file access to social engineering. International Journal of Information Security, 3:70–85, 2004.
22. P. Bonacich. Power and centrality: a family of measures. American Journal of Sociology,
92:1170–1182, 1987.
23. G. Canright and K. Engø-Monsen. A natural definition of clusters and roles in undirected graphs.
Science of Computer Programming, 53:195, 2004.
24
Jan Bergstra, Mark Burgess
24. M. Burgess, G. Canright, and K. Engø. Inportance-ranking functions from the eigenvectors of
directed graphs. Journal of the ACM (Submitted), 2004.
25. J.V. Neumann and O. Morgenstern. Theory of games and economic behaviour. Princeton Uni-
versity Press, Princeton, 1944.
26. A. Rapoport. N-Person Game Theory: Concepts and Applications. Dover, New York, 1970.
27. ITU-T. Open Systems Interconnection - The Directory: Overview of Concepts, models and ser-
vice. Recommendation X.500. International Telecommunications Union, Geneva, 1993.
28. ITU-T Recommendation. X.509 (1997 e): Information technology - open systems interconnec-
tion - the directory: Authentication framework. Technical report, 1997.
29. R. Housley, W. Polk, W. Ford, and D. Solo. Internet x.509 public key infrastructure: Certificate
and certificate revocation list (crl) profile. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3280, 2002.
30. A. Abdul-Rahman. The pgp trust model. EDI-Forum: the Journal of Electronic Commerce,
1997.
31. M. Burgess. Cfengine www site. http://www.cfengine.org, 1993.
32. G.R. Grimmett and D.R. Stirzaker. Probability and random processes (3rd edition). Oxford
scientific publications, Oxford, 2001.
33. J. Pearl. Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference. Mor-
gen Kaufmann, San Francisco, 1988.
A Expectation
Here we expand on our notion of an expectation function for completeness. These details
are not essential to the arguments in the rest of the paper.
An expectation function is a statistical concept that relies either on a body of evidence,
or alternatively on a belief informed by limited observation. Such evidences or beliefs are
summarized by a probability distribution over the different possible outcomes. We shall
consider mainly the outcomes “promise kept” and “promise not kept”, though varying de-
grees are possible.
The notion of an expectation value is well known from the theory of probability and
can be based on either classical frequentist-probability or Bayesian belief-probability[32].
There is, for this reason, no unique expectation operator.
Why dabble in intangibles such as beliefs? Computer systems are frequently asked to
trust one another without ever having met (for example when they automatically download
patches and updates from their operating system provider, virus update from third-parties
or even accept the word of trusted third parties in identification) – thus they have little or no
empirical evidence to go on. Each time they interact however, they are able to revise their
initial estimates on the basis of experience. In this regard, a Bayesian view of probability
is a natural interpretation, see e.g. [33]. This is a subjective view of probability that works
well with our subjective agents.
Definition 8 (Expectation function E(X)) Given random variables X, Y , an expectation
operator or function has the properties:
1. If X ≥ 0, E(X) ≥ 0.
2. If a, b ∈ R, then E(aX + bY ) = aE(X) + bE(Y ).
3. E(1) = 1.
For a probability distribution over discrete classes c = 1 . . . C, it is the convex sum
C
Xc=1
pcXx (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
C
Xc=1
E(X) =
pc = 1.
(75)
The expectation value of a Bernoulli variable (with value 0 or 1) is clearly just equal to the
probability of obtaining 1 p1 = P r(X = 1). In general, a promise might lead to more than
one outcome, several of which might be acceptable ways of keeping the promise, however
this possibility only complicates the story for now, hence we choose to consider only the
simplest case of
Local and Global Trust Based on the Concept of Promises
25
Definition 9 (Agent expectation EA(a π:b−→ c)) The agent expectation EA(X) is defined
to be the agent A’s estimation of the probability that a promise a π:b−→ c will be kept.
This can be realized in any number of different ways, e.g. as a mapping from an ensemble
of evidence of size N (with the binary outcomes 0 and 1) into the open interval:
EA : {0, 1}N → [0, 1]
(76)
or it could could be an ad hoc value selected from a table of pre-decided values.
A.1 Ensembles and samples of evidence
An ensemble is a collection of experiments that test the value of a random variable. In one
experiment, we might evaluate the agent expectation to be p1. In another, we might evaluate
it to be P1. What then is the probability we should understand from the ensemble of both?
We expect that the appropriate answer is an average of these two values, but what if we
attach more importance to one value than to the other? Probabilities discard an essential
piece of information: the size of the body of evidence on which they are based. Let us
consider this important point for a moment.
In the frequentist interpretation of probability, all esti-
A.1.1 Frequentistic interpretation
mates are based on past hard evidence. Probabilities are considered reliable as estimators of
future behaviour if they are based on a sufficiently large body of evidence. Let lower-case
p1 = n1/n, the probability of keeping a promise, be based on a total of n measurements,
of which the frequencies n1 were positive and n0 were negative, with n1 + n0 = n. Also,
let upper-case P1 = N1/N be an analogous set of measurements for which N 6= n. How
should we now combine these two independent trials into a single value for their ensemble?
In the frequentist interpretation of probability, the answer is clear: we simply com-
bine all the original data into one trial and see what this means for the probabilities.
Rationally, the combined probability E for the ensemble must end up having the value
E = (n1 + N1)/(n + N ). If we express this result in terms of the probabilities, rather than
the frequencies, we have
E =(cid:18) n
n + N(cid:19) p1 +(cid:18) N
n + N(cid:19) P1 =
n1 + N1
n + N
(77)
This leads us to the intuitive conclusion that the probabilities should be combined according
to a weighted average, in which the weights are chosen to attach proportionally greater
importance to the larger trial:
E = α1p1 + α2P1, α1 + α2 = 1.
(78)
In general, then, with T trials of different sizes, the result would be a convex combination
of the expectations from each trial:
T
T
E =
αipi,
αi = 1.
(79)
Xi=1
Xi=1
In the case that there are more possible outcomes than simply 0 and 1, the same argument
applies for each outcome.
The problem occurs when we do not have complete knowledge of the sample sizes
n, N, . . . etc., for, in this case, we can only guess the relative importances αi, and choose
them as a matter of policy. If, for example, we could choose to make all the αi equally
important, in which case we have no control over the importance of the expectations.
This so-called frequentist interpretation of expectation or probability generally requires
a significant body of evidence in the form of independent events to generate a plausible
26
Jan Bergstra, Mark Burgess
estimate. However, in most ad hoc encounters, we do not have such a body of evidence.
Trust is usually based on just a handful of encounters, and one’s opinion of the current
evidence is biased by prior expectations. Hence, we turn to the alternative interpretation or
Bayesian probability.
A.1.2 Bayesian interpretation The policy formula in eqn. (79) is essentially a Bayesian
belief formula, which can be derived from the classic Bayes interpretation for a posteriori
belief.
Suppose we devise an experimental test e to determine whether a hypothesis H of ex-
pected trustworthiness is true. We repeat this test, or borrow other agent’s observations, thus
collecting n of these e1 . . . en. The result for P (Hen, e), our belief in the trustworthiness-
hypothesis given the available evidence, changes by iteration according to:
P (Hen, e) =
P (Hen) × P (een, H)
P (een, H)P (Hen) + P (een, ¬H)P (¬Hen)
(80)
where we feed back one value P (Hen−1, e) from the previous iteration as P (Hen), and
we must revise potentially two estimates on each iteration:
– P (een, H) is our estimate that the test e will show positive as a direct result of the
Hypothesis being true, i.e. because the host was trustworthy.
– P (een, ¬H) is our estimate of how often e is true due to other causes than the hypoth-
esis H of trustworthiness, e.g. due to trickery.
Note that P (¬Hen) = 1 − P (Hen). This gives us a definite iterative procedure based on
well-accepted Bayesian belief networks for updating our policy on trust[33]. It can easily
be seen that eqn. (79) has this form, but lacks a methodology for rational policy-making.
The advantage of a Bayesian interpretation of policy then, is that it fits well with the
notion of trust as a policy decision.
A.2 Policy and rationality
What kind of policy should be employed in defining the expectation of future behaviour?
Probability theory is built on the assumption that past evidence can motivate a prediction of
the future. At the heart of this is an assumption that the world is basically constant. How-
ever, future prediction is the essence of gambling: there are scenarios in which evidence of
the past is not an adequate guide to future behaviour. An agent might also look elsewhere
for guidance.
– Initialization: An agent of which we have initially no experience might be assigned an
2 , or 0 if we are respectively trusting, neutral or un-trusting by
initial trust value of 1, 1
nature.
– Experience: One’s own direct experience of a service or promise has primacy as a basis
for trusting an agent in a network. However, an optimistic agent might choose not to
allow the past to rule the future, believing that agents can change their behaviour, e.g.
“the agent was having a bad day”.
– Advice: An agent might feel that it is not the best judge and seek the advice of a rep-
utable or trustworthy agent. “Let’s see what X thinks”. We shall use this idea in section
8 to define a global trustworthiness.
– Reputation: Someone else’s experience with a promise can serve as an initial value for
our own trust.
– Damnation: Some agents believe that, if an agent fails even once to fulfil a promise,
then it is completely un-trustworthy. This extreme policy seems excessive, since there
might be reasons beyond the control of the agent that prevent it from delivering on its
promise.
Local and Global Trust Based on the Concept of Promises
27
If we lack any evidence at all about the trustworthiness of an agent with respect to a
given promise, we might adopt a policy of using the agent’s record of keeping other kinds
of promises.
Proposal 4 (Transference of evidence) In the absence of direct evidence of type t(b), in a
promise body b, one may use a policy determined mixture of values from other types as an
initial estimate.
The rationality of such a procedure can easily be questioned, but there is no way to rule out
the ad hoc decision as a matter of policy.
|
1502.01253 | 2 | 1502 | 2016-11-27T13:26:39 | Prices Matter for the Parameterized Complexity of Shift Bribery | [
"cs.MA"
] | In the Shift Bribery problem, we are given an election (based on preference orders), a preferred candidate $p$, and a budget. The goal is to ensure that $p$ wins by shifting $p$ higher in some voters' preference orders. However, each such shift request comes at a price (depending on the voter and on the extent of the shift) and we must not exceed the given budget. We study the parameterized computational complexity of Shift Bribery with respect to a number of parameters (pertaining to the nature of the solution sought and the size of the election) and several classes of price functions. When we parameterize Shift Bribery by the number of affected voters, then for each of our voting rules (Borda, Maximin, Copeland) the problem is W[2]-hard. If, instead, we parameterize by the number of positions by which $p$ is shifted in total,then the problem is fixed-parameter tractable for Borda and Maximin,and is W[1]-hard for Copeland. If we parameterize by the budget, then the results depend on the price function class. We also show that Shift Bribery tends to be tractable when parameterized by the number of voters, but that the results for the number of candidates are more enigmatic. | cs.MA | cs |
Prices Matter for the Parameterized Complexity of
Shift Bribery
Robert Bredereck1, Jiehua Chen1, Piotr Faliszewski2, Andr´e Nichterlein1, and
Rolf Niedermeier1
1Institut fur Softwaretechnik und Theoretische Informatik, TU Berlin, Berlin, Germany
{robert.bredereck, jiehua.chen, andre.nichterlein, rolf.niedermeier}@tu-berlin.de
2AGH University of Science and Technology, Krakow, Poland [email protected]
Abstract
In the Shift Bribery problem, we are given an election (based on preference orders), a
preferred candidate p, and a budget. The goal is to ensure p's victory by shifting p higher in
some voters' preference orders. However, each such shift request comes at a price (depending
on the voter and on the extent of the shift) and we must not exceed the given budget. We
study the parameterized computational complexity of Shift Bribery with respect to a
number of parameters (pertaining to the nature of the solution sought and the size of the
election) and several classes of price functions. When we parameterize Shift Bribery by
the number of affected voters, then for each of our voting rules (Borda, Maximin, Copeland)
the problem is W[2]-hard. If, instead, we parameterize by the number of positions by which
p is shifted in total, then the problem is fixed-parameter tractable for Borda and Maximin,
and is W[1]-hard for Copeland. If we parameterize by the budget, then the results depend
on the price function class. We also show that Shift Bribery tends to be tractable when
parameterized by the number of voters, but that the results for the number of candidates
are more enigmatic.
1
Introduction
Rank aggregation and election-winner determination are of key importance in various economical
and political settings. For instance, there are product rankings based on comparing their prices,
their features, and different tests (performed by various institutions such as foundations, journals,
etc.); universities are judged based on multiple different criteria (e.g., the number of students per
faculty member, availability of particular facilities, the number of Nobel prize winners employed
etc.); sport competitions involve multiple rankings (for example, a Formula 1 season consists of
about twenty races, each resulting in a ranking of the drivers); and political elections require
members of the society to express preferences regarding the participating candidates. In each of
these cases the provided rankings are aggregated into the final one, often of significant importance
(for example, customers decide on their purchases based on product rankings, students pick the
best-ranked universities, the Formula 1 world champion is the driver who comes out first in the
aggregated ranking, and the most appreciated candidate becomes the country's president). A
1
sophisticated way of dealing with rankings based on multiple different criteria is to compute
a consensus ranking using preference-based rank aggregation methods.1 In order to affect the
outcome of the rank aggregation one has to influence the component rankings obtained from
different sources (different product tests, different judgment criteria, different races, different
voters). Clearly, the cost of influencing may differ from source to source and, indeed, can
sometimes be quite high. Nonetheless, the effect of improved position in the final ranking can
be very beneficial.
In this work, we study the computational complexity of affecting the outcome of the rank
aggregation by "bribing" specific agents to change their rankings. Moreover, replacing "bribery"
with "product development," or "university expansion," or "training," or "political campaign-
ing" we see that our work is relevant to all the settings mentioned above; the particular entities
(companies offering their products, universities, drivers, politicians) can find out how much effort
they need to invest in order to achieve a better position in the aggregated ranking (or maybe
even become the winner). A natural and simple model in this context, using the formalisms of
voting theory, is Shift Bribery as introduced by Elkind et al. [32]. We extend their studies
in terms of charting the border of computational worst-case tractability, herein putting partic-
ular emphasis on the voter-specific "shifting prices" (how expensive it is to shift a candidate by
x positions "up").
Informally (see Section 3 for a formal definition), Shift Bribery is the following decision
problem:
Shift Bribery
Input: An election, that is, a set of candidates and a set of voters, each with a linear
preference order over the candidate set, some preferred candidate p, and some budget.
Question: Can we make p win by bribing voters to shift p higher in their preference
orders by "paying" no more than the given budget?
We assume that we have the knowledge of the voters' preference orders (for example, from
preelection polls). Further, in our example settings often the full rankings are known. For
example, a driver preparing for a new Formula 1 season has full knowledge of the results from
the previous one. Our Shift Bribery problem models the situation where we approach each
of the voters, one-on-one, and try to convince2 him or her to rank p higher. Naturally, the effect
(the number of positions by which p is shifted in each voter's preference order) depends on the
voter's character and situation, and on the amount of effort we invest into convincing the voter.
This "effort" could, for example, mean the amount of time spent, the cost of implementing a
particular change, or, in the bribery view of the problem, the payment to the voter. Thus, the
computational complexity of the problem depends on the voting rule used in the election, on
various election parameters such as the numbers of candidates and voters, and on the type of
1For example, the German website idealo.de aggregates different product tests by first translating the test
results into a unified rating system and then taking the "average" of all the ratings. Various university rankings
are prepared in a similar way. It would be very interesting, however, to utilize the rankings themselves, instead
of the ratings, for the aggregation. Moreover, Formula 1 racing (and numerous similar competitions) use pure
ranking information (e.g., Formula 1 uses a very slightly modified variant of the Borda election rule).
2What "to convince" means can vary a lot depending on the application scenario. On the evil side we have
bribery, but it can also mean things such as product development, hiring more faculty members, training on a
particular racing circuit, or explaining the details of one's political platform. Clearly, different ranking providers
may appreciate different efforts, which is modeled by the individual price functions.
2
price functions describing the efforts needed to shift p up by a given number of positions in the
voters' preference orders. Our goal is to unravel the nature of these dependencies.
Related Work. The computational complexity of bribery in elections was first studied by
Faliszewski et al. [35]. They considered the Bribery problem, where one asks if it is possible to
ensure that a given candidate is an election winner by changing at most a given number of votes.
Its priced variant, $Bribery, is the same except that each voter has a possibly different price
for which we can change his or her vote. These problems were studied for various election rules,
including Borda [35, 22], Maximin [38], and Copeland [36] (see Section 2 for exact definitions of
these rules). Recently, Gertler et al. [42] studied the bribery problem for linear ranking systems.
Notably, the destructive variant of the Bribery problem (known under the name Margin of
Victory), where the goal is to ensure that a despised candidate does not win (and which was
studied, e.g., by Magrino et al. [50] and Xia [60]) has a surprisingly positive motivation-it can
be used to detect fraud in elections.
The above problems, however, do not take into account that the price of bribing a voter
may depend on what vote we wish the "bribed" voter to cast. For example, a voter might
be perfectly happy to swap the two least preferred candidates but not the two most preferred
ones. To model such situations, Elkind et al. [32] introduced the Swap Bribery problem. They
assumed that each voter has a swap-bribery price function which gives the cost of swapping each
two candidates (provided they are adjacent in the voter's preference order; one can perform a
series of swaps to transform the voter's preference order in an arbitrary way). They found that
Swap Bribery is both NP-hard and hard to approximate for most well-known voting rules
(essentially, because the Possible Winner problem [47, 61, 6, 4], which is NP-hard for almost
all natural voting rules, is a special case of Swap Bribery with each swap costing either zero or
infinity). Motivated by this, Dorn and Schlotter [28] considered the parameterized complexity
of Swap Bribery for the case of k-Approval (where each voter gives a point to his or her top k
candidates). In addition, Elkind et al. [32] also considered Shift Bribery, a variant of Swap
Bribery where all the swaps have to involve the preferred candidate p. They have shown that
Shift Bribery remains NP-hard for Borda, Maximin, and Copeland but that there is a 2-
approximation algorithm for Borda and a polynomial-time algorithm for the k-Approval voting
rule. Shift Bribery was further studied by Elkind and Faliszewski [31], who viewed it as a
political campaign management problem (and whose view we adopt in this paper), and who gave
a 2-approximation algorithm for all scoring rules (generalizing the result for Borda) and other
approximation algorithms for Maximin and Copeland. Then, Schlotter et al. [59] have shown
that Shift Bribery is polynomial-time solvable for the case of Bucklin and Fallback voting
rules.
Based on the idea of modeling campaign management as bribery problems, other researchers
introduced several variants of bribery problems. For example, Schlotter et al. [59] introduced
Support Bribery and Baumeister et al. [5] introduced Extension Bribery (both problems
model the setting where voters cast partial votes that rank some of their top candidates only,
and the briber extends these votes; they differ in that the former assumes that the voters know
their full preference orders but do not report them completely and the latter assumes that the
voters have no preferences regarding the not-reported candidates).
There is quite a lot of research on various other algorithmic aspects of elections. Reviewing
this literature is beyond the scope of this paper, but we point the readers to some of the recent
3
surveys [10, 25, 37, 33, 11] and to recent textbooks [13, 57].
Our Contributions. For the Borda, the Maximin, and the Copeland rules, Elkind et al. [31,
32] have shown that Shift Bribery has high worst-case complexity, but that one can deal
with it using polynomial-time approximation algorithms. To better understand where the in-
tractability of Shift Bribery really lies in different special cases, we use another approach of
dealing with computationally hard problems, namely parameterized complexity analysis and,
more specifically, the notion of fixed-parameter tractability and the correspondingly developed
exact algorithms. For instance, almost tied elections are tempting targets for Shift Bribery.
An exact algorithm which is efficient for this special case may be more attractive than a general
approximation algorithm. In close-to-tied elections it might suffice, for example, to contact only
a few voters or, perhaps, to shift the preferred candidate by only a few positions in total. Simi-
larly, it is important to solve the problem exactly if one has only a small budget at one's disposal.
This is captured by using various problem parameterizations and performing a parameterized
complexity analysis.
Furthermore, it is natural to expect that the computational complexity of Shift Bribery
depends on the nature of the voters' price functions and, indeed, there is some evidence for this
fact: For example, if we assume that shifting p by each single position in each voter's preference
order has a fixed unit price or, at the very least, if functions describing the prices are convex,
then one can verify that the 2-approximation algorithm of Elkind and Faliszewski [31] boils down
to a greedy procedure that picks the cheapest available single-position shifts until it ensures the
designated candidate's victory (such an implementation would be much faster than the expensive
dynamic programming algorithm that they use, but would guarantee a 2-approximate solution
for convex price functions only). On the contrary, the hardness proofs of Elkind et al. [32] all use
a very specific form of price functions which we call all-or-nothing prices, where if one decides
to shift the preferred candidate p in some vote, then the cost of this shift is independent of how
far one shifts p. In effect, one might as well shift p to the top of the vote. See Section 3 for the
definitions of the different price functions that we study.
We combine the above two sets of observations and we study the parameterized complexity
of Shift Bribery for Borda, Maximin, and Copelandα, for parameters describing the number
of affected voters, the number of unit shifts, the budget, the number of candidates, and the
number of voters, under price functions that are either all-or-nothing, sortable, arbitrary, convex,
or have a unit price for each single shift. The three voting rules that we select are popular
in different kinds of elections apart from political ones. For instance, Borda is used by the
X.Org Foundation to elect its board of directors, its modified variant is used for the Formula 1
World Championship (and numerous other competitions including, e.g., ski-jumping, and song
contests). A slightly modified version of Copeland is used to elect the Board of Trustees for the
Wikimedia Foundation.
We summarize our results in Table 1, and we discuss them throughout the paper. In short, it
turns out that indeed both the particular parameters used and the nature of the price functions
have strong impact on the computational complexity of Shift Bribery. Three key technical
contributions of our work are:
1. novel FPT approximation schemes exploiting the parameters "number of voters" and
"number of candidates" (such schemes are rare in the literature and of significant practical
interest),
4
parameter
R
#shifts (t)
B/M [Thm 1 & 3]
C
[Thm 4]
#affected voters (na)
Shift Bribery
unit
prices
convex
prices
arbitrary sortable all-or-nothing
prices
prices
prices
FPT
FPT
W[1]-h W[1]-h W[1]-h W[1]-h W[1]-h
FPT
FPT
FPT
B/M/C [Thm 5]
W[2]-h W[2]-h W[2]-h W[2]-h W[2]-h
budget (B)
B/M [Cor 2]
[Cor 3]
C
#voters (n)
FPT
W[2]-h W[2]-h W[2]-h
FPT
W[1]-h W[1]-h W[2]-h W[2]-h W[2]-h
B/M [Pro 2]
C
[Thm 7 & Pro 2] W[1]-h W[1]-h W[1]-h W[1]-h
W[1]-h⋆ W[1]-h⋆ W[1]-h⋆ W[1]-h⋆ FPT
FPT
#candidates (m)
B/M/C [Thm 9]
#voters (n)
B/M/C [Thm 7]
#candidates (m)
B/M/C [Thm 8]
FPT♠
XP
XP
FPT♦
FPT♦
Shift Bribery(O)
FPT-AS for all considered price function families
FPT-AS for sortable prices
Table 1: The parameterized complexity of R Shift Bribery and R Shift Bribery(O) for
Borda (B), Maximin (M), and Copelandα (C) (for each rational number α, 0 ≤ α ≤ 1). Note that
Shift Bribery(O) is the optimization variant of Shift Bribery, which seeks to minimize the
budget spent. "W[1]-h" (resp. "W[2]-h") stands for W[1]-hard (resp. W[2]-hard). Definitions for
FPT, W[1], W[2], XP are provided in Section 2.3. The W[1]-hardness results marked with "⋆"
follow from the work of Bredereck et al. [21]. The FPT result marked with "♠" follows from
the work of Dorn and Schlotter [28]. The FPT results marked with "♦" follow from the work of
Bredereck et al. [20].
2. a surprising W[1]-hardness result for the parameter "number of voters" when using Copelandα
voting (contrasting fixed-parameter tractability results when using Borda and Maximin),
and
3. a partial kernelization (polynomial-time data reduction) result for the parameter "number
of unit shifts".
5
Article Outline. The paper is organized as follows.
In Section 2 we present preliminary
notions regarding elections and parameterized complexity theory. In Section 3 we formally de-
fine the Shift Bribery problem, together with its parameterizations and definitions of price
functions. Our results are in Section 4 (parameterization by solution cost) and Section 5 (pa-
rameterization by solution election size). We discuss an outlook of our research in Section 6.
In the appendix we provide those proofs that were omitted from the main part for the sake of
readability.
2 Preliminaries
Below we provide a brief overview of the notions regarding elections and parameterized com-
plexity theory.
2.1 Elections and Voting Rules
We use the standard, ordinal model of elections where an election E = (C, V ) consists of a set
C = {c1, . . . , cm} of candidates and a set V = {v1, . . . , vn} of voters. Each voter v provides a
preference order over C, i. e., a linear order ranking the candidates from the most preferred one
(position 1) to the least preferred one (position m). For example, if C = {c1, c2, c3}, then writing
v : c1 ≻ c2 ≻ c3 indicates that voter v likes c1 best, then c2, and then c3. For two candidates
ci, cj and voter v we write v : ci ≻ cj to indicate that v prefers ci to cj. Further, we write ≻v
to denote voter v's preference order. Given an election E, for each two candidates c and d, we
define NE(c, d) to be the number of voters in E who prefer c over d.
A voting rule R is a function that given an election E outputs a non-empty set ∅ 6= R(E) ⊆ C
of the tied winners of the election. Note that we use the nonunique-winner model, where each
of the tied winners is considered a winner and we disregard tie-breaking. This is a standard
assumption in papers on bribery in elections [35, 32, 31, 59, 28, 5]. However, we mention that
various types of tie-breaking can sometimes affect the complexity of election-related problems
quite significantly [55, 56, 34, 26]. Furthermore, we implicitly assume that all voting rules that
we consider are anonymous, i.e., their outcomes depend only on the numbers of voters with
particular preference orders and not on the identities of the particular voters that cast them.
We consider Borda, Maximin, and the Copelandα family of rules. These rules assign points
to every candidate and pick as winners those who get most; we write scoreE(c) to denote the
number of points candidate c ∈ C receives in election E-the particular voting rule used to
compute the score will always be clear from the context.
Let E := (C, V ) be an election. Under Borda, each candidate c ∈ C receives from each
voter v ∈ V as many points as there are candidates that v ranks lower than c. Formally, the
Borda score of candidate c is scoreE(c) :=Pd∈C\{c} NE(c, d). Similarly, the Maximin score of a
candidate c is the number of voters who prefer c to his or her "strongest competitor." Formally,
for Maximin we have scoreE(c) := mind∈C\{c} NE(c, d).
2.2 Conventions for Describing Preference Orders
Under Copelandα with α being a rational number, α ∈ [0, 1], we organize a head-to-head contest
between each two candidates c and d; if c wins (i.e., if NE(c, d) > NE(d, c)) then c receives one
6
point, if d wins then d receives one point, and if they tie (i.e., NE(c, d) = NE(d, c)) then they
both receive α points. Formally, Copelandα assigns to each candidate c ∈ C score:
{d ∈ C \ {c} : NE(c, d)>NE(d, c)} + α {d ∈ C \ {c} : NE(c, d)=NE(d, c)} .
Typical values of α are 0, 1/2, and 1, but there are cases where other values are used. All our
results that regard Shift Bribery for Copelandα hold for each rational value of α. For brevity's
sake, we write "Copeland" instead of "Copelandα for arbitrary rational number α" throughout
this paper.
Given a subset A of candidates, unless specified otherwise, we write hAi to denote an arbitrary
←−
hAi to denote the reverse of hAi. If A is empty,
but fixed preference order over A. We write
then hAi means an empty preference order.
Let A and B be two disjoint subsets of candidates which do not contain our preferred
candidate p (i.e., p /∈ A ∪ B). Let d, g, z /∈ A ∪ B be three distinct candidates. We write
point-pair(p, A, d, g, B, z) to denote the following two preference orders:
p ≻ hAi ≻ d ≻ g ≻ hBi ≻ z
and
z ≻
←−−
hBi ≻ d ≻ g ≻
←−
hAi ≻ p.
With these two preference orders, under the Borda rule we achieve the effect that candidate d
gains one point more than every other candidate in A ∪ B ∪ {p, z} and two points more than
candidate g. Observe that p is ranked first in the first preference order and in order to let d's
score decrease (by shifting p forward), one has to shift p by A + 1 positions in the second vote.
This is crucial for some of our reductions.
Consider a set A = {a1, . . . , a2x+1} of candidates. For each i, 1 ≤ i ≤ 2x, set Ai
:=
{a(i+1) mod (2x+1), . . . , a(i+x) mod (2x+1)}. For each candidate ai, we write half-seq1(A, ai) and
half-seq2(A, ai) to denote the following two preference orders, respectively:
ai ≻ hAii ≻ hA \ Aii
and
←−−−−−
hA \ Aii ≻ ai ≻
←−−
hAii.
Under these two preference orders, we achieve the effect that candidate ai wins head-to-head
contests against exactly half of the other candidates (namely, those in Ai) and ties with all the
remaining ones. All the other pairs of candidates tie in their head-to-head contests.
2.3 Parameterized Complexity
We point the reader to standard text books for general information on parameterized com-
plexity and algorithms [27, 29, 40, 54]. There are also general accounts on the applications of
parameterized complexity analysis to computational social choice [10, 14].
To speak of parameterized complexity of a given problem, we declare a part of the input as a
parameter (here we consider numerical parameters only, e.g., for Shift Bribery it could be the
number of candidates or the budget; see the next section). We say that a problem parameterized
by k is fixed-parameter tractable, that is, is in FPT, if there exists an algorithm that given input
I with parameter k gives a correct solution in time f (k) · IO(1), where f (k) is an arbitrary
computable function of k, and I is the length of the encoding of I. To describe the running
times of our algorithms, we often use the O∗(·) notation. It is a variant of the standard O(·)
notation where polynomial factors are omitted. For example, if the algorithm's running time is
f (k) · IO(1), where f is superpolynomial, then we would say that it is O∗(f (k)).
7
Parameterized complexity theory also provides a hierarchy of hardness classes, starting
with W[1], such that FPT ⊆ W[1] ⊆ W[2] ⊆ . . . ⊆ XP. For our purposes, it suffices to de-
fine the W-classes through their complete problems and an appropriate reducibility notion.
Definition 1. Let A and B be two decision problems. We say that A reduces to B (in a
parameterized way) if there are two functions g1 and g2 such that, given instance IA of A with
parameter kA, it holds that:
i) IA is a yes-instance of A if and only if g1(IA) is a yes-instance of B with parameter g2(kA),
and
ii) g1 is computable in FPT time (for parameter kA).
W[1] is the class of problems that reduce (in a parameterized way) to Clique, and W[2] is
the class of problems that reduce to Set Cover-in both problems we take solution size k as
the parameter. In effect, these two problems are complete for these two classes.
Clique
Input: An undirected graph G = (V (G), E(G)) and a non-negative integer k ≥ 0.
Question: Does G contain a clique of size k, that is, a subset Q ⊆ V (G) of k vertices
such that for each two distinct vertices u, w ∈ Q one has {u, w} ∈ E(G)?
Note that even though we use letters V and E to denote, respectively, voter sets and elections,
when we speak of a graph G, we write V (G) to denote its set of vertices and E(G) to denote its
set of edges.
Set Cover
Input: A family S = (S1, . . . , Sm) of sets over a universe U = {u1, . . . , un} of elements
and a non-negative integer k ≥ 0.
Question: Is there a size-k set cover, that is, a collection Q of k sets in S whose union
is U?
For problems where an FPT algorithm and a hardness proof are elusive, one can at least try
to show an XP algorithm whose running time is polynomial if one treats the parameter as a
constant. As opposed to FPT, the degree of the polynomial describing the "XP" running time
can depend on the parameter.
Below we provide a brief overview of the notions regarding elections and parameterized
complexity theory.
2.4 Elections and Voting Rules
We use the standard, ordinal model of elections where an election E = (C, V ) consists of a set
C = {c1, . . . , cm} of candidates and a set V = {v1, . . . , vn} of voters. Each voter v provides a
preference order over C, i. e., a linear order ranking the candidates from the most preferred one
(position 1) to the least preferred one (position m). For example, if C = {c1, c2, c3}, then writing
v : c1 ≻ c2 ≻ c3 indicates that voter v likes c1 best, then c2, and then c3. For two candidates
ci, cj and voter v we write v : ci ≻ cj to indicate that v prefers ci to cj. Further, we write ≻v
to denote voter v's preference order. Given an election E, for each two candidates c and d, we
define NE(c, d) to be the number of voters in E who prefer c over d.
8
A voting rule R is a function that given an election E outputs a non-empty set ∅ 6= R(E) ⊆ C
of the tied winners of the election. Note that we use the nonunique-winner model, where each
of the tied winners is considered a winner and we disregard tie-breaking. This is a standard
assumption in papers on bribery in elections [35, 32, 31, 58, 28, 5]. However, we mention that
various types of tie-breaking can sometimes affect the complexity of election-related problems
quite significantly [55, 56, 34, 26]. Furthermore, we implicitly assume that all voting rules that
we consider are anonymous, i.e., their outcomes depend only on the numbers of voters with
particular preference orders and not on the identities of the particular voters that cast them.
We consider Borda, Maximin, and the Copelandα family of rules. These rules assign points
to every candidate and pick as winners those who get most; we write scoreE(c) to denote the
number of points candidate c ∈ C receives in election E-the particular voting rule used to
compute the score will always be clear from the context.
Let E := (C, V ) be an election. Under Borda, each candidate c ∈ C receives from each
voter v ∈ V as many points as there are candidates that v ranks lower than c. Formally, the
Borda score of candidate c is scoreE(c) :=Pd∈C\{c} NE(c, d). Similarly, the Maximin score of a
candidate c is the number of voters who prefer c to his or her "strongest competitor." Formally,
for Maximin we have scoreE(c) := mind∈C\{c} NE(c, d).
Under Copelandα with α being a rational number, α ∈ [0, 1], we organize a head-to-head
contest between each two candidates c and d; if c wins (i.e., if NE(c, d) > NE(d, c)) then c
receives one point, if d wins then d receives one point, and if they tie (i.e., NE(c, d) = NE(d, c))
then they both receive α points. Formally, Copelandα assigns to each candidate c ∈ C score:
{d ∈ C \ {c} : NE(c, d)>NE(d, c)} + α {d ∈ C \ {c} : NE(c, d)=NE(d, c)} .
Typical values of α are 0, 1/2, and 1, but there are cases where other values are used. All our
results that regard Shift Bribery for Copelandα hold for each rational value of α. For brevity's
sake, we write "Copeland" instead of "Copelandα for arbitrary rational number α" throughout
this paper.
3 Shift Bribery
Given a voting rule R, in R Shift Bribery the goal is to ensure that a certain candidate p (the
preferred candidate) is an R-winner of the election. To achieve this effect, we can shift p forward
in some of the voters' preference orders. Each shift may have a different price, depending on the
voter and on the length of the shift. The problem was defined by Elkind et al. [32]. Here we
follow the notation of Elkind and Faliszewski [31]; see the introduction for other related work.
3.1 The Problem
Let E = (C, V ) be some election, where C = {p, c1, . . . , cm} and V = {v1, . . . , vn}; p is the
preferred candidate. A Shift Bribery price function πi for voter vi ∈ V , πi : N → N, gives
the price of shifting p forward in vi's preference order a given number of positions. We require
that πi(0) = 0 and that πi(ℓ) ≤ πi(ℓ + 1) for each ℓ ∈ N. We also assume that if p is ranked on
a position r in the preference order, then πi(ℓ) = πi(ℓ − 1) whenever ℓ ≥ r. In other words, it
costs nothing to keep a voter's preference order as is, it never costs less to shift p farther, and
we cannot shift p beyond the top position in the preference order. For instance, let vi be a voter
9
with preference order vi : c1 ≻ c2 ≻ p ≻ c3 and let πi be vi's Shift Bribery price function.
Then, by paying πi(1) we can change vi's preference order to c1 ≻ p ≻ c2 ≻ c3, and by paying
πi(2) we can change it to p ≻ c1 ≻ c2 ≻ c3.
It is clear that we need at most C − 1 values to completely describe each Shift Bribery
price function. We write Π = (π1, . . . , πn) to denote the list of Shift Bribery price functions
for the voters in V .
A shift action #»s is a vector (s1, . . . , sn) of natural numbers, describing how far p should
be shifted in each of the n voters' preference orders. We define shift(E, #»s ) to be the election
E′ = (C, V ′) identical to E except that p has been shifted forward in each voter vi's preference
order by si positions. If that would mean moving p beyond the top position in some preference
i=1 πi(si) to denote the price
of a given shift action. A shift action s is successful if p is a winner in the election shift(E, #»s ).
The term unit shift refers to shifting p by one position in one preference order.
order, we shift p up to the top position only. We write Π( #»s ) =Pn
Given the above notation, the decision variant of R Shift Bribery is defined as follows.
R Shift Bribery
Input: An election E = (C, V ) with voter set V = {v1, . . . , vn}, a list Π = (π1, . . . , πn)
of Shift Bribery price functions for V , a candidate p ∈ C, and an integer B ∈ N.
Question: Is there a shift action #»s = (s1, . . . , sn) such that Π( #»s ) ≤ B and p is an
R-winner in shift(E, #»s )?
The optimization variant is defined analogously, but we do not include the budget B in the
input and we ask for a shift action #»s that ensures p's victory while minimizing Π( #»s ). For an
input instance I of the optimization variant of R Shift Bribery, we write OPT(I) to denote
the cost of the cheapest successful shift action for I (and we omit I if it is clear from the context).
We sometimes also write "R Shift Bribery" when we refer to the optimization variant (and
this is clear from the context).
Typically, approximation algorithms are asked to run in polynomial time. It is, however, not
always possible to approximate the optimal solution to an arbitrary given factor in polynomial
time. Relaxing the polynomial running time to FPT time, we can obtain the following notion
(also see Marx [51] for more information).
Definition 2 (FPT-approximation scheme (FPT-AS)). An FPT-approximation scheme (FPT-AS)
with parameter k for R Shift Bribery is an algorithm that, given an instance I = (C, V, Π, p)
and a number ε > 0, returns a successful shift action #»s such that Π( #»s ) ≤ (1 + ε) · OPT(I). This
algorithm must run in f (k, ε) · IO(1) time, where f is a computable function depending on k
and ε.
When describing the running time of an approximation scheme, we treat ε as a fixed con-
stant. Thus, a polynomial-time approximation scheme may, for example, include exponential
dependence on 1/ε.
3.2 Parameters for Shift Bribery
So far, Shift Bribery has not been studied from the parameterized complexity theory point
of view. Dorn and Schlotter [28] and Schlotter et al. [59] have, however, provided parameterized
complexity results for Swap Bribery and for Support Bribery.
10
We consider two families of parameters, those referring to the properties of the successful
shift action that we seek and those describing the input election. Regarding the first group, we
study:
1. the total number t of unit shifts in the solution (#shifts),
2. the total number na of voters whose preference orders are changed (#voters-affected), and
3. the budget B.
Regarding the second group, we consider:
1. the number m of candidates (#candidates) and
2. the number n of voters (#voters).
As we can test every possible value of a parameter in increasing order, we assume that the values
of these parameters are passed explicitly as part of the input. Note that pairs of parameters such
as m and n clearly are incomparable, whereas n, as well as #shifts, clearly upper-bound #voters-
affected, making #voters-affected "stronger" [46] than the two other parameters. Similarly, B
upper-bounds both #shifts and #voters-affected, provided that each shift has price at least one.
3.3 Price Functions
One of the conclusions from our work is that the price functions used in Shift Bribery instances
may strongly affect the complexity of the problem. In this section we present the families of
price functions that we focus on.
All-or-nothing prices A Shift Bribery price function π is all-or-nothing if there is a value
c such that π(0) = 0 and for each ℓ > 0, π(ℓ) = c (this value c can be different for each
Interestingly, the NP-hardness proofs of Elkind et al. [32] use exactly this family of
voter).
price functions (without referring to them directly, though). All-or-nothing price functions are
a special case of what we would intuitively call concave functions.
Convex prices We are also interested in convex price functions; π is convex if for each ℓ,
π(ℓ + 1) − π(ℓ) ≤ π(ℓ + 2) − π(ℓ + 1) (provided that it is possible to shift the preferred candidate
by up to ℓ + 2 positions in the given preference order).
Unit prices To capture the setting where each unit shift has the same cost for each voter, we
define the price functions by setting π(ℓ) := ℓ for each ℓ such that p can be shifted by ℓ positions.
Unit prices are an extreme example of convex price functions.
Sortable prices Finally, we consider sortable price functions. A list Π = (π1, π2, . . .) of price
functions is called sortable if for each two voters vi, vj ∈ V with the same preference order (that
is, for each two voters vi and vj such that ≺i = ≺j) it holds that ∀1 ≤ ℓ ≤ m − 2 : πi(ℓ) >
Informally, this means that one can sort each set V ′ of
πj (ℓ) =⇒ πi(ℓ + 1) > πj(ℓ + 1).
voters having the same preference order so that the prices of shifting the preferred candidate
by each ℓ positions are nondecreasing along the corresponding sorted order of V ′. Thus, for a
11
Πconvex
Πall
Πunit
Πsort
Π0/1
Figure 1: The Hasse diagram of the inclusion relationship among the price function families (for
a given election) that we study.
given number of shifts, bribing the voters according to the sorted order is always optimal. Many
natural price function families are sortable. For example, a list of exponential functions of the
form πi(ℓ) = aℓ
i (where each voter vi may have an individual base ai) is sortable. A list of
polynomials of the form πi(ℓ) = ai · ℓb (where the exponent b is the same for the voters having
the same preference order but each voter vi may have an individual coefficient ai) is sortable as
well.
Given an election E = (C, V ), we write Πall to mean the set of all possible price functions
for this election, Πconvex to mean the set of the lists of convex price functions, Πunit to mean
the set of the lists of unit price functions, Π0/1 to mean the set of the lists of all-or-nothing
price functions, and Πsort to mean the set of all sortable lists of price functions. We observe the
following straightforward relations between these sets (also see the Hasse diagram in Figure 1).
Proposition 1. For each given election, the following relations hold between the families of
price functions:
1. Πunit ⊂ Πconvex ⊂ Πall,
2. Π0/1 ⊂ Πsort ⊂ Πall,
3. Πunit ⊂ Πsort.
4 Parameterizations by Solution Cost Measures
In this section we present our results for parameters measuring the solution cost, i.e., for the
number of unit shifts, for the number of voters affected by at least one shift, and for the budget.
It turns out that parameterization by the number of unit shifts tends to lower complexity (FPT
algorithms for Borda and Maximin and W[1]-hardness for Copeland) than parameterization by
the number of affected voters (W[2]-hardness). The case of parameterization by the budget lies
in between, and the complexity depends on each particular price function family.
4.1 Unit Shifts
Borda Shift Bribery and Maximin Shift Bribery parameterized by the number t of unit
shifts in the solution are in FPT for arbitrary price functions. The reason is that in these cases it
is easy to isolate a small number of candidates on which one needs to focus. More precisely, we
can shrink the number of candidates as well as the number of voters to be bounded by functions
in t (in effect, achieving a partial kernelization [9]).
12
Theorem 1. Borda Shift Bribery parameterized by the number t of unit shifts is in FPT
for arbitrary price functions. The running time of the algorithm is O∗((2t · (t + 1) · t)t).
Proof. Let I = (E = (C, V ), Π, p, B) be an input instance of Borda Shift Bribery for which
we seek a shift action that uses at most t unit shifts. Our algorithm iterates over all possible
number t′ with 0 ≤ t′ ≤ t, which we interpret as the exact number of shifts used in the solution.
Under the Borda rule, applying a shift action that uses t′ unit shifts increases the score of p
to exactly scoreE(p) + t′. This means that irrespective of which shift action with t′ unit shifts
we use, if some candidate c has score at most scoreE(p) + t′ in election E, then after applying
the shift action, p will certainly have score at least as high as c. On the contrary, if in election E
some candidate c has score greater than scoreE(p) + t′, then a successful shift action must ensure
that c loses at least scoreE(c) − (scoreE(p) + t′) points. Since every unit shift decreases the score
of exactly one candidate, it follows that if there is a successful shift action that uses exactly t′
shifts, then the set C(t′) := {c ∈ C \ {p} scoreE(c) > scoreE(p) + t′} has at most t′ elements.
Our algorithm first computes the set C(t′). If C(t′) > t′, then the algorithm skips the current
iteration and continues with t′ ← t′ + 1.
By the above argument, we can focus on a small group of candidates, namely on C(t′).
Obviously, this set has at most t′ elements and can be found in linear time. Now if we only
need to brute-force search all possible shift actions among a small group of voters, whose size is
upper-bounded by a function in t′, then we obtain our desired FPT result. Indeed, the remainder
of this proof is devoted to show that only a small subset of voters (whose size is upper-bounded
by a function in t′) are relevant to search for a successful shift action and this subset can be
found in polynomial time.
We first define a subset of "relevant" voters and then show why it is enough to focus on
them. For each candidate subset C′ of C(t′) and for each number j, 0 ≤ j ≤ t′, we compute a
subset V j
C ′ of t′ voters v such that:
i) if we shift p by j positions in v's preference order, then p passes each candidate from C′
and j − C′ other candidates from C \ C(t′), and
If there are several subsets of voters that satisfy these conditions, then we pick one arbitrarily.
V j
C ′.
πv(j) is minimal.
C′
ii) Pv∈V j
We set V (t′) :=S C′ ⊆C(t′ )
0≤j≤t′
#»
If there is a shift action #»s that uses exactly t′ unit shifts and has price at most B, then
s′ that uses exactly t′ shifts, has price at most B, and affects only the
there is a shift action
voters in V (t′). To see this, assume that there is a voter vi 6∈ V (t′) and a number j such that #»s
shifts p by j positions in vi. Let C′ be the set of candidates from C(t′) that p passes if shifted j
positions in vi. By definition of V j
C ′ and by simple counting arguments, there is a voter vk ∈ V j
C ′
for which #»s does not shift p. Again, by definition of V j
C ′ , πvk (j) ≤ πvi (j). Thus, if in #»s we
replace the shift by j positions in vi by a shift of j positions in vk, then we still get a successful
shift action using exactly t′ shifts and with price no greater than that of #»s . We can repeat this
process until we obtain a successful shift action of cost at most B that affects the voters in V (t′)
only.
In effect, to find a successful shift action that uses at most t′ unit shifts, it suffices to focus on
t′ ≤
the voters from V (t′). The cardinality of V (t′) can be upper-bounded by V (t′) ≤P C′⊆C(t′ )
0≤j≤t′
13
2t′
· (t′ + 1) · t′. Since in the preference order of each voter in V (t′) we can shift p by at most
t′ positions and we can do so for at most t′ voters, there are at most V (t′)t′
shift actions that
we need to try. Moreover, V (t′) can be found in polynomial time. We can consider them all in
FPT time O∗((2t′
· (t′ + 1) · t′)t′
).
Using the ideas of the previous proof, we can transform a given election into one that includes
only f (t) candidates and g(t) voters, where f and g are two computable functions. In this way,
we obtain a so-called partial problem kernel [9, 45]. It is a partial problem kernel only since the
prices defined by the price function Π and the budget are not necessarily upper-bounded by a
function of t.
Theorem 2. An instance of Borda Shift Bribery parameterized by the number t of unit
shifts can be reduced to an equivalent instance with the same budget, and with O(t4 ·2t) candidates
and O(t3 · 2t) voters.
Proof. By the proof of Theorem 1, we know that we only need to focus on a subset Ccrit of
candidates whose size is upper-bounded by a function of the parameter t. This set Ccrit is
defined as follows:
t
Ccrit :=
C(t′),
[t′=0
where C(t′) := {c ∈ C \ {p} scoreE(c) > scoreE(p) + t′} if the number of candidates whose
scores are greater than scoreE(p) + t′ is at most t′; otherwise it will not be possible to decrease
the score of every of those candidates by at least one within t′ unit shifts, thus, C(t′) := ∅.
If n ≤ t3 · 2t, then we simply set Vcrit := V to be the set of all voters. Otherwise, from the
previous proof it follows that we only need to focus on a small group of voters from the following
set
t
Vcrit :=
V (t′),
[t′=0
where V (t′) is defined as in the proof of Theorem 1. Briefly put, V (t′) consists of the voters such
that if we shift p in some of their preference orders by a total of t′ positions, then we may make
t′=0 V (t′) when n ≥ t3 · 2t, it follows that Vcrit can
be computed in polynomial time using the straightforward algorithm in the previous proof.
p a winner. Since we only need to compute St
Clearly, Ccrit ≤ t · (t − 1)/2 and Vcrit ≤ min{n,Pt
The remaining task now is to construct an election containing all the candidates from Ccrit
and the voters from Vcrit along with their price functions such that the election size is still
upper-bounded by a function in t.
· (t′ + 1) · t′} ≤ min{n, t3 · 2t}.
t′=0 2t′
We construct the candidate set Cnew of the new election as follows: We introduce a dummy
candidate di for every candidate ci ∈ Ccrit. This dummy candidate will be used to realize the
original score difference between p and every candidate from Ccrit. We denote the set of all these
dummy candidates as D.
For each voter vi ∈ Vcrit, we need to "replace" the candidates in his or her original preference
order that do not belong to Ccrit but that are still "relevant" for the shift action. Let Ci be the set
of candidates from Ccrit that are ranked ahead of p by voter vi, that is, Ci := {c′ ∈ Ccrit c′ ≻i p}.
We introduce a new set Fj of dummy candidates whose size equals the number of irrelevant
14
candidates that rank ahead of p by no more than t positions. That is,
Fi := {c ∈ C \ Ccrit c is ranked at most t positions ahead of p by vi}.
Now, the new candidate set Cnew is set to
Cnew := Ccrit ∪ D ∪ [vi∈Vcrit
Fi.
Clearly, Cnew ≤ 2Ccrit + t · Vcrit ≤ t · (t − 1) + min{t4 · 2t, t · n}.
The new voter set V consists of two blocks:
1. The first block is constructed to maintain the score difference between p and any candi-
date cj ∈ Ccrit in the original election. To this end, let sj be this score difference. We intro-
duce sj pairs of voters with the preference orders point-pair(p, ∅, cj, dj, Cnew \ {p, cj, dj }, ·)
(see Section 2.2 for the definitions). Note that the two preference orders that are specified
by point-pair() will cause cj to have two points more than dj and one point more than any
other candidate, including p. We set their price for the first unit shift to B + 1.
2. The second part is constructed to "maintain" the important part of the voters from Vcrit.
That is, for each voter vi ∈ Vcrit, we set his or her new preference order to be
vi : hCi ∪ Fii ≻ p ≻ hCnew \ (Ci ∪ Fi ∪ {p})i,
where hCi ∪ Fii corresponds to the order of the candidates in vi's original preference order
and the price function remains unchanged. We also add a dummy voter v′
i with the reverse
preference order of vi and we set his or her price for shifting p by the first position to B + 1.
The size of the newly constructed voter set Vnew is (Pcj∈Ccrit
2sj) + 2Vcrit ≤ t · (t − 1) + t3 · 2t+1.
The equivalence of the two instances can be verified as follows: The newly added dummy
candidates, either from D or from Fi have at most the same score as p. Each candidate cj ∈ Ccrit
has exactly sj points more than p. Since it will be too expensive to bribe the voters from the
first block or the dummy voters v′
i (B + 1 budget for one unit shift), the only possibility of
shifting p within the budget B is to bribe the voters who come from the original election and
who have the "same" preference orders up to renaming of the candidates that do not belong to
Ccrit.
The fixed-parameter tractability result for Maximin Shift Bribery follows by using a
similar approach as in Theorem 1.
Theorem 3. Maximin Shift Bribery parameterized by the number t of unit shifts is in FPT
for arbitrary price functions. The running time of the algorithm is O∗((2t · (t + 1) · t)t).
Proof. Let I = (E = (C, V ), Π, p, B) be an input instance of Maximin Shift Bribery. Suppose
that, altogether, we are allowed to shift p by at most t positions. Under Maximin, such a shift
can make p gain at most t points. Just similar to the case of Borda in Theorem 1, our algorithm
iterates over all possible numbers t′ with 0 ≤ t′ ≤ t, which we interpret as the exact number of
points that p gains after a successful shift action with t unit shifts and then, in each iteration,
executes the following algorithm.
15
For each candidate c ∈ C \ {p}, if NE(p, c) < scoreE(p) + t′, then we have to shift p to pass
c in some preference orders. Since in every unit shift p passes exactly one candidate, a counting
argument shows that if there are more than t − t′ + 1 candidates c with NE(p, c) < scoreE(p) + t′,
then there is no successful shift action that uses at most t′ unit shifts. Thus the set C(t′) = {c ∈
C \ {p} NE(p, c) < scoreE(p) + t′} has at most t − t′ + 1 candidates. Hence, if C(t′) > t − t′ + 1,
then the algorithm skips the current iteration and continues with t′ ← t′ + 1.
By the above argument, it suffices to focus on a small set of candidates: the set C(t′). Using
the same reasoning as in Theorem 1 for Borda voting, it also suffices to focus on a subset V (t′)
of at most 2t · (t + 1) · t voters (we can compute this set in a way analogous to that for Borda
voting). Since we can use at most t unit shifts and, thus, we can affect at most t voters, there
are at most O∗(V (t′)t) = O∗((2t · (t + 1) · t)t) shift actions that we have to try. We can do so
in FPT time.
Using an analogous approach to construct an equivalent election as for Theorem 2, we obtain
the following.
Corollary 1. An instance of Maximin Shift Bribery parameterized by the number t of unit
shifts can be reduced to an equivalent instance with the same budget, and with O(t4 ·2t) candidates
and O(t3 · 2t) voters.
For Copeland, we do not get FPT membership, but we show W[1]-hardness even for unit prices
and for all-or-nothing prices, which implies hardness for each of our price function families.
Theorem 4. Copeland Shift Bribery parameterized by the number of unit shifts is W[1]-
hard for each price function family that we consider.
Proof. We first show the result for all-or-nothing prices which, by Proposition 1, also covers the
case of convex prices, sortable prices, and arbitrary price functions. In the second part, we deal
with unit prices.
All-or-nothing prices For the sake of completeness, fix some rational number α, 0 ≤ α ≤ 1,
for the Copeland "tie breaking"; we will see later that we will not use α since the number of
voters in the constructed instance is odd.
We give a reduction from Clique parameterized by the clique size. Let G = (V (G), E(G)) be
our input graph and let k be the clique size that we seek (we assume k > 1). Let n = V (G) and
m = E(G). Without loss of generality, assume that n is odd and that n > 6 (both assumptions
can be realized by adding several isolated vertices to the graph).
We construct an election E = (C, V ) as follows. First, we set the available budget B to be
k · (k − 1)/2. We let C = V (G) ∪ {p, d} ∪ D, where p is our preferred candidate, d is the unique
winner in E, and D is a set of 2n dummy candidates. Note that we use V (G) to denote both
the vertex set and a subset of the candidates. However, given an element in V (G) we will always
make it clear whether we mean a vertex or a candidate.
We form V so that V is odd and the following holds:
i) For each edge e = {x, y} in E(G), there are two voters ve with preference order
x ≻ y ≻ p ≻ hC \ {x, y, p}i
16
e with the reversed ordering of ve. They have all-or-nothing price functions πe, π′
e
e(j) = B + 1 for each j ≥ 0. We
and v′
such that πe(0) = 0 and πe(j) = 1 for each j > 0 and π′
set Vedges := {ve e ∈ E(G)}.
ii) There is a set Vstruct of polynomially many voters who implement the following results of
head-to-head contests (this indeed can be done by applying the classic McGarvey's theo-
rem [53]): Each candidate in V (G) wins head-to-head contests against p (by 2k − 3 voters'
preference orders) and against d (by one voter's preference order). Candidate d wins head-
to-head contests against all candidates in D (by one voters' preference order). Candidate p
wins head-to-head contests against 2n − k − 1 candidates in D and loses the remaining ones
(by one preference order); p also wins the head-to-head contest against d (by one preference
order). Each candidate in V (G) ∪ D wins exactly half of the head-to-head contests against
the other members of V (G) ∪ D (i.e., each member of V (G) ∪ D wins head-to-head contests
against exactly ⌊3n/2⌋ other members of V (G) ∪ D; recall that n is odd).
A formal definition of the preference orders of voters in Vstruct reads as follows. Let D1 ⊆ D
be a subset of k + 1 (arbitrary) candidates.
a) There is one voter with preference order hV (G) ∪ Di ≻ p ≻ d.
b) There are (k − 2) pairs of voters with preference orders
hV (G)i ≻ p ≻ d ≻ hDi and
←−−
hDi ≻ d ≻
←−−−−
hV (G)i ≻ p.
c) There are two voters with preference orders
d ≻ hDi ≻ p ≻ hV (G)i
and
←−−−−
hV (G)i ≻ p ≻ d ≻
←−−
hDi.
d) There are two voters with preference orders
p ≻ hD \ D1i ≻ hD1i ≻ hV (G)i ≻ d and
←−−−−
hV (G)i ≻
←−−
hD1i ≻ p ≻
←−−−−−−
hD \ D1i.
d ≻
e) For each candidate x ∈ V (G) ∪ D, there are two voters with preference orders
half-seq1(V (G) ∪ D, x) ≻ p ≻ d and
d ≻ p ≻ half-seq2(V (G) ∪ D, x).
(See Section 2.2 for the construction of preference orders half-seq1 and half-seq2.)
Finally, each voter in Vstruct has all-or-nothing price function π such that π(0) = 0 and
π(j) = B + 1 for each j > 0.
Note that due to the budget, we can only afford to bribe the voters in Vedges.
Prior to any bribery, p has 2n − k points, d has 2n points, and each other candidate has at
most ⌊3n/2⌋ + 2 points. This means that d is the unique winner of E. We claim that there is a
shift action #»s such that Π( #»s ) ≤ B and p is a winner of shift(E, #»s ) if and only if G has a clique
of order k.
17
Assume that there is a successful shift action that ensures p's victory. Given our price
functions, we can bribe up to k(k − 1)/2 voters in Vedges, in each case to shift p by two positions
to the top. Further, it is clear that a successful shift action must ensure that p obtains k
additional points (it is impossible to decrease the score of d). This means that there is some set
Q ⊆ V (G) with at least k candidates such that p passes each candidate from Q at least k − 1
times (if x ∈ Q and p passes x in k − 1 preference orders, then the value NE(x, p) − NE(p, x)
changes from 2k − 3 to −1 and p wins the head-to-head contest against x). Given our budget,
we can altogether shift p by t = k(k − 1) positions (each two positions correspond to an edge
in G; t is the value of our parameter). Thus Q contains exactly k candidates, in each unit shift
p passes one of them, and p passes each candidate from Q exactly k − 1 times. This is possible
if and only if candidates in Q correspond to a clique in G.
On the contrary, if Q is a set of k vertices from V (G) that form a clique, then shifting p
forward in B preference orders from Vedges that correspond to the edges of the graph induced
by Q ensures p's victory.
Unit prices The above argument can be adapted to the case of unit prices. The key trick
is to insert sufficiently many "filler" candidates directly in front of p in the preference orders
of some voters who are not intended to be affected. This simulates the effect of all-or-nothing
prices.
We again reduce from Clique parameterized by the order of the clique. The budget B
is set to 3k · (k − 1)/2. We use the same notation for the input instance (G, k) of Clique.
Without loss of generality, we assume that (n + m) is odd. We set the candidate set C to be
V (G) ∪ {p, d} ∪ D1 ∪ D2 ∪ F ∪ R where:
1. p is our preferred candidate,
2. d will be the unique winner in the constructed election E,
3. D1 is a set of 4(m + n) − (k · (k − 1)/2 + k + 1) dummy candidates,
4. D2 is a set of k · (k − 1)/2 + k + 1 dummy candidates,
5. F := F1 ∪ F2 consists of two sets of B "filler candidates" each, and
6. R := {qe e ∈ E(G)} is a set of E(G) "edge candidates".
The filler candidates are used to simulate the affect of prices higher than the budget B by
forming a "wall" of B candidates in front of p against which p wins anyway. The edge candidates
together with a budget blow-up of k · (k − 1)/2 in the score difference between d and p are used
to enforce that one has to shift p to the top position whenever one bribes a voter.
We form the voter set V as follows:
i) For each edge e = {x, y} in E(G), add two voters ve, v′
e with preference orders
ve : qe ≻ x ≻ y ≻ p ≻ hF i ≻ hC \ ({x, y, p, qe} ∪ F )i and
←−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−
hC \ ({x, y, p, qe} ∪ F )i ≻
←−−
hF i ≻ p ≻ y ≻ x ≻ qe,
v′
e :
that is, v′
e has the reversed preference order of ve. Let Vedges be the set of all voters ve.
18
ii) Add one voter with preference order
hRi ≻ hV (G)i ≻ d ≻ hD2i ≻ hF i ≻ p ≻ hD1i.
iii) Add two voters with preference orders (the boldfaced parts highlight the parts in the two
voters that do not occur reversed.)
p ≻ d ≻ hF i ≻ hC \ ({p, d} ∪ F )i
←−−−−−−−−−−−−
hC \ ({p, d} ∪ F )i ≻
←−−
hF i ≻ p ≻ d.
and
iv) Add k − 2 pairs of voters with preference orders
hV (G)i ≻ hF i ≻ p ≻ hC \ ({p} ∪ F ∪ V (G))i
←−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−
hC \ ({p} ∪ F ∪ V (G))i ≻
←−−−−
hV (G)i ≻
←−
hF i ≻ p.
and
v) Add k − 1 four tuples of voters with preference orders
p ≻ hD1i ≻ hF1i ≻ hF2i ≻ hC \ ({p} ∪ F ∪ D1)i,
←−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−
←−−
hC \ ({p} ∪ F ∪ D1)i ≻
hF1i,
p ≻ hD1i ≻ hF2i ≻ hF1i ≻ hC \ ({p} ∪ F ∪ D1)i, and
←−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−
hC \ ({p} ∪ F ∪ D1)i ≻
←−−
hF1i ≻ p ≻
←−−
hF2i ≻ p ≻
←−−
hD1i ≻
←−−
hD1i ≻
←−−
hF2i.
vi) Set A = V (G) ∪ D1 ∪ D2 ∪ R. For each candidate x ∈ A, add one pair of voters with
preference orders (see Section 2.2 for the definitions of half-seq1 and half-seq2)
half-seq1(hAi, x) ≻ hF i ≻ p ≻ d
and
d ≻ p ≻
←−−
hF i ≻ half-seq2(hAi, x).
One can check that the score difference between p and the unique winner d is k + k · (k − 1)/2,
see Table 2 for details.
Now, observe that with budget B, p can only gain any additional points by defeating can-
didates from V (G) ∪ R and by passing candidates in the preference orders of the voters in
Vedges(the candidates from F block all other possibilities). Since in the election E, each vertex
candidate ci ∈ V (G) wins against p by 2k − 3 voters and each edge candidate qe wins against
p by 1 voter, the only possibility for p to gain at least k · (k − 1)/2 additional points (within
budget B) is to win against k · (k − 1)/2 candidates from R. This means that for every successful
shift action there is some set E′ ⊆ E(G), E′ = k · (k − 1)/2 such that p was shifted to the top
position in the preference order of each the voter ve, e ∈ E′. To achieve this, the whole budget
must be used. To gain the additional k points (not from contests against candidates from R), p
must have been shifted in front of k vertex candidates k − 1 times each. This is only possible if
G[E′] induces a clique of size k.
19
candidate
d
p
∈ D1
∈ D2
∈ V (G)
∈ F
∈ R
2 + k + 1)
head-to-head contests won
4(m + n)
+ 2B
4(m + n) − ( k·(k−1)
+ 2B
+ 1
2(m + n) + ⌊(n + m)/2⌋
+ 2B
2(m + n) + ⌊(n + m)/2⌋
+ 2B
+ 1
2(m + n) + ⌊(n + m)/2⌋
+ 2B
+ 2
≤ 2B
2(m + n) + ⌊(n + m)/2⌋
+ 2B
+ 2
against
(D1 ∪ D2)
(F )
(D1)
(F )
(d)
(half of V (G) ∪ D1 ∪ D2 ∪ R)
(F )
(half of V (G) ∪ D1 ∪ D2 ∪ R)
(F )
(p)
(half of V (G) ∪ D1 ∪ D2 ∪ R)
(F )
(p and d)
(F )
(half of V (G) ∪ D1 ∪ D2 ∪ R)
(F )
(p and d)
Table 2: Head-to-head contests won in the construction. Except for the candidate d, every other
candidate wins less than 4(m + n) + 2B head-to-head contests.
4.2 Number of Affected Voters and Budget
For the number of affected voters, Shift Bribery is W[2]-hard for each of Borda, Maximin, and
Copelandα, and this is true for each family of price functions that we consider: The result for all-
or-nothing prices follows almost directly from the NP-hardness proofs due to Elkind et al. [32].
Their reductions have to be adapted to work for Set Cover (see below for the definition) rather
than its restricted variant, Exact Cover by 3-Sets [41], but this can be done quite easily.
To obtain the result for unit prices, with some effort, it is still possible to carefully modify their
proofs, maintaining their main ideas. Our proofs are included in A.
Theorem 5. Borda, Maximin, and Copeland Shift Bribery parameterized by the number
of affected voters are W[2]-hard for each price function family that we consider.
When we parameterize Shift Bribery by the available budget, the results fall between
those from Section 4.1 and Theorem 5. In essence, the hardness proofs for all-or-nothing prices
carry over from the number of affected voters case to the budget case (and this implies hardness
for arbitrary prices and sortable prices), while the results for the number of unit shifts carry
over to the setting with convex/unit prices.
The hardness results translate because in the construction for all-or-nothing prices behind
Theorem 5 the budget equals the parameter value "solution size" of the Set Cover instance
from which we reduce. The FPT results parameterized by the number of unit shifts translate
because for convex/unit prices the budget is an upper bound on the number of possible unit
shifts.
20
Corollary 2. Borda and Maximin Shift Bribery parameterized by the budget B are W[2]-
hard for arbitrary, sortable, and all-or-nothing prices, and are in FPT for convex and unit prices
with running time O∗((2B · (B + 1) · B)B).
For Copeland Shift Bribery with unit prices, the budget equals the number of unit shifts
in the reduction behind Theorem 4. This implies the following corollary.
Corollary 3. Copeland Shift Bribery parameterized by the budget is W[2]-hard for arbi-
trary, sortable, and all-or-nothing prices, and is W[1]-hard for convex and unit prices.
5 Parameterizations by Election-Size Measures
In this section we consider Shift Bribery parameterized by either the number of candidates or
the number of voters. Elections with few candidates are natural in politics (for example, there
is typically only a handful of candidates in presidential elections) and elections with few voters
arise naturally in multiagent systems
(for example, Dwork et al. [30] suggested election-based methods for aggregating results from
several web search engines; see also the work of Brandt et al. [12] and of Chen et al. [24] for
further results and motivation regarding elections with few voters). For example, Dwork et al.
[30] suggested voting-based methods for aggregating results from several web search engines.
Betzler et al. [8], Brandt et al. [12], Fellows et al. [39] considered winner determination problems
with few voters, while Chen et al. [24] considered voting control by adding alternatives with few
voters.
5.1 Number of Voters
Let us now consider Shift Bribery parameterized by the number of voters. We have not
found FPT algorithms for our rules in this setting, but we did find a general FPT-approximation
scheme. The idea of our algorithm is to use a scaling technique combined with a brute-force
search through the solution space. The scaling part of the algorithm reduces the range of prices
and then the brute-force search finds a near-optimal solution.
Theorem 6. Let R be a voting rule for which winner determination parameterized by the num-
ber n of voters is in FPT. There is a factor-(1 + ε) approximation algorithm solving R Shift
Bribery in time O∗(⌈n/ε + 1⌉n) times the cost of R's winner determination.
Proof. Let R be our voting rule and let I = (C, V, Π, p) be an instance of the optimization
version of R Shift Bribery. Further, let ε > 0 be the desired approximation parameter. We
will show how to compute a (1 + ε)-approximate solution for I.
#»
#»
We will need the following notation. For a vector
b = (b1, . . . , bn) ∈ Nn, shift action
b ) = (Π-shift1(b1), . . . , Π-shiftn(bn)) is such that for each i, 1 ≤ i ≤ n, value Π-shifti(bi)
Π-shift(
is the largest number ti such that πi(ti) ≤ bi. In other words, Π-shift(
b ) is the shift action that
shifts p in each voter vi's preference order as much as possible, without exceeding the per-voter
budget limit bi.
#»
Let m = C and n = V . The algorithm works as follows. First, we guess a voter vi ∈ V and
a number j ∈ [m]. We set πmax = πi(j). We interpret πmax as the cost of the most expensive
21
shift within the optimal solution. (Note that there are only n · m choices of vi and j). We
set K = ε · πmax/n and define a list Π′ of n price functions as follows. For each vi ∈ V and
j ∈ {0, . . . , m}, we set
π′
i(j) =(l πi(j)
K m
n·(n+1)
ε
if πi(j) ≤ πmax
+ 1 otherwise.
We form an instance I ′ = (C, V, Π′, p). Note that for each i, 1 ≤ i ≤ n, and each j, 0 ≤ j ≤ m,
we have that if πi(j) ≤ πmax then π′
i(j) ≤ n/ε + 1.
We compute (if there exists one) a lowest-cost shift action
s′ for I ′ that ensures p's victory
and does not use shifts that cost n · (n + 1)/ε + 1. We can do so by considering all vectors
b = (b1, . . . , bn) where each bi is in {0, . . . , ⌈n/ε⌉}: For each
b we check if p is an R-winner of
shift(E, Π′-shift(
b ). We take s′ to denote the cheapest stored
shift action (we make an arbitrary choice if there are several stored shift actions of the same
cost; if there is no stored shift action then it means that our guess of πmax was incorrect). This
process requires considering O(⌈n/ε + 1⌉n) shift actions.
b )) and, if so, we store Π′-shift(
#»
#»
#»
#»
#»
After trying each guess for πmax, we return the cheapest successful shift action s′ that we
obtained. We claim that this shift action has cost at most (1 + ε) · OPT(I).
Consider an iteration where the guess of πmax is correct. Let K, Π′, and s′ be as in that
iteration and let s be a lowest-cost successful shift action for I (i.e., p is an R-winner of shift(E, s)
and Π(s) = OPT(I)). We have the following inequalities:
Π(s′) ≤ K · Π′(s′) ≤ K · Π′(s) ≤ Π(s) + K · n ≤ Π(s) + ε · πmax.
The first inequality follows because of the rounding in Π′, the second inequality follows because
s′ is optimal for I ′, the third inequality follows because for each i, 1 ≤ i ≤ n, and each j,
0 ≤ j ≤ m, K · ⌈πi(j)/K⌉ ≤ πi(j) + K, and the final equality follows by the definition of K.
Since πmax ≤ OPT(I) and by the above inequalities, we have:
Π(s′) ≤ Π(s) + ε · πmax ≤ (1 + ε) · OPT(I).
Thus the algorithm returns a (1 + ε)-approximate solution. Our estimates of the running time
given throughout the analysis justify that the algorithm runs in FPT time.
Is it possible to obtain full-fledged FPT algorithms for the parameterization by the number
of voters? For the case of all-or-nothing price functions, we do provide a very simple FPT
algorithm, but for the other price-function classes this is impossible (under the assumption that
FPT 6= W[1]).
Proposition 2. Let R be a voting rule for which winner determination parameterized by the
number of voters is in FPT. R Shift Bribery parameterized by the number of voters is in FPT
for all-or-nothing prices.
Proof. Note that with all-or-nothing prices, it suffices to consider shift actions where for each
voter's preference order we either shift the preferred candidate to the top or do not shift him or
her at all. Thus, given an election with n voters it suffices to try each of the 2n shift actions of
this form.
22
For Copeland we show W[1]-hardness already for the case of unit prices, via a somewhat
involved reduction from a variant of the Clique problem. For Borda the same result holds
due to a very recent argument of Bredereck et al. [21] (and one can verify that their technique
generalizes to the case of Maximin).
Theorem 7. Copeland Shift Bribery parameterized by the number of voters is W[1]-hard
for unit prices.
Proof. We give a reduction from Multicolored Clique-a variant of Clique which, given an
undirected graph G = (V (G), E(G)), a non-negative integer k ≥ 0, and a coloring col : V (G) →
[k], asks whether G contains a size-k multicolored clique Q ⊆ V (G), that is size-k vertex sub-
set Q ⊆ V (G) such that the vertices in Q are pairwise adjacent and have pairwise distinct colors.
We assume in the following that G is regular, that is, all vertices have the same degree, and
the coloring is proper, that is, there are no edges between vertices of the same color. Note that
even this restricted variant of Multicolored Clique parameterized by the clique size k is
W[1]-hard [52].
Observe that in the given Multicolored Clique instance (G, k, col), a multicolored clique
contains exactly one vertex of color i for each i ∈ [k]. We exploit this fact in our reduction which
we now describe at high level: For each color i ∈ [k] there is a color-gadget consisting of two
voters v2i−1 and v2i. Each possible combination of shifting p in the preference orders of these
two voters will refer to a selection of one vertex of color i. Each edge in E(G) is represented
by one candidate; we call all candidates representing edges edge candidates. In the constructed
election, our preferred candidate p loses all head-to-head contests against the edge candidates
and has a score difference of (cid:0)k
order to make p a winner, p has to win head-to-head contests against at least(cid:0)k
2(cid:1) with the original winner d. With some technical gadget, in
2(cid:1) edge candidates
after the shifting. Furthermore, to win in a head-to-head contest against the edge candidate
representing edge {x, y}, one has to "select" x and y in the respective color-gadgets. Thus,
if p can be made a winner, then the corresponding selected vertices in the color-gadgets form a
multicolored clique. We now describe the construction in detail.
First, set nG = V (G) and mG = E(G), and let ∆ be the vertex degree in the regular
graph G, implying mG = ∆ · nG/2. Furthermore, for each i ∈ [k], let ℓi denote the number of
vertices with color i. We start with initially empty sets V of voters and C of candidates. First,
add to C the preferred candidate p and the candidate d. Candidate d will be the unique winner
in the original election. Then, we extend the set C of candidates by adding
i) for each color i ∈ [k] and each index j ∈ [ℓi + 1], add a set S(i)
j
of 2n3
j
G filler candidates; we say that S(i)
and a set F (i)
colored i if j ≤ ℓi.
Let S be the set of all selection candidates and let F be the set of all filler candidates.
For each color i ∈ [k], define S(i)
· ; equivalently,
·
define F (i)
·
and define S(−i)
j=1 S(i)
:= F \ F (i)
· ;
and define F (−i)
:= Sℓi
:= S \ S(i)
·
of n3
G selection candidates
corresponds to the jth vertex with
j
j=1 F (i)
j
:=Sℓi
ii) for each edge e ∈ E(G), add an edge candidate ce; we say that ce corresponds to edge e.
Denote by Redges the set of all edge candidates. For each color i ∈ [k] and each index j ∈ [ℓi],
we denote by R(i)
the set of edge candidates corresponding to the edges that are incident to
j
j
·
23
the jth vertex with color i. Accordingly, we define R(i)
·
:= Sj∈[ℓi] R(i)
j and define R(−i)
:=
·
Si′∈[k]\{i} R(i′)
·
;
iii) add three sets of dummy candidates, denoted by D1, D2, D3, each of size n5
G.
Define D := D1 ∪ D2 ∪ D3. Accordingly, for each i ∈ [3], we define D−i := D \ Di.
G ·Pk
i=1(ℓi + 1) + mG + 3n5
Note that C = 3n3
Next, we specify the voters. The voter set V consists of 2k + 3 voters: v2i−1, v2i for all i ∈ [k]
and v2k+1, v2k+2, v2k+3. The first 2k voters form the k color-gadgets as mentioned above. The
last three voters are necessary to obtain the desired scores. We begin with the color-gadgets. For
each color i ∈ [k], we first specify the "interesting" part of the preference orders of voters v2i−1
and v2i by setting
G = 3(k + nG + n2
G + mG.
G) · n3
hP2i−1i := hS(i)
hP2ii := hS(i)
ℓi
2 i ≻ hR(i)
i ≻ hR(i)
ℓi
1 i ≻ hF (i)
i ≻ hF (i)
ℓi
2 i ≻ . . . ≻ hS(i)
i ≻ . . . ≻ hS(i)
ℓi+1i ≻ hR(i)
1 i ≻ hR(i)
i ≻ hF (i)
1 i ≻ hF (i)
ℓi
1 i ≻ p.
ℓi+1i ≻ p,
Note that both hP2i−1i as well as hP2ii have exactly ℓi · (3n3
"interesting" parts, we specify the preference orders of voters v2i−1 and v2i as
G + ∆) + 1 candidates. Having these
1 i ≻ hD1i ≻ hP2i−1i ≻ hD−1i ≻ hS(−i)
·
∪ R(−i)
·
←−−
hD1i ≻ d ≻
i ≻ hF (−i)
i,
←−−−−
hF (−i)
i.
·
1 i ≻ hF (i)
d ≻ hS(i)
←−−−−−−−−−−
hS(−i)
∪ R(−i)
i ≻ hS(i)
·
·
Let R ⊆ Redges be a set of (cid:0)k
←−−−−
hD−1i ≻ hP2ii ≻
ℓi+1i ≻
ℓi+1i ≻ hF (i)
2(cid:1) arbitrary edge candidates and let R′ := Redges \ R be the set
·
consisting of the remaining edge candidates. To complete V , we set the preference orders of
voters v2k+1, v2k+2, and v2k+3 as
d ≻ hRedgesi ≻ hD1i ≻ p ≻ hD−1i ≻ hS ∪ F i,
hR′i ≻ d ≻ hRi ≻ hD2i ≻ p ≻ hD−2i ≻ hS ∪ F i,
hS ∪ F i ≻ hRedgesi ≻ hD3i ≻ p ≻ hD−3i ≻ d.
Finally, set the budget B := (nG + k) · (3n3
the construction (recall that we consider unit prices).
G + ∆) and the election E := (C, V ). This completes
Before showing the correctness of the construction we determine the score of each candidate.
Recall that the score of candidate d in Copeland for odd number of voters is equal to the
number of candidates against whom d wins the head-to-head contests. To this end, let cd ∈ D,
let cu ∈ S ∪ F , and let ce ∈ Redges with e being an edge incident to the rth vertex of color i and
24
the sth vertex of color j. The scores are:
scoreE(d) = C \ R′ − 1 = C −
∆ · nG
2
+(cid:18)k
2(cid:19) − 1,
∆ · nG
2
∆ · nG
2
s ∪ S(j)
s+1) − 1
scoreE(p) = C \ (Redges ∪ S) − 1 = C −
− n3
G · (nG + k) − 1,
scoreE(cd) < C \ Redges − 1 = C −
− 1 < scoreE(c),
scoreE(ce) ≤ C \ (S(i)
= C − 4n4
r+1 ∪ S(j)
r ∪ S(i)
G − 1 < scoreE(c),
scoreE(cu) ≤ C \ (D1 ∪ {d}) − 1 < C − n5
G < scoreE(c).
G +(cid:0)k
Hence, candidate d is the unique winner with score C − ∆ · nG/2 +(cid:0)k
2(cid:1) − 1 and p needs (nG +
2(cid:1) additional points to become a winner. Observe that in each preference order, when
k) · n3
d beats p, it is at least n5
G > B positions ahead of p. Hence, during the shifting of p the score
of d cannot be decreased, implying that p can only win by increasing its score. This can only
happen if p wins against candidates in Redges ∪ S. Furthermore, note that for all cu ∈ S and
all ce ∈ Redges, it holds that
NE(ce, p) = NE(p, ce) + 7,
NE(cu, p) = NE(p, cu) + 1.
In particular, this means that p has to pass cu in just one voter's preference order in order to
win against cu. To win the contest against ce, however, p has to pass ce in at least four voters'
preference orders. Furthermore, the number of selection candidates is much higher than the
number of edge candidates. Hence, p has to be shifted over basically all selection candidates to
obtain the necessary points. Because of the distribution of the selection candidates, it follows
that the only way of winning against all selection candidates is to spend (ℓi+1)·(3n3
G+∆) shifts in
each pair of voters v2i−1, v2i. This means that for each color i, we can select exactly one vertex of
index j ∈ [ℓi] such that p passes in v2i−1's and in v2i's preference orders all candidates from R(i)
j ,
implying that p wins against all edge candidates with the corresponding edges incident to the
jth vertex of color i. Thus, if p wins against (cid:0)k
describe a multicolored clique in G.
2(cid:1) edge candidates, then the corresponding edges
We now formalize this idea when proving the correctness of our construction: (G, k, col) is a
yes-instance of Multicolored Clique if and only if (E, p, B) is a yes-instance of Copeland
Shift Bribery with unit prices.
"⇒:" Let Q ⊆ V (G) be a size-k multicolored clique. We construct a shift-action mak-
ing p a winner in shift(E, #»s ) with at most B shifts. To this end let Q = {u(1)
} be
the multicolored clique such that for each i ∈ [k], ui
ji is the jith vertex of color i. For each
color i ∈ [k], perform the following shifts in v2i−1's and v2i's preference orders: Shift p in v2i−1's
preference order directly in front of the first candidate in hS(i)
ji+1i and shift p in v2i's preference
order directly in front of the first candidate in hS(i)
ji i. We perform no shifts in the last three
preference orders. This completes the description of #»s . First, observe that altogether these
are (nG + k) · (3n3
G + ∆) = B shifts. Next, observe that p passes in v2i−1's preference order all
j1 , . . . , u(k)
jk
25
ji, uh
ji , uh
jh } with ui
r=ji
r . Recall that for all cu ∈ S(i)
Altogether p gains (nG + k) · n3
winner in shift(E, #»s ).
selection candidates from Sℓi
tion candidates fromSr∈[ji] S(i)
S(i)
r+1. Furthermore, p passes in v2i's preference order all selec-
· , we have NE(cu, p) = NE(p, cu)+1.
This implies that p wins in shift(E, #»s ) against all selection candidates. Furthermore, note that
for each edge e = {ui
jh ∈ Q, p also passes ce in the preference orders of
ji and ce ∈ R(h)
voters v2i−1, v2i, v2j−1, and v2j as ce ∈ R(i)
. As NE(ce, p) = NE(p, ce) + 7 for
each ce ∈ C(E(G)), p wins against the (cid:0)k
2(cid:1) edge candidates corresponding to the edges in G[Q].
G +(cid:0)k
2(cid:1) additional points after the shifting and, hence, p is a
G + (cid:0)k
2(cid:1) points through the shifting. As p already wins in
that p gains at least (nG + k) · n3
the original election E against all dummy candidates in D and as D1 = D2 = D3 > B,
by the construction of the preference orders, we can assume that p is shifted in no preference
order from the last three voters, and that p is shifted at most ℓi · (3n3
G + ∆) positions in v2i−1's
or v2i's preference order, that is, s2k+1 = s2k+2 = s2k+3 = 0, s2i−1 ≤ ℓi · (3n3
G + ∆), and s2i ≤
ℓi · (3n3
"⇐:" Let #»s = (s1, . . . , s2k+3) be a shift action making p a winner in shift(E, #»s ). This means
jh
G + ∆).
We next show that, for each color i there is at most one vertex of color i such that p is
shifted in v2i−1's and in v2i's preference orders over some edge candidates corresponding to this
vertex's incident edges. In other words, if p wins in shift(E, #»s ) against the edge candidates ce1
and ce2 with e1 = {x1, y1} and e2 = {x2, y2} such that x1 and x2 are both colored with i,
then x1 = x2. Suppose for the sake of contradiction that p wins in shift(E, #»s ) against the
edge candidates ce1 and ce2 such that e1 = {x1, y1}, e2 = {x2, y2}, x1 and x2 are both colored
with i, and x1 6= x2. A lower bound for s2i−1 + s2i under this assumption can be seen as
follows. Recall that in order to make p a winner one must shift p over each selection candidate
from S(i)
· . This can only be done by shifting p at least once (in v2i−1 or v2i) over each of
altogether ℓi · (3n3
· . Furthermore, at least two
sets of filler candidates (each containing 2n3
G candidates and corresponding either to x1 or to
x2) and the two edge candidates ce1 and ce2 have to be passed by p a second time. Hence,
s2i−1 + s2i ≥ ℓi · (3n3
G − ∆ + 2. Thus, the remaining
budget B′ is:
G + ∆) candidates from X (i) := S(i)
G + 2 = (ℓi + 1) · (3n3
G + ∆) + 4n3
· ∪ R(i)
· ∪ F (i)
G + ∆) + n3
B′ = Xj∈[k]\{i}
s2j−1 + s2j
= B − (s2i−1 + s2i)
≤ (nG + k) · (3n3
= − (n3
G − ∆ + 2) + (3n3
G + ∆) − (ℓi + 1) · (3n3
G + ∆) − n3
G + ∆ − 2
G + ∆) · Xj∈[k]\{i}
(ℓj + 1)
The first equation holds since s2k+1 = s2k+2 = s2k+3 = 0, To see the second equation and the
inequality apply the definitions of B′ and B and the above discussed lower bound for s2i−1 + s2i.
Next, observe that in order to win in shift(E, #»s ), p has to win head-to-head contests against
at least S − mG selection candidates. This implies that for each j ∈ [k], at least (ℓj + 1) ·
(3n3
G + ∆) − mG unit shifts in the color-gadget for color j are needed. The number of required
26
unit shifts sum up to:
Xj∈[k]\{i}
((ℓj + 1) · (3n3
G + ∆) − mG)
G + ∆) · Xj∈[k]\{i}
G + ∆) · Xj∈[k]\{i}
= − (k − 1) · mG + (3n3
(ℓj + 1)
> − (n3
G − ∆ + 2) + (3n3
(ℓj + 1).
G/2 <
G/2 − ∆ + 2. Finally, it follows that the number of additional shifts needed to make p a
To see the last inequality recall that mG = ∆ · nG/2 and k < nG and observe that ∆ · n2
∆ · n3
winner exceeds the remaining budget B′; a contradiction.
Next, we show how to construct a multicolored clique given the shift-action #»s that makes p
a winner. Denote by X the set of edge candidates against whom p wins already in shift(E, #»s ),
let E(X) be the corresponding set of edges, and let V (X) be the vertices incident to these edges,
that is, V (X) =Se∈E(X) e. We now prove that V (X) forms a multicolored clique of size k. We
already showed above that for each pair e1 = {x1, y1} ∈ E(X) and e2 = {x2, y2} ∈ E(X) such
that x1 and x2 are both colored with i it follows that x1 = x2. Hence, V (X) contains at most
one vertex of each color, implying that V (X) ≤ k. Even though we assume that p wins against
all selection candidates in shift(E, #»s ), p has to further win against at least (cid:0)k
2(cid:1) edge candidates
in shift(E, #»s ) in order to have the same score as d and win the election. Hence, E(X) ≥(cid:0)k
2(cid:1).
Thus, V (X) forms a clique of size exactly k in G. Since for each color there is at most one vertex
in V (X) and there are k colors and thus V (X) is multicolored.
Since determining the winner under the Copeland rule can be done in polynomial-time, the
above W[1]-hardness result shows that unless unlikely complexity class collapses occur, it is
impossible to improve Theorem 6 to provide an exact FPT algorithm. Since the publication
of our conference paper [15], Bredereck et al. [21] complemented our W[1]-hardness result by
showing that for the Borda and maximin rules, Shift Bribery parameterized by the number
of voters is W[1]-hard.
5.2 Number of Candidates
As opposed to almost all other (unweighted) election problems ever studied in computational
social choice, for Shift Bribery (and for bribery problems in general) the parameterization
by the number of candidates is one of the most notorious ones. In other election problems, the
natural, standard attack is to give integer linear program (ILP) formulations and use Lenstra's
algorithm [49]. For instance, this has been applied to winner determination [2], control [36],
possible winner [7, 17], and lobbying [16] problems. This works because with m candidates
there are at most m! different preference orders and we can have a variable for each of them in
the ILP. However, in our setting this approach fails. The reason is that in bribery problems the
voters are not only described by their preference orders, but also by their prices. This means that
we cannot easily lump together a group of voters with the same preference orders anymore, and
we have to treat each of them individually (however, for the case of sortable and all-or-noting
price function families, Bredereck et al. [18] found a novel way of employing the ILP approach
to obtain FPT algorithms).
27
Dorn and Schlotter [28] have already considered the complexity of Swap Bribery parame-
terized by the number of candidates. However, their proof implicitly assumes that each voter has
the same price function and, thus, it implies that Shift Bribery (parameterized by the num-
ber m of candidates) is in FPT for unit prices, but not necessarily for the other families of price
functions. Whenever the number of different prices or different price functions is upper-bounded
by some constant or, at least, by some function only depending on m, Dorn and Schlotter's
approach can be adapted.
For the more general price function families (i.e., for convex and arbitrary price functions),
we were neither able to find alternative FPT attacks nor to find hardness proofs (which, due to
the limited number of candidates one can use and the fact that the voters are unweighted, seem
particularly difficult to design). However, as in the case of parameterization by the number of
voters (Theorem 6), we can show that there is an FPT-approximation scheme for the number of
candidates when the prices are sortable.
Theorem 8. Let R be a voting rule for which winner determination parameterized by the num-
ber m of candidates is in FPT. There is a factor-(1 + 2ε + ε2) approximation algorithm solving
R Shift Bribery for sortable prices in time O∗(M M·⌈ln(M/ε)⌉+1) (where M = m · m!) times
the cost of R's winner determination.
Proof. Let I = (C, V, Π, p) be an instance of (the optimization variant of) R Shift Bribery
with Π being sortable, and let ε > 0 be a rational number. We show how to compute a successful
shift action #»s for I such that Π(s) ≤ (1 + ε) · OPT. Our algorithm will have FPT running time
for the combined parameter number of candidates and ε.
Before we start with the algorithm, we describe a helpful interpretation of solutions for
R Shift Bribery with sortable prices. We call a set of voters all having the same preference
order a voter block. Let m′ ≤ m! denote the number of voter blocks in our election. We assume
that the voters from each voter block appear consecutively and are ordered according to the
price of shifting p to the top position (if they did not, then we could sort them in this way).
Using the fact that the price function list Π in I is sortable, simple exchange arguments show
that there is a successful minimum-cost shift action #»s such that for each two voters vi and vj
from the same block, it holds that i < j implies si ≥ sj. Informally, this means that for each
two voters with the same preference order, one never shifts p farther in the preference order of
the more expensive voter.
Based on the above observation, we can conveniently express shift actions for our election
m−1,
1, . . . , µ1
1 , . . . , µm′
m−1, µ2
m−1) is a vector of natural numbers, such that for each x ∈ [m′], µx
in an alternative way. We say that a stepwise shift action #»µ = (µ1
. . . , µm′
m−1
describe the shifts p makes in the block x in the following way: for each y ∈ [m − 1], µx
y is the
number of voters in the x'th block for whom we shift p by at least y positions. More precisely,
we define s-shift(E, #»µ ) to be the election E′ = (C, V ′) identical to E, except that p has been
shifted forward in µx
y voters of block x by at least y positions. Moreover, a stepwise shift action
#»µ is valid if for each x ∈ [m′], y ∈ [m − 2] it holds that µx
y . Informally, a stepwise shift
action is valid if one never shifts p by at least y + 1 positions without first having it shifted by
at least y positions. A stepwise shift action is successful if p is an R-winner in s-shift(E, #»µ ).
Every valid stepwise shift action can be translated into a shift action.
1, . . . , µ2
0 , . . . , µx
y+1 ≤ µx
The above notion is crucial for understanding our algorithm. Thus, let us give a concrete
example (see Figure 2). Assume that we have four voters, all in the same voter block. The first
28
v1 1 1 1 p 3
v2 4 2 1 p 7
v3 3 3 3 p 3
v4 6 4 6 p 0
5 3 5
shift action: (3, 3, 1, 0)
stepwise shift action: (3, 2, 2)
budget distribution: (3, 7, 3, 0)
stepwise budget distribution: (5, 3, 5)
Figure 2: Illustration of the shift action (3, 3, 1, 0) restricted to a specific voter block, where p
ranks fourth in the common preference order. The price functions are π1(j) = j, π2(j) = 2j − 1,
π3(j) = 3j, and π4(j) = j2 + j + 4 with j < 4. The voters are sorted descending with respect to
their price functions, that is, for any 1 ≤ j ≤ 4 and 1 ≤ i < i′ ≤ 4 it holds that πi(j) ≤ πi′ (j).
Each row in the matrix represents one voter. The entry j cells left of p contains the price for
moving p from position 4 − j + 1 to position 4 − j. The cell in row i and column 4 − j is
marked gray if we shift p by j positions in voter i's preference order. Counting the number of
marked cells row-wise gives the shift action. Summing up the costs row-wise gives the budget
distribution. Summing up the costs column-wise gives the stepwise budget distribution.
#»
#»
one has price function π1(j) = j, the second one has price function π2(j) = 2j − 1, the third
one has price function π3(j) = 3j, and the fourth one has price function π4(j) = j2 + j + 4. For
b = (6, 4, 9, 0), Π-s-shift(
b ) is a stepwise shift action (3, 2, 2, 0, . . .): We can spend the 6 units
of budget on shifting p forward by at least one position and this suffices to shift p forward for
the first, second, and third voter. Note that, the cost is actually 5 units. For these three voters,
we have 4 units of budget to shift p further. This is enough to shift p one position up in the
preference orders of the first and the second voter (the actual cost of this operation is 3). Finally,
for these two voters, we have 9 units of budget to shift p forward by one more position. This
costs 3 for both voters and so we, again, shift p forward by one more position in the preference
orders of the first and second voter. Even though we have 6 units of budget left, we do not use
them on anything (in particular, we do not try to spend them on the third voter). The stepwise
budget distribution corresponding to the stepwise shift action is (5, 3, 5).
#»
Let
b = (b1
1, . . . , b1
m−1, b2
1, . . . , b2
#»
m−1, . . . , bm′
1 , . . . , bm′
m−1) be a vector (intuitively, the entries
in this vector should sum up to the amount of money that we wish to spend). We define
the stepwise shift action Π-s-shift(
1), . . . ,
m−1), . . . , Π-s-shift(bm′
Π-s-shift(b2
m−1)) such that for each x ∈ [m′], y ∈ [m−1]
it holds that Π-s-shift(bx
y such that the cost of shifting p in the preference
orders of tx
y voters of block x by y positions (provided that they have already been shifted by
y − 1 positions) is at most bx
y′ , for all y′ ∈ [m − 2]). Note that the last condition
ensures that Π-s-shift(
b ) can be computed in
polynomial time.
b ) = (Π-s-shift(b1
1 ), . . . , Π-s-shift(bm′
b ) is valid. It is not hard to verify that Π-s-shift(
y ) is the largest number tx
1), . . . , Π-s-shift(b1
m−1), Π-s-shift(b2
y (and tx
y′+1 ≤ tx
#»
#»
We are now ready to sketch the idea behind the main component of our algorithm (we present
the formal proof later), namely behind Algorithm 1. Given an ǫ > 0 and a budget B, if it is
possible to ensure p's victory by spending at most B units of budget, the algorithm computes a
shift-action with cost at most ≤ (1 + ε) · B. The algorithm consists of two parts: an FPT time
exhaustive search part (realized by the function Search), and an approximation and verification
part (realized by the bottom loop of the algorithm). If there is a successful stepwise shift action
29
Algorithm 1: FPT approximation scheme for Shift Bribery parameterized by the number of
candidates.
Parameters:
(C, V, Π, p, B) - input Shift Bribery instance
R - voting rule
m′ - the number of voter blocks
m - the number of candidates
ε - approximation parameter
Search( #»q = (q1, . . . , qM ), Q, t):
if t = 0 then
return { #»q } ;
R ← {} ;
foreach i ∈ [M ] do
#»
q′ ← (q1, . . . , qi−1, qi + Q
M
q′, Q − Q
R ← R ∪ Search(
M
#»
, qi+1, . . . , qM ) ;
, t − 1) ;
return R ;
M ← m′ · (m − 1);
R ← Search((0, . . . , 0), B, M · ⌈ln( M
foreach
#»
ε )⌉ + 1) ;
b′ ∈ R do
b′ + ( ε
#»
# »
b′′ ←
M · B, . . . , ε
M · B) ;
if p is R-winner in s-shift(E, Π-s-shift(
b′′)) then
return shift action corresponding to Π-s-shift(
# »
b′′);
# »
return "no";
#»
#»
#»
#»
b . Observe that at least one entry in
b whose entries sum up to B
of cost B = OPT(I), then there is a stepwise budget distribution
b ) is a successful stepwise shift action. The algorithm tries to find this
and such that Π-s-shift(
b must be greater than or equal to B/(m′ · (m − 1))
vector
(that is, to the average value of the entries). Search simply guesses the correct entry and repeats
this procedure recursively with the remaining budget. Doing this, it guesses the entries to which
it allocates smaller and smaller chunks of the budget (perhaps adding funds to the entries that
already received some part of the budget), until it distributes a "major part" of the budget
(never in any entry exceeding the corresponding value from
b ). Then, the algorithm turns to
the approximation part: It simply increases every entry in the vector by whatever was left of
the budget. In effect, we find a vector such that every entry matches or exceeds that of
b but
the total price is not much greater than B. The only problem with this approach is that we do
not know OPT(I). However, we will see that trying a certain small number of different budget
values B suffices.
#»
#»
We now move on to the formal proof. We will first show that for each integer B, if I(B) =
(C, V, Π, p, B) is a yes-instance of R Shift Bribery with sortable prices, m candidates, and
m′ different voter blocks, then Algorithm 1 computes in O∗((m′ · m)m′·m·⌈ln(m′·m/ε)⌉+1 · w(m))
time (where w(m) is the exponential part of the running time needed for winner determination)
a successful shift action #»s for I such that Π( #»s ) ≤ (1 + ε)B.
Let M = m′ · (m − 1). It is easy to verify the running time of Algorithm 1 which comes from
the exhaustive search of depth M ·⌈ln(M/ε)⌉+1 in Search. To see that it indeed gives the desired
answer, assume that I(B) is a yes-instance and let
m−1) be
m−1, . . . , bm′
1, . . . , b2
1, . . . , b1
m−1, b2
b = (b1
#»
30
a vector such that Px∈[m′],y∈[m−1] bx
y = B, and Π-s-shift(b) is a successful stepwise shift action.
We observe that, by the pigeonhole principle, there are x ∈ [m′], y ∈ [m−1], such that bx
y ≥ B/M .
Search tries each choice of x and y and then repeats this process recursively for M ·⌈ln(M/ε)⌉+1
m−1)
steps. This means that there is a vector
among those in R such that:
m−1, . . . , b′m′
1 , . . . , b′m′
1, . . . , b′1
1, . . . , b′2
m−1, b′2
b′ = (b′1
#»
(a) for each x ∈ [m′], y ∈ [m − 1] it holds that b′x
y ≤ bx
y , and
(b) B −Px∈[m′],y∈[m−1] b′x
y < B(1 − 1
M )M·ln M
ε < B · e− ln M
ε = ε
M · B.
Thus, for each x ∈ [m′], y ∈ [m − 1] it holds that b′′x
is a vector computed by Search. Now, Π-s-shift(
ensuring that Π-s-shift(
value in Π-s-shift(
b′′
b′′) is a successful stepwise shift action. Even
b′′) is valid will not decrease any component below the corresponding
b′′) is at most (1 + ε) · B.
b ). The cost of Π-s-shift(
y + B · ε/M ≥ bx
y . Recall that
y = b′x
#»
#»
#»
#»
#»
Now we can compute an approximate solution for I as follows. We start by considering shift
action Π-shift(0, . . . , 0) and output it if it is successful. Otherwise, we run Algorithm 1 for each
budget (1 + ε)i, for i = 0, 1, 2, . . . and output the first successful shift action that it outputs.
Note that if the cost of some cheapest successful shift action for I is B, then after O(ln B)
iterations the procedure above will find a budget B′ such that B ≤ B′ < (1 + ε) · B. For this B′,
Algorithm 1 will output a successful shift action with cost at most (1 + ε) · B′ ≤ (1 + ε)2 · B =
(1 + 2ε + ε2) · B. This shows that our algorithm is indeed an approximation scheme. It remains
to show that it runs in FPT time (parameterized by the number of candidates). To see this, it
suffices to note that O(ln B) = O(ln(Π(m, . . . , m))) = O(I) and that Algorithm 1 runs in FPT
time.
Since the publication of our original findings [15], Bredereck et al. [18] have improved upon
our FPT-AS result stated in Theorem 8, using mixed integer linear programs to show membership
in FPT. Their approach relies on the fact that the fixed-parameter tractability result of ILP
Feasibility parameterized by the number of variables [48] also holds for mixed integer linear
programs, where the number of integer-valued variables is upper-bounded by a function in the
parameter but the number of real-valued variables is not restricted (i.e., the number of real-
valued variables is polynomial in the size of the input). Nonetheless, they also use a number of
insights from the above algorithm.
Adopting some of the ideas of the above proof, we obtain the following XP algorithm for Shift
Bribery with arbitrary price functions. The corresponding algorithm relies on the fact that for
a set of voters with the same preference orders, finding a subset of q voters who shift p higher
by exactly the same number j of positions and who have the minimum price is polynomial-time
solvable.
Theorem 9. Let R be a voting rule whose winner determination procedure is in XP when
parameterized by the number m of candidates. R Shift Bribery parameterized by m is in XP
for each price function family that we consider. The algorithm runs in time O∗((nm)m!) times
the cost of R's winner determination.
Proof. Let R be a voting rule whose winner determination procedure is in XP when parameter-
ized by the number of candidates. We give an XP algorithm for R Shift Bribery.
31
Let I = (C, V, Π, p) be an input instance of R Shift Bribery. Let n be the number of
voters and let m be the number of candidates in E = (C, V ). Each voter has one of m! possible
preference orders and we partition V into vectors V 1, . . . , V m! of voters with the same preference
orders. Our algorithm works as follows:
1. For each ℓ, 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ m!, guess a vector
#»
qℓ = (qℓ
0, . . . , qℓ
m) of nonnegative integers that sum
up to (cid:12)(cid:12)V ℓ(cid:12)(cid:12). For each guessed list of vectors do the following:
(a) Compute the cheapest shift action #»s such that for each ℓ, 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ m!, and for each
j, 0 ≤ j ≤ m, there are exactly qℓ
j voters in V ℓ for whom we shift p by exactly j
positions. If such a shift action does not exist then move on to another guess in the
preceding step of the algorithm. (Below we describe precisely how to implement this
step.)
(b) If p is an R-winner of shift(E, #»s ) then store #»s as a successful shift action.
2. Return the cheapest stored successful shift action.
Since, in essence, the algorithm tries all interesting shift actions, it is clear that it is correct.
We now show that it is possible to implement it to run in XP time with respect to the number
of voters.
In the first step, the algorithm has O((nm)m!) possible guesses so we can try them all.
qm! in step (1a). Let ℓ be some
However, it is not clear how to implement given vectors
integer, 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ m!. We will show how to compute the part of #»s that implements
q1, . . . ,
#»
qℓ.
#»
# »
We solve the problem by reducing it to an instance of a variant of Min Cost/Max Flow
problem where, in addition to the standard formulation, we are also allowed to put lower bounds
on the amount of flow traveling through some edges (we call these values demands; this problem
is well-known to be polynomial-time solvable [1]).
Let us rename the voters in V ℓ so that V ℓ = (v1, . . . , vr) for some r ∈ N. We form the
following flow network for Min Cost/Max Flow. We let the set N of vertices be {s, t} ∪
{v1, . . . , vr} ∪ {0, . . . , m}. Vertices s and t are, respectively, the source and the sink. Vertices
v1, . . . , vr form the first layer in the flow network and correspond to the voters in V ℓ. Vertices
0, . . . , m form the second layer in the network and correspond to the extent to which p should
be shifted (in a given group of voters). We have the following edges:
1. For each i, 1 ≤ i ≤ r, there is an edge with unit capacity and zero cost from s to vi.
2. For each i, 1 ≤ i ≤ r and each j, 0 ≤ j ≤ m, there is an edge with unit capacity and cost
πi(j) from vi to j (πi is vi's price function).
3. For each j, 0 ≤ j ≤ m, there is an edge from j to t with capacity and demand qℓ
j and
zero cost (the setting of capacity and demand means that we are interested in flows where
there are exactly qℓ
j units of flow traveling from j to t).
There is a polynomial-time algorithm that finds a lowest-cost flow from s to t that satisfies
the capacity and demand constraints of all the edges [1]. The constructed flow network is of
polynomial size with respect to our input instance, so our algorithm indeed runs in XP time.
Further, the flow from vertices {v1, . . . , vr} to vertices {0, . . . , j} defines the desired shift action
in a natural way: If a unit of flow travels from some vi, 1 ≤ i ≤ r, to some j, 0 ≤ j ≤ m, then
we shift p by j positions in vi. This completes the argument.
32
6 Conclusion
We have studied the parameterized complexity of Shift Bribery under the voting rules Borda,
Maximin, and Copeland, for several natural parameters (either describing the nature of the
solution or the size of the election) and for several families of price functions (arbitrary, convex,
unit, sortable, and all-or-nothing). Our results confirmed the belief that the computational
complexity depends on all three factors: the voting rule, the parameter, and the type of price
function used.
Our work leads to some natural follow-up questions. First, it would be interesting to resolve
the complexity of Shift Bribery parameterized by the number of candidates for arbitrary price
functions (see Table 1); at the moment we only know that it is W[1]-hard and in XP. For both
Borda and Maximin, and for the parameter "number t of unit shifts", we obtain a partial problem
kernel, that is, using polynomial time, we can shrink a given instance to one whose numbers of
alternatives and voters are upper-bounded by a function in t (Theorem 2 and Corollary 1). This
function, however, is an exponential function. Thus, it would be interesting to know whether it is
possible to design an efficient kernelization algorithm [9] that replaces this exponential function
with a polynomial. A similar concept to the kernelization lower bound would be to show a lower
bound on the size of only part of the problem kernel
Further, one could study the problem for other voting rules. Going in the direction of the
Margin of Victory type of problems, it would be interesting to study Destructive Shift
Bribery, where we can push back the despised candidate to prevent him or her from being a
winner (initial results in this direction are due to Kaczmarczyk and Faliszewski [44]).
Finally, recently Bulteau et al. [23] introduced a model of affecting election outcomes by
adding groups of voters to the election (this is an extension of a well-studied problem known
as Control by Adding Voters [3, 43]). Bredereck et al. [19] considered Shift Bribery in
a similar setting where one can affect multiple voters at the same time (for example, airing an
advertisement on TV could affect several voters at the same time). Unfortunately, most of their
results are quite negative and it would be interesting to investigate the combinatorial variant of
Shift Bribery from the point of view of heuristic algorithms.
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to the anonymous referees of AAAI 2014 and of Information and Computation
that helped us to significantly improve the paper.
Robert Bredereck was supported by the DFG project PAWS (NI 369/10). Jiehua Chen was
partially supported by the Studienstiftung des Deutschen Volkes. Piotr Faliszewski was partially
supported by the DFG project PAWS (NI 369/10) while staying at TU Berlin, and by AGH
University grant 11.11.230.124 (statutory research) during the rest of the project.
References
33
Bibliography
[1] R. Ahuja, T. Magnanti, and J. Orlin. Network Flows: Theory, Algorithms, and Applications.
Prentice-Hall, 1993. 32
[2] J. Bartholdi, III, C. Tovey, and M. Trick. Voting schemes for which it can be difficult to
tell who won the election. Social Choice and Welfare, 6(2):157–165, 1989. 27
[3] J. Bartholdi, III, C. Tovey, and M. Trick. How hard is it to control an election? Mathematical
and Computer Modeling, 16(8/9):27–40, 1992. 33
[4] D. Baumeister and J. Rothe. Taking the final step to a full dichotomy of the possible winner
problem in pure scoring rules. Information Processing Letters, 112(5):186–190, 2012. 3
[5] D. Baumeister, P. Faliszewski, J. Lang, and J. Rothe. Campaigns for lazy voters: Truncated
ballots. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and
Multiagent Systems (AAMAS '12), pages 577–584. IFAAMAS, 2012. 3, 6, 9
[6] N. Betzler and B. Dorn. Towards a dichotomy of finding possible winners in elections based
on scoring rules. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 76(8):812–836, 2010. 3
[7] N. Betzler, S. Hemmann, and R. Niedermeier. A multivariate complexity analysis of de-
termining possible winners given incomplete votes. In Proceedings of the 21st International
Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI '09), pages 53–58. AAAI Press, 2009. 27
[8] N. Betzler, J. Guo, and R. Niedermeier. Parameterized computational complexity of Dodg-
son and Young elections. Information and Computation, 208(2):165–177, 2010. 21
[9] N. Betzler, J. Guo, C. Komusiewicz, and R. Niedermeier. Average parameterization and
partial kernelization for computing medians. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 77
(4):774–789, 2011. 12, 14, 33
[10] N. Betzler, R. Bredereck, J. Chen, and R. Niedermeier. Studies in computational aspects
of voting-a parameterized complexity perspective. In The Multivariate Algorithmic Rev-
olution and Beyond, volume 7370 of LNCS, pages 318–363. Springer-Verlag, 2012. 4, 7
[11] F. Brandt, V. Conitzer, and U. Endriss. Computational social choice. In G. Weiss, editor,
Multiagent Systems, pages 213–283. MIT Press, 2013. 4
[12] F. Brandt, P. Harrenstein, K. Kardel, and H. Seedig. It only takes a few: On the hardness of
voting with a constant number of agents. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference
on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS '13), pages 375–382. IFAAMAS,
2013. 21
[13] F. Brandt, V. Conitzer, U. Endriss, J. Lang, and A. Procaccia, editors. Handbook of
Computational Social Choice. Cambridge University Press, 2016. 4
[14] R. Bredereck, J. Chen, P. Faliszewski, J. Guo, R. Niedermeier, and G. J. Woeginger. Param-
eterized algorithmics for computational social choice: Nine research challenges. Tsinghua
Science and Technology, 19(4):358–373, 2014. 7
34
[15] R. Bredereck, J. Chen, P. Faliszewski, A. Nichterlein, and R. Niedermeier. Prices matter for
the parameterized complexity of shift bribery. In Proceedings of the 28th AAAI Conference
on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI '14), pages 1398–1404. AAAI Press, 2014. 27, 31
[16] R. Bredereck, J. Chen, S. Hartung, S. Kratsch, R. Niedermeier, O. Such´y, and G. J. Woeg-
inger. A multivariate complexity analysis of lobbying in multiple referenda. Journal of
Artificial Intelligence Research, 50:409–446, 2014. 27
[17] R. Bredereck, J. Chen, R. Niedermeier, and T. Walsh. Parliamentary voting procedures:
Agenda control, manipulation, and uncertainty. In Proceedings of the 25th International
Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI '15), pages 164–170. AAAI Press, 2015.
27
[18] R. Bredereck, P. Faliszewski, R. Niedermeier, P. Skowron, and N. Talmon. Elections with
few candidates: Prices, weights, and covering problems. In Proceedings of the 4th Interna-
tional Conference on Algorithmic Decision Theory, volume 9346 of LNCS, pages 414–431.
Springer-Verlag, 2015. 27, 31
[19] R. Bredereck, P. Faliszewski, R. Niedermeier, and N. Talmon. Large-scale election cam-
paigns: Combinatorial shift bribery. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference
on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS '15), pages 67–75. IFAAMAS,
2015. 33
[20] R. Bredereck, P. Faliszewski, R. Niedermeier, and N. Talmon. Large-scale election cam-
paigns: Combinatorial shift bribery. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 55:603–652,
2016. 5
[21] R. Bredereck, P. Faliszewski, R. Niedermeier, and N. Talmon. Complexity of shift bribery in
committee elections. In Proceedings of the 30th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
(AAAI '16), pages 2452–2458. AAAI Press, 2016. 5, 23, 27
[22] E. Brelsford, P. Faliszewski, E. Hemaspaandra, H. Schnoor, and I. Schnoor. Approxima-
bility of manipulating elections. In Proceedings of the 23rd AAAI Conference on Artificial
Intelligence (AAAI '08), pages 44–49. AAAI Press, 2008. 3
[23] L. Bulteau, J. Chen, P. Faliszewski, R. Niedermeier, and N. Talmon. Combinatorial voter
control in elections. Theoretical Computer Science, 589:99–120, 2015. 33
[24] J. Chen, P. Faliszewski, R. Niedermeier, and N. Talmon. Elections with few voters: Can-
In Proceedings of the 29th AAAI Conference on Artificial
didate control can be easy.
Intelligence (AAAI '15), pages 2045–2051. AAAI Press, 2015. 21
[25] Y. Chevaleyre, U. Endriss, J. Lang, and N. Maudet. A short introduction to computational
social choice. In Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Current Trends in
Theory and Practice of Computer Science, volume 4362 of LNCS, pages 51–69. Springer-
Verlag, 2007. 4
[26] V. Conitzer, M. Rognlie, and L. Xia. Preference functions that score rankings and maximum
likelihood estimation. In Proceedings of the 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial
Intelligence (IJCAI '09), pages 109–115. AAAI Press, 2009. 6, 9
35
[27] M. Cygan, F. Fomin, L. Kowalik, D. Lokshtanov, D. Marx, M. Pilipczuk, M. Pilipczuk,
and S. Saurabh. Parameterized Algorithms. Springer-Verlag, 2015. 7
[28] B. Dorn and I. Schlotter. Multivariate complexity analysis of swap bribery. Algorithmica,
64(1):126–151, 2012. 3, 5, 6, 9, 10, 28
[29] R. G. Downey and M. R. Fellows. Fundamentals of Parameterized Complexity. Springer-
Verlag, 2013. 7
[30] C. Dwork, R. Kumar, M. Naor, and D. Sivakumar. Rank aggregation methods for the web.
In Proceedings of the 10th International World Wide Web Conference, pages 613–622. ACM
Press, 2001. 21
[31] E. Elkind and P. Faliszewski. Approximation algorithms for campaign management.
In Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop On Internet And Network Economics
(WINE '10), volume 6484 of LNCS, pages 473–482. Springer, 2010. 3, 4, 6, 9
[32] E. Elkind, P. Faliszewski, and A. Slinko. Swap bribery. In Proceedings of the 2nd Interna-
tional Symposium on Algorithmic Game Theory (SAGT '09), volume 5814 of LNCS, pages
299–310. Springer-Verlag, 2009. 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 11, 20, 38
[33] P. Faliszewski and A. Procaccia. AI's war on manipulation: Are we winning? AI Magazine,
31(4):52–64, 2010. 4
[34] P. Faliszewski, E. Hemaspaandra, and H. Schnoor. Copeland voting: Ties matter.
In
Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent
Systems (AAMAS '08), pages 983–990. IFAAMAS, 2008. 6, 9, 42
[35] P. Faliszewski, E. Hemaspaandra, and L. Hemaspaandra. How hard is bribery in elections?
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 35:485–532, 2009. 3, 6, 9
[36] P. Faliszewski, E. Hemaspaandra, L. Hemaspaandra, and J. Rothe. Llull and Copeland
voting computationally resist bribery and constructive control. Journal of Artificial Intel-
ligence Research, 35:275–341, 2009. 3, 27
[37] P. Faliszewski, E. Hemaspaandra, and L. Hemaspaandra. Using complexity to protect
elections. Communications of the ACM, 53(11):74–82, 2010. 4
[38] P. Faliszewski, E. Hemaspaandra, and L. Hemaspaandra. Multimode control attacks on
elections. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 40:305–351, 2011. 3
[39] M. R. Fellows, B. M. P. Jansen, D. Lokshtanov, F. A. Rosamond, and S. Saurabh. Deter-
mining the winner of a Dodgson election is hard. In Proceedings of the 30th Conference
on Foundations of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science (FSTTCS '10),
pages 459–468. Internationales Begegnungs- und Forschungszentrum fur Informatik (IBFI),
Schloss Dagstuhl, 2010. 21
[40] J. Flum and M. Grohe. Parameterized Complexity Theory. Springer-Verlag, 2006. 7
[41] M. Garey and D. Johnson. Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-
Completeness. W. H. Freeman and Company, 1979. 20
36
[42] E. Gertler, E. Mackin, M. Magdon-Ismail, L. Xia, and Y. Yi. Computing manipulations
of ranking systems. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Autonomous
Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS '15), pages 685–693. IFAAMAS, 2015. 3
[43] E. Hemaspaandra, L. Hemaspaandra, and J. Rothe. Anyone but him: The complexity of
precluding an alternative. Artificial Intelligence, 171(5–6):255–285, 2007. 33
[44] A. Kaczmarczyk and P. Faliszewski. Destructive shift bribery. In Proceedings of the 15th
International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS '16),
pages 305–313. IFAAMAS, 2016. 33
[45] C. Komusiewicz. Kernelization, partially polynomial kernels. In M. Kao, editor, Encyclo-
pedia of Algorithms. Springer-Verlag, 2015. 14
[46] C. Komusiewicz and R. Niedermeier. New races in parameterized algorithmics. In Pro-
ceedings of the 37th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer
Science (MFCS '12), volume 7464 of LNCS, pages 19–30. Springer-Verlag, 2012. 11
[47] K. Konczak and J. Lang. Voting procedures with incomplete preferences. In Proceedins
of the Multidisciplinary IJCAI-05 Worshop on Advances in Preference Handling, pages
124–129, 2005. 3
[48] H. W. Lenstra. Integer programming with a fixed number of variables. Mathematics of
Operations Research, 8(4):538–548, 1983. 31
[49] H. Lenstra, Jr. Integer programming with a fixed number of variables. Mathematics of
Operations Research, 8(4):538–548, 1983. 27
[50] T. Magrino, R. Rivest, E. Shen, and D. Wagner. Computing the margin of victory in
IRV elections. Presented at 2011 Electronic Voting Technology Workshop/Workshop on
Trustworthy Elections, 2011. 3
[51] D. Marx. Parameterized complexity and approximation algorithms. The Computer Journal,
51(1):60–78, 2008. 10
[52] L. Mathieson and S. Szeider. Editing graphs to satisfy degree constraints: A parameterized
approach. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 78(1):179–191, 2012. 23
[53] D. McGarvey. A theorem on the construction of voting paradoxes. Econometrica, 21(4):
608–610, 1953. 17, 42
[54] R. Niedermeier. Invitation to Fixed-Parameter Algorithms. Oxford University Press, 2006.
7
[55] S. Obraztsova and E. Elkind. On the complexity of voting manipulation under random-
ized tie-breaking. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Joint Conference on Artificial
Intelligence (IJCAI '11), pages 319–324. AAAI Press, 2011. 6, 9
[56] S. Obraztsova, E. Elkind, and N. Hazon. Ties matter: Complexity of voting manipulation
revisited. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and
Multiagent Systems (AAMAS '11), pages 71–78. IFAAMAS, 2011. 6, 9
37
[57] J. Rothe, editor. Economics and Computation. Springer, 2015. 4
[58] I. Schlotter, P. Faliszewski, and E. Elkind. Campaign management under approval-
driven voting rules. In Proceedings of the 25th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
(AAAI '11), pages 726–731. AAAI Press, 2011. 9
[59] I. Schlotter, P. Faliszewski, and E. Elkind. Campaign management under approval-driven
voting rules. Algorithmica, pages 1–32, 2015. 3, 6, 10
[60] L. Xia. Computing the margin of victory for various voting rules. In Proceedings of the
13th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC '12), pages 982–999, 2012. 3
[61] L. Xia and V. Conitzer. Determining possible and necessary winners given partial orders.
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 41:25–67, 2011. 3
A Proof of Theorem 5
In this appendix we present the omitted proof of Theorem 5. To this end, we split the proof in
three propositions, each proposition covering one of the considered voting rules. In most cases
the proofs of the propositions base on an idea already present in the literature (mostly in the
paper of Elkind et al. [32]), but they do include some additional insights.
Proposition 3. Borda Shift Bribery parameterized by the number of affected voters is
W[2]-hard for each price function family that we consider.
Proof. We consider Borda Shift Bribery for unit prices first. We give a parameterized
reduction from Set Cover parameterized by the set cover size k. Let I = (U, S, k) be our
input instance, where U = {u1, . . . , un} and S = {S1, . . . , Sm} is a collection of subsets of U,
and k is a positive integer. We set the budget B = k · (n + 1) and form a set of candidates
C = {p, d, g} ∪ U ∪ F , where F is a set of "filler" candidates, F = {f1, . . . , f2k·(n+1)+2}. We form
a set V of voters as follows:
i) We form a subset Vsets of voters as follows (note that this subset will be useful in the proof
for the case of Copeland). For each set Si in S we create two voters, v2i−1 and v2i. Voter
v2i−1 has preference order
d ≻ hSii ≻ hFii ≻ p ≻ hC \ (Si ∪ Fi ∪ {p, d})i,
where Fi is an arbitrarily chosen set of n − Si candidates from F . Voter v2i has the
reversed preference order of v2i−1. Note that each pair of voters v2i−1, v2i, gives each
candidate C − 1 points.
ii) For each i, 1 ≤ i ≤ n, we add B+1 pairs of voters with preference orders from point-pair(p, ∅, ui, g, C\
{ui, g, p, d}, d) (see Section 2.2 for the definition) to the voter set V . Note that, with two
preference orders from point-pair(p, ∅, ui, g, C \ {ui, g, p, d}, d), ui receives C points, g re-
ceives C − 2 points, and each remaining candidate in C \ {ui, g} receives C − 1 points.
In both preference orders, there are C − 2 candidates between p and d.
38
iii) Let F ′ be an arbitrary size-(B + 1) subset of F and let z ∈ F \ F ′ be an arbitrary candidate.
We add B + k pairs of voters with preference orders of point-pair(p, F ′, d, g, C \ ({p, g, d, z} ∪
F ′), z) to the voter set V .
Since we are dealing with unit price functions, each voter has price function π(j) = j. By
routine calculation, it is easy to verify that there is a value L such that the candidates in election
E = (C, V ) have the following scores:
• scoreE(p) = L,
• scoreE(d) = L + B + k,
• for each i, 1 ≤ i ≤ n, scoreE(ui) = L + B + 1, and
• for each f ∈ F ∪ {g}, scoreE(f ) ≤ L.
We set the maximal number na of affected voters to k. We claim that I is a yes-instance of
Set Cover if and only if the formed instance of Borda Shift Bribery is a yes-instance.
"⇒": Assume that there is a collection Q of k sets from S such that their union gives U.
Without loss generality, let Q := {S1, . . . , Sk}. Bribing the voters v2i−1, . . . , v2k−1 to shift p to
the top position has price k · (n + 1) = B and ensures p's victory: Such shifts ensure that p gains
k · (n + 1) points, each ui ∈ U loses at least one point (because S1, . . . Sk is a cover of U), and
d loses k points (because p passes d in each of these k voters' preference orders). In effect, p, d,
and each ui ∈ U, have L + k · (n + 1) points each and tie for victory.
"⇐": For the reverse direction, assume that there is a successful shift action #»s that ensures
p's victory and affects na = k voters only. Since the budget is k · (n + 1) and we use unit price
functions, the score of p can increase to at most L + k · (n + 1). Since d has score L + k · (n + 1) + k
and we can affect k voters only, for each voter where we shift p, p must pass d.
Thus #»s involves only the voters from the set V ′ = {v2i+1 1 ≤ i ≤ m}. The reason for this
is that each voter in V \ V ′ either already prefers p to d or ranks d more than B positions ahead
of p (so p would not be able to pass d within the budget). Consequently, in the preference order
of each voter from V ′ affected by #»s , p must be shifted to the top position (because in these
preference orders, d is ranked first).
Further, since the score of p can increase to at most L + k · (n + 1) and each candidate ui ∈ U,
prior the shifts, has score L + k · (n + 1) + 1, it must be the case that p passes each ui at least
once. This means that the voters affected under #»s correspond to a cover of U by at most k sets
from S.
To complete the proof, it is easy to verify that the reduction works in polynomial time.
The above argument applies to unit prices but, by Proposition 1, it also immediately covers
the case of convex price functions, sortable price functions, and of arbitrary price functions. To
deal with all-or-nothing price functions, it suffices to use the same construction as above and set
the budget B to k, but with the following prices:
i) For each i, 1 ≤ i ≤ n, we set the price function of voter v2i+1 to be π(j) = 1 for each j > 0
(and, of course, π(0) = 0).
ii) For all the remaining voters, we use price function π′, such that π′(j) = B + 1 for each
j > 0 (and π′(0) = 0).
39
It is easy to see that the construction remains correct with these price functions.
Proposition 4. Maximin Shift Bribery parameterized by the number of affected voters is
W[2]-hard for each price function family that we consider.
Proof. We reduce from Set Cover parameterized by the set cover size to Maximin Shift
Bribery parameterized by the number of affected voters. Let I = (U, S, k) be our input instance
of Set Cover, where U = {u1, . . . , un}, S = {S1, . . . , Sm} is a collection of subsets of U, and k is
a positive integer (and the value of the parameter). We form a candidate set C = {p, d, g}∪U ∪F ,
where d is the unique winner in the original election and F = {f1, . . . , f2n·k+2k} is a set of "filler"
candidates (we partition F into two disjoint sets X1 and X2 of cardinality n · k + k each). We
form a set V of voters as follows:
i) We create a set Vsets of voters as follows. For each Si ∈ S, we include in Vsets two voters,
v2i−1 and v2i, such that v2i−1 has preference order
g ≻ hSii ≻ hFii ≻ p ≻ hF \ Fii ≻ hU \ Sii, ≻ d
where each Fi contains an arbitrarily fixed subset of n − Si candidates from F , and v2i
has preference order which is the revers of v2i−1's.
ii) We create a set Vstruct of voters by including the following group of voters:
a) we include k voters with preference order
p ≻ d ≻ g ≻ hUi ≻ hX1i ≻ hX2i,
b) we include k − 1 voters with the same preference order
g ≻ hX1i ≻ p ≻ hX2i ≻ d ≻ hUi,
c) we include a single voter with preference order
g ≻ hUi ≻ hX1i ≻ p ≻ hX2i ≻ d, and
d) we include 2k voters with preference order
d ≻ g ≻ hUi ≻ hX2i ≻ p ≻ hX1i.
We set V = Vsets ∪ Vstruct, and E = (C, V ). Each voter has a unit price function and we set the
budget B to be k · (n + 1). We claim that the constructed Maximin Shift Bribery instance
is a yes-instance if and only if I is a yes-instance of Set Cover. However, before we prove this
fact, let us calculate the scores of the candidates in the election E.
In Table 3 we give the values of the function NE(·, ·) for the just constructed election (for
the values of the function among candidates from the set U ∪ F we use the trivial upper bound,
m + 4k). Note that for each x, y ∈ C, the voters from Vsets contribute value m to NE(x, y) and
the remaining value comes from the voters in V2. Based on the function NE, we calculate the
scores of the candidates in our election:
• scoreE(p) = m + k,
40
p
–
g
d
U
F
m + k m + 2k m + 2k − 1 ≥ m + 2k
p
g
m + 3k
–
m + k
d m + 2k m + 3k
U m + 2k + 1
F ≤ m + 2k
m
m
m + 4k
m + 4k
m + 4k − 1 m + 3k
–
m + 1 ≤ m + 4k m + 3k + 1
m + k m + k − 1 ≤ m + 4k
Table 3: Table of the values of the NE(·, ·) function for the election constructed for the Maximin
part of the proof of Proposition 4.
• scoreE(g) = m + k,
• scoreE(d) = m + 2k,
• for each ui ∈ U, scoreE(ui) = m, and
• for each fj ∈ F , scoreE(fj) = m.
Thus, prior to any bribery, d is the unique winner.
We show that (U, S, k) is a yes-instance for Set Cover if and only if the constructed
Maximin Shift Bribery instance is a yes-instance.
"⇒": Suppose without loss of generality that S1, . . . , Sk cover the universe U. Then, it
suffices for each voter in the set V ′ = {v2i−1 1 ≤ i ≤ k} to shift p to the top position. This
leads to p passing g for k times and to p passing each candidate from U at least once. In effect,
the score of p increases to m + 2k, and p and d are tied winners. Further, doing so costs at
most n · k + k: In each of the at most k preference orders where we shift p, we shift p by n + 1
positions.
"⇐": Assume that there is a shift-action #»s such that applying #»s ensures that p is a
(co)winner. We can assume that #»s shifts p only in some preference orders of the voters in
the set V ′ = {v2i−1 1 ≤ i ≤ n}. This is so because in all the other preference orders, p is
ranked just below a group of at least B candidates from F and for each candidate fi ∈ F , we
have NE(p, fi) = m + 2k; fi is not blocking p from gaining additional k points and, since we
can affect at most k voters, p can get at most k additional points. Further, voters in the set V ′
rank p ahead of d, and so by applying #»s we certainly cannot lower the score of d. This means
that #»s must ensure that p's score increases to at least m + 2k. This is possible only if #»s affects
exactly k voters, in each vote affected by #»s candidate p passes g, and p passes each candidate
from U at least once. This means that #»s shifts p to the first position in the preference orders
of k voters from V ′, this costs exactly B (shifting p to the top position in the preference order
of a single voter from V ′ has price n + 1), and the voters for which #»s shifts p correspond to the
sets from S that cover U.
The above construction covers the case of unit price functions. By Proposition 1, this also
applies to convex price functions, sortable price functions, and arbitrary price functions. For the
all-or-nothing price functions, we can adapt the above proof in the same way in which we have
adapted the proof for the case of Borda, see proof of Proposition 3.
41
Proposition 5. Copeland Shift Bribery parameterized by the number of affected voters is
W[2]-hard for each price function family that we consider.
Proof. We reduce from Set Cover parameterized by the set cover size. Our reduction is similar
to that for the case of Borda and, in particular, we use the same notation for the input instance I
of Set Cover, we form the same candidate set C = {p, d, g}∪U (see the proof for Proposition 3),
and we use the subset Vsets of voters. However, we extend Vsets to a complete set of voters in a
different way, described below. Let r = 2k · (n + 1) + 3 be the number of candidates in the set
F ′ := F ∪ {g}.
i) We introduce a single voter p ≻ d ≻ hU i ≻ hF ′i (the reason for doing so is to have an odd
number of voters, so the proof will work for all values of α).
ii) Using a modified McGarvey's construction (see below), we introduce voters to ensure the
following results of head-to-head contests among the candidates:
a) Candidate d defeats each candidate in U by one preference order; d defeats p by 2k −
1 preference orders, and d defeats by one preference order r − n (arbitrarily chosen)
candidates from F ′ (the remaining candidates from F ′ defeat d by one preference order).
b) Candidate p defeats by one preference order r − n arbitrarily chosen candidates from F ′
and loses to the remaining n of them by 2k + 1 preference orders. Candidate p loses by
one preference order to each candidate from U.
c) For each i, 1 ≤ i ≤ n, ui defeats by one preference order all candidates uj such that i > j.
Candidate ui defeats by one preference order r − (i − 1) arbitrarily chosen candidates
from F ′, and loses to the remaining i − 1 candidates from F ′.
d) Each candidate in F ′ defeats by one preference order at most ⌊F ′/2⌋ candidates from
F ′ (an easy way of constructing a set of results of head-to-head contests that achieves
this effect and a proof that this way we can set the results of all head-to-head contests
among the candidates from F ′ is given in the work of Faliszewski et al. [34, discussion
after their Lemma 2.3]).
Before we explain what we mean by modified McGarvey's construction, let us first calculate
the scores that the candidates would have if we formed election E = (C, V ) according to the
above description. We would have:
• scoreE(p) = r − n,
• scoreE(d) = n + r − n + 1 = r + 1,
• each candidate ui in U would have scoreE(ui) = i − 1 + r − (i − 1) + 1 = r + 1, and
• each candidate f in F would have scoreE(f ) ≤ 1 + 1 + n + r/2 ≤ r (because k > 2).
Let us now describe what we mean by modified McGarvey's construction. McGarvey's
theorem [53] is as follows. Assume that we are given given a set of candidates and a set of results
of head-to-head contests (specified for each pair x, y of candidates by the number M (x, y) of
voters that prefer x over y minus the number of voters that prefer y over x; either all values
M (x, y) are odd or all are even). Then, we can compute in polynomial time (with respect to
42
the number of candidates, the number of given voters, and the sum of the values M (x, y)) an
election E such that for each two candidates x, y we have NE(x, y) − NE(y, x) = M (x, y).
It is standard to prove McGarvey's theorem using a construction that introduces pairs of
voters (for candidate set C) with preference orders of the form x ≻ y ≻ hC − {x, y}i, and
←−−−−−−−−
hC − {x, y}i ≻ x ≻ y. We use this construction with the modification that we ensure that
in each preference order p and d are always separated from each other by at least k · (n + 1)
candidates. (For example, it suffices to ensure that p and d are always ranked first, second, last,
or second to last, and that if p is ranked first or second then d is ranked last or second to last,
and the other way round).
We can now continue our proof. We set budget B := k ·(n+1) and we use unit price functions
for all the voters. We claim that there is a cover of U by at most k sets from S if and only if
our instance of Copeland Shift Bribery is a yes-instance.
"⇒": Assume without loss of generality that S1, . . . , Sk cover the universe U. Indeed, if we
shift p to the top position in those preference orders from {v2i−1 1 ≤ i ≤ k}, then p will pass d
k times (in effect winning the head-to-head contest against d), p will pass each candidate from
U at least once (in effect winning head-to-heat contests with all of them), and this shift action
will have price exactly B. In effect, the score of p will increase to r + 1, the scores of candidate
in U ∪ {d} will decrease to r, and p will be the unique winner.
"⇐": Now assume that our instance of Copeland Shift Bribery is a yes-instance and let
#»s be a shift-action that involves at most k voters, has price at most B, and ensures p's victory.
Note that by shifting p in at most k preference orders, p can win at most n + 1 additional
head-to-head contests (only those with the candidates in U ∪ {d}). If, after applying #»s , p does
not win the contest against d, then p's score is at most r and d's score remains r + 1 (so p is not a
winner). Thus we know that p must win the head-to-head contest against d and, so, p must pass
d in at least k preference orders. Since all the voters other than those in V ′ = {v2i−1 1 ≤ i ≤ n}
either already prefer p to d, or rank d ahead of more than B other candidates that themselves
are ranked ahead of p, #»s must involve exactly k voters from V ′, and for each preference order of
the voters from V ′ where p is shifted, p must be shifted to the top (because otherwise p would
not pass d). Since, in addition, p must pass each candidate ui from U at least once (to win the
head-to-head contest with ui, to obtain the final score of r + 1), it follows that the voters for
which #»s shifts p to the top position correspond to the sets from S that form a cover of U.
The above proof covers the case of unit price functions, convex price functions, sortable price
functions, and arbitrary price functions. It is easy to adapt it to work for all-or-nothing prices
in the same way in which the proof for Borda was adapted.
43
|
1611.07824 | 1 | 1611 | 2016-10-31T13:37:08 | SimAthens: A spatial microsimulation approach to the estimation and analysis of small-area income distributions and poverty rates in Athens, Greece | [
"cs.MA"
] | Published during a severe economic crisis, this study presents the first spatial microsimulation model for the analysis of income inequalities and poverty in Greece. First, we present a brief overview of the method and discuss its potential for the analysis of multidimensional poverty and income inequality in Greece. We then present the SimAthens model, based on a combination of small-area demographic and socioeconomic information available from the Greek census of population with data from the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC). The model is based on an iterative proportional fitting (IPF) algorithm, and is used to reweigh EU-SILC records to fit in small-area descriptions for Athens based on 2001 and 2011 censuses. This is achieved by using demographic and socioeconomic characteristics as constraint variables. Finally, synthesis of the labor market and occupations are chosen as the main variables for externally validating our results, in order to verify the integrity of the model. Results of this external validation process are found to be extremely satisfactory, indicating a high goodness of fit between simulated and real values. Finally, the study presents a number of model outputs, illustrating changes in social and economic geography, during a severe economic crisis, offering a great opportunity for discussing further potential of this model in policy analysis. | cs.MA | cs | SimAthens: A spatial microsimulation approach to the estimation and analysis
of small-area income distributions and poverty rates in Athens, Greece
Anastasia Panoria,*, Dimitris Ballasbc, Yannis Psycharisd
a Department of Economic and Regional Development, Panteion University of Social
and Political Sciences, 136 Syngrou Avenue, 17671 Athens, Greece
b Department of Geography, University of Sheffield, Winter Street, Sheffield S10 2TN,
UK
c Department of Geography, University of the Aegean, University Hill, 81100
Mytilene, Greece
d Department of Geography, Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences, 136
Syngrou Avenue, 17671 Athens, Greece
* Corresponding author, email: [email protected]
Preprint submitted to Computers, Environment and Urban Systems (accepted 2
August 2016).
Abstract
Published during a severe economic crisis, this study presents the first spatial
microsimulation model for the analysis of income inequalities and poverty in Greece.
First, we present a brief overview of the method and discuss its potential for the
analysis of multidimensional poverty and income inequality in Greece. We then
present the SimAthens model, based on a combination of small-area demographic
and socioeconomic information available from the Greek census of population with
data from the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC).
The model is based on an iterative proportional fitting (IPF) algorithm, and is used to
reweigh EU-SILC records to fit in small-area descriptions for Athens based on 2001
and 2011 censuses. This is achieved by using demographic and socioeconomic
characteristics as constraint variables. Finally, synthesis of the labor market and
occupations are chosen as the main variables for externally validating our results, in
order to verify the integrity of the model. Results of this external validation process
are found to be extremely satisfactory, indicating a high goodness of fit between
simulated and real values. Finally, the study presents a number of model outputs,
illustrating changes in social and economic geography, during a severe economic
crisis, offering a great opportunity for discussing further potential of this model in
policy analysis.
Keywords: spatial microsimulation; small-area microdata; small-area income data;
inequalities
1
1. Introduction
Over the past four decades, there have been a rapidly growing number of
multidisciplinary efforts to investigate the main aspects of poverty through a wider
perspective. In particular, since the 1980s, a new framework has been started to
develop, based on the theoretical work of Sen (1983, 1999, 1992), who investigated
poverty under the perspective of capability approach. According to this approach,
poverty is considered to be caused by not only economic factors but also various
components covering wider notions of development such as health, education, and
living conditions.
Moving away from conventional poverty measures that include purely income-based
indicators and examining poverty under a multidimensional perspective can be
challenging due to the paucity of suitable secondary data sets at the small-area level.
In order to develop new indicators that attempt to combine and interpret different
dimensions of poverty, there is a need for detailed socioeconomic micro-data sets to
be collected via social surveys. An example of a comprehensive survey of this type is
the census of population, which generates very useful socioeconomic and
demographic information for small areas and which has been typically the basis for
the development of widely used indexes of deprivation such as the Townsend
indicator (Townsend, 1979). Nevertheless, the census questionnaires cover a
relatively limited set of themes and in most cases, they do not include any
information on income, wealth, and other variables reflecting socioeconomic
circumstances in order to preserve confidentiality and minimize nonresponse (Marsh,
1993).
Spatial microsimulation has been gaining prominence as an appropriate method of
estimation of small-area microdata
that can be used
for
the analysis of
interdependencies between different household and individual characteristics. This
method is particularly suitable for bridging the gap between the innovative, human-
based theoretical frameworks to examine poverty and the difficulty of implementing it
at a small-area level, because of lack of data. Adding geographical information to
microlevel data with the use of spatial microsimulation analysis allows for a small-
area approach in policy analysis. By using this approach, the distributional impact of
implementing different socioeconomic policies could be estimated at a microlevel
(Ballas et al. 2005; Ballas et al. 2006; Callan 1991).
Microsimulation models have a long history and tradition in economics, originating in
the work of Orcutt (Orcutt 1957) who indicated the importance of determining the
2
relationship between parameters used in a socioeconomic model and the aggregate
results. During the 1970s, the first microanalytic models were built to simulate
socioeconomic systems and
investigate
their behavior under various policy
implication scenarios (Kain & Apgar 1985; Orcutt et al. 1976).
Although these initial efforts offered a whole new perspective on the way in which
aggregate data should be approached, they were aspatial, as they did not include
any geographical dimension or perspective. The necessity of incorporating the spatial
context was first highlighted by Hagerstrand (1957), who treated time and space as
inseparable notions that affect individual's decision making at daily, yearly, or lifetime
scales of observation (PRED 1977). The first implementation of such type of model is
the work of Wilson and Pownall (1976), which inspired a series of surveys focusing
on the field of regional development (Birkin & Clarke 1988, 2011). Other domains in
economics where spatial microsimulation has been implemented are labor market
(Campbell & Ballas 2013; Ballas et al. 2005; Ballas et al. 2006) and education
(Kavroudakis et al. 2012; Kavroudakis & Ballas 2013).
Of particular relevance to the work presented is this study is a comparative study of
the social geography of two major cities in Japan and Britain, which involved an
estimation of small-area microdata using spatial microsimulation (Ballas et al. 2012).
Also of relevance is the work of researchers who developed and implemented
statistical small-area estimation approaches involving complementing social survey
microdata, such as the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions
(EU-SILC) with administrative sources, in order to calculate income and poverty
measures based on the idea of utilizing regression models (Fay & Herriot 1979;
Elbers et al. 2003; Nagle et al. 2011; Pereira & Coelho 2013; Fabrizi et al. 2014).
The EU-SILC database has proven to be an effective tool, which works as a basis
upon which various microsimulation models have been developed. In most cases,
the spatial level of analysis remains at a country level, and microdata are used to
assess the effect of policy changes, especially referring to national tax benefit
systems (Sutherland & Figari 2013; Betti et al. 2010; O'Donoghue et al. 2013).
This study describes the development of the first spatial microsimulation model in
Greece that combines census and social survey data, followed by an extensive
external validation process, using labor market and occupations structure data. This
model aims at estimating small-area poverty measures, including multidimensional
poverty index (MPI) within Athens, before and after the economic crisis. An indicative
3
analysis of the main poverty components, as long as the way in which they are
affected by recent ongoing economic crisis in Greece, is also performed. This
analysis highlights the necessity of using innovative techniques and methodologies
for simulating and assessing policy decisions at a microlevel.
2. Methodology and data
As mentioned in the previous section, there have only been a handful of studies that
attempted to investigate poverty under a multidimensional context at a geographical
scale lower than that of countries or NUTS1 regions (Alkire et al. 2014; Miranti et al.
2010; Harding et al. 2006; Tanton et al. 2009). In most cases, the results illustrate
that geography matters even at a high level of spatial analysis. There is also a
growing literature that refers especially to urban poverty and the importance of
structural clusters that are geographically defined within large spatial agglomerations
(Amis 1995; Glaeser 1998; Wratten 1995; Satterthwite 1997; Moser 1998). Thus, the
need to focus our research on smaller area levels becomes evident, highlighting the
necessity of implementing innovative techniques and methodologies.
2.1 Data, methods and scales of analysis
In order to build a static spatial microsimulation model, two main sources of data are
essential: aggregate data at the spatial level to be used for the analysis and
nonspatial microdata. The main idea is to use the existing high-quality aggregate
data that have a high degree of accuracy and reliability, such as those derived by
national censuses, based on which small-area microdata fitting is acquired, resulting
in resynthesized small-area populations.
In this study, the metropolitan area of Athens is used as the main case study.
Aggregate data for its 59 municipalities are derived from the last two national
censuses (2001 and 2011). The choice of municipalities as the main areal unit is
based on the fact that municipality is the lower administrative level at which
aggregate data can be found in national censuses. Their size is appropriate to
perform spatial analysis in most cases, as they are not too small, leading to a large
number of areal units and thus high complexity in calculations. On the contrary, using
larger areal units for the analysis could potentially gloss over spatial differentiations
within the metropolitan area, reducing its accuracy.
The EU-SILC database was the most appropriate main source of microdata, because
of the nature of this research, high quality of the database, and the relative paucity of
4
other relevant survey microdata in Greece. This database contains a large number of
parameters referring to economic and social conditions of EU countries. However,
although it offers an extremely rich variety of yearly variables that are suitable for
poverty analysis, it does not provide geographical information when descending to
lower spatial levels of analysis, limiting its use to a country or NUTS1 level.
In order to make a comparative analysis before and after the economic crisis
affecting Greece over the past six years, 2006 and 2011 were chosen as the two
reference years, and
thus
the corresponding EU-SILC waves were used.
Furthermore, an initial assumption that has to be mentioned is that the 2001 census
data were used as aggregate basis for 2006 microdata. It has long been argued
(e.g., see Rees, Martin, and Williamson 2002) that when it comes to accuracy and
geographical coverage, census data are considered to be the "gold standard." Thus,
in order to take advantage of this important strength of census data, it is assumed
that between 2001 and 2006, there would have been only small changes in
demographic characteristics of the areal units being used here, leaving aggregate
data almost unaffected.
The choice of variables being used to constrain a spatial microsimulation model is
one of the key factors that play an important role in the process of model building.
Different constraint variables may lead to considerable variation in the synthetic
populations being produced and thus different results (Edwards et al. 2010; Ballas et
al. 2007; Burden and Steel, 2013). The first step when making a decision regarding
which small-area variables (known as "small-area constraints") should be used as
constraints in spatial microsimulation is to examine the extent to which there is a
correlation between these variables with the so-called "target" variables of the
simulation (outputs – e.g., income).
Within the context of the research presented in this study, the main variables used for
constraining the spatial microsimulation model are age/sex, marital status, education,
and main economic activity status. All of them were selected in terms of creating a
comprehensive picture of spatial units' demographic characteristics and bec ause
they are widely accepted as good indicators of an individual's socioeconomic
condition.
2.2 Spatial microsimulation
Static spatial microsimulation methods generate simulated microdata for small-area
populations at a given time point. Depending on the reweighing method upon which
5
they are based, they can be categorized as either probabilistic or deterministic
approaches (Ballas et al., 2005). In the first case, a combinatorial optimization
approach (with the use of random number generators) is typically implemented, in
order to find the optimal combination of individuals from the micro-data set to
reproduce as closely as possible the small-area population (Tanton 2014). The use
of a random number generator increases computational intensity of the process
(Pritchard & Miller 2011) and a different result is produced in each model run,
because of its probabilistic nature.
We choose to follow Lovelace, Ballas, and Watson (2014) and use the so-called
deterministic reweighing approach, underpinned by the iterative proportional fitting
(IPF) technique as proposed by Ballas et al. (2005). This approach uses the IPF
method to give a weight to each individual, by adjusting for each constraint variable
the initial weight through a reweighting algorithm (Ballas et al., 2005; Tanton 2014).
As a result, individuals whose characteristics match in a higher extent the
demographic characteristics of each area are given higher weights. Some of the
main advantages of this method include the fact that results remain unchanged in
each run of the model, as well as low complexity and high speed of the model
(Pritchard & Miller 2011; Lovelace & Ballas 2013; Lovelace & Dumont 2016).
We have also considered alternative approaches for the integerization of the weights
derived from the reweighing algorithm. Following Lovelace and Ballas (2013), we
choose the TRS (truncate, replicate, sample) method to produce integer micro-data
set populations. The main advantage of this integerization method is the fact that the
populations it produces have exactly the same size as the census populations,
avoiding oversampling. Moreover, Lovelace and Ballas (2013) showed that TRS
outperforms the other three investigated methods in terms of accuracy, while at the
same time performs really well in terms of speed of calculations.
The original code, based on which the SimAthens model was developed, is written by
Lovelace and Ballas (2013) and is available as open source, including all the
essential documentation (Lovelace and Ballas 2013, Supplementary Information and
GitHub - https://github.com/Robinlovelace/IPF-performance-testing). More useful
information regarding spatial analysis and microsimulation modeling with R can also
be found in Lovelace & Dumont (2016). The new version of the code, used in our
case for the development of SimAthens model, is also available on line as a
supplementary material.
6
It must be pointed out that the intention of this study is to advance research on
census data by combining them with social survey data in new innovative ways, with
respect to the investigation of complex socioeconomic phenomena at a regional
level, which could not be examined to date. The results are particularly relevant and
timely, given the severe crisis and recession affecting Greece over the past 6 years.
The spatial microsimulation approach adopted here shows how census data can be
combined with social survey data to inform relevant debates about the geographical
dimension of income distribution and poverty within Athens.
2.3 Model validation
A key step in spatial microsimulation modeling is the verification of model integrity.
This is particularly important, in cases where model results are used as inputs for
policy-making issues in regional development (Clarke & Holm 1987; Chin & Harding
2007; Smith et al. 2009; Edwards et al. 2010; Ballas et al. 2013).
In order to compare simulation outputs with actual data, there are two main validation
methods: internal and external. In the first case, aggregate results of constraint
variables are used to calculate the degree of fitting between actual and simulated
data. However, because the IPF method is based on optimum fitting of the constraint
variables, it is expected that the quality of fitting between actual and simulated results
will be high in most cases. The latter method of validating a static spatial
microsimulation model consists of using external variables or data sets to compare
aggregate results at a regional level (Edwards and Tanton 2013). These external
sources of data may be real spatial microdata, external data sets, primary data
obtained from specific areas or aggregated data at higher geographies (Lovelace et
al. 2014).
The choice of measures of fitting and accuracy is another key decision that needs to
be made. We choose to use scatter plots for actual and simulated values, illustrating
a first descriptive representation of the model's goodness of fit. In order to calculate
the extent of dispersion from the equality line and obtain information about the
accuracy of the model, we choose to calculate the standard error about identity (SEI)
(Ballas et al. 2007; Tanton 2011). The coefficient of determination (R2) is also
estimated through linear regression analysis, as a measure of precision, giving us
information about the extent to which simulated values fit the actual data. Finally, an
equal variance two-tailed t-test is used to reveal any possible statistical significance
arising from the differences between simulated and actual data (Robert Tanton;
Kimberley L. Edwards 2013).
7
2.3.1 Internal validation
Results of the internal validation of the model, using scatter plots of simulated and
actual populations of constraint variables, are shown in Figure 1. As it is displayed in
the graphs, almost all points of the scatter plots are on the equality line (45° line),
showing that the goodness of fit of the SimAthens model is excellent for both
reference years.
Figure 1: Simulated versus census results at the aggregate level for constraint
variables.
Source: Authors' calculations
Table 1 indicates the values of measures used for internal validation referring to both
reference years. It shows that in terms of accuracy and precision, our static spatial
microsimulation model shows a very good behavior. Coefficients of determination
and SEI values are equal to unity in all cases. The equal-variance two-tailed t-test,
which was conducted to all subcategories of constraint variables, illustrates that
deviations between simulated and actual data are statistically significant in only two
cases: Females/20–29 and Females/70–79 for 2011. Thus, estimation results are in
general terms robust.
8
01000002000003000000100000200000300000010000020000030000020062011AgeMarital statusMain activityEducational levelSimulatedCensusConstraint Table 1: Measures of validation for constraint variables
2006
SEI
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
R2
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
T-test
(Prob.)
R2
0.548
0.515
0.087
0.500
0.528
0.705
0.283
0.442
0.379
0.626
0.851
0.870
0.627
0.538
0.192
0.810
0.080
0.541
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
2011
SEI
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
T-test
(Prob.)
0.113
0.043
0.126
0.379
0.099
0.017
0.081
0.008
0.010
0.189
0.206
0.053
0.004
0.068
0.055
0.065
0.060
0.596
1.000
1.000
0.149
1.000
1.000
0.573
1.000
1.000
0.317
1.000
1.000
0.625
1.000
1.000
0.828
1.000
1.000
0.436
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.801
0.130
0.784
0.881
0.818
0.422
0.204
0.115
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.174
0.657
0.630
0.930
0.781
0.116
0.104
0.057
Validation
measure
Sex/Age
Male/20–29
Male/30–39
Male/40–49
Male/50–59
Male/60–69
Male/70–79
Male/80+
Female/20–29
Female/30–39
Female/40–49
Female/50–59
Female/60–69
Female/70–79
Female/80+
Marital Status
Not married
Married
Widowed
Divorced
Main activity
Empl./Primary
Sect.
Empl./Second.
Sect.
Empl./Tertiary.
Sect.
Unemployed
Student
Retired
Housework
Other
Educational level
1.000
1.000
1.000
Source: Authors' calculations
Tertiary
Secondary
Primary
2.3.2 External validation
In order to externally validate our static spatial microsimulation model, we chose to
use the synthesis of the labor market and occupations. In particular, we used the
9
Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European Community (NACE)
and the International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO) as guidelines for
aggregating the actual and simulated data in all areal units. The choice of these
classification standards was made, as it was the closest match between the relevant
variables found in the EU-SILC and Greek census data.
Although for 2006 all the necessary data for calculating external validation measures
at the municipality level (intra-urban municipal units, within Athens) were available,
the same was not feasible for the 2011 data. As a result, external validation
measures were calculated at the municipality level only for 2006.
Labor market structure
Table 2 illustrates the proportions of aggregated simulated and actual data referring
to labor market structure of the metropolitan area of Athens. As it is shown, very
small deviations exist between real and estimated values, regarding the proportions
of labor market sections. SimAthens overestimates in both cases section G referring
to wholesale and retail trade: repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles. It also
overestimates sections from B to E for 2011 that represent mining and quarrying;
manufacturing; electricity, gas, steam, and air conditioning supply and water supply;
sewerage, waste management; and remediation activities. Finally, it underestimates
section H, transportation and storage, for the same year.
Table 2: Simulated versus actual census shares for labor market structure in Athens
metropolitan area
2006
2011
Census
SimAthens
(%)
(%)
Diff.
NACE
Rev. 2
Sections
Census
SimAthens
(%)
(%)
Diff.
0.54
15.29
7.99
18.40
4.98
9.35
4.63
9.15
9.80
6.60
5.94
7.32
0.53
14.56
7.61
21.41
4.09
9.22
3.21
10.64
10.42
6.32
5.53
6.46
−0.01 A
−0.73 B − E
−0.38 F
3.01 G
−0.89 H
−0.13
I
−1.42 K
1.49
0.62 O
−0.28 P
−0.41 Q
−0.86 R − U + J
L − N
0.66
11.27
6.51
19.04
7.01
5.84
4.30
10.74
10.32
7.17
7.02
10.12
0.53
14.88
7.28
21.96
4.71
4.44
5.52
9.92
8.69
7.42
5.50
9.15
−0.13
3.61
0.77
2.92
−2.3
−1.4
1.22
−0.82
−1.63
0.25
−1.52
−0.97
10
NACE
Rev 1.1
Sections
A + B
C + D + E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O + P + Q
Source: Authors' calculations
From the scatter plot for labor market structure at municipality level for 2006 in
Figure 3, we can observe that there is a high goodness of fit between the actual
census data and the simulated aggregate results, because of the distribution of
scatter plot points very close to equality line.
Figure 3: Scatter plot for labor market structure at municipality level (2006).
Source: Authors' calculations
We can observe from Table 3 that validation measures are in most cases extremely
satisfactory. Coefficients of determination and SEI values are very close to unity in all
sections. Moreover, the equal-variance two-tailed t-test, conducted in all NACE
sections shows that deviations between simulated and actual data are statistically
significant in only four sections of the labor market: G (Wholesale and retail trade;
repair of motor vehicles, motorcycles), J (Financial intermediation), K (Real estate,
renting and business activities) and L (Public administration and defence, compulsory
social security).
11
050001000015000Simulated050001000015000CensusA + BC + D + EFGHIJKLMNO + P + QNACE Rev 1.1 Sections Table 3: Measures of validation for labor market structure
R2
0.999
0.990
0.974
0.995
0.988
0.950
0.992
0.993
0.992
0.993
0.982
0.963
2006
SEI
T-test (Prob.)
0.998
0.980
0.923
0.903
0.883
0.934
0.873
0.981
0.989
0.992
0.944
0.813
0.808
0.527
0.820
0.002
0.111
0.785
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.465
0.499
0.545
Validation measure
NACE Rev. 1.1 Sections
A + B
C + D + E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O + P + Q
Source: Authors' calculations
Occupational structure
The same analysis as before was also conducted in the case of occupations'
classification. Using ISCO-88 and ISCO-08 classification system for the two
reference years, respectively, we can see in Table 4 that in both cases there are
acceptable deviations between simulated and actual data. Their range varies from
0.02 (Skilled agricultural and fishery workers, 2006) up to 4.55 percentage units
(Legislators, senior officials and managers & Professionals. 2011).
12
Table 4: Simulated versus actual census shares for occupational structure in Athens
metropolitan area.
ISCO - 88
Legislators,
senior officials
and managers &
Professionals
Technicians and
associate
professionals
Clerks & Service
workers and
shop and
market sales
workers
Skilled
agricultural and
fishery workers
Craft and related
trade workers
Plant and
machine
operators and
assemblers
Elementary
occupations
2006
2011
Census
SimAthens
(%)
(%)
Diff.
Census
SimAthens
(%)
(%)
Diff.
26.76
26.97
0.21
28.00
23.45
−4.55
11.21
11.13
−0.08
11.63
9.29
−2.34
30.25
30.42
0.17
33.23
33.45
0.22
0.71
0.69
−0.02
0.93
1.74
0.81
15.61
16.87
1.26
11.46
14.46
3.00
6.96
6.25
−0.71
6.07
8.08
2.01
8.50
7.67
−0.83
8.68
9.53
0.85
Source: Authors' calculations
Figure 4 clearly shows the high goodness of fit between the static spatial
microsimulation model that we have constructed and the actual data for 2006 at a
municipality level. All scatter plot points are dispersed around the equality line,
indicating a very low level of deviation between the data.
13
Figure 4: Scatter plot for occupation categories at a municipality level (2006).
Source: Authors' calculations
The accuracy of the model can also be determined from the validation measures
calculated for the same year at a municipality level (Table 5). Both R2 and SEI
indicators have high values close to unity indicating a good behavior of the model, in
terms of accuracy and precision. The equal-variance two-tailed t-test was rejected in
almost all cases, with the exception of Craft and related trade workers and Plant and
machine operators and assemblers categories, where the deviations seem to be
statistically significant.
14
05000100001500020000Simulated05000100001500020000CensusLegislators, senior officials and managers & ProfessionalsTechnicians and associate professionalsClerks & Service workers and shop and market sales workersSkilled agricultural and fishery workersCraft and related trades workersPlant and machine operators and assemblersElementary occupationsOccupation categories Table 5: Measures of validation for labor market structure
Validation measure
ISCO – 88
R2
2006
SEI
T-test
(Prob.)
Legislators, senior officials and managers
& Professionals
0.997
0.995
0.762
Technicians and associate professionals
0.997
0.997
0.464
Clerks & Service workers and shop and
market sales workers
0.999
0.997
0.851
Skilled agricultural and fishery workers
0.981
0.979
0.461
Craft and related trade workers
0.998
0.995
0.000
Plant and machine operators and
assemblers
0.983
0.972
0.002
Elementary occupations
0.960
0.790
0.541
Source: Authors' calculations
3. Measures of poverty
Over
the past
four decades,
there have been significant efforts to better
conceptualize a broader concept of poverty (Townsend 1979; Atkinson 2003; Nolan
& Whelan 2011; Alkire et al. 2014). More recently, the European Commission has
been contributing to these efforts by adjusting multidimensional measurement of
poverty frameworks for advanced economies (Weziak-Bialowolska & Dijkstra 2014;
Atkinson & Marlier 2010). The work presented here builds upon these efforts and
aims to highlight the regional and local dimensions of the indicators being used to
date by the EU, by calculating them at small-area levels. The main measures
selected for our analysis are the so-called at-risk-of-poverty (AROP) rate, material
deprivation (MD) rate, and MPI. The first two measures consist of simple headcount
ratios referring to the proportion of people considered poor each time. However, MPI
is based on the Alkire Foster (AF) methodology using an adjusted headcount ratio
(Alkire & Foster 2011a; Alkire & Foster 2011b), which includes intensity.
Since 2001, the measure for income poverty in EU has been established by the
European Commission as the AROP rate, which is the proportion of people whose
income is <60% of the national (in our case municipality) household equivalized
median income. Moreover, an indicator concerning MD has been proposed and
formally agreed by the EU in 2009 (Guio, Fusco, and Marlier 2009; Fusco, Guio, and
15
Marlier 2010; Guio et. al., 2009). This indicator focuses mainly on some key aspects
of material living conditions, and is defined as the proportion of people living in
households, lacking at least three of a list of nine basic items. In our analysis, we
choose to examine the relationship between a relative measure of poverty, using
municipality-based thresholds to calculate poverty lines for the AROP rates, and an
absolute measure, using MD rates, where the same standard is applied to all
regions. Finally, for the calculation of MPI, we used as guideline the recent work of
Weziak-Bialowolska and Dijkstra (2014), where the main dimensions of MPI are
adjusted at a regional level for the EU regions.
4. SimAthens results
In this section, we present the results of our simulated small-area populations, where
metropolitan area of Athens was used as a case study. The EU-SILC data sets that
were used include 3375 (2006) and 2754 (2011) observations for the overall Attica
region. It must be indicated that only individuals living in the greater area of Attica
were chosen as inputs for the static spatial microsimulation model, instead of using
the total number of EU-SILC observations for Greece, in order to increase the
accuracy of the results, following a similar approach by Ballas et al. (2005), who us ed
regional subsamples of a national survey in their SimBritain model.
Table 7 shows the first example of SimAthens outputs: equivalized income. The table
shows maximum and minimum estimated values of its distribution within the
metropolitan area of Athens. In the last column, their proportional difference before
and after the economic crisis is also illustrated. All municipalities experienced a
decrease in their mean equivalized income during this period of approximately 9–
10%. In particular, for the case of metropolitan area of Athens as a whole, this
decrease had a mean value of 9.72%.
16
Table 7: Mean equivalized income per capita and its proportional difference for the
five richest and five poorest municipalities of metropolitan area of Athens.
Municipality
Mean equivalized
income 2006
(€ per capita)
Mean equivalized
income 2011
(€ per capita)
Difference
06/11
(%)
Met. Athens
14453.32
13047.03
−9.72
Top 5 by income (2011)
Psychik o
Filothei
Ek ali
Papagou
Neo Psychik o
Bottom 5 by income (2011)
Keratsini
Drapetsona
Agios Ioannis Rentis
Agia Varvara
Perama
Source: Authors' calculations
17408.58
17482.81
17334.02
17280.42
16293.64
13039.01
12921.85
12800.99
12803.30
12695.54
15766.14
15742.46
15482.58
15440.98
14798.05
11615.62
11563.58
11488.40
11452.38
11410.29
−9.43
−9.95
−10.68
−10.64
−9.18
−10.92
−10.51
−10.25
−10.55
−10.12
On the basis of these estimations, the AROP rates were also calculated for each
municipality, to obtain a first income-based estimation of poverty. Two ways of
calculating AROP rates were considered, aiming to highlight the difference between
spatially absolute and spatially relative ways of approaching this measure.
In the first case, the poverty line being used to calculate AROP rates is referring to
60% of the median equivalized income of the total metropolitan area of Athens. This
way of calculating the AROP rate is considered to measure poverty in a spatially
absolute way, because all individuals have a common reference line, despite living in
different areal units. The results of this measure are illustrated in Figure 5, where as
we move to more disadvantaged regions, the AROP rate is increasing in both years.
Moreover, it is important to note that the proportional difference before and after the
crisis also shows an inverse relationship with mean equivalized income. This means
that although the headcount ratio of poor people increased in all regions of Athens,
the rise was relatively higher in economically depressed municipalities.
17
Figure 5: At-risk-of-poverty rates (%) in absolute terms for municipalities in the
metropolitan area of Athens
Source: Authors' calculations
The previous picture changes radically when using as poverty line the 60% of each
municipality's median of equivalized income. In contrast to the previous case, this
time each individual is compared only with others living in the same region. As a
result, AROP rate in this case has a spatially relative character, exploring inequality
within municipal units and using the municipal average income as the point of
reference. The results of this measure are given in Figure 6. When looking more
carefully at the data, it is very interesting to note that in contrast to the previous
measure, their values decline while moving to economically depres sed areas for
2006. This behaviour could be explained by a possible continuation of the socio-
spatial polarization in Athens observed in the 1990s (Maloutas, 2007) underpinned
by the tendency of people moving from low income to more affluent areas when they
can afford to do so. These interregional movements lead to a more homogenous
regional formation, especially for low-income areas, resulting in minor intraregional
income inequalities.
Nonetheless, results for 2011 suggest that economic crisis affected primarily low-
income areas, where proportions of relatively poor people living in these areas were
substantially expanded. By observing the curves illustrated in Figure 6, it becomes
18
10152025AROP - Absolute (%)1000012000140001600018000Mean equivalised income20062011 obvious that spatially relative AROP rates increased in all areas during this period.
This indicates that intraregional income inequality expanded, while at the same time
gaps in terms of spatially relative AROP rates between areas decreased.
Figure 6: At-risk-of-poverty rates (%) in relative terms for municipalities in the
metropolitan area of Athens
Source: Authors' calculations
As a second measure of absolute poverty we choose to use MD rates. An important
characteristic of this measure is the fact that MD criteria do not change over time. We
can observe in Figure 7 that MD rates increased during this period, while their values
also increased relatively to income levels. Considering the differences between the
reference years, it becomes clear that these are much higher than the absolute
AROP rates. This is probably due to the time-invariant character of MD rates.
Absolute AROP rates may be calculated using a common poverty line for all
municipalities, but which still differs between 2006 and 2011. By using MD rates, we
can correct this time-dependent inconsistency and this helps us have a clearer view
of the crisis effects. Moreover, MD rates offer a more comprehensive view of poverty,
by incorporating a diversified view of this phenomenon.
19
1618202224AROP - Relative (%)1000012000140001600018000Mean equivalised income20062011 Figure 7: Material deprivation rates (%) for municipalities in the metropolitan area of
Athens
Source: Authors' calculations
We have also used the SimAthens model to calculate the MPI index at a municipality
level and some of these results are shown in Figure 8. As can be seen, there is clear
evidence that during this prolonged recession period, this measure of poverty
increased considerably in most areas.
This observation is of significant interest and relevance to current policy debates,
given that the MPI index constitutes a synthetic measure of poverty, not focusing on
income, and thus incorporating much information related to aspects of human
development and well-being. Another important advantage of this measure is the fact
that it is calculated by weighting a simple headcount ratio of multidimensional poor
people in each spatial unit, with the intensity of poverty in the same area. As a result,
municipalities which are placed at the lowest parts of the ranking in terms of
multidimensional poverty perform worse in both headcount ratio and intensity of
poverty.
20
510152025Deprivation ratio (%)1000012000140001600018000Mean equivalised income20062011 Figure 8: Multidimensional poverty index for municipalities in the metropolitan area of
Athens
Source: Authors' calculations
The results obtained by SimAthens model can also help us map and explore the
spatial patterns in the distribution of poverty within Athens. Figure 9 shows the exact
location of the metropolitan area of Athens, investigated in this study. Moreover,
Figure 10 depicts the distribution of model aggregate outputs regarding mean
equivalized income, MD and AROP rates, within Athens for 2006. As it is illustrated,
the more affluent areas are generally located in northeast Athens (Fig. 10.a),
showing at the same time lower levels of MD and AROP rates in absolute terms (Fig.
10.b and 10.d).
21
.04.06.08.1.12MPI1000012000140001600018000Mean equivalised income20062011 Figure 9: Location of the metropolitan area of Athens
Source: Authors' calculations
It is also important to indicate that lower levels of mean equivalized income and
poverty are not located in the center of Athens, but that they are generally found in
the western part of this large urban agglomeration. However, when concerning the
AROP rates in relative terms, these areas seem to have the lowest values, implying
low levels of income inequality within these areas. Furthermore, Figure 10 illustrates
that the central part of Athens consists of municipalities that are placed at the middle
of income and poverty distribution.
22
Figure 10: Distribution of income and poverty measures within the metropolitan area
of Athens (2006).
(a) Mean equivalized income
(b) Material Deprivation rate
(c) At-risk-of-poverty rate – Relative terms
(d) At-risk-of-poverty rate – Absolute terms
Source: Authors' calculations
5. Concluding remarks
In this study, we have constructed a static spatial microsimulation model that
combines small-area census data with social survey data, aiming to analyze income
distribution and poverty in Athens. The construction of the SimAthens model resulted
in the creation of a rich small-area micro-data set for Athens, which was then used
23
for small-area-level analysis of the socioeconomic changes that took place during the
period between 2006 and 2011.
After classifying areas based on their mean equivalized income for 2011, the results
for the top five and bottom five municipalities were illustrated for both reference
years, to investigate the patterns in the two tails of the income distribution. The
results indicate that during the period of economic crisis, there was a decrease in all
income levels and at the same time a large increase in poverty.
The SimAthens model outputs included different measures of poverty focusing on
alternative dimensions of poverty and attempting to track differentiations of this
phenomenon in space and time using diversified components. Looking at absolute
measures, such as the MD and AROP rates in absolute terms, it is interesting to note
that their spatial distribution seems to be the converse of the corresponding income
allocation. However, because MD rates are time independent (as they do not depend
on the average income at the time), there is a higher increase in their values between
2006 and 2011, indicating a relative increase of intermunicipality inequality.
AROP rates in spatially relative terms seem to follow income distribution before the
economic crisis, illustrating lower levels of income inequality in poorer regions.
However, this situation changed in 2011: relative AROP rates become more
homogenous between spatial units of Athens, showing a significant increase in
intramunicipality income inequalities for more deprived areas. Finally, looking at the
results referring to MPI, we can observe that the values of this measure increase as
we move to areas with lower mean equivalized incomes.
It can be argued that the findings presented in this study constitute an initial step of
understanding deeper aspects of the ways in which a large city reacts to an
economic shock, such as the economic crisis of 2008 and the ongoing recession
since then. If the city is assumed a continuously changing dynamic system, the
SimAthens model presented in this study offers a great opportunity to investigate the
underlying dynamics resulting from the individual spatial units composing it. By using
the simulated results, to construct either simple or more complex indices, such as the
MPI, it becomes obvious that we can expand the analysis to special social groups.
Therefore, SimAthens could be an appropriate tool to deepen this type of research
and investigate possible what-if scenarios for policy-making decisions at a local level.
24
The research presented in this study provides a glimpse of the potential of combining
small-area census data with social survey data, to estimate geographical distributions
of variables, for which there are no data available at low spatial levels. To the best of
the authors' knowledge, SimAthens represents the first effort to build a spatial
microsimulation model for Greece. This model could be treated as a platform, on
which alternative perspectives regarding the geographical dimension of fiscal
consolidation and social policies, as well as the social and spatial impacts of austerity
measures in Europe could be tested. For example, at the time of writing this study,
the Greek government announced a new round of budget cuts (worth €5.4bn; Smith,
2016) and austerity measures to be introduced in 2016 and 2017, ranging from
increases in income tax for particular groups in the labor market (such as the self-
employed) to increases in value-added tax and national pension contributions. At the
same time, and on a more positive note, there are investment possibilities such as
the European Commission Investment Plan for Europe (Michalopoulos, 2016), which
may offset the impact of austerity to some extent. The geographical as well as
socioeconomic impact of all these developments and proposed developments can be
analyzed with the use of SimAthens to inform debates and possible help with the
formulation of alternative policies and strategies. Overall, SimAthens has great
potential to be used as a tool for simulating small-area phenomena. Finally, it could
provide an effective solution to the analysis of the spatial and socioeconomic impacts
of alternative urban, regional, and national social policies, or, in other words, for
what-if scenario analysis.
25
References
Alkire, S., Apablaza, M. & Jung, E., 2014. Multidimensional poverty measurement for
EU-SILC countries. OPHI Research in Progress 36b.
Alkire, S. & Foster, J., 2011a. Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement.
Journal
of
Public
Economics,
95(7-8),
pp.476–487. Available
at:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272710001660.
Alkire, S. & Foster, J., 2011b. Understandings and misunderstandings of
multidimensional poverty measurement. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 9(2),
pp.289–314. Available at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10888-011-9181-4.
Amis, P., 1995. Making sense of urban poverty. Environment and Urbanization, 7(1),
pp.145–158. Available at: http://eau.sagepub.com/content/7/1/145.short.
Atkinson, A.B., 2003. Multidimensional Deprivation: Contrasting Social Welfare and
Counting Approaches. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 1(1), pp.51–65. Available
at: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A%3A1023903525276.
Atkinson, B. & Marlier, E., 2010. Income and living conditions in Europe.
Ballas, D. et al., 2013. A Review of Microsimulation for Policy Analysis. In C.
O'Donoghue et al., eds. Spatial Microsimulation for Rural Policy Analysis SE - 3.
Advances in Spatial Science. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 35–54. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30026-4_3.
Ballas, D. et al., 2012. A Spatial Microsimulation Approach to Small Area Income
Estimation in Britain and Japan. Studies in Regional Science, 42(1), pp.163–187.
Available
at:
http://japanlinkcenter.org/DN/JST.JSTAGE/srs/42.163?lang=en&from=CrossRef&typ
e=abstract.
Ballas, D., 2005. Geography matters: simulating the local impacts of national social
policies, Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Ballas, D. et al., 2007. Using SimBritain to Model the Geographical Impact of
National Government Policies. Geographical Analysis, 39(1), pp.44–77. Available at:
http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1538-4632.2006.00695.x.
26
Ballas, D., Clarke, G. & Dewhurst, J., 2006. Modelling the Socio-economic Impacts of
Major Job Loss or Gain at the Local Level: a Spatial Microsimulation Framework.
Spatial
Economic
Analysis,
1(1),
pp.127–146.
Available
at:
http://econpapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:specan:v:1:y:2006:i:1:p:127-146.
Ballas, D., Clarke, G.P. & Wiemers, E., 2005. Building a dynamic spatial
microsimulation model for Ireland. Population, Space and Place, 11(3), pp.157–172.
Available at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/psp.359.
Betti, G., Donatiello, G. & Verma, V., 2010. The Siena Micro Simulation Model (SM2)
for netgross conversion of EU-SILC income variables. International Journal of
Microsimulation, 3(2), pp.35–53.
Birkin, M. & Clarke, M., 2011. Spatial microsimulation models: a review and a
glimpse into the future. In Population Dynamics and Projection Methods. Springer,
pp. 193–208.
Birkin, M. & Clarke, M., 1988. SYNTHESIS -- a synthetic spatial information system
for urban and regional analysis: methods and examples. Environment and Planning
A,
20(12),
pp.1645–1671.
Available
at:
http://www.envplan.com/abstract.cgi?id=a201645.
Callan, T., 1991. Income Tax and Welfare Reforms: Microsimulation Modelling and
Analysis, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
Campbell, M. & Ballas, D., 2013. A spatial microsimulation approach to economic
policy analysis in Scotland. Regional Science Policy & Practice, 5(3), pp.263–288.
Available at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/rsp3.12009.
Chin, S.-F. & Harding, A., 2007. Model 22 SpatialMSM - NATSEM's Small Area
Household Model for Australia. In Modelling Our Future: Population Ageing, Health
and Aged Care. International Symposia in Economic Theory and Econometrics.
Emerald Group
Publishing
Limited,
pp.
567–569.
Available
at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1571-0386(06)16041-X.
Clarke, M. & Holm, E., 1987. Microsimulation Methods in Spatial Analysis and
Planning. Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, 69(2), pp.145–164.
Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/490448.
27
Dimitris Kavroudakis, Dimitris Ballas, M.B., 2013. SimEducation: A Dynamic Spatial
Microsimulation Model for Understanding Educational Inequalities. In R. Tanton & K.
Edwards, eds. Spatial Microsimulation: A Reference Guide for Users. Dordrecht:
Springer Netherlands. Available at: http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/978-
94-007-4623-7.
Edwards, K.L. et al., 2010. Internal and External Validation of Spatial Microsimulation
Models: Small Area Estimates of Adult Obesity. Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy,
4(4), pp.281–300. Available at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12061-010-9056-2.
Elbers, C., Lanjouw, J.O. & Lanjouw, P., 2003. Micro–level estimation of poverty and
inequality. Econometrica, 71(1), pp.355–364.
Fabrizi, E. et al., 2014. Mapping average equivalized income using robust small area
methods. Papers in Regional Science, 93(3), pp.685–701.
Fay, R.E. & Herriot, R.A., 1979. Estimates of income for small places: an application
of James-Stein procedures to census data. Journal of the American Statistical
Association, 74(366a), pp.269–277.
Fusco, A., Guio, A.-C. & Marlier, E., 2010. Characterising the income poor and the
materially deprived in European countries. Income and living conditions in Europe,
p.133.
Glaeser, E.L., 1998. Are Cities Dying? The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12(2),
pp.139–160 CR
– Copyright © 1998 American Econo. Available at:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2646967.
Guio, A.-C., Fusco, A. & Marlier, E., 2009. A European Union approach to material
deprivation using EU-SILC and Eurobarometer data.
Integrated Research
Infrastructure in the Socio-economic Sciences (IRISS) Working Paper Series, 19,
p.2009.
Hagerstrand, T., 1957. Migration in Sweden: A Symposium D. Hannerberg, ed.,
Available
at:
https://books.google.gr/books/about/Migration_in_Sweden.html?id=9zkiAAAAMAAJ&
pgis=1.
Harding, A. et al., 2006. Poverty and disadvantage among Australian children: a
spatial perspective,
28
Kain, J.F. & Apgar, W.C., 1985. Housing and Neighborhood Dynamics: A Simulation
Study,
Harvard
University
Press.
Available
at:
https://books.google.com/books?id=XdT8OncAQe0C&pgis=1.
Kavroudakis, D., Ballas, D. & Birkin, M., 2012. Using Spatial Microsimulation to
Model Social and Spatial Inequalities in Educational Attainment. Applied Spatial
Analysis
and
Policy,
6(1),
pp.1–23.
Available
at:
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12061-012-9075-2.
Lovelace, R. & Ballas, D., 2013. "Truncate, replicate, sample": A method for creating
integer weights for spatial microsimulation. Computers, Environment and Urban
Systems,
41,
pp.1–11.
Available
at:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0198971513000240.
Lovelace, R., Ballas, D. & Watson, M., 2014. A spatial microsimulation approach for
the analysis of commuter patterns: from individual to regional levels. Journal of
Transport
Geography,
34,
pp.282–296.
Available
at:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692313001361.
Lovelace, R., & Dumont, M. (2016). Spatial Microsimulation with R. CRC Press.
Maloutas, T (2007), Segregation, SOcial Polarization and imigration in Athens during
the 1990s: Theoretical Expectations and Contextual Difference, International Journal
of Urban and Regional Research, vo. 31, pp. 733-758
Marsh, C. (1993) Privacy, confidentiality and anonymity in the 1991 Census. In The
1991 Census User's Guide (eds. A Dale and C Marsh), London: Her Majesty's
Stationary Office, 111-128
Michalopoulos, S (2016), Schinas: Juncker Plan is 'good news' for Greece, Euractiv,
14
April
2016,
available
from:
http://www.euractiv.com/section/euro-
finance/interview/schinas-juncker-plan-is-good-news-for-greece-stay-tuned/
Miranti, R. et al., 2010. Poverty at the Local Level: National and Small Area Poverty
Estimates by Family Type for Australia in 2006. Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy,
4(3), pp.145–171. Available at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12061-010-9049-1.
Moser, C.O.N., 1998. The asset vulnerability framework: Reassessing urban poverty
reduction strategies. World Development, 26(1), pp.1–19. Available at:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X97100158.
29
Nagle, N.N., Sweeney, S.H. & Kyriakidis, P.C., 2011. Geostatistical Linear
Regression Model for Small Area Data. Geographical analysis.
Nolan, B. & Whelan, C.T., 2011. Poverty and Deprivation in Europe, Oxford
University
Press.
Available
at:
http://ideas.repec.org/b/oxp/obooks/9780199588435.html.
O'Donoghue, C., Loughrey, J. & Morrissey, K., 2013. Using the EU-SILC to model
the impact of the economic crisis on inequality. IZA Journal of European Labor
Studies, 2(1), p.23. Available at: http://www.izajoels.com/content/2/1/23.
Orcutt, G.H., 1957. A New Type of Socio-Economic System. The Review of
Economics and Statistics, 39(2), pp.116–123.
Orcutt, G.H., Caldwell, S. & Wertheimer, R.F., 1976. Policy Exploration Through
Microanalytic
Simulation,
The
Urban
Insitute.
Available
at:
https://books.google.com/books?id=4g44Qr51NEwC&pgis=1.
Pereira, L.N. & Coelho, P.S., 2013. Estimation of house prices in regions with small
sample sizes. The Annals of Regional Science, 50(2), pp.603–621.
PRED, A., 1977. The choreography of existence: comments on Hagerstrand's time-
geography and its usefulness. Economic Geography, 53, pp.207–221.
Pritchard, D.R. & Miller, E.J., 2011. Advances in population synthesis: fitting many
attributes per agent and fitting to household and person margins simultaneously.
Transportation,
39(3),
pp.685–704.
Available
at:
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11116-011-9367-4.
Rees, P., Martin, D. & Williamson, P., 2002. Census data resources in the United
Kingdom. In P. Rees, D. J. Martin, & P. Williamson, eds. The Census Data System.
Wiley, pp. 1–24.
Robert Tanton; Kimberley L. Edwards, 2013. Introduction to Spatial Microsimulation:
History, Methods and Applications. In Spatial Microsimulation: A Reference Guide for
Users. Springer Netherlands, pp. 3–8.
Satterthwaite, D., 1997. Urban Poverty: Reconsidering its Scale and Nature. IDS
Bulletin,
28(2),
pp.9–23. Available
at:
http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1759-
5436.1997.mp28002002.x.
30
Sen,
A.,
1999.
Development
as
Freedom,
Available
at:
https://books.google.com/books?hl=el&lr=&id=NQs75PEa618C&pgis=1.
Sen,
A.,
1992.
Inequality
Reexamined,
Available
at:
https://books.google.com/books?hl=el&lr=&id=D6_eCtTK6-oC&pgis=1.
Sen, A., 1983. Poor, Relatively Speaking. Oxford Economic Papers, 35(2), pp.153–
169 CR
– Copyright ©
1983 Oxford Univers. Available
at:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2662642.
Smith, D.M., Clarke, G.P. & Harland, K., 2009. Improving the synthetic data
generation process in spatial microsimulation models. Environment and Planning A,
41(5),
pp.1251–1268.
Available
at:
http://econpapers.repec.org/RePEc:pio:envira:v:41:y:2009:i:5:p:1251-1268.
Smith, H (2016), Greek MPs approve toughest austerity measures yet amid rioting,
The
Guardian,
8
May
2016,
available
from:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/08/rioters-take-to-the-streets-ahead-of-
greek-austerity-vote#img-1
Sutherland, H. & Figari, F., 2013. EUROMOD: the European Union tax-benefit
microsimulation model, EUROMOD Working Paper.
Tanton, R., 2014. A Review of Spatial Microsimulation Methods. International Journal
of
Microsimulation,
7(1),
pp.4–25.
Available
at:
http://ideas.repec.org/a/ijm/journl/v7y2014i1p4-25.html.
Tanton, R. et al., 2009. Old, Single and Poor: Using Microsimulation and Microdata to
Analyse Poverty and the Impact of Policy Change among Older Australians.
Economic Papers: A journal of applied economics and policy, 28(2), pp.102–120.
Available at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1759-3441.2009.00022.x.
Tanton, R., 2011. Spatial microsimulation as a method for estimating different
poverty rates in Australia. Population, Space and Place, 17(3), pp.222–235. Available
at: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/psp.601.
Townsend, P., 1979. Poverty in the United Kingdom: A Survey of Household
Resources
and
Standards
of
Living,
Available
at:
https://books.google.com/books?hl=el&lr=&id=weGYy_-czvsC&pgis=1.
31
Weziak-Bialowolska, D. & Dijkstra, L., 2014. Monitoring multidimensional poverty in
the EU regions.
Wilson, A.G. & Pownall, C.E., 1976. A New Representation of the Urban System for
Modelling and for the Study of Micro-Level Interdependence. Area, 8(4), pp.246–254.
Wratten, E., 1995. Conceptualizing urban poverty. Environment and Urbanization,
7(1), pp.11–38. Available at: http://eau.sagepub.com/content/7/1/11.short.
32
|
1711.11068 | 2 | 1711 | 2017-12-09T04:44:59 | Happiness Pursuit: Personality Learning in a Society of Agents | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI"
] | Modeling personality is a challenging problem with applications spanning computer games, virtual assistants, online shopping and education. Many techniques have been tried, ranging from neural networks to computational cognitive architectures. However, most approaches rely on examples with hand-crafted features and scenarios. Here, we approach learning a personality by training agents using a Deep Q-Network (DQN) model on rewards based on psychoanalysis, against hand-coded AI in the game of Pong. As a result, we obtain 4 agents, each with its own personality. Then, we define happiness of an agent, which can be seen as a measure of alignment with agent's objective function, and study it when agents play both against hand-coded AI, and against each other. We find that the agents that achieve higher happiness during testing against hand-coded AI, have lower happiness when competing against each other. This suggests that higher happiness in testing is a sign of overfitting in learning to interact with hand-coded AI, and leads to worse performance against agents with different personalities. | cs.MA | cs |
Happiness Pursuit: Personality Learning
in a Society of Agents
Rafał Muszy´nski
University College London
[email protected]
Jun Wang
University College London
[email protected]
Abstract
Modeling personality is a challenging problem with applications spanning com-
puter games, virtual assistants, online shopping and education. Many techniques
have been tried, ranging from neural networks to computational cognitive archi-
tectures. However, most approaches rely on examples with hand-crafted features
and scenarios. Here, we approach learning a personality by training agents using
a Deep Q-Network (DQN) model on rewards based on psychoanalysis, against
hand-coded AI in the game of Pong. As a result, we obtain 4 agents, each with
its own personality. Then, we define happiness of an agent, which can be seen as
a measure of alignment with agent's objective function, and study it when agents
play both against hand-coded AI, and against each other. We find that the agents
that achieve higher happiness during testing against hand-coded AI, have lower
happiness when competing against each other. This suggests that higher happi-
ness in testing is a sign of overfitting in learning to interact with hand-coded AI,
and leads to worse performance against agents with different personalities.
1
Introduction
Personality is defined in [19] as the "unique, relatively enduring internal and external aspects of a
person's character that influence behavior in different situations." Theories of personality strive to
explain and describe different types of personalities among people. Freud [4, 3] was the first to
develop a modern theory of personality based mostly on clinical observations. In [19], Freudian
structure of personality is described as composing of three elements: id, ego, and superego. Id is
concentrated on following basic instincts. It is interested in instant gratification, knows no morality
and is selfish. On the opposite side, superego constitutes the moral aspect of personality. It wants
to act according to parental and societal values and standards. Ego is the rational element of the
Freudian model. Its role is to resolve the conflicts between the demands of id and the moralizing
superego by using defense mechanisms such as denial or repression. Many alternative approaches
describing personality have been proposed since (e.g., see [19]). Moreover, computational models of
personality have also been implemented (see section 2). Most of them concentrate on intrapersonal
aspects of personality and work with hand-crafted features, in relatively simple settings.
In the last few years, the advances in Deep Learning (DL) [7, 18] and the development of Deep Q-
Networks (DQN) [9] have made it possible to work with increasingly more complex environments,
e.g. Atari 2600 games [2], using only pixels as input.
In this work, we explore the applicability of DQN to computational psychology on the intrapersonal
level. We concentrate on id and superego components of personality. The key idea is to employ
DQN to learn a Freudian-inspired personality model from raw input in the game of Pong and use
the resulting agents with different personalities to study their performance both in training and in
a society of bots. Firstly, to achieve agents with different personalities, we formulate and train a
DQN-based model using Freudian-inspired reward functions (section 3). We let one DQN learn
NIPS 2017, Aligned Artificial Intelligence Workshop, Long Beach, CA, USA.
Figure 1: Possible RID and RSE values combinations at the end of the game and the actual average
values obtained by the agents during 1000 test games against hand-coded AI.
from a reward signal strengthening selfish behavior - in Pong this can be reflected by scoring a point
against an opponent - which is a typical characteristic of id [19]. Another DQN learns superego -
based on rewards corresponding to morality, cooperation. In the game, this can be represented by
trying to win, but without getting ahead of our opponent by more than one point. Secondly, we
define a "happiness" measure of a resulting id/superego agent based on its performance in relation
to its objective function (section 3). Finally, when the trained id and superego agents play against
each other, we find that the agents that are less happy after the training session - or less aligned with
their intended reward objective - are more happy when they compete against each other (section 4).
This suggests that less overfitting during training, leads to a more successful, resilient behavior of
an agent in a society.
2 Related work
To our knowledge, the first attempt to computationally describe the psychoanalytic theory of mind
was [11] (cf. [10]), and used basic probability. We did not find any extensions of the model to com-
puter simulations. A computational model of personality using some of the traits of the Big Five
theory of personality (the Five Factor Model, FFM; cf. [19]) and neural networks was presented in
[15]. Other studies using neural networks to learn a personality include [13, 14]. Another proba-
bilistic approach was given by [6], which used a Bayesian Belief Network with the FFM to build
a multilayer personality model in a chat application. The fact that you can replicate many of the
previous experiments used in computational models of personality, e.g. [15, 14], within a CLAR-
ION cognitive architecture was demonstrated in [20]. As far as other cognitive architectures are
concerned, [5] used one trait of the FFM in the ACT-R architecture and demonstrate the behavior of
their model, PIACT, in a soccer simulation environment. The BDI architecture was used to simulate
personality in [12], and more recently with the FFM in [1]. The biggest difference in our approach
to modeling personality is that it only involves specifying new reward signals for the id or superego
components of the personality model to achieve complex behavior in a challenging environment.
3 Problem description
Motivated by the Freudian theory of personality [4, 3], we formulate two types of rewards and agents
corresponding to the id and superego elements of personality.
Definition 1. ID reward (rID) is a predefined, scalar reward signal sent to the agent at each time
step, encouraging selfish behavior.
Definition 2. SE reward (rSE) is a predefined, scalar reward signal sent to the agent at each time
step, encouraging social behavior.
Definition 3. Cumulative ID reward (RID) is a total reward achieved by an agent in a Markov
Chain of length n, ending with a terminus event e:
RID = rID1 + ... + rIDn
(1)
2
Figure 2: Training IDL and SER agents against
hand-coded AI for 10 million frames.
Figure 3: Lower happiness score during testing
leads to higher happiness in a society.
Definition 4. Cumulative SE reward (RSE) is a total reward achieved by an agent in a Markov
Chain of length n, ending with a terminus event e:
RSE = rSE1 + ... + rSEn
(2)
Definition 5. ID is an agent with an objective of maximizing RID.
Definition 6. SUPEREGO (SE) is an agent with an objective of maximizing RSE.
Happiness of people can be measured through surveys, e.g. [8], and captured as a scalar value on
a scale. More recently, it has been described mathematically in computational neuroscience as a
relation between certain rewards, expected values of given gambles, and the difference between ex-
pected and actual rewards in individual [17], and more broadly in social context [16]. Our definition
of happiness is for artificial agents and takes into account maximum, and minimum values they can
obtain in an environment, and is independent of the happiness of other agents.
Definition 7. Happiness of Agent X (HX) is defined as the quotient:
HX = (RX − R∗
(3)
where the cumulative reward obtained by agent X in a Markov Chain, ending with a terminus event
e is denoted as RX, and its potential maximum and minimum values as R∗∗
X, respectively.
Using the above definitions, we train ID and SE agents in the game of Pong. We study their happiness
both when training against hand-coded AI, and when they play against each other in a society of bots.
X and R∗
X )/(R∗∗
X − R∗
X )
4 Experiment set-up and results
In order to demonstrate ID and SE agents in practice, we modified a simple Pong game. The game
has 2 players, each controlling one of the paddles on either side of the screen. The goal of the game
is to bounce the ball in such a way, so that it goes past the opponent's paddle - for which the player
is awarded 1 point. The game ends with one of the players scoring 11 points.
In terms of the terminology from section 3, scoring 11 points is the terminus event (e), after which
a new match begins. A subjective reward (rID) used to train ID relates to the id component of
the Freudian theory of personality that is selfish. Here, we set rID to +1, if the ball goes past the
opponent (ID scores a point), -1 if it goes past ID (ID loses a point), and 0 otherwise. As a
result, the minimum value of RID (i.e. R∗
ID) in one match is -11 (losing every single point), and
the maximum is +11 (R∗∗
ID). On the other hand, rSE captures the social aspect of the environment,
in line with the superego component of personality. Here, the rules for getting the reward are more
involved. In short, the goal of SE is still winning, ideally 11:10, and taking turns in scoring the
points with the opponent.1 Hence, R∗
SE is 10.5. Fig. 1 shows possible values of
RID and RSE that an agent can obtain at the end of each match (for clarity, the values of RSE are
rounded). Note the natural trade-off line between the optimal ID (pair RSE = 3, RID = 11, the
green diamond at the top) and SE values (pair RSE = 10.5, RID = 1, the rightmost blue diamond).
To train ID and SE agents, we use DQN [9] with rID and rSE as the reward signals. Both ID
and SE agents are first trained separately against a hand-coded AI, and strive to maximize RID and
SE is -6, and R∗∗
1To see the full code and the videos showing the performance of agents, go to https://git.io/vbT1v.
3
Table 1: Performance of agents during 1000
test games against hand-coded AI.
Table 2: Summary statistics of 100 matches be-
tween agents.
Agent
IDL
IDR
SEL
SER
Average
score
11.00
11.00
8.84
10.78
Average
% won RID
100% 9.99
100% 10.76
-1.69
16%
91%
4.08
RSE
2.48
3.03
5.09
4.41
Match
IDL vs. IDR
SEL vs. SER
IDL vs. SER
SEL vs. IDR
Average score
L
10.80
3.50
9.44
8.92
R
5.29
10.93
8.96
9.05
% won
R
L
91% 9%
3%
97%
51% 49%
40% 60%
RSE respectively. We train ID to control the paddle on the left and right on 10 million frames. We
do the same for the SE agent. As a result we obtain 4 models: ID trained to control the paddle on
the left (IDL), right (IDR), and the SE agents respectively (SEL and SER). Note that IDL did
not perform well when used to control the paddle on the opposite end of the screen (the same was
observed for other agents), hence the 2 agents per side. Fig. 2 shows a learning curve for the IDL
and SER agents during training. For clarity, the lines on the graph show the moving averages of
RID and RSE over the last 10 matches. The learning curves of IDR and SEL look similarly and
are therefore omitted. Note that performance of SER starts to deteriorate slightly around 4 million
frames. We observe a similar behavior when training SEL. Hence, in the following experiments we
froze the weights calculated at 4.2M frames for SEL, 4.15M for SER, and 10M for both ID agents.
In the test phase, we set the epsilon value to 0, and run each model for 1000 matches against the
hand-coded AI (see Table 1). One can note, that ID agents learned to win every single time (%
won column in Table 1), with IDR agent beating the hand-coded opponent by a larger number of
points than IDL, as can be seen by its higher average RID value. SEL agent did not learn to win
consistently, but it achieves the highest score among all the agents on its core objective - maximizing
the RSE value. The numbers indicate that rSE is a harder signal to learn, as both SE agents did not
get as close to their potential maximum (RSE = 10.5, RID = 1) as both ID agents. The visual
confirmation of this is presented in Fig. 1, where the average values of RSE and RID obtained by
the agents during testing are plotted against all the possible scenarios. Indeed, the averages of both
ID agents are closer to their respective maximum (the green diamond at the top), than those for the
SE agents (the rightmost blue diamond). We find that rID is easier to learn as the same actions lead
to the same rewards. The SE agent has a more difficult function to learn, as the same actions result
in different reward depending on the score. ID rewards are independent of the score.
Subsequently, the 4 trained agents played 100 matches against each other (see Table 2). The IDL
agent - which performed worse than IDR during testing - won 91% of the games against its oppo-
nent, and also beat SER by a small margin. SER also achieved lower RSE than SEL in testing,
yet it greatly outperformed SEL in a series of matches. Finally, happiness statistics (see Figure 3)
further indicate, that agents achieving lower happiness on their respective objective during testing,
show higher happiness when interacting with other agents during the matches. This suggests that
achieving high performance on the given reward objective against the hand-coded Pong AI is not
enough to generate a resilient strategy. Agents may need more variability during training to better
respond to the changing environment later on.
5 Conclusions
In this paper we describe the computational model of personality based on Freudian psychoanalysis
and DQN, and define "happiness" of an agent. Through the experiments, we show that the agents
that are less aligned with their intended objective after the training period, exhibit more alignment
when interacting with other agents. Here, we acknowledge the weaknesses of this work and mention
possible further improvements. Firstly, due to the nature of the DQN algorithm, it is impossible to
compare our work with other computational models of personality as was done in [20]. Secondly,
this study relies on the psychoanalytic theory of personality. However, it appears that extending
this work to the FFM could further improve the ability of the model to capture human personality.
Lastly, in order to calculate the happiness, one needs to know the minimum and maximum values of
RSE and RID, which may be impossible in more complex environments.
4
Acknowledgment
This work was supported by Microsoft Research through its PhD Scholarship Programme.
References
[1] Sebastian Ahrndt, Johannes Fahndrich, and Sahin Albayrak. Modelling of personality in
agents: from psychology to implementation. Proceedings of the HAIDM, pages 1–16, 2015.
[2] Marc G Bellemare, Yavar Naddaf, Joel Veness, and Michael Bowling. The arcade learning
environment: An evaluation platform for general agents. Journal of Artificial Intelligence
Research, 47:253–279, 2013.
[3] Sigmund Freud. The ego and the id. WW Norton & Company, 1962.
[4] Sigmund Freud. Inhibitions, symptoms and anxiety. WW Norton & Company, 1977.
[5] Sara Karimi and Mohammad Reza Kangavari. A computational model of personality.
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 32:184–196, 2012.
[6] Sumedha Kshirsagar. A multilayer personality model. In Proceedings of the 2nd international
symposium on Smart graphics, pages 107–115. ACM, 2002.
[7] Yann LeCun, Yoshua Bengio, and Geoffrey Hinton. Deep learning. Nature, 521(7553):436–
444, 2015.
[8] Sonja Lyubomirsky and Heidi S Lepper. A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary
reliability and construct validation. Social indicators research, 46(2):137–155, 1999.
[9] Volodymyr Mnih, Koray Kavukcuoglu, David Silver, Andrei A Rusu, Joel Veness, Marc G
Bellemare, Alex Graves, Martin Riedmiller, Andreas K Fidjeland, Georg Ostrovski, et al.
Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning. Nature, 518(7540):529–533, 2015.
[10] Tohru Nitta. A computational model of personality. No Matter, Never Mind: Proceedings of
Toward a Science of Consciousness: Fundamental approaches, Tokyo 1999, 33:315, 2002.
[11] Tohru Nitta, Toshio Tanaka, Kenji Nishida, and Hiroaki Inayoshi. Modeling human mind.
In Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1999. IEEE SMC'99 Conference Proceedings. 1999 IEEE
International Conference on, volume 2, pages 342–347. IEEE, 1999.
[12] Lin Padgham and Guy Taylor. A system for modelling agents having emotion and personality.
In Intelligent Agent Systems Theoretical and Practical Issues, pages 59–71. Springer, 1997.
[13] Mike Poznanski and Paul Thagard. Changing personalities: towards realistic virtual characters.
Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 17(3):221–241, 2005.
[14] Michael Quek and DS Moskowitz. Testing neural network models of personality. Journal of
Research in Personality, 41(3):700–706, 2007.
[15] Stephen J Read, Brian M Monroe, Aaron L Brownstein, Yu Yang, Gurveen Chopra, and Lynn C
Miller. A neural network model of the structure and dynamics of human personality. Psycho-
logical review, 117(1):61, 2010.
[16] Robb B Rutledge, Archy O De Berker, Svenja Espenhahn, Peter Dayan, and Raymond J Dolan.
The social contingency of momentary subjective well-being. Nature communications, 7, 2016.
[17] Robb B Rutledge, Nikolina Skandali, Peter Dayan, and Raymond J Dolan. A computational
and neural model of momentary subjective well-being. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences, 111(33):12252–12257, 2014.
[18] Jurgen Schmidhuber. Deep learning in neural networks: An overview. Neural networks, 61:85–
117, 2015.
[19] Duane P Schultz and Sydney Ellen Schultz. Theories of personality. Cengage Learning, 2016.
[20] Ron Sun and Nicholas Wilson. A model of personality should be a cognitive architecture itself.
Cognitive Systems Research, 29:1–30, 2014.
5
|
1312.7580 | 4 | 1312 | 2015-04-20T07:37:17 | On the Learning Behavior of Adaptive Networks - Part II: Performance Analysis | [
"cs.MA",
"eess.SY",
"math.OC"
] | Part I of this work examined the mean-square stability and convergence of the learning process of distributed strategies over graphs. The results identified conditions on the network topology, utilities, and data in order to ensure stability; the results also identified three distinct stages in the learning behavior of multi-agent networks related to transient phases I and II and the steady-state phase. This Part II examines the steady-state phase of distributed learning by networked agents. Apart from characterizing the performance of the individual agents, it is shown that the network induces a useful equalization effect across all agents. In this way, the performance of noisier agents is enhanced to the same level as the performance of agents with less noisy data. It is further shown that in the small step-size regime, each agent in the network is able to achieve the same performance level as that of a centralized strategy corresponding to a fully connected network. The results in this part reveal explicitly which aspects of the network topology and operation influence performance and provide important insights into the design of effective mechanisms for the processing and diffusion of information over networks. | cs.MA | cs | IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
1
On the Learning Behavior of Adaptive Networks --
Part II: Performance Analysis
Jianshu Chen, Member, IEEE, and Ali H. Sayed, Fellow, IEEE
5
1
0
2
r
p
A
0
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
4
v
0
8
5
7
.
2
1
3
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract -- Part I [2] of this work examined the mean-square
stability and convergence of the learning process of distributed
strategies over graphs. The results identified conditions on the
network topology, utilities, and data in order to ensure stability;
the results also identified three distinct stages in the learning
behavior of multi-agent networks related to transient phases I
and II and the steady-state phase. This Part II examines the
steady-state phase of distributed learning by networked agents.
Apart from characterizing the performance of the individual
agents, it is shown that the network induces a useful equalization
effect across all agents. In this way, the performance of noisier
agents is enhanced to the same level as the performance of agents
with less noisy data. It is further shown that in the small step-size
regime, each agent in the network is able to achieve the same
performance level as that of a centralized strategy corresponding
to a fully connected network. The results in this part reveal
explicitly which aspects of the network topology and operation
influence performance and provide important insights into the
design of effective mechanisms for the processing and diffusion
of information over networks.
Index Terms -- Multi-agent learning, diffusion of information,
steady-state performance, centralized solution, stochastic approx-
imation, mean-square-error.
I. INTRODUCTION
In Part I of this work [2], we carried out a detailed
transient analysis of the global learning behavior of multi-
agent networks. The analysis revealed interesting results about
the learning abilities of distributed strategies when constant
step-sizes are used to ensure continuous tracking of drifts
in the data. It was noted that when constant step-sizes are
employed to drive the learning process,
the dynamics of
the distributed strategies is modified in a critical manner.
Specifically, components that relate to gradient noise are not
annihilated any longer, as happens when diminishing step-sizes
are used. These noise components remain persistently active
throughout the adaptation process and it becomes necessary
to examine their impact on network performance, such as
Manuscript received December 28, 2013; revised November 21, 2014;
accepted March 29, 2015. This work was supported in part by NSF grants
CCF-1011918 and ECCS- 1407712. A short early version of limited parts of
this work appears in the conference publication [1] without proofs and under
more restrictive conditions.
J. Chen was with Department of Electrical Engineering, University of
California, Los Angeles, and is currently with Microsoft Research, Redmond,
WA 98052. This work was performed while he was a PhD student at UCLA.
Email: [email protected].
A. H. Sayed is with Department of Electrical Engineering, University of
California, Los Angeles, CA 90095. Email: [email protected].
Communicated by Prof. Nicol`o Cesa-Bianchi, Associate Editor for Pattern
Recognition, Statistical Learning, and Inference.
Copyright (c) 2014 IEEE. Personal use of this material
is permitted.
However, permission to use this material for any other purposes must be
obtained from the IEEE by sending a request to [email protected].
examining questions of the following nature: (a) can these
persistent noise components drive the network unstable? (b)
can the degradation in performance be controlled and mini-
mized? (c) what is the size of the degradation? Motivated by
these questions, we provided in Part I [2] detailed answers to
the following three inquiries: (i) where does the distributed
strategy converge to? (ii) under what conditions on the data
and network topology does it converge? (iii) and what are the
rates of convergence of the learning process? In particular, we
showed in Part I [2] that there always exist sufficiently small
constant step-sizes that ensure the mean-square convergence
of the learning process to a well-defined limit point even in
the presence of persistent gradient noise.
We characterized this limit point as the unique fixed
point solution of a nonlinear algebraic equation consisting of
the weighted sum of individual update vectors. The scaling
weights were shown to be given by the entries of the right-
eigenvector of the network combination policy corresponding
to the eigenvalue at one (also called the Perron eigenvector;
its entries are normalized to add up to one and are all
strictly positive for strongly-connected networks). The analysis
from Part I [2] further revealed that the learning curve of
the multi-agent network exhibits three distinct phases. In the
first phase (Transient Phase I), the convergence rate of the
network is determined by the second largest eigenvalue of
the combination policy in magnitude, which is related to the
degree of network connectivity. In the second phase (Transient
Phase II), the convergence rate is determined by the Perron
eigenvector. And, in the third phase (the steady-state phase)
the mean-square error (MSE) performance attains a bound on
the order of step-size parameters.
In this Part II of the work, we address in some detail two
additional questions related to network performance, namely,
iv) how close do the individual agents get to the limit point
of the distributed strategies over the network? and v) can the
system of networked agents be made to match the learning
performance of a centralized solution where all information
is collected and processed centrally by a fusion center? In
the process of answering these questions, we shall derive
a closed-form expression for the steady-state MSE of each
agent. This closed-form expression turns out to be a revealing
result; it amounts to a non-trivial extension of a classical
result for stand-alone adaptive agents [3] -- [6] to the more
demanding context of networked agents and for cost functions
that are not necessarily quadratic or of the mean-square-error
type. As we are going to explain in the sequel, the closed-
form expression of the steady-state MSE captures the effect
of the network topology (through the Perron vector of the
2
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
combination matrix), gradient noise, and data characteristics
in an integrated manner and shows how these various factors
influence performance. The derived results in this paper ap-
plies to connected networks under fairly general conditions
and for fairly general aggregate cost functions.
We shall also explain later in Sections V and VI of this
part that, as long as the network is strongly connected, a
left-stochastic combination matrix can always be constructed
to have any desired Perron-eigenvector. This observation has
an important ramification for the following reason. Starting
from any collection of N agents, there exists a finite number
of topologies that can link these agents together. And for
each possible topology, there are infinitely many combination
policies that can be used to train the network. Since the
performance of the network is dependent on the Perron-
eigenvector of its combination policy, one of the important
conclusions that will follow is that regardless of the network
topology, there will always exist choices for the respective
combination policies such that the steady-state performance
of all topologies can be made identical to each other to first-
order in µmax, which is the largest step-size across agents.
In other words, no matter how the agents are connected to
each other, there is always a way to select the combination
weights such that the performance of the network is invariant
to the topology. This will also mean that, for any connected
topology, there is always a way to select the combination
weights such that the performance of the network matches that
of the centralized stochastic-approximation (since a centralized
solution can be viewed as corresponding to a fully-connected
network).
Notation. We adopt the same notation from Part I [2]. All
vectors are column vectors. We use boldface letters to denote
random quantities (such as uk,i) and regular font to denote
their realizations or deterministic variables (such as uk,i). We
use diag{x1, . . . , xN} to denote a (block) diagonal matrix
consisting of diagonal entries (blocks) x1, . . . , xN , and use
col{x1, . . . , xN} to denote a column vector formed by stack-
ing x1, . . . , xN on top of each other. The notation x (cid:22) y
means each entry of the vector x is less than or equal to
the corresponding entry of the vector y, and the notation
X (cid:22) Y means each entry of the matrix X is less than or
equal to the corresponding entry of the matrix Y . The notation
x = vec(X) denotes the vectorization operation that stacks
the columns of a matrix X on top of each other to form a
vector x, and X = vec−1(x) is the inverse operation. The
operators ∇w and ∇wT denote the column and row gradient
vectors with respect to w. When ∇wT is applied to a column
vector s, it generates a matrix. The notation a(µ) ∼ b(µ)
means that limµ→0 a(µ)/b(µ) = 1, a(µ) = o(b(µ)) means
that limµ→0 a(µ)/b(µ) = 0, and a(µ) = O(b(µ)) means that
there exists a constant C > 0 such that a(µ) ≤ C · b(µ). The
notation a = Θ(b) means there exist constants C1 and C2
independent of a and b such that C1 · b ≤ a ≤ C2 · b.
II. FAMILY OF DISTRIBUTED STRATEGIES
A. Distributed Strategies: Consensus and Diffusion
We consider a connected network of N agents that are
linked together through a topology -- see Fig. 1. Each agent
Fig. 1. A network representing a multi-agent system. The set of all agents
that can communicate with node k is denoted by Nk.The edge linking any two
agents is represented by two directed arrows to emphasize that information
can flow in both directions.
k implements a distributed algorithm of the following form to
update its state vector from wk,i−1 to wk,i:
l=1
N(cid:88)
N(cid:88)
N(cid:88)
l=1
φk,i−1 =
ψk,i =
wk,i =
a1,lkwl,i−1
a0,lkφl,i−1 − µk sk,i(φk,i−1)
a2,lkψl,i
(1)
(2)
(3)
l=1
where wk,i ∈ RM is the state of agent k at time i, usually
an estimate for the solution of some optimization problem,
φk,i−1 ∈ RM and ψk,i ∈ RM are intermediate variables gen-
erated at node k before updating to wk,i, µk is a non-negative
constant step-size parameter used by node k, and sk,i(·) is an
M × 1 update vector function at node k. We explained in Part
I [2] that in deterministic optimization problems, the update
vectors sk,i(·) can be selected as the gradient or Newton steps
associated with the individual utility functions at the agents
[7]. On the other hand, in stocastic approximation problems,
such as adaptation, learning and estimation problems [8] --
[26], the update vectors sk,i(·) are usually computed from
realizations of data samples that arrive sequentially at the
nodes. In the stochastic setting, the quantities appearing in (1) --
(3) become random variables and we shall use boldface letters
to highlight their stochastic nature. In Example 1 of Part I [2],
we illustrated various choices for sk,i(w) in different contexts.
The combination coefficients a1,lk, a0,lk and a2,lk in (1) -- (3)
are nonnegative convex-combination weights that each node k
assigns to the information arriving from node l and will be zero
if agent l is not in the neighborhood of agent k. Therefore, each
summation in (1) -- (3) is actually confined to the neighborhood
of node k. We let A1, A0 and A2 denote the N × N matrices
that collect the coefficients {a1,lk}, {a0,lk} and {a2,lk}. Then,
the matrices A1, A0 and A2 satisfy
AT
1
1 = 1, AT
0
(4)
where 1 is the N × 1 vector with all its entries equal to one.
Condition (4) means that the matrices {A0, A1, A2} are left-
stochastic (i.e., the entries on each of their columns add up to
1 = 1, AT
2
1 = 1
Nkk123456789a1kak110 CHEN AND SAYED: ON THE LEARNING BEHAVIOR OF ADAPTIVE NETWORKS -- PART II: PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
3
DIFFERENT CHOICES FOR A1, A0 AND A2 CORRESPOND TO DIFFERENT
DISTRIBUTED STRATEGIES.
TABLE I
Consensus
Distributed Strategeis A1 A0 A2
I
A
I
ATC diffusion
CTA diffusion
A
I
I
I
I
A
A1A0A2
A
A
A
one). We also explained in Part I [2] that different choices for
A1, A0 and A2 correspond to different distributed strategies,
such as the such as the traditional consensus [7], [8], [11] --
[14], [27] and diffusion (ATC and CTA) [17] -- [22], [25], [26]
algorithms -- see Table I. In our analysis, we will proceed
with the general form (1) -- (3) to study all three schemes, and
other possibilities, within a unifying framework.
B. Review of the Main Results from Part I [2]
Due the coupled nature of the social and self-learning steps
in (1) -- (3), information derived from local data at agent k
will be propagated to its neighbors and from there to their
neighbors in a diffusive learning process. It is expected that
some global performance pattern will emerge from these
localized interactions in the multi-agent system. As mentioned
in the introductory remarks, in Part I [2] and in this Part II,
we examine the following five questions:
• Limit point: where does each state wk,i converge to?
• Stability: under which condition does convergence occur?
• Learning rate: how fast does convergence occur?
• Performance: how close does wk,i get to the limit point?
• Generalization: can wk,i match the performance of a
centralized solution?
In Part I [2], we addressed the first three questions in detail and
derived expressions that fully characterize the answer in each
case. One of the main conclusions established in Part I [2]
is that for general left-stochastic matrices {A1, A0, A2}, the
agents in the network will have their iterates wk,i converge, in
the mean-square-error sense, to the same limit vector wo that
corresponds to the unique solution of the following algebraic
equation:
pksk(w) = 0
(5)
where the update functions sk(·) are defined further ahead in
(17) as the conditional means of the update directions sk,i(·)
used in (1) -- (3), and each positive coefficient pk is the kth
entry of the following vector:
(cid:27)
p = col
π1, . . . ,
µN
µmax
πN
µmax
(6)
Here, µmax is the largest step-size among all agents, πk is the
kth entry of the vector π (cid:44) A2θ, and θ is the right eigenvector
of A (cid:44) A1A0A2 corresponding to the eigenvalue at one with
its entries normalized to add up to one, i.e.,
Aθ = θ,
1T θ = 1
(7)
We refer to θ as the Perron eigenvector of A. The unique
solution wo of (5) has the interpretation of a Pareto optimal
N(cid:88)
k=1
(cid:26) µ1
Fig. 2. A typical mean-square-error (MSE) learning curve includes a transient
stage that consists of two phases and a steady-state phase. The plot shows
how the learning curve of a network of agents compares to the learning curve
of a centralized reference solution. The analysis in this work, and in the
accompanying Part I [2] characterizes in detail the parameters that determine
the behavior of the network (rate, stability, and performance) during each
phase of the learning process.
solution corresponding to the weights {pk} [2], [21], [28]. By
selecting different combination policies A, or even different
topologies, the entries {pk} can be made to change (since θ
will change) and the limit point wo resulting from (5) can be
steered towards different Pareto optimal solutions.
The second major conclusion from Part I [2] is that, during
the convergence process towards the limit point wo,
the
learning curve at each agent exhibits three distinct phases (see
Fig. 2): Transient Phase I, Transient Phase II, and Steady-State
Phase. These phases were shown in Part I [2] to have the
following features:
• Transient Phase I:
If the agents are initialized at different values, then the
iterates at the various agents will initially evolve in such
a way to make each wk,i get closer to the following
reference (centralized) recursion ¯wc,i:
N(cid:88)
which is initialized at
¯wc,i = ¯wc,i−1 − µmax
N(cid:88)
¯wc,0 =
pksk( ¯wc,i−1)
(8)
k=1
θkwk,0
(9)
k=1
where wk,0 is the initial value of the distributed strategy
at agent k. The rate at which the agents approach ¯wc,i
is geometric (linear) and is determined by λ2(A), the
second largest eigenvalue of A in magnitude. If the agents
are initialized at the same value, say, e.g., wk,0 = 0, then
the learning curves start at Transient Phase II directly.
• Transient Phase II:
In this phase, the trajectories of all agents are uniformly
close to the trajectory of the reference recursion; they
converge in a coordinated manner to steady-state
in
geometric (linear) rate. The learning curves at this phase
are well modeled by the same reference recursion (8)
Phase&I&Phase&II&Steady,State&MSE&(dB)&Number&of&Itera9ons&&Reference&(centralized)&strategy&&&&&Steady,state&MSE&&&&&&Distributed&strategies& 4
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
since we showed in (145) from Part I [2] that:
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2 = (cid:107) wc,i(cid:107)2 + O(µ1/2
(10)
where the error vectors are defined by wk,i = wo − wk,i
and wc,i = wo − ¯wc,i. Furthermore, for small step-sizes
and during the later stages of this phase, ¯wc,i will be close
enough to wo and the convergence rate r was shown in
expression (114) from Part I [2] to be given by
max) · γi
c + O(µmax)
(11)
where ρ(·) denotes the spectral radius of its matrix
argument, is an arbitrarily small positive number, and
Hc is defined as the aggregate (Hessian-type) sum:
r =(cid:2)ρ(IM − µmaxHc)(cid:3)2
Hc (cid:44) N(cid:88)
+ O(cid:0)(µmax)
2(M−1)(cid:1)
1
pk∇wT sk(wo)
(12)
• Steady-State Phase:
k=1
The reference recursion (8) continues converging towards
wo so that (cid:107) wc,i(cid:107)2 will converge to zero (−∞ dB in
Fig. 2). However, for the distributed strategy (1) -- (3),
the mean-square-error E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2 at each agent k will
converge to a finite steady-state value that is on the order
of O(µmax):
lim sup
i→∞
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2 ≤ O(µmax)
(13)
Note that
the bound (13) provides a partial answer to
the fourth question we are interested in, namely, how close
the wk,i get to the network limit point wo. Expression (13)
indicates that the mean-square error is on the order of µmax.
However, in this Part II, we will examine this mean-square
error more closely and provide a more accurate characteriza-
tion of the steady-state MSE value by deriving a closed-form
expression for it. In particular, we will be able to characterize
this MSE value in terms of the vector p as follows1:
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2 = µmax·Tr(cid:8)X(pT⊗IM ) · Rv · (p⊗IM )(cid:9)
lim
i→∞
+ o(µmax)
(14)
where X is the solution to a certain Lyapunov equation
described later in (41) (when Σ = I), Rv is a gradient noise
covariance matrix defined below in (27), and o(µmax) denotes
a strictly higher order term of µmax. Expression (14) is a most
revealing result; it captures the effect of the network topology
through the eigenvector p, and it captures the effects of
gradient noise and data characteristics through the matrices Rv
and X, respectively. Expression (14) is a non-trivial extension
of a classical and famous result pertaining to the mean-square-
error performance of stand-alone adaptive agents [3] -- [6] to the
more demanding context of networked agents. In particular,
it can be easily verified that (14) reduces to the well-known
v/2 expression for the mean-square deviation of single
µM σ2
LMS learners when the network size is set to N = 1 and
the topology is removed [3] -- [6]. However, expression (14)
is not limited to single agents or to mean-square-error costs.
It applies to rather general connected networks and to fairly
general cost functions.
1The interpretation of the limit in (14) is explained in more detail in Sec.
IV.
C. Relation to Prior Work
As pointed out in Part I [2] (see Sec. II-B), most prior works
in the literature [7] -- [14], [29] -- [33] focus on studying the
performance and convergence of their respective distributed
strategies under diminishing step-size conditions and for
doubly-stochastic combination policies. In contrast, we focus
on constant step-sizes in order to enable continuous adaptation
and learning under drifting conditions. We also focus on left-
stochastic combination matrices in order to induce flexibility
about the network limit point; this is because doubly-stochastic
policies force the network to converge to the same limit point,
while left-stochastic policies enable the networks to converge
to any of infinitely many Pareto optimal solutions. Moreover,
the value of the limit point can be controlled through the
selection of the Perron eigenvector.
Furthermore, the performance of distributed strategies has
usually been characterized in terms of bounds on their steady-
state mean-square-error performance -- see, e.g., [7] -- [10],
[27], [29], [31], [33]. In Part I [2] of the work, as a byproduct
of our study of the three stages of the learning process, we
were able to derive performance bounds for the steady-state
MSE of a fairly general class of distributed strategies under
broader (weaker) conditions than normally considered in the
literature. In this Part II, we push the analysis noticeably
further and derive a closed-form expression for the steady-state
MSE in the slow adaptation regime, such as expression (14),
which captures in an integrated manner how various network
parameters (topology, combination policy, utilities) influence
performance.
Other useful and related works in the literature appear in
[11] -- [13], [30]. These works, however, study the distribution
of the error vector in steady-state under diminishing step-size
conditions and using central limit theorem (CLT) arguments.
They established a Gaussian distribution for the error quan-
tities in steady-state and derived an expression for the error
variance but the expression tends to zero as i → ∞ since,
under the conditions assumed in these works, the error vector
wk,i approaches zero almost surely. Such results are possible
because, in the diminishing step-size case, the influence of
gradient noise is annihilated by the decaying step-size. How-
ever, in the constant step-size regime, the influence of gradient
noise is always present and seeps into the operation of the
algorithm. In this case, the error vector does not approach
zero any longer and its variance approaches instead a steady-
state positive-definite value. Our objective is to characterize
this steady-state value and to examine how it is influenced
by the network topology, by the persistent gradient noise
conditions, and by the data characteristics and utility functions.
In the constant step-size regime, CLT arguments cannot be
employed anymore because the Gaussianity result does not
hold any longer. Indeed, reference [34] illustrates this situation
clearly; it derived an expression for the characteristic function
of the limiting error distribution in the case of mean-square-
error estimation and it was shown that the distribution is not
Gaussian. For these reasons, the analysis in this work is based
on alternative techniques that do not pursue any specific form
for the steady-state distribution and that rely instead on the
CHEN AND SAYED: ON THE LEARNING BEHAVIOR OF ADAPTIVE NETWORKS -- PART II: PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
5
N(cid:88)
use of energy conservation arguments [20], [22], [35]. As the
analysis and detailed derivations in the appendices show, this
is a formidable task to pursue due to the coupling among
the agents and the persistent noise conditions. Nevertheless,
under certain conditions that are generally weaker than similar
conditions used in related contexts in the literature, we will
be able to derive accurate expressions for the network MSE
performance and its convergence rate in small constant step-
size regime.
We finally remark that
the analysis in this paper and
its accompanying Part I [2] is not focused on the solution
of deterministic distributed optimization problems, although
algorithm (1) -- (3) can still be applied for that purpose (see
future Sec. VI-B). Instead, we consider a stochastic setting
where each individual cost Jk(w) is generally expressed as
the expectation of some loss function, say, as
Jk(w) = EQk(w; xk,i)
(15)
and the objective is to minimize the aggregate stochastic cost:
J glob(w) =
Jk(w)
(16)
k=1
In such problems, we usually do not know the exact form of
the cost function because we do not have prior knowledge
about the exact statistical distribution of the data xk,i. What
is generally available to each agent k is a stream of data
points xk,0, xk,1, . . . that arrives at agent k sequentially over
time. The agents in the network then use stochastic gradients
constructed as ∇Q(w; xk,i) (or from variations thereof), in
place of the the actual gradients, ∇Jk(w), to learn from the
streaming data. Because of the stochastic nature of the learning
algorithms, they will exhibit different convergence behavior
than deterministic optimization algorithms. For example, even
with a constant step-size, stochastic gradient distributed strate-
gies can still converge at a geometric rate towards a small
MSE in steady-state, whereas diminishing step-sizes of the
form µ(i) = µo/i, ensure a slower almost sure convergence
rate of O(1/i).
III. MODELING ASSUMPTIONS
In this section, we first recall the assumptions used in Part
I [2] and then introduce two conditions that are required to
carry out the MSE analysis in this part. We already explained
in Sec. III of Part I [2] how the assumptions listed below relate
to, and extend, similar conditions used in the literature.
Assumption 1 (Strongly-connected network): The N × N
matrix product A (cid:44) A1A0A2 is assumed to be a primitive
left-stochastic matrix, i.e., AT 1 = 1 and there exists a finite
integer jo such that all entries of Ajo are strictly positive.
Assumption 2 (Update vector: Randomness): There exists
an M × 1 deterministic vector function sk(w) such that, for
all M × 1 vectors w in the filtration Fi−1 generated by the
past history of iterates {wk,j} for j ≤ i− 1 and all k, it holds
that
E{sk,i(w)Fi−1} = sk(w)
(17)
for all i, k. Furthermore, there exist α ≥ 0 and σ2
that for all i, k and w ∈ Fi−1:
E(cid:110)
(cid:107)sk,i(w)−sk(w)(cid:107)2(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
≤ α·(cid:107)w(cid:107)2 +σ2
v
(cid:111)
holds with probability one.
v ≥ 0 such
(18)
Assumption 3 (Update vector: Lipschitz): There exists a
nonnegative λU such that for all x, y ∈ RM and all k:
(cid:107)sk(x) − sk(y)(cid:107) ≤ λU · (cid:107)x − y(cid:107)
where the subscript "U" in λU means "upper bound".
(19)
(cid:104)
N(cid:88)
k=1
(cid:105)
Assumption 4 (Update vector: Strong monotonicity): Let
pk denote the kth entry of the vector p defined in (6). There
exists λL > 0 such that for all x, y ∈ RM :
(x − y)T ·
pk
sk(x) − sk(y)
≥ λL · (cid:107)x − y(cid:107)2
(20)
where the subscript "L" in λL means "lower bound", and λL
may depend on {pk}.
Assumption 5 (Jacobian matrix: Lipschitz): Let wo denote
the limit point of the distributed strategy (1) -- (3), which was
defined earlier as the unique solution to (5) and was character-
ized in Theorem 1 of Part I [2]. Then, in a small neighborhood
around wo, we assume that sk(w) is differentiable with respect
to w and satisfies
(cid:107)∇wT sk(wo + δw) − ∇wT sk(wo)(cid:107) ≤ λH · (cid:107)δw(cid:107)
(21)
for all (cid:107)δw(cid:107) ≤ rH for some small rH, and where λH is a
nonnegative number independent of δw.
The following lemma gives the equivalent forms of Assump-
tions 3 -- 4 when the {sk(w)} happen to be differentiable.
Lemma 1 (Equivalent conditions on update vectors):
Suppose {sk(w)} are differentiable in an open set S ⊆ RM .
Then, having conditions (19) and (20) hold on S is equivalent
to the following conditions, respectively,
(cid:107)∇wT sk(w)(cid:107) ≤ λU
(22)
[Hc(w) + H T
(23)
for any w ∈ S, where (cid:107)·(cid:107) denotes the 2-induced norm (largest
singular value) of its matrix argument and
c (w)] ≥ λL · IM
1
2
pk∇wT sk(w)
(24)
Proof: See Appendix B in Part I [2].
Next, we introduce two new assumptions on sk,i(w), which
are needed for the MSE analysis of this Part II. Assumption
6 below has been used before in the stochastic approximation
literature -- see, for example, [36] and Eq. (6.2) in Theorem
6.1 of [37, p.147]. Before we state the assumptions, we first
introduce some useful quantities. Let vi(x) denote the M N×1
global vector that collects the statistical fluctuations in the
stochastic update vectors across all agents:
vi(x) (cid:44) col{s1,i(x1) − s1(x1), . . . , sN,i(xN ) − sN (xN )}(25)
Hc(w) (cid:44) n(cid:88)
k=1
6
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
where we are using the vector x to denote a block vector
i.e., x (cid:44)
consisting of entries xk of size M × 1 each,
col{x1, . . . , xN}. For any xk ∈ Fi−1, 1 ≤ k ≤ N, we
(cid:9)
introduce the covariance matrix:
Rv,i(x) (cid:44) E(cid:8)vi(x)vT
(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
i (x)
(26)
where, again, we are using the notation x to refer to the block
vector x = col{x1, . . . , xN} with stochastic entries of size
M × 1 each. Note that Rv,i(x) generally depends on time i.
This is because the distribution of sk,i(·) given Fi−1 usually
varies with time. The following assumption requires that, in
the limit, this second-order moment of the distribution tends
to a constant value.
Assumption 6 (Second-order moment of gradient noise):
We assume that, in the limit, Rv,i(x) becomes invariant and
tends to a deterministic constant value when evaluated at
x = 1 ⊗ wo with probability one (almost surely):
i→∞Rv,i(1 ⊗ wo) (cid:44) Rv
lim
(27)
Furthermore, in a small neighborhood around 1 ⊗ wo, we
assume that
there exists deterministic constants λv ≥ 0,
rV > 0, and κ ∈ (0, 4] such that for all i ≥ 0:
(cid:107)Rv,i(1 ⊗ wo + δx) − Rv,i(1 ⊗ wo)(cid:107) ≤ λv · (cid:107)δx(cid:107)κ
(28)
for all (cid:107)δx(cid:107) ≤ rV with probability one.
Example 1: We illustrate how Assumption 6 holds au-
tomatically in the context of distributed least-mean-squares
estimation. Suppose each agent k receives a stream of data
samples {uk,i, dk(i)} that are generated by the following
linear model:
dk(i) = uk,iwo + nk(i)
(29)
where the 1 × M regressors {uk,i} are zero mean and
independent over time and space with covariance matrix
Ru,k = E{uT
k,iuk,i} ≥ 0 and the noise sequence {nl(j)}
is also zero mean, white, with variance σ2
n,l, and independent
of the regressors {uk,i} for all l, k, i, j. The objective is to
estimate the M × 1 parameter vector wo by minimizing the
following global cost function
N(cid:88)
J glob(w) =
Jk(w)
where
k=1
Jk(w) = Edk(i) − uk,iw2
(30)
(31)
(32)
In this case, the actual gradient vector when evaluated at an
M × 1 vector xk is given by
sk(xk) = ∇wEdk(i) − uk,ixk2
and it can be replaced by the instantaneous approximation
sk,i(xk) = −2uT
l,i[dl(i) − ul,ixk]
(33)
(Recall from (2) that the stochastic gradient at each agent k is
evaluated at φk,i−1 and in this case xk = φk,i−1.) It follows
that the gradient noise vector vk,i(xk) evaluated at xk, at each
agent k is given by
vk,i(xk) = 2(Ru,k − uT
k,iuk,i)(wo − xk) − 2uT
k,ink(i)
(34)
and it is straightforward to verify that
Rv,i(1 ⊗ wo) = diag{4σ2
n,1Ru,1,··· , 4σ2
n,N Ru,N}
(35)
which is independent of i and, therefore, condition (27) holds
with Rv given by (35). Furthermore, condition (28) is also
satisfied. Indeed, let x = col{x1, . . . , xN} ∈ RM N , and from
(34) we find that
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
Note that
so that
Rv,i(x) = diag{G1, . . . , GN} + Rv,i(1 ⊗ wo)
k,iuk,i)(wo − xk)
k,iuk,i
· (cid:107)wo − xk(cid:107)2
(wo − xk)T (Ru,k − uT
k,iuk,i)T(cid:9)
where each Gk is a function of wo − xk and is given by
Gk (cid:44) 4 · E(cid:8)(Ru,k − uT
(cid:107)Gk(cid:107) ≤ 4 · E(cid:13)(cid:13)Ru,k − uT
(cid:13)(cid:13)Rv,i(x) − Rv,i(1 ⊗ wo)(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:8)4 · E(cid:107)Ru,k − uT
(cid:8)4 · E(cid:107)Ru,k − uT
(cid:8)4 · E(cid:107)Ru,k − uT
(cid:8)4 · E(cid:107)Ru,k−uT
1≤k≤N (cid:107)Gk(cid:107)
≤ max
1≤k≤N
≤ max
1≤k≤N
= max
k,iuk,i(cid:107)2 · (cid:107)wo − xk(cid:107)2(cid:9)
k,iuk,i(cid:107)2(cid:9)
k,iuk,i(cid:107)2(cid:9)
k,iuk,i(cid:107)2(cid:9)
N(cid:88)
1≤k≤N (cid:107)wo − xk(cid:107)2
· max
·
· (cid:107)1 ⊗ wo−x(cid:107)2 (36)
In other words, condition (28) holds for the least-mean-squares
estimation case with κ = 2.
≤ max
1≤k≤N
= max
1≤k≤N
(cid:107)wo − xk(cid:107)2
k=1
Assumption 7 (Fourth-order moment of gradient noise):
There exist nonnegative numbers α4 and σ2
any M × 1 random vector w ∈ Fi−1,
(cid:107)vk,i(w)(cid:107)4(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
(cid:9)
E(cid:8)
≤ α4 · (cid:107)w(cid:107)4 + σ4
v4
(37)
v4 such that for
holds with probability one.
This assumption will be used in the analysis for constant
step-size adaptation to arrive at accurate expressions for the
steady-state MSE of the agents. By assuming that the fourth-
order moment of the gradient noise is bounded as in (37),
it becomes possible to derive MSE expressions that can be
shown to be at most O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
(cid:1) away from the actual
MSE performance. When the step-sizes are sufficiently small,
the size of the term O(µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
) is even smaller and, for
all practical purposes, this term is negligible -- see expressions
(39) -- (40) in Theorem 1 (and also (43)).
max
max
Example 2: It turns out that condition (37) is automatically
satisfied in the context of distributed least-mean-squares es-
timation. We continue with the setting of Example 1. From
CHEN AND SAYED: ON THE LEARNING BEHAVIOR OF ADAPTIVE NETWORKS -- PART II: PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
7
k,iuk,i)(wo − w) − uT
· (cid:107)wo − w(cid:107)4
expression (34), we have that for any M × 1 random vector
w ∈ Fi−1,
k,ink(i)(cid:13)(cid:13)4
(a)
≤ 16 × 8
(cid:107)vk,i(w)(cid:107)4 = 16(cid:13)(cid:13)(Ru,k − uT
(cid:16)(cid:13)(cid:13)Ru,k − uT
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
+ (cid:107)uk,i(cid:107)4 · (cid:107)nk(i)(cid:107)4(cid:17)
8(cid:13)(cid:13)Ru,k − uT
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
+ 8(cid:13)(cid:13)Ru,k − uT
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
+ (cid:107)uk,i(cid:107)4 · (cid:107)nk(i)(cid:107)4(cid:17)
≤ 128
k,iuk,i
k,iuk,i
k,iuk,i
(cid:16)
(b)
· (cid:107)w(cid:107)4
· (cid:107)wo(cid:107)4
(38)
where steps (a) and (b) use the inequality (cid:107)x+y(cid:107)4 ≤ 8(cid:107)x(cid:107)4 +
8(cid:107)y(cid:107)4, which can be obtained by applying Jensen's inequality
to the convex function (cid:107)·(cid:107)4. Applying the expectation operator
conditioned on Fi−1, we obtain
(a)
k,iuk,i
(cid:107)vk,i(w)(cid:107)4Fi−1
E(cid:8)
(cid:9)
≤ 1024 · E(cid:110)(cid:13)(cid:13)Ru,k − uT
1024 · E(cid:110)(cid:13)(cid:13)Ru,k − uT
128 · E(cid:110)
= 1024 · E(cid:110)(cid:13)(cid:13)Ru,k − uT
1024 · E(cid:110)(cid:13)(cid:13)Ru,k − uT
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
· E(cid:110)
(cid:13)(cid:13)4(cid:111)
(cid:13)(cid:13)4(cid:111)
k,iuk,i
128 · E(cid:107)uk,i(cid:107)4 · E(cid:107)nk(i)(cid:107)4
(cid:107)uk,i(cid:107)4 Fi−1
k,iuk,i
k,iuk,i
(cid:111)
(b)
(cid:44) α4 · (cid:107)w(cid:107)4 + σ4
v4
· (cid:107)w(cid:107)4+
(cid:111)
· (cid:107)wo(cid:107)4+
(cid:111)
(cid:111)
Fi−1
Fi−1
(cid:107)nk(i)(cid:107)4 Fi−1
· (cid:107)w(cid:107)4+
· (cid:107)wo(cid:107)4+
where step (a) uses the fact that w ∈ Fi−1 and is thus
determined given Fi−1, and step (b) uses the fact that uk,i
and vk,i(i) are independent of Fi−1.
IV. PERFORMANCE OF MULTI-AGENT LEARNING
STRATEGY
A. Main Results
In this section, we are interested in evaluating E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
Σ as
i → ∞ for arbitrary positive semi-definite weighting matrices
Σ. The main result is summarized in the following theorem.
Theorem 1 (Steady-state performance): When
Assumptions 1 -- 7 hold and the step-sizes are sufficiently
small so that the distributed strategy (1) -- (3) is mean-square
stable2,
the weighted mean-square-error of (1) -- (3) (which
includes diffusion and consensus algorithms as special cases)
satisfies
lim sup
i→∞
lim inf
i→∞
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
Σ ≤ µmax · Tr(cid:8)X(pT ⊗ IM ) · Rv · (p ⊗ IM )(cid:9)
+ O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
Σ ≥ µmax · Tr(cid:8)X(pT ⊗ IM ) · Rv · (p ⊗ IM )(cid:9)
− O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
(cid:1)
(cid:1)
(40)
(39)
max
max
2The explicit condition for mean-square stability is given by (129) in Part
I [2].
(cid:90) ∞
Fig. 3. Decomposition of the error quantity wk,i (best viewed in color).
The error quantity wk,i (solid red line) can be decomposed into three terms
(the solid back lines): (i) the offset of wk,i from the centroid of {wk,i},
denoted by (uL,k⊗IM )we,i, (ii) the offset of the centroid from the reference
recursion (8), denoted by wc,i, and (iii) the error between the reference
recursion and the optimal solution wo, denoted by wc,i.
where Σ is any positive semi-definite weighting matrix, and X
is the unique positive semi-definite solution to the following
Lyapunov equation:
H T
c X + XHc = Σ
(41)
where Hc was defined earlier in (12). The unique solution of
(41) can be represented by the integral expression [38, p.769]:
X =
0
−H T
e
c t · Σ · e
−Hctdt
(42)
Moreover, if Σ is strictly positive-definite, then X is also
strictly positive-definite.
Proof: The argument is nontrivial and involves several steps.
The details are provided in Appendix A. We briefly describe
the main steps of the proof here:
1) By following the network transformation introduced in
Part I [2], we decompose the error vector wk,i into three
terms, as illustrated in Fig. 3: (i) (uL,k ⊗ IM )we,i, the
offset of wk,i from the centroid of {wk,i}, defined as
N(cid:88)
wc,i =
θkwk,i
k=1
where θk is the kth entry of the Perron vector defined
in (7), (ii) wc,i, the offset of the centroid from the
reference recursion (8), and (iii) wc,i, the error between
the reference recursion and the optimal solution wo.
2) Only the second term, wk,i, contributes to the steady-
state MSE, which we already know from (13) (see also
(146) in Part I [2]) that it is O(µmax). For the other
two terms, wc,i converges to zero and (uL,k ⊗ IM )we,i
converges to a higher-order term in µmax. In Sections
A and B of Appendix A, we make this argument rig-
orous by deriving the gap between the error covariance
matrices of wk,i and wc,i and showing that it is indeed
a higher-order term.
3) Next, we show that the recursion for wc,i can be viewed
as a perturbed version of a linear dynamic system driven
by the gradient noise term. In Section C of Appendix
A, we bound the gap between these two recursions and
show that it is also a higher-order term. This would
Converges to 0 at agent k Centroid of Reference {wk,i}wowk,i¯wc,iwc,iwk,iwc,iwc,i(uL,k⌦IM)we,iwk,iO(µmax)Converges to O(µ2max)wk,i 8
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
· Tr(cid:8)(pT ⊗ IM ) · Rv · (p ⊗ IM )(cid:9)
+ O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
µmax
(cid:1)
4
max
=
(46)
require us to bound the fourth-order moments of the
error quantity wk,i, which are derived in Appendices
B -- E.
4) Then, in Section D of Appendix A, we examine the
covariance matrix of the linear dynamic model and find
a closed-form expression for it.
5) Finally, in Section E of Appendix A, we combine all
results together to obtain the closed-form expression for
the steady-state MSE of the network.
Strictly speaking, the limit of E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
Σ may not exist as
it requires the lim sup and the lim inf of E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
Σ to be
equal to each other. However, note from (39) and (40) that
the first-order terms of µmax in both lim sup and lim inf
expressions are the same. When the step-size µmax is small,
the lim sup and the lim inf bounds will be dominated by this
same first-order term, and the steady-state MSE will be tightly
sandwiched between (39) and (40).3 For this reason, with
some slight abuse in notation, we will use the traditional limit
notation for simplicity of presentation and will write instead:
Σ = µmax·Tr(cid:8)X(pT ⊗IM ) · Rv · (p⊗IM )(cid:9)
+O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
lim
i→∞
(43)
(cid:1)
max
Remark: Note from (43) that the steady-state MSE consists of
two terms: a first-order term, and a higher-order term. We will
show in Sec. V that the first-order term is the same as that of
the centralized MSE.
B. Useful Special Cases
Example 3: (Distributed stochastic gradient-descent: Gen-
eral case) When stochastic gradients are used to define the
update directions sk,i(·) in (1) -- (3),
then we can simplify
the mean-square-error expression (43) as follows. We first
substitute sk(w) = ∇wJk(w) into (12) to obtain
N(cid:88)
k=1
Hc =
pk∇2
wJk(wo)
Now the matrix Hc is the weighted sum of the Hessian
matrices of the individual costs {Jk(w)} and is therefore
symmetric. Then, the Lyapunov equation (41) becomes
HcX + XHc = Σ
(44)
We have simple solutions to (44) for the following two choices
of Σ:
1) When Σ = IM , we have X = 1
2 H−1
c
and
lim
i→∞
· Tr(cid:8)H
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
+ O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
(pT ⊗ IM ) · Rv · (p ⊗ IM )(cid:9)
(cid:1)
µmax
−1
c
=
2
(45)
max
2) When Σ = 1
2 Hc, we have X = 1
4 IM and
lim
i→∞
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
Hc
2
3Recall that we always have lim inf
i→∞
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
Σ ≤ lim sup
i→∞
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
Σ.
Example 4: (Distributed stochastic gradient descent: Un-
correlated noise) In the special case that the gradient noises
at the different agents are uncorrelated with each other, then
Rv is block diagonal and we write it as
Rv = diag{Rv,1, . . . , Rv,N}
where Rv,k is the M × M covariance matrix of the gradient
noise at agent k. Then, the MSE expression (45) at each agent
k can be written as
lim
i→∞
=
(cid:32) N(cid:88)
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
+O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
· Tr
µmax
k=1
2
max
(cid:1)
pk∇2
(cid:33)−1
(cid:32) N(cid:88)
k=1
·
p2
kRv,k
(cid:33)
wJk(wo)
and expression (46) for the weighted MSE becomes
lim
i→∞
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
Hc
2
=
(cid:41)
(cid:40) N(cid:88)
+ O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
· Tr
µmax
k=1
4
max
(cid:1)
p2
kRv,k
N(cid:88)
k=1
V. PERFORMANCE OF CENTRALIZED STOCHASTIC
APPROXIMATION SOLUTION
We conclude from (43) that the weighted mean-square-error
at each node k will be the same across all agents in the network
for small step-sizes. This is an important "equalization" effect.
Moreover, as we now verify, the performance level given by
(43) is close to the performance of a centralized strategy that
collects all the data from the agents and processes them using
the following recursion:
wcent,i = wcent,i−1 − µmax
pk sk,i(wcent,i−1)
(47)
To establish this fact, we first note that the performance of the
above centralized strategy can be analyzed in the same manner
as the distributed strategy. Indeed, let wcent,i (cid:44) wcent,i − ¯wc,i
denote the discrepancy between the above centralized recur-
sion and reference recursion (8). Then, we obtain from (8) and
(47) that
wcent,i = Tc(wcent,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1)
− µmax · (pT ⊗ IM )vi(wcent,i−1)
(48)
where the operator Tc(w) is defined as the following mapping
from RM to RM :
Tc(w) (cid:44) w − µmax
pksk(w)
N(cid:88)
k=1
CHEN AND SAYED: ON THE LEARNING BEHAVIOR OF ADAPTIVE NETWORKS -- PART II: PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
9
N(cid:88)
interested in minimizing some aggregate cost function of the
form (16):
J glob(w) =
Jk(w)
(55)
k=1
Based on whether the individual costs {Jk(w)} share a com-
mon minimizer or not, we can classify problems of the form
(55) into two broad categories.
A. Category I: Distributed Learning
In this case, the data streams {xk,i} are assumed to be
generated by (possibly different) distributions that nevertheless
depend on the same parameter vector wo ∈ RM . The objective
is then to estimate this common parameter wo in a distributed
manner. To do so, we first need to associate with each agent k
a cost function Jk(w) that measures how well some arbitrary
parameter w approximates wo. The cost Jk(w) should be such
that wo is one of its minimizers. More formally, let W o
k denote
the set of vectors that minimize the selected Jk(w), then it is
expected that
(cid:111)
(cid:44)(cid:110)
(51)
wo ∈ W o
k
w : arg min
Jk(w)
w
(56)
for k = 1, . . . , N. Since J glob(w) is assumed to be strongly
k should contain
convex, then the intersection of the sets W o
the single element wo:
Comparing (48) with expression (103) from Part I [2]
peated below):
wc,i = Tc(wc,i−1)−Tc( ¯wc,i−1)−µmax·(pT ⊗IM ) [zi−1 +vi]
(49)
(re-
we note that these two recursions take similar forms except
for an additional perturbation term zi−1 in (49). Therefore,
following the same line of transient analysis as in Part I [2]
and steady-state analysis as in the proof of Theorem 1 stated
earlier, we can conclude that, in the small step-size regime, the
transient behavior of the centralized strategy (47) is close to
the reference recursion (8), and the steady-state performance
is again given by (43).
Theorem 2 (Centralized performance): Suppose Assump-
tions 2 -- 7 hold and suppose the step-size parameter µmax in
the centralized recursion (47) satisfies the following condition
(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 ·
U
λL
(cid:16) λ2
+ O(cid:0)(µmax)
2 + 2α
(cid:17)
2(M−1)(cid:1)
1
Then, the MSE term E(cid:107) wcent,i(cid:107)2 converges at the rate of
r =(cid:2)ρ(IM − µmaxHc)(cid:3)2
where is an arbitrarily small positive number. Furthermore,
in the small step-size regime, the steady-state MSE of (47)
satisfies
0 < µmax <
(50)
lim sup
i→∞
lim inf
i→∞
E(cid:107) wcent,i(cid:107)2
E(cid:107) wcent,i(cid:107)2
Σ ≤ µmax·Tr(cid:8)X(pT ⊗IM ) · Rv · (p⊗IM )(cid:9)
+O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
Σ ≥ µmax·Tr(cid:8)X(pT ⊗IM ) · Rv · (p⊗IM )(cid:9)
−O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
(cid:1)
(cid:1)
(53)
(52)
max
max
Remark: Similar to our explanation following (39) -- (40), ex-
pressions (52) -- (53) also mean that, for small step-sizes, the
steady-state MSE of the centralized strategy will be tightly
sandwiched between two almost identical bounds. Therefore,
we will again use the traditional limit notation for the central-
ized steady-state MSE for simplicity, and will write instead:
Σ = µmax·Tr(cid:8)X(pT ⊗IM ) · Rv · (p⊗IM )(cid:9)
+O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
E(cid:107) wcent,i(cid:107)2
lim
i→∞
(54)
(cid:1)
max
which is the same as (43) up to the first-order of µmax.
VI. BENEFITS OF COOPERATION
In this section, we illustrate the implications of the main
results of this work in the context of distributed learning and
distributed optimization. Consider a network of N connected
agents, where each agent k receives a stream of data {xk,i}
arising from some underlying distribution. The networked
multi-agent system would like to extract from the distributed
data some useful information about the underlying process.
To measure the quality of the inference task, an individual
cost function Jk(w) is associated with each agent k, where w
denotes an M × 1 parameter vector. The agents are generally
N(cid:92)
k=1
wo ∈ W o =
W o
k
(57)
The main motivation for cooperation in this case is that the
data collected at each agent k may not be sufficient to uniquely
identify wo since wo is not necessarily the unique element
in W o
k; this happens, for example, when the individual costs
Jk(w) are not strictly convex. However, once the individual
costs are aggregated into (55) and the aggregate function is
strongly convex, then wo is the unique element in W o. In
this way, the cooperative minimization of J glob(w) allows the
agents to estimate wo.
1) Working under Partial Observation: Under the scenario
described by (57), the solution of (5) agrees with the unique
minimizer wo for J glob(w) given by (55) regardless of the
{pk} and, therefore, regardless of the combination policy A.
Therefore, the results from Sec. II-B (see also Sec. IV of Part
I [2]) show that the iterate wk,i at each agent k converges to
this unique wo at a centralized rate and the results from Sec.
IV of this Part II show that this iterate achieves the centralized
steady-state MSE performance. Note that Assumption 4 can
be satisfied without requiring each Jk(w) to be strongly
convex. Instead, we only require J glob(w) to be strongly
convex. In other words, we do not need each agent to have
complete information about wo; we only need the network to
have enough information to determine wo uniquely. Although
the individual agents in this case have partial information
about wo, the distributed strategies (1) -- (3) enable them to
attain the same performance level as a centralized solution.
The following example illustrates the idea in the context of
distributed least-mean-squares estimation over networks.
10
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
N(cid:88)
Example 5: Consider Example 1 again. When the covari-
ance matrix Ru,k (cid:44) E[uT
k,iuk,i] is rank deficient, then Jk(w)
in (31) would not be strongly convex and there would be
infinitely many minimizers to Jk(w). In this case, the informa-
tion provided to agent k via (29) is not sufficient to determine
wo uniquely. However, if the global cost function is strongly
convex, which can be verified to be equivalent to requiring:
pkRu,k > λLIM > 0
(58)
k=1
then the information collected over the entire network is rich
enough to learn the unique wo. As long as (58) holds for
one set of positive {pk}, it will hold for all other {pk}. A
"network observability" condition similar to (58) was used in
[11] to characterize the sufficiency of information over the
network in the context of distributed estimation over linear
models albeit with diminishing step-sizes.
2) Optimizing the MSE Performance: Since the distributed
strategies (1) -- (3) converge to the same unique minimizer wo
of (55) for any set of {pk}, we can then consider selecting
the {pk} to optimize the MSE performance. Consider the case
where Hk ≡ H and µk ≡ µ and assume the gradient noises
vk,i(w) are asymptotically uncorrelated across the agents so
that Rv from (27) is block diagonal with entries denoted by:
(59)
Rv = diag{Rv,1, . . . , Rv,N}
Then, we have βk = 1, pk = θk and
Hc = H = ∇2
wJ1(wo) = ··· = ∇2
wJN (wo)
in which case expression (45) becomes
(60)
(cid:1)
µmax
N(cid:88)
kTr(cid:0)H
+ O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
θ2
k=1
2
·
(cid:1)
−1Rv,k
lim
i→∞
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2 =
(61)
The optimal positive coefficients {θk} that minimize (61)
max
k=1 θk = 1 are given by
subject to(cid:80)N
N(cid:88)
θo
k =
−1
−1Rv,k)]
−1Rv,(cid:96))]
−1
[Tr(H
[Tr(H
(cid:96)=1
and, substituting into (61), the optimal MSE is then given by
,
k = 1, . . . , N
(62)
(cid:35)−1
+ O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
max
(cid:1)
MSEopt =
µmax
2 ·
1
Tr(H−1Rv,(cid:96))
(cid:34) N(cid:88)
(cid:96)=1
N} can be
The optimal Perron-eigenvector θo = col{θo
implemented by selecting the combination policy A as the
following Hasting's rule [19], [39], [40]:
1, . . . , θo
ao
(cid:96)k =
k)−1
(θo
k)−1,N(cid:96)·(θo
(cid:88)
max{Nk·(θo
ao
mk,
1 −
m∈Nk\{k}
(a)
=
max(cid:8)
Nk·Tr(H−1Rv,k), N(cid:96)·Tr(H−1Rv,(cid:96))(cid:9) ,
Tr(H−1Rv,k)
(cid:88)
1 −
m∈Nk\{k}
(cid:96)∈Nk\{k}
ao
mk,
(cid:96) = k
(63)
where Nk denotes the cardinality of the set Nk, and step
(a) substitutes (62). From (63), we note that the above com-
bination matrix can be constructed in a decentralized manner,
where each node only requires information from its own
neighbors. In practice, the noise covariance matrices {Rv,(cid:96)}
need to be estimated from the local data and an adaptive
estimation scheme is proposed in [19] to address this issue.
3) Matching Performance across Topologies: Note that the
steady-state mean-square error depends on the vector p, which
is determined by the Perron eigenvector θ of the matrix A. The
above result implies that, as long as the network is strongly
connected, i.e., Assumption 1 holds, a left-stochastic matrix
A can always be constructed to have any desired Perron
eigenvector θ with positive entries according to (63). Now,
starting from any collection of N agents, there exists a finite
number of topologies that can link these agents together. For
each possible topology, there are infinitely many combination
policies that can be used to train the network. One important
conclusion that follows from the above results is that regard-
less of the topology, there always exists a choice for A such
that the performance of all topologies are identical to each
other to first-order in µmax. In other words, no matter how
the agents are connected to each other, there is always a way
to select the combination weights such that the performance of
the network is invariant to the topology. This also means that,
for any connected topology, there is always a way to select the
combination weights such that the performance of the network
matches that of the centralized solution.
Example 6: We illustrate the result using the diffusion least-
mean-square estimation context discussed earlier in Example
1. Consider a network of 30 agents (N = 30), where each
agent has access to a stream of data samples {uk,i, dk(i)}
that are generated by the linear model (29). As assumed in
Example 1, the 1 × M regressors {uk,i} are zero mean and
independent over time and space with covariance matrix Ru,k,
and the noise sequence {nl(j)} is also zero mean, white,
n,l, and independent of the regressors {uk,i}
with variance σ2
for all l, k, i, j. In the simulation here, we consider the case
where M = 10, Ru,k = IM . In diffusion LMS estimation,
each agent k uses (31) as its cost function Jk(w) and (33)
as the stochastic gradient vector sk,i(·). Therefore, each agent
k adopts the following recursion to adaptively estimate the
model parameter wo, which is the minimizer of the global
cost function (16):
(cid:96) )−1}
, (cid:96)∈Nk\{k}
(cid:96) = k
wk,i =
alkψl,i
ψk,i = wk,i + 2µkuT
k,i[dk(i) − uk,iwk,i−1]
(cid:88)
l∈Nk
CHEN AND SAYED: ON THE LEARNING BEHAVIOR OF ADAPTIVE NETWORKS -- PART II: PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
11
(a)
(c)
(b)
(d)
Fig. 4. Comparing the performance of a 30-node diffusion LMS network with that of the centralized strategy (47), where M = 10, µk = 0.0005 for all
agents, and Hasting's rule (63) is used as the combination policy. The result is obtained by averaging over 1000 Monte Carlo experiments. (a) A randomly
generated topology. (b) The noise profile across the network, and the steady-state MSE of diffusion LMS, centralized strategy, and the theoretical value (the
first-order term in (43)). (c) The learning curves for different agents in the diffusion LMS network, the centralized strategy, and the theoretical steady-state
MSE (the first-order term in (43)). (d) The centralized strategy, the steady-state MSE of diffusion strategy at all agents, and the theoretical value (the first-order
term in (43)) for different values of step-sizes.
We randomly generate a topology as shown in Fig. 4 (a) and
noise variance profile across agents as shown in Fig. 4 (b).
We choose µk ≡ µ = 0.0005 to be the step-size for all
agents and Hasting's rule (63) as the combination policy. In the
simulation, we assume the noise variances are known to the
agents. Alternatively, they can also be estimated in an adaptive
manner using approaches proposed in [19]. The results are
obtained by averaging over 1000 Monte Carlo experiments.
In Fig 4(b), we also show the steady-state MSE of all agents,
respectively, and compare them to the theoretical value (the
first-order term in (43)) and to the following centralized LMS
strategy:
N(cid:88)
k=1
wcent,i = wcent,i−1 + 2µ
k,i[dk(i) − uk,iwcent,i−1]
where pk = θo
k is given by (62). Fig. 4(b) illustrates the
equalization effect over the network; each agent in the network
pk · uT
achieves almost the same steady-state MSE that is close to the
centralized strategy although the noise variances in the data
are different across the agents. Furthermore, In Fig. 4 (c), we
illustrate the learning curves of all agents, and compare them
to the theoretical value and the centralized LMS strategy. We
observe from Fig. 4 (c) that the learning curves of all agents are
close to each other and to the centralized strategy. Finally, we
show in Fig. 4 the steady-state MSE of the diffusion strategy
at all agents for different values of the step-sizes, and compare
them to the MSE of the centralized strategy and against the
theoretical values (the first-order term in (43)). It is seen in the
figure that, for small step-sizes, the steady-state MSE values at
different agents approach that of the centralized strategy and
the first-order term in (43) since the higher-order term in (43)
decays faster than the first-order term.
Network topology 051015202530051015Index of the agentsNoise variance (dB)051015202530−20020Index of the agentsSteady−state MSE (dB) Diffusion strategyCentralized strategyTheory00.511.52x 104−30−20−100102030Number of iterationsMean square error (dB) Centralized strategySteady−state MSE (theory)Diffusion strategy1.31.41.51.61.7x 104−33−32.5−32−31.5−31−30.5−30−29.5−29−28.5 10−410−310−210−1−40−35−30−25−20−15−10−50Step−sizesSteady−state MSE (dB) Centralized strategySteady−state MSE (theory)Diffusion Strategy 12
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
B. Category II: Distributed Optimization
In this case, we include situations where the individual costs
Jk(w) do not have a common minimizer, i.e., W o = ∅. The
optimization problem should then be viewed as one of solving
a multi-objective minimization problem
w {J1(w), . . . , JN (w)}
min
(64)
where Jk(w) is an individual convex cost associated with each
agent k. A vector wo is said to be a Pareto optimal solution
to (64) if there does not exist another vector w that is able to
improve (i.e., reduce) any individual cost without degrading
(increasing) some of the other costs. Pareto optimal solutions
are not unique. The question we would like to address now
is the following. Given individual costs {Jk(w)} and a com-
bination policy A, what is the limit point of the distributed
strategies (1) -- (3)? From Sec. II-B (see also Theorem 4 in Part
I [2]), the distributed strategy (1) -- (3) converges to the limit
point wo defined as the unique solution to (5). Substituting
sk(w) = ∇wJk(w) into (5), we obtain
pk∇wJk(wo) = 0
N(cid:88)
In other words, wo is the minimizer of the following global
cost function:
J glob(w) =
pkJk(w)
(65)
k=1
It is shown in [28, pp.178 -- 180] that the minimizer of (65) is
a Pareto-optimal solution for the multi-objective optimization
problem (64). And different choices for the vector p lead to
different Pareto-optimal points on the tradeoff curve.
Now, a useful question to consider is the reverse direction.
Suppose, we are given a set of {pk} (instead of A) and we
want the distributed strategy (1) -- (3) to converge to the limit
point wo that is the solution of:
N(cid:88)
k=1
N(cid:88)
k=1
VII. CONCLUSION
Along with Part I [2], this work examined in some detail
the mean-square performance, convergence, and stability of
distributed strategies for adaptation and learning over graphs
under constant step-size update rules. Keeping the step-size
fixed allows the network to track drifts in the underlying data
models, their statistical distributions, and even drifts in the
utility functions. Earlier work [41] has shown that constant
adaptation regimes endow networks with tracking abilities
and derived results that quantify how the performance of
adaptive networks is affected by the level of non-stationarity
in the data. Similar conclusions extend to the general scenario
studied in Parts I and II of the current work, which is the
reason why step-sizes have been set
to a constant value
throughout our treatment. When this is done, the dynamics
of the learning process is enriched in a nontrivial manner.
This is because the effect of gradient noise does not die out
anymore with time (in comparison, when diminishing step-
sizes are used, gradient noise is annihilated by the decaying
step-sizes). And since agents are coupled through their inter-
actions over the network, it follows that their gradient noises
will continually influence the performance of their neighbors.
As a result, the network mean-square performance does not
tend to zero anymore. Instead, it approaches a steady-state
level. One of the main objectives of this Part II has been
to quantify this level and to show explicitly how its value
is affected by three parameters: the network topology, the
gradient noise, and the data characteristics. As the analysis
and the detailed derivations in the appendices of the current
manuscript show, this is a formidable task to pursue due to
the coupling among the agents. Nevertheless, under certain
conditions that are generally weaker than similar conditions
used in related contexts in the literature, we were able to
derive accurate expressions for the network MSE performance
and its convergence rate. For example, the MSE expression
we derived is accurate in the first order term of µmax. Once
an MSE expression has been derived, we were then able to
optimize it over the network topology (for the important case
of uniform Hessian matrices across the network, as is common
for example in machine learning [42] and mean-square-error
estimation problems [35]). We were able to show that arbitrary
connected topologies for the same set of agents can always
be made to perform similarly. We were also able to show
that arbitrary connected topologies for the same set of agents
can be made to match the performance of a fully connected
network. These are useful insights and they follow from the
analytical results derived in this work.
pk∇wJk(wo) = 0
(66)
Note that once the topology of the network is given, the
positions of the nonzero entries in the matrix A are known
and we are free to select the values of these nonzero entries.
One possibility is to choose the same step-size for all agents
(i.e., µk ≡ µ), and to select the nonzero entries of A such that
its Perron vector θ equals this desired p. This construction can
be achieved by using the following Hasting's rule [19], [40]:
a(cid:96)k =
max(cid:8)
1 −
(cid:88)
−1
p
k
−1
Nk · p
k ,Nl · p
amk,
m∈Nk\{k}
(cid:9) ,
−1
l
l ∈ Nk\{k}
l = k
(67)
APPENDIX A
PROOF OF THEOREM 1
That is, as long as we substitute the desired set of {pk} into
(67) and use the obtained {a(cid:96)k} together with µk ≡ µ, the
distributed strategy will converge to the wo in (66) with the
desired {pk}.
The argument
labeled steps A
through E, and relies also on intermediate results that are
proven in this appendix. We start with step A.
involves several steps,
CHEN AND SAYED: ON THE LEARNING BEHAVIOR OF ADAPTIVE NETWORKS -- PART II: PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
13
where wk,i (cid:44) wo − wk,i. Note that if we are able to evaluate
Πi as i → ∞, then we can obtain the steady-state weighted
mean-square-error for any individual agent via the following
relation:4
A. Relating the weighted MSE to the steady-state error co-
variance matrix Πi
Let Πi (cid:44) E(cid:8) wi wT
i
the global error vector
(cid:9) denote the error covariance matrix of
wi (cid:44) col{ w1,i, . . . , wN,i}
Σ = E(cid:110)
= E(cid:8) wT
= E(cid:0)Tr(cid:8) wi wT
= Tr(cid:8)E(cid:2) wi wT
col{ w1,i, . . . , wN,i}T
(cid:111)
· diag{0, . . . , Σ, . . . , 0}
(cid:9)
· col{ w1,i, . . . , wN,i}
i (Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)(cid:1)
(cid:3) (Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)
i (Ekk ⊗ Σ) wi
i
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
= Tr{Πi(Ekk ⊗ Σ)}
(68)
where Ekk is an M × M matrix with (k, k)-entry equal to
one and all other entries equal to zero. We could proceed
with the analysis by deriving a recursion of wi from (1) -- (3)
and examining the corresponding error covariance matrix, Πi.
However, we will take an alternative approach here by calling
upon the following decomposition of the error quantity wk,i
from Part I [2] (see Eq. (74) therein):
(69)
wk,i = wc,i − wc,i − (uL,k ⊗ IM )we,i
where wc,i (cid:44) wo − wc,i denotes the error of the reference
recursion (8) relative to wo, the vectors wc,i and we,i are the
two transformed quantities introduced in Eqs. (77) and (67) in
Part I [2], and uL,k is the kth row of the matrix UL which is
a sub-matrix of the transform matrix introduced in Eq. (61) in
Part I [2]. In particular, wc,i represents the error of the centroid
of the iterates {wk,i} relative to the reference recursion:
wc,i (cid:44) wc,i − ¯wc,i
wc,i (cid:44) N(cid:88)
where the centroid wc,i is defined as
θkwk,i
k=1
and (uL,k ⊗ IM )we,i represents the error of the iterate wk,i at
agent k relative to the centroid wc,i. The details and derivation
of the decomposition (69) appear in Sec. V-A of Part I [2].
Relation (69) can also be written in the following equivalent
global form:
wi = 1 ⊗ wc,i − 1 ⊗ wc,i − (UL ⊗ IM )we,i
(70)
The major motivation to use (70) in our steady-state analysis is
that the convergence results and non-asymptotic MSE bounds
already derived in Part I [2] for each term in (70) will reveal
that some quantities will either disappear or become higher
4More formally, the limit of (68) may not exist. However, as we proceed
Σ are equal to each other
to show, the lim sup and the lim inf of E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
up to first-order in µmax.
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P1[AT
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)2
order terms in steady-state for small step-sizes. In particular,
we are going to show that the mean-square-error of wi is
dominated by the mean-square-error of wc,i. Therefore, it will
suffice to examine the mean-square-error of wc,i. We start by
recalling the related non-asymptotic and asymptotic bounds
from Part I [2]. We derived in expression (103) from Part I
[2] the following relation for wc,i:
wc,i = Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1)
− µmax · (pT ⊗ IM ) [zi−1 + vi]
where
Tc(x) (cid:44) x − µmax
N(cid:88)
k=1
pksk(x)
vi (cid:44) si (φi−1)−s (φi−1)
zi−1 (cid:44) s (φi−1)−s(1 ⊗ wc,i−1)
(71)
(72)
(73)
(74)
The two perturbation terms vi(φi−1) and zi−1 were further
shown to satisfy the following bounds in Appendix I in Part
I [2].
P [zi−1] (cid:22) λ2
U ·
P [s(1⊗wc,i−1)] (cid:22) 3λ2
U ·P [ wc,i−1]·1+3λ2
E{P [vi]Fi−1} (cid:22) 4α · 1 · P [ wc,i−1]
∞·11T ·P [we,i−1]
(75)
U(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 · 1+3go
(76)
+ 4α · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:107)2∞ · 11T P [we,i−1]
+(cid:2)4α · ((cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 +(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2)+σ2
+(cid:2)4α · ((cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 +(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2)+σ2
· 1 (77)
1 UL](cid:107)2∞ · 11T EP [we,i−1]
· 1 (78)
where P [ wc,i−1] = (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2, and go (cid:44) P [s(1 ⊗ wo)]. We
EP [vi] (cid:22) 4α · 1 · EP [ wc,i−1]
further showed in Eqs. (130) and (131) from Part I [2] that
+ 4α · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
(cid:3)
(cid:3)
v
v
lim sup
i→∞
lim sup
i→∞
E(cid:107) wc,i(cid:107)2 ≤ O(µmax)
E(cid:107)we,i(cid:107)2 ≤ O(µ2
max)
(79)
(80)
B. Approximation of Πi by 11T ⊗ Πc,i
In order to examine Πi, which is needed for the limiting
value of (68), we first establish the result (85) further ahead
using (70): in steady-state, the error covariance matrix of
wi (i.e., Πi) is equal to the error covaraince matrix of the
component 1⊗ wc,i to the first order in µmax. Indeed, let Πc,i
denote the covariance matrix of wc,i, i.e., Πc,i (cid:44) E{ wc,i wT
c,i}.
Πi = E(cid:8) wi wT
By (70), we have
+ E(cid:8)[(UL ⊗ IM )we,i][(UL ⊗ IM )we,i]T(cid:9)
(cid:1)T
− (1 ⊗ wc,i)(cid:0)1 ⊗ E wc,i + (UL ⊗ IM )Ewe,i
(cid:1)(1 ⊗ wc,i)T
(cid:0)1 ⊗ E wc,i + (UL ⊗ IM )Ewe,i
+ E(cid:8)(1 ⊗ wc,i)[(UL ⊗ IM )we,i]T(cid:9)
(cid:9)
= 11T ⊗ [ wc,i wT
c,i] + 11T ⊗ Πc,i
−
i
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
where
= [IM − µmaxHc] wc,i−1 − µmax · (pT ⊗ IM )vi
− µmax · (pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
− µmax
(cid:0)sc(wc,i−1) − sc( ¯wc,i−1) − Hc wc,i−1
Hc (cid:44) N(cid:88)
sc(w) (cid:44) N(cid:88)
pk∇wT sk(wo)
pksk(w)
k=1
(cid:1) (86)
(87)
(88)
k=1
Next, we show that the mean-square-error between wc,i gener-
ated by (86) and the wa,i generated by the following auxiliary
recursion is small for small step-sizes:
wa,i = [IM − µmaxHc] wa,i−1 − µmax · (pT ⊗ IM )vi
Indeed, subtracting (89) from (86) leads to
wc,i − wa,i = [IM − µmaxHc] ( wc,i−1 − wa,i−1)
(cid:0)sc(wc,i−1) − sc( ¯wc,i−1) − Hc wc,i−1
(90)
We recall the definition of the scalar factor γc from Eq. (166)
in Part I [2]:
− µmax
− µmax · (pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(89)
(cid:1)
γc (cid:44) 1 − µmaxλL +
1
2
µ2
max(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
U
(91)
Now evaluating the squared Euclidean norm of both sides of
(90), we get
(cid:107) wc,i − wa,i(cid:107)2
14
(b)
(a)
≤
+
+ 2(cid:107)1 ⊗ wc,i(cid:107) ·
+ 2
+ E(cid:8)[(UL ⊗ IM )we,i](1 ⊗ wc,i)T(cid:9)
so that(cid:13)(cid:13)Πi − 11T ⊗ Πc,i
(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:13)(cid:13)11T ⊗ [ wc,i wT
c,i](cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:13)(cid:13)E(cid:8)[(UL ⊗ IM )we,i][(UL ⊗ IM )we,i]T(cid:9)(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:13)(cid:13)1 ⊗ E wc,i + (UL ⊗ IM )Ewe,i
(cid:13)(cid:13)E(cid:8)(1 ⊗ wc,i)[(UL ⊗ IM )we,i]T(cid:9)(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:13)(cid:13)11T ⊗ [ wc,i wT
c,i](cid:13)(cid:13) + E(cid:107)(UL ⊗ IM )we,i](cid:107)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)1 ⊗ E wc,i + (UL ⊗ IM )Ewe,i
+ 2(cid:13)(cid:13)E(cid:8)(1 ⊗ wc,i)[(UL ⊗ IM )we,i]T(cid:9)(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:13)(cid:13)Πi − 11T ⊗ Πc,i
(cid:8)2(cid:13)(cid:13)E(cid:8)(1 ⊗ wc,i)[(UL ⊗ IM )we,i]T(cid:9)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:9) (81)
where step (a) uses triangular inequality, and step (b) applies
Jensen's inequality (cid:107)E[·](cid:107) ≤ E(cid:107)·(cid:107) to the convex function (cid:107)·(cid:107)
and the inequality (cid:107)xyT(cid:107) ≤ (cid:107)x(cid:107)·(cid:107)y(cid:107). Taking lim sup of both
sides as i → ∞, we obtain
lim sup
i→∞
≤ lim sup
i→∞
(cid:13)(cid:13)
E(cid:107)(UL ⊗ IM )we,i](cid:107)2
+ 2(cid:107)1 ⊗ wc,i(cid:107) ·
+ lim sup
i→∞
(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:13)(cid:13)
≤
since wc,i → 0 as i → ∞ according to Theorem 2 in Part I
[2]. We now bound the two terms on the right-hand side of
(81) using (79) -- (80) and show that they are higher order terms
of µmax. By (80), the first term on the right-hand side of (81)
is O(µ2
max) because
lim sup
i→∞
≤ lim sup
E(cid:107)(UL ⊗ IM )we,i](cid:107)2
i→∞ (cid:107)UL ⊗ IM(cid:107)2 · E(cid:107)we,i(cid:107)2 ≤ O(µ2
max)
(82)
Moreover, for any random variables x and y, we have
E{xy}2 ≤ E{x2} · E{y2}. Applying this result to the last
term in (81) we have
≤
(cid:13)(cid:13)E(cid:2)(1 ⊗ wc,i)[(UL ⊗ IM )we,i]T(cid:3)(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:113)E(cid:107)1 ⊗ wc,i(cid:107)2 · E(cid:107)(UL ⊗ IM )we,i(cid:107)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)E(cid:2)(1 ⊗ wc,i)[(UL ⊗ IM )we,i]T(cid:3)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ O(µ3/2
(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ O(µ3/2
(cid:13)(cid:13)Πi − 11T ⊗ Πc,i
lim sup
i→∞
max)
(83)
max) (84)
(85)
Therefore, substituting (82) and (84) into (81), we conclude
that
Using (79) and (80), we conclude that
lim sup
i→∞
C. Approximation of Πc,i by Πa,i
Now we examine the expression for Πc,i at steady-state
(i → ∞) to arrive at further expression (109). To do this, we
rewrite expressions (71) -- (74) for wc,i as
N(cid:88)
k=1
(cid:2)sk(wc,i−1)−sk( ¯wc,i−1)(cid:3)
pk
wc,i = wc,i−1−µmax
− µmax · (pT ⊗ IM ) [zi−1 + vi]
=(cid:13)(cid:13)γc ·
1
γc
1 − γc
1 − γc
2
2
(cid:13)(cid:13) 1
γc
1−γc
·
2
1 − γc
2
+
+
(a)
≤ γc ·
+
+
≤
(cid:1)
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:0)sc(wc,i−1)−sc( ¯wc,i−1)−Hc wc,i−1
·
· (pT ⊗IM )zi−1
[IM − µmaxHc] ( wc,i−1 − wa,i−1)
· −2µmax
1 − γc
· −2µmax
[IM −µmaxHc] ( wc,i−1− wa,i−1)(cid:13)(cid:13)2
1 − γc
(cid:13)(cid:13)−2µmax
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)−2µmax
1 − γc ·
1 − γc
(cid:13)(cid:13)sc(wc,i−1) − sc( ¯wc,i−1) − Hc wc,i−1
(cid:0)sc(wc,i−1)−sc( ¯wc,i−1)−Hc wc,i−1
· (pT ⊗IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
·
(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:13)2
max
2µ2
1
γc · (cid:107)IM − µmaxHc(cid:107)2 · (cid:107) wc,i−1 − wa,i−1(cid:107)2
2µ2
1 − γc ·
+
1 − γc · (cid:107)(pT ⊗IM )(cid:107)2 · (cid:107)zi−1(cid:107)2
1
γc · (cid:107)Bc(cid:107)2 · (cid:107) wc,i−1 − wa,i−1(cid:107)2
+
max
+
(b)
=
(cid:13)(cid:13)sc(wc,i−1)−sc( ¯wc,i−1)−Hc wc,i−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
U ·
1λ2
U ·(cid:107)(pT ⊗IM )(cid:107)2·1T P [zi−1]
1λ2
(92)
2µmax
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
2µmax
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
λL− 1
λL− 1
+
where in step (a) we used the convexity of the squared norm
(cid:107)·(cid:107)2, and in step (b) we introduced Bc (cid:44) IM − µmaxHc. We
CHEN AND SAYED: ON THE LEARNING BEHAVIOR OF ADAPTIVE NETWORKS -- PART II: PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
now proceed to bound the three terms on the right-hand side
of the above inequality. First note that
BT
c Bc = (I − µmaxHc)T (I − µmaxHc)
= I − µmax(Hc + H T
c ) + µ2
maxH T
c Hc
Under Assumption 5, conditions (22) and (23) hold in the ball
δw(cid:107) ≤ rH around wo. Recall from (87) that Hc is evaluated
at wo. Therefore, from (23) we have
(93)
(94)
Hc + H T
c ≥ 2λL · IM
and by (22), we have
(cid:107)Hc(cid:107) =
≤
≤
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N(cid:88)
N(cid:88)
N(cid:88)
k=1
k=1
k=1
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)
pk∇wT sk(wo)
pk(cid:107)∇wT sk(wo)(cid:107)
pk · λU = (cid:107)p(cid:107)1 · λU
c Hc), where λmax(·)
Note further that (cid:107)Hc(cid:107)2 ≡ λmax(H T
denotes the largest eigenvalue of the matrix argument. This
implies that
1λ2
U · IM
0 ≤ H T
c Hc ≤ (cid:107)p(cid:107)2
so that
BT
c Bc ≤
(cid:0)1 − 2µmaxλL + µ2
Substituting (94) and (95) into (93), we obtain
max(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
U
(cid:19)2
(cid:107)Bc(cid:107)2 ≤ 1 − 2µmaxλL + µ2
max(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1
µ2
max(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
2
1 − µmaxλL +
(cid:18)
1λ2
U
1λ2
U
≤
(95)
(cid:1)
· I
= γ2
c
(96)
2 x)2. Next,
where in the last inequality we used (1−x) ≤ (1− 1
we bound the second term on the right-hand side of (92). To
do this, we need to bound it in two separate cases:
1) Case 1: (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107) + (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107) ≤ rH
This condition implies that, for any 0 ≤ t ≤ 1, the vector
¯wc,i−1 + t wc,i−1 is inside a ball that is centered at wo
with radius rH since:
(cid:107)( ¯wc,i−1 + t wc,i−1) − wo(cid:107) = (cid:107) − wc,i−1 + t wc,i−1(cid:107)
≤ (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107) + t(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)
≤ (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107) + (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)
≤ rH
By Assumption 5, the function sk(w) is differentiable at
¯wc,i−1 +t wc,i−1 so that using the following mean-value
theorem [43, p.6]:
sk(wc,i−1) = sk( ¯wc,i−1)
(cid:19)
(cid:18)(cid:90) 1
0 ∇wT sk( ¯wc,i−1 + t wc,i−1)dt
+
Then, we have
(cid:13)(cid:13)sc(wc,i−1) − sc( ¯wc,i−1) − Hc wc,i−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
· wc,i−1
(97)
15
0
0
0
(a)
=
=
=
pk
k=1
k=1
k=1
k=1
k=1
k=1
≤
−
≤
pk ·
pk ·
pk ·
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:90) 1
∇wT sk( ¯wc,i−1 + t wc,i−1)
(cid:13)(cid:13) N(cid:88)
(cid:90) 1
pk[sk(wc,i−1) − sk( ¯wc,i−1)] − Hc wc,i−1
(cid:13)(cid:13) N(cid:88)
0 ∇wT sk( ¯wc,i−1 + t wc,i−1)dt · wc,i−1
N(cid:88)
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:90) 1
pk∇wT sk(wo) · wc,i−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N(cid:88)
(cid:2)
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2
− ∇wT sk(wo)(cid:3)dt · wc,i−1
(cid:110) N(cid:88)
(cid:13)(cid:13)∇wT sk( ¯wc,i−1 + t wc,i−1)
(cid:111)2
− ∇wT sk(wo)(cid:13)(cid:13)dt · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)
(cid:90) 1
(cid:110) N(cid:88)
(cid:111)2
λH · (cid:107)( ¯wc,i−1 + t wc,i−1) − wo(cid:107)dt
(cid:90) 1
(cid:110) N(cid:88)
· (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)
(cid:111)2
λH · ((cid:107) ¯wc,i−1 − wo(cid:107) + t(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107))dt
(cid:90) 1
(cid:110) N(cid:88)
· (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)
(cid:111)2
λH · ((cid:107) ¯wc,i−1 − wo(cid:107) + (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107))dt
(cid:111)2
(cid:110) N(cid:88)
· (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)
(cid:110)
(cid:111)2
pk · λH · ((cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107) + (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)) · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)
(cid:107)p(cid:107)1 · λH · ((cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107) + (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)) · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)
=
H · ((cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107) + (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107))2 · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2
1 · λ2
= (cid:107)p(cid:107)2
≤ 2(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 · λ2
H · ((cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2 + (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2) · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2
(98)
where step (a) uses Assumption 5 and the last inequality
uses (x + y)2 ≤ 2x2 + 2y2.
It holds that
pk ·
pk ·
≤
≤
k=1
k=1
k=1
=
0
0
pk
k=1
2) Case 2: (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107) + (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107) > rH
(cid:13)(cid:13)sc(wc,i−1) − sc( ¯wc,i−1) − Hc wc,i−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
=(cid:13)(cid:13) N(cid:88)
(cid:2)sk(wc,i−1) − sk( ¯wc,i−1)
(cid:3)(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:110) N(cid:88)
(cid:13)(cid:13)sk(wc,i−1) − sk( ¯wc,i−1)
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:111)2
(cid:110) N(cid:88)
(cid:0)
− ∇wT sk(wo) · wc,i−1
− ∇wT sk(wo) · wc,i−1
≤
k=1
pk
pk
(cid:107)sk(wc,i−1) − sk( ¯wc,i−1)(cid:107)
≤
k=1
16
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
(cid:1)(cid:111)2
(b)
(a)
k=1
≤
(cid:111)2
pk · (λU · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107) + λU · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107))
(cid:19)2
(cid:110) N(cid:88)
+ (cid:107)∇wT sk(wo)(cid:107) · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)
(cid:110)
(cid:111)2
2(cid:107)p(cid:107)1 · λU · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)
=
(cid:18)
U · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2
1 · λ2
≤ 4(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
· (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2
1 · λ2
≤ 4(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
U ·
4λ2
H · ((cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2 + (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2) · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2
≤ 2(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
U
1 ·
r2
(99)
where in step (a) we used (19) and (22), in step (b)
we used the fact that (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107) + (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107) > rH in
the current case, and in step (c) we used the relation
(cid:107)x + y(cid:107)2 ≤ 2(cid:107)x(cid:107)2 + 2(cid:107)y(cid:107)2.
(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107) + (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)
rH
(c)
Based on (98) and (99) from both cases, we have
(cid:13)(cid:13)sc(wc,i−1) − sc( ¯wc,i−1) − Hc wc,i−1
≤ 2(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1·λ2
HU ·((cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2 +(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2) · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2 (100)
where
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:27)
(cid:26)
λ2
HU
(cid:44) max
λ2
H ,
4λ2
U
r2
H
+
HU
1λ2
U
The third term on the right-hand side of (92) can be bounded
by (75). Therefore, substituting (96), (100) and (75) into (92)
and applying the expectation operator, we get
E(cid:107) wc,i − wa,i(cid:107)2
≤ γc · E(cid:107) wc,i−1 − wa,i−1(cid:107)2
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:0)E(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2 · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2 + E(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4(cid:1)
4µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
λL − 1
·
2N µmax(cid:107)pT ⊗IM(cid:107)2
U ·λ2
λL− 1
1λ2
1 U1](cid:107)2∞·E(cid:107)we,i−1(cid:107)2
(101)
where in the last term on the right-hand side of (101) we used
1T P [x] = (cid:107)x(cid:107)2 from property (157) in Part I [2]. Recall from
Theorem 2 in Part I [2] that wc,i−1 → 0, and from (79) -- (80)
that E(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2 ≤ O(µmax) and E(cid:107)we,i−1(cid:107)2 ≤ O(µ2
max)
in steady-state. Moreover, we also have the following result
regarding E(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4 in steady-state.
Lemma 2 (Asymptotic bound on the 4th order moment):
Using Assumptions 1 -- 7, it holds that
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
U ·(cid:107) ¯P1[AT
+
lim sup
i→∞
lim sup
i→∞
E(cid:107) wc,i(cid:107)4 ≤ O(µ2
E(cid:107)we,i(cid:107)4 ≤ O(µ4
max)
max)
(102)
(103)
Proof: See Appendix B.
sion (101), we obtain
Therefore, taking lim sup of both sides of inequality recur-
lim sup
i→∞
E(cid:107) wc,i− wa,i(cid:107)2
≤ γc · lim sup
i→∞
E(cid:107) wc,i−1− wa,i−1(cid:107)2 + O(µ3
max)
= γc · lim sup
i→∞
E(cid:107) wc,i− wa,i(cid:107)2 + O(µ3
max)
(104)
As long as γc < 1, which is guaranteed by the stability
condition (129) from Part I [2], inequality (104) leads to
E(cid:107) wc,i − wa,i(cid:107)2
lim sup
i→∞
1
≤
=
max)
1 − γc · O(µ3
1
µmax − 1
max(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
2 µ2
U · O(µ3
1λ2
max) = O(µ2
max)
(105)
Based on (105), we can now show that
the steady-state
covariance matrix of wc,i is equal to the covariance matrix
of wa,i plus a high order perturbation term. First, we have
Πc,i = E[ wc,i wT
c,i]
a,i] + E[ wa,i( wc,i − wa,i)T ]
= E[( wa,i + wc,i − wa,i)( wa,i + wc,i − wa,i)T ]
= E[ wa,i wT
+E[( wc,i− wa,i) wT
a,i]+E[( wc,i− wa,i)( wc,i− wa,i)T ]
= Πa,i + E[ wc,i( wc,i − wa,i)T ] + E[( wc,i − wa,i) wT
c,i]
− E[( wc,i − wa,i)( wc,i − wa,i)T ]
(106)
The second to the fourth terms in (106) are asymptotically
high order terms of µmax. Indeed, for the second term, we
have as i → ∞:
(cid:13)(cid:13)E[ wc,i( wc,i − wa,i)T ](cid:13)(cid:13)
lim sup
i→∞
E(cid:13)(cid:13) wc,i( wc,i − wa,i)T(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:113)E(cid:107) wc,i(cid:107)2 · E(cid:107) wc,i − wa,i(cid:107)2
E[(cid:107) wc,i(cid:107) · (cid:107) wc,i − wa,i(cid:107)]
≤ lim sup
i→∞
≤ lim sup
i→∞
≤ lim sup
i→∞
≤ O(µ3/2
max)
(107)
(108)
Likewise, the third term in (106) is asymptotically O(µ3/2
For the fourth term in (106), we have as i → ∞:
(cid:13)(cid:13)E[( wc,i − wa,i)( wc,i − wa,i)T ](cid:13)(cid:13)
lim sup
i→∞
E(cid:13)(cid:13)( wc,i − wa,i)( wc,i − wa,i)T(cid:13)(cid:13)
(a)
≤ lim sup
i→∞
max).
E(cid:107) wc,i − wa,i(cid:107)2
(b)
≤ lim sup
i→∞
≤ O(µ2
(c)
max)
where step (a) applies Jensen's inequality to the convex
function (cid:107) · (cid:107), step (b) uses the relation (cid:107)xyT(cid:107) ≤ (cid:107)x(cid:107) · (cid:107)y(cid:107),
and step (c) uses (105). Substituting (107) -- (108) into (106),
we get,
(cid:13)(cid:13) Πc,i − Πa,i
(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ O(µ3/2
max)
lim sup
i→∞
(109)
Combining (109) with (85) we therefore find that
i→∞ (cid:107)Πi − 11T ⊗ Πa,i(cid:107)
lim sup
= lim sup
i→∞ (cid:107)Πi − 11T ⊗ Πc,i + 11T ⊗ ( Πc,i − Πa,i)(cid:107)
CHEN AND SAYED: ON THE LEARNING BEHAVIOR OF ADAPTIVE NETWORKS -- PART II: PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
17
≤ lim sup
(a)
= lim sup
i→∞ (cid:107)Πi−11T ⊗ Πc,i(cid:107)+lim sup
i→∞ (cid:107)11T ⊗ ( Πc,i− Πa,i)(cid:107)
i→∞ (cid:107)Πi−11T ⊗ Πc,i(cid:107)+lim sup
i→∞ (cid:107)11T(cid:107)·(cid:107) Πc,i− Πa,i(cid:107)
(110)
≤ O(µ3/2
max)
where step (a) uses the fact that the 2−induced matrix norm
is the largest singular value and that the singular values of
X ⊗ Y are equal to the products of the respective singular
values of X and Y .
D. Evaluation of Πa,∞
We now proceed to evaluate Πa,i from recursion (89):
+µ2
c + µ2
c +µ2
Πa,i = Bc Πa,i−1BT
= Bc Πa,i−1BT
max(pT ⊗IM )E(cid:2)
max(pT ⊗ IM )ERv,i(φi−1)(p ⊗ IM )
max(pT ⊗ IM )ERv,i(1⊗wo)(p⊗IM )
(111)
We will verify that the last perturbation term in (111) is also
a high-order term in µmax. First note that
Rv,i(φi−1)−Rv,i(1⊗wo)(cid:3)(p⊗IM)
Rv,i(φi−1) − Rv,i(1 ⊗ wo)(cid:3)(p ⊗ IM )(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:13)(cid:13)µ2
max(pT ⊗ IM )E(cid:2)
max · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2 · E(cid:13)(cid:13)Rv,i(φi−1) − Rv,i(1 ⊗ wo)(cid:13)(cid:13)
≤ µ2
(112)
Next, we bound the rightmost term inside the expectation of
(112). We also need to bound it in two separate cases before
arriving at a universal bound:
1) Case 1: (cid:107) φi−1(cid:107) ≤ rV
By (28) in Assumption 6, we have
(cid:13)(cid:13)Rv,i(φi−1) − Rv,i(1 ⊗ wo)
(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:13)(cid:13)Rv,i(φi−1) − Rv,i(1 ⊗ wo)(cid:13)(cid:13)
2) Case 2: (cid:107) φi−1(cid:107) > rV
In this case, we have
≤ (cid:107)Rv,i(φi−1)(cid:107) + (cid:107)Rv,i(1 ⊗ wo)(cid:107)
(114)
To proceed, we first bound (cid:107)Rv,i(w)(cid:107) as follows, where
w (cid:44) col{w1, . . . , wN}. From the definition of Rv,i(w)
in (26), we have
(cid:107)Rv,i(w)(cid:107)
(cid:3)
i (w)Fi−1}
i (w)]Fi−1}
(a)
(b)
=
= Tr(cid:2)E{vi(w)vT
≤ Tr[Rv,i(w)]
= E{Tr[vi(w)vT
N(cid:88)
= E{(cid:107)vi(w)(cid:107)2Fi−1}
N(cid:88)
N(cid:88)
N(cid:88)
{α · (cid:107)wk(cid:107)2 + σ2
≤
k=1
k=1
k=1
=
(c)
E{(cid:107)vk,i(wk)(cid:107)2Fi−1}
vFi−1}
{α · (cid:107)wk − wo + wo(cid:107)2 + σ2
vFi−1}
≤
k=1
{2α(cid:107)wk−wo(cid:107)2 +2α(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 +σ2
vFi−1}
≤ λv · (cid:107)φi−1 − 1 ⊗ wo(cid:107)κ = λv · (cid:107) φi−1(cid:107)κ
(113)
4αN(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 + 2N σ2
v
= 2α · (cid:107)w−1 ⊗ wo(cid:107)2 +2αN(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 +N σ2
v
(115)
where in step (a) we used (cid:107)X(cid:107) ≤ Tr(X) for any
symmetric positive semi-definite matrix X, in step (b)
we used the definition of vi(w) in (25), and in step
(c) we used (18). Using (115) with w = φi−1 and
w = 1 ⊗ wo, respectively, for the two terms on the
right-hand side of (114), we get
(cid:13)(cid:13)Rv,i(φi−1) − Rv,i(1 ⊗ wo)(cid:13)(cid:13)
≤ 2α · (cid:107) φi−1(cid:107)2 +(cid:0)4αN(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 + 2N σ2
=(cid:0)2α +
≤ 2α · (cid:107) φi−1(cid:107)2 + 4αN(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 + 2N σ2
4αN(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 + 2N σ2
(cid:1)
(a)
v
v
v
(cid:1)
· (cid:107) φi−1(cid:107)2
r2
V
(116)
· (cid:107) φi−1(cid:107)2
r2
V
where in step (a) we used the fact that (cid:107) φi−1(cid:107) > rV in
the current case.
In summary, from (113) and (116), we obtain the following
bound that holds in general:
4αN(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 +2N σ2
v
r2
V
2α+
≤ max
≤ λV U · max
≤ λV U ·
where
(cid:13)(cid:13)Rv,i(φi−1) − Rv,i(1 ⊗ wo)(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:18)
(cid:26)
(cid:110)
(cid:107) φi−1(cid:107)2,(cid:107) φi−1(cid:107)κ(cid:111)
λv·(cid:107) φi−1(cid:107)κ,
(cid:107) φi−1(cid:107)2 + (cid:107) φi−1(cid:107)κ(cid:111)
(cid:110)
λV U (cid:44) max(cid:8)λv, 2α +
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)µ2
max(pT ⊗ IM )E(cid:2)
− Rv,i(1 ⊗ wo)(cid:3)(p ⊗ IM )
lim sup
i→∞
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)
r2
V
Substituting (117) into (112), we arrive at
Rv,i(φi−1)
1 wi−1(cid:107)2
max · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2 · λV U ·
1 (cid:107)2 · E(cid:107) wi−1(cid:107)2
(cid:104)E(cid:107) φi−1(cid:107)2 + E(cid:107) φi−1(cid:107)κ(cid:105)
(cid:2)E(cid:107)AT
max · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2 · λV U ·
1 wi−1(cid:107)κ(cid:3)
max · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2 · λV U ·
(cid:2)
1 (cid:107)κ · E(cid:107) wi−1(cid:107)κ(cid:3)
(cid:107)AT
(cid:104)
1 (cid:107)κ · E(cid:8)((cid:107) wi−1(cid:107)4)κ/4(cid:9)(cid:105)
(cid:107)AT
(cid:104)
1 (cid:107)κ · (E(cid:107) wi−1(cid:107)4)κ/4(cid:105)
i→∞ µ2
≤ lim sup
(a)
i→∞ µ2
= lim sup
+ E(cid:107)AT
i→∞ µ2
≤ lim sup
+ (cid:107)AT
i→∞ µ2
= lim sup
+ (cid:107)AT
i→∞ µ2
≤ lim sup
+ (cid:107)AT
≤ µ2
max · [O(µmax) + O(µκ/2
max)]
= O(µ3
1 (cid:107)2 · E(cid:107) wi−1(cid:107)2
1 (cid:107)2 · E(cid:107) wi−1(cid:107)2
max · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2 · λV U ·
max · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2 · λV U ·
max) + O(µκ/2+2
(cid:107)AT
max
(c)
(b)
)
(118)
(cid:19)
(cid:27)
·(cid:107) φi−1(cid:107)2
(117)
(cid:9)
18
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
max
(cid:1)
(120)
lim sup
c +µ2
a,i = Bc Πo
i→∞ (cid:107) Πa,i − Πo
Taking the 2-induced norm of both sides, we get
a,i = Bc( Πa,i−1 − Πo
+ µ2
where in step (a) we used the relation φi−1 = AT
1 wi−1 from
(88) in Part I [2], in step (b) we applied Jensen's inequality
E(xκ/4) ≤ (Ex)κ/4 since xκ/4 is a concave function when
0 < κ ≤ 4, and in step (c) we used the fact that the lim sup of
E(cid:107) wi−1(cid:107)2 is on the order of O(µmax)5 and that the lim sup
of E(cid:107) wi−1(cid:107)4 is on the order of O(µ2
max)6. The bound (118)
implies that recursion (111) is a perturbed version of the
following recursion
Πo
a,i−1BT
max(pT ⊗IM )ERv,i(1⊗wo)(p⊗IM )
(119)
We now show that the covariance matrices obtained from these
two recursions are close to each other in the sense that
Subtracting (119) from (111), we get
Πa,i− Πo
a,i−1)BT
c
a,i(cid:107) ≤ O(cid:0)µmin(2,1+κ/2)
Rv,i(φi−1)−Rv,i(1⊗wo)(cid:3)(p⊗IM)
(cid:13)(cid:13)
Rv,i(φi−1)−Rv,i(1⊗wo)(cid:3)(p⊗IM)(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:13)(cid:13)
Rv,i(φi−1)−Rv,i(1⊗wo)(cid:3)(p⊗IM)(cid:13)(cid:13)
max(pT ⊗IM )E(cid:2)
(cid:13)(cid:13) Πa,i − Πo
(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:13)(cid:13) Πa,i−1 − Πo
+(cid:13)(cid:13)µ2
max(pT ⊗IM )E(cid:2)
(cid:13)(cid:13) Πa,i−1 − Πo
+(cid:13)(cid:13)µ2
max(pT ⊗IM )E(cid:2)
(cid:13)(cid:13) Πa,i − Πo
(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:13)(cid:13) Πa,i−1 − Πo
(cid:13)(cid:13)µ2
Rv,i(φi−1) − Rv,i(1⊗wo)(cid:3)
max(pT ⊗IM )E(cid:2)
· (p⊗IM)(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:13)(cid:13) + O(µ3
(cid:13)(cid:13) Πa,i−1 − Πo
(cid:13)(cid:13)+O(µ3
(cid:13)(cid:13) Πa,i− Πo
where in step (a) we are using (96). Taking lim sup of both
sides the above inequality, we obtain
lim sup
i→∞
≤ γ2
c · lim sup
i→∞
+ lim sup
i→∞
c · lim sup
i→∞
c · lim sup
i→∞
max) + O(µκ/2+2
max)+O(µκ/2+2
≤ (cid:107)Bc(cid:107)2 ·
≤ γ2
= γ2
≤ γ2
c ·
) (121)
a,i−1
a,i−1
a,i−1
a,i−1
max
max
(a)
(a)
a,i
a,i
a,i
)
where step (a) uses (118). Recalling that γc < 1, which is
already guaranteed by choosing µmax according to the stability
condition (129) in Part I [2], we can move the first term on
the right-hand side of (121) to the left, divide both sides by
1 − γ2
c and get
(cid:13)(cid:13) Πa,i − Πo
a,i
(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤
lim sup
i→∞
O(µ3
max) + O(µκ/2+2
max
1 − γ2
c
O(µ3
max) + O(µκ/2+2
max
)
)
1 − γc
max) + O(µκ/2+2
)
max(cid:107)p(cid:107)1λ2
O(µ3
µmaxλL − 1
2 µ2
max
U
≤
(a)
=
5This can be derived by using (70), (79), (80) along with the fact that
wc,i → 0 (Thm. 2 in Part I [2]) and (cid:107)x+y +z(cid:107)2 ≤ 3((cid:107)x(cid:107)2 +(cid:107)y(cid:107)2 +(cid:107)z(cid:107)2).
6This can be derived by using (70), (102), (103) along with the fact that
wc,i → 0 and (cid:107)x + y + z(cid:107)4 ≤ 27((cid:107)x(cid:107)4 + (cid:107)y(cid:107)4 + (cid:107)z(cid:107)4).
=
=
max
O(µ2
λL − 1
max) + O(µκ/2+1
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)1λ2
O(cid:0)µmin(2,1+κ/2)
(cid:1)
max
U
λL − 1
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)1λ2
U
where in step (a) we are substituting (91).
)
(122)
E. Final expression for Π∞
Therefore, by (110) and (120), we have
lim sup
i→∞ (cid:107)Πi − 11T ⊗ Πo
a,i(cid:107)
a,i)(cid:107)
= lim sup
≤ lim sup
+ lim sup
i→∞ (cid:107)Πi − 11T ⊗ Πa,i + 11T ⊗ ( Πa,i − Πo
i→∞ (cid:107)Πi − 11T ⊗ Πa,i(cid:107)
i→∞ (cid:107)11T ⊗ ( Πa,i − Πo
i→∞ (cid:107)Πi − 11T ⊗ Πa,i(cid:107)
i→∞ (cid:107)11T(cid:107) · (cid:107) Πa,i − Πo
max) + O(µmin(2,1+κ/2)
a,i(cid:107)
)
a,i)(cid:107)
+ lim sup
= lim sup
≤ O(µ3/2
= O(µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
max
)
max
(123)
As i → ∞, the unperturbed recursion (119) converges to
a unique solution Πo
a,∞ that satisfies the following discrete
Lyapunov equation:
Πo
a,∞ = Bc Πo
a,∞BT
c + µ2
max(pT ⊗ IM ) · Rv · (p ⊗ IM )
(124)
where we used (27) from Assumption 6.7 In other words, as
i → ∞, Πo
lim sup
= lim sup
a,i converges to Πo
i→∞ (cid:107)Πi − 11T ⊗ Πo
a,∞ so that
a,∞(cid:107)
i→∞ (cid:107)Πi − 11T ⊗ Πo
i→∞ (cid:107)Πi − 11T ⊗ Πo
i→∞ (cid:107)11T ⊗ ( Πo
a,i + 11T ⊗ ( Πo
a,i(cid:107)
a,i − Πo
a,∞)(cid:107)
+ lim sup
≤ lim sup
a,i − Πo
a,∞)(cid:107)
(125)
≤ O(µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
max
)
Furthermore, using (68) and (125), we also have
(cid:12)(cid:12)E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
Σ − Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
(cid:12)(cid:12)Tr(cid:8)Πi(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)
− Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
(cid:12)(cid:12)Tr(cid:8)(Πi − 11T ⊗ Πo
(cid:12)(cid:12)[vec(Πi − 11T ⊗ Πo
(cid:13)(cid:13)vec(Πi − 11T ⊗ Πo
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)(cid:12)(cid:12)
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)(cid:12)(cid:12)
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)(cid:12)(cid:12)
a,∞)(cid:13)(cid:13) ·
(cid:12)(cid:12)
(cid:13)(cid:13)vec(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:13)(cid:13)
a,∞)]T vec(Ekk ⊗ Σ)
lim sup
i→∞
= lim sup
i→∞
= lim sup
i→∞
= lim sup
i→∞
(a)
≤ lim sup
i→∞
7The almost sure convergence in (27) implies ERv,i(1 ⊗ wo) → Rv in
(119) and (124) because of the dominated convergence theorem [44, p.44].
The condition of dominated convergence theorem can be verified by showing
that (cid:107)Rv,i(1 ⊗ wo)(cid:107) is upper bounded almost surely by a deterministic
constant 2αN(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 + N σ2
v, which can be proved by following a similar
line of argument in (115) using (18), (25), and (26).
CHEN AND SAYED: ON THE LEARNING BEHAVIOR OF ADAPTIVE NETWORKS -- PART II: PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
19
)
max
(128)
a,∞)]T vec(Σ) − O(µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
= [vec( Πo
where step (a) adds and subtracts the same term, step (b) uses
x ≥ −x, step (c) uses(126), and step (d) uses the property
Tr(X⊗Y ) = Tr(X)Tr(Y ) for Kronecker products. Note from
(127) and (128) that the first terms in the lim sup and lim inf
bounds are the same, and the second terms are high-order
terms of µmax. Therefore, once we find the expression for
Πo
a,∞, we will have a complete characterization of the steady-
state MSE.
Now we proceed to derive the expression for Πo
a,∞. Vec-
torizing both sides of (124), we obtain
vec( Πo
−1
= µ2
= µmax · (IM ⊗ Hc +Hc ⊗ IM −µmaxHc ⊗ Hc)
a,∞)
max · (IM 2 − Bc ⊗ Bc)
× vec(cid:8)(pT ⊗ IM ) · Rv · (p ⊗ IM )(cid:9)
× vec(cid:8)(pT ⊗ IM ) · Rv · (p ⊗ IM )(cid:9)
(cid:2)IM 2−µmax(Hc⊗Hc)(IM ⊗Hc +Hc⊗IM )
× vec(cid:8)(pT ⊗ IM ) · Rv · (p ⊗ IM )(cid:9)
= µmax · (IM ⊗ Hc + Hc ⊗ IM )
×
−1
(a)
−1
−1(cid:3)−1
(129)
where step (a) uses the fact that (X + Y )−1 = X−1(I +
Y X−1)−1 given X is invertible. Note that the existence of
the inverse of IM ⊗ Hc + Hc ⊗ IM is guaranteed by (23)
for the following reason. First, condition (23) ensures that all
the eigenvalues of Hc have positive real parts. To see this, let
λ(Hc) and x0 (x0 (cid:54)= 0) denote an eigenvalue of Hc and the
corresponding eigenvector8. Then,
∗
(130)
∗
0Hcx0 = λ(Hc) · (cid:107)x0(cid:107)2
Hcx0 = λ(Hc) · x0 ⇒ x
∗
⇒ (x
0Hcx0)
∗
⇒ x
0H
∗
0H T
⇒ x
∗
= λ
∗
(Hc) · (cid:107)x0(cid:107)2
∗
(131)
(Hc) · (cid:107)x0(cid:107)2
where (·)∗ denotes the conjugate transpose operator, and the
last step uses the fact that Hc is real so that H∗
c .
c = H T
Summing (130) and (131) leads to
∗
c x0 = λ
c x0 = λ
(Hc) · (cid:107)x0(cid:107)2
∗
0(Hc + Hc)T x0 = 2Re{λ(Hc)} · (cid:107)x0(cid:107)2
x
x∗
0(Hc + Hc)T x0
⇒ Re{λ(Hc)} =
2(cid:107)x0(cid:107)2
≥ λL > 0
where the last step uses (23). Furthermore, the M 2 eigenvalues
of IM ⊗Hc +Hc⊗IM are λm1(Hc)+λm2 (Hc) for m1, m2 =
1, . . . , M, where λm(·) denotes the mth eigenvalue of a matrix
[45, p.143]. Therefore, the real parts of the eigenvalues of
IM ⊗ Hc + Hc ⊗ IM are Re{λm1(Hc)} + Re{λm2(Hc)} >
0 so that the matrix IM ⊗ Hc + Hc ⊗ IM is not singular
and is invertible. Observing that for any matrix X where the
necessary inverse holds, we have
(I − µmaxX)
⇔(I − µmaxX)
⇔(I − µmaxX)
−1(I − µmaxX) = I
−1 − µmax(I − µmaxX)
−1 = I + µmax(I − µmaxX)
−1X = I
−1X
8Note that the matrix Hc need not be symmetric and hence its eigenvalues
and eigenvectors need not be real.
(cid:13)(cid:13)F ·
(cid:13)(cid:13)Ekk ⊗ Σ(cid:13)(cid:13)F
(cid:13)(cid:13)Πi − 11T ⊗ Πo
(cid:13)(cid:13)
(cid:13)(cid:13)Πi − 11T ⊗ Πo
a,∞
a,∞
= lim sup
i→∞
(b)
≤ C · lim sup
i→∞
≤ O(µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
max
)
(126)
Σ
where step (a) uses Cauchy-Schwartz inequality and step (b)
uses the equivalence of matrix norms. The bound (126) is use-
ful in that it has the following implications about the lim sup
and lim inf of the weighted mean-square-error E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
Σ:
(cid:110)
Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
lim sup
i→∞
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)(cid:111)
Σ − Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
(a)
= lim sup
i→∞
= Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)
+ E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)(cid:105)
(cid:104)E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
Σ − Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)
≤ Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
Σ − Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9) + O(µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
≤ Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
= Tr(cid:8)(11T Ekk) ⊗ ( Πo
a,∞Σ)(cid:9) + O(µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
+ lim sup
i→∞
+ lim sup
i→∞
max
max
(c)
(b)
)
)
(d)
= Tr(11T Ekk) · Tr( Πo
= Tr( Πo
= [vec( Πo
a,∞Σ) + O(µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
a,∞)]T vec(Σ) + O(µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
a,∞Σ) + O(µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
max
max
max
)
)
)
(127)
where step (a) adds and subtracts the same term, step (b)
uses x ≤ x, step (c) uses (126), and step (d) uses the
property Tr(X ⊗ Y ) = Tr(X)Tr(Y ) for Kronecker products
[45, p.142]. Likewise, the lim inf of the weighted MSE can
be derived as
Σ
(b)
+ lim inf
i→∞
(cid:110)
Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
lim inf
i→∞
Σ − Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
(a)
= lim inf
i→∞
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)
= Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
+ E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
(cid:104)E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
Σ − Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
≥ Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
(cid:110)
Σ − Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)
≥ Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
Σ − Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)
≥ Tr(cid:8)(11T ⊗ Πo
= Tr(cid:8)(11T Ekk) ⊗ ( Πo
a,∞Σ)(cid:9)
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)(cid:111)
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)(cid:105)
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:111)
a,∞)(Ekk ⊗ Σ)(cid:9)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
− O(µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
− lim sup
i→∞
+ lim inf
i→∞
−
max
(c)
)
)
− O(µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
a,∞Σ) − O(µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
)
max
max
(d)
= Tr(11T Ekk) · Tr( Πo
= Tr( Πo
a,∞Σ) − O(µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
max
)
20
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
lim sup
i→∞
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
and lim inf expressions (134) -- (135) for the weighted MSE
become
Σ ≤ µmax · Tr(cid:8)X(pT ⊗ IM ) · Rv · (p ⊗ IM )(cid:9)
+ O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
Σ ≥ µmax · Tr(cid:8)X(pT ⊗ IM ) · Rv · (p ⊗ IM )(cid:9)
− O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
(cid:1)
(cid:1)
(137)
(136)
max
max
(132)
lim inf
i→∞
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
As a final remark, since condition (23) ensures that all the
eigenvalues of Hc have positive real parts, i.e., the matrix −Hc
is asymptotically stable, the following Lyapunov equation,
which is equivalent to (41),
(−H T
c )X + X(−Hc) = −Σ
will have a unique solution given by (42) [45, pp.145-146]
and is positive semi-definite (strictly positive definite) if Σ is
symmetric and positive semi-definite (strictly positive definite)
( see [43, p.39] and [38, p.769]).
APPENDIX B
PROOF OF LEMMA 2
The arguments in the previous appendix relied on results
(102) and (103) from Lemma 2. To establish these results, we
first need to introduce a fourth-order version of the energy
operator we dealt with in Appendices C and D in Part I [2],
and establish some of its properties.
Definition 1 (Fourth order moment operator): Let x =
col{x1, . . . , xN} with sub-vectors of size M × 1 each. We
define P (4)[x] to be an operator that maps from RM N to RN :
P (4)[x] (cid:44) col{(cid:107)x1(cid:107)4,(cid:107)x2(cid:107)4, . . . ,(cid:107)xN(cid:107)4}
By following the same line of reasoning as the one used for
the energy operator P [·] in Appendices C and D in Part I [2],
we can establish the following properties for P (4)[·].
Lemma 3 (Properties of the 4th order moment operator):
The operator P (4)[·] satisfies the following properties:
1) (Nonnegativity): P (4)[x] (cid:23) 0
2) (Scaling): P (4)[ax] = a4 · P (4)[x]
3) (Convexity): Suppose x(1), . . . , x(K) are N × 1 block
vectors formed in the same manner as x, and let
a1, . . . , aK be non-negative real scalars that add up to
one. Then,
P (4)(cid:2)a1x(1) + ··· + aKx(K)(cid:3)
(cid:22) a1P (4)(cid:2)x(1)(cid:3) + ··· + aKP (4)(cid:2)x(K)(cid:3)
and, hence,
(cid:2)IM 2 − µmax(Hc ⊗ Hc)(IM ⊗ Hc + Hc ⊗ IM )
−1(cid:3)−1
(cid:2)I−µmax(Hc⊗Hc)(IM ⊗Hc +Hc⊗IM )
= IM 2 +µmax
−1
−1(cid:3)−1
× (Hc ⊗ Hc)(IM ⊗ Hc + Hc ⊗ IM )
(a)
= IM 2 + O(µmax)
where step (a) is because
(cid:110)
1
lim
µmax→0
×
µmax
µmax
−1(cid:3)−1
(cid:2)I−µmax(Hc⊗Hc)(IM ⊗Hc +Hc⊗IM )
(cid:2)I − µmax(Hc ⊗ Hc)(IM ⊗ Hc + Hc ⊗ IM )
(Hc⊗Hc)(IM ⊗Hc +Hc⊗IM )
µmax→0
−1(cid:111)
= lim
−1(cid:3)−1
× (Hc ⊗ Hc)(IM ⊗ Hc + Hc ⊗ IM )
−1
= (Hc ⊗ Hc)(IM ⊗ Hc + Hc ⊗ IM )
= constant
−1
vec( Πo
a,∞) = µmax ·
Therefore, substituting (132) into (129) leads to
−1 + O(µmax)(cid:3)
(cid:2)(IM ⊗ Hc + Hc ⊗ IM )
× vec(cid:8)(pT ⊗ IM )Rv(p ⊗ IM )(cid:9)
× vec(cid:8)(pT ⊗ IM )Rv(p ⊗ IM )(cid:9) + O(µ2
= µmax · (IM ⊗ Hc + Hc ⊗ IM )
max)
−1
(133)
Substituting (133) into (127) and(128), we obtain
lim sup
i→∞
lim inf
i→∞
Σ
max
(cid:1)
(cid:1)
c +H T
c +H T
c ⊗ IM )
−1vec(Σ)
(cid:0)vec(cid:8)(pT ⊗ IM ) · Rv · (p ⊗ IM )(cid:9)(cid:1)T
max) + O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
(cid:0)vec(cid:8)(pT ⊗ IM ) · Rv · (p ⊗ IM )(cid:9)(cid:1)T
(cid:0)vec(cid:8)(pT ⊗ IM ) · Rv · (p ⊗ IM )(cid:9)(cid:1)T
max) − O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
(cid:0)vec(cid:8)(pT ⊗ IM ) · Rv · (p ⊗ IM )(cid:9)(cid:1)T
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
≤ µmax ·
× (IM ⊗ H T
+ O(µ2
+ O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
= µmax ·
× (IM ⊗ H T
E(cid:107) wk,i(cid:107)2
≥ µmax ·
× (IM ⊗ H T
+ O(µ2
= µmax ·
× (IM ⊗ H T
−1vec(Σ)
−1vec(Σ)
−1vec(Σ)
c ⊗ IM )
c ⊗ IM )
c ⊗ IM )
c +H T
(cid:1)
max
max
Σ
c +H T
− O(cid:0)µmin(3/2,1+κ/2)
(cid:1)
the term (IM ⊗ H T
max
(134)
(135)
c ⊗ IM )−1vec(Σ)
Note that
c + H T
in (134) and (135) is in fact
the vectorized version of
the solution matrix X to the Lyapunov equation (41) for
any given positive semi-definite weighting matrix Σ. Us-
vec(Y ) =
= vec(Y )T vec(X T ), the lim sup
ing again the relation Tr(XY ) = (cid:0)vec(X T )(cid:1)T
(cid:16)(cid:0)vec(X T )(cid:1)T
(cid:17)T
vec(Y )
4) (Super-additivity):
P (4)[x + y] (cid:22) 8 · P (4)[x] + 8 · P (4)[y]
5) (Linear transformation):
P (4)[Qx] (cid:22) (cid:107) ¯P [Q](cid:107)3∞ · ¯P [Q] P (4)[x]
(cid:22) (cid:107) ¯P [Q](cid:107)4∞ · 11T · P (4)[x]
(138)
(139)
(140)
(141)
CHEN AND SAYED: ON THE LEARNING BEHAVIOR OF ADAPTIVE NETWORKS -- PART II: PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
21
6) (Update operation): The global update vector s(x) (cid:44)
col{s1(x1), . . . , sN (xN )} satisfies the following relation
on P (4)[·]:
P (4)[s(x) − s(y)] (cid:22) λ4
U · P (4)[x − y]
7) (Centralizd operation):
P (4)[Tc(x) − Tc(y)] (cid:22) γ4
c · P (4)[x − y]
with the same factor
(142)
(143)
1
2
max(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
µ2
γc (cid:44) 1 − µmaxλL +
(144)
8) (Stable Kronecker Jordan operator): Suppose DL =
DL ⊗ IM , where DL is the L× L Jordan matrix defined
by (168) -- (169) in Part I [2]. Then, for any LM × 1
vectors xe and ye, we have
1λ2
U
P (4)[DLxe + ye] (cid:22) Γe,4·P (4)[xe]+
8
(1−d2)3 ·P (4)[ye]
(145)
where Γe,4 is the L × L matrix defined as
d2
Γe,4 (cid:44)
(146)
8
(1−d2)3
...
...
...
8
(1−d2)3
d2
To proceed, we recall the transformed recursions (103) -- (104)
from Part I [2], namely,
wc,i = Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1)
we,i = DN−1we,i−1−URAT
− µmax · (pT ⊗ IM ) [zi−1 + vi]
(147)
2 M [s(1 ⊗ wc,i−1)+zi−1 +vi]
(148)
If we now apply the operator P (4)[·] to recursions (147) --
(148), and follow arguments similar to the those employed in
Appendices H and I from Part I [2], we arrive at the following
result. The statement extends Lemma 4 in Part I [2] to 4th
order moments.
Lemma 4 (Recursion for the 4th order moments): The
satisfy the following inequality
fourth order moments
recursion
(cid:48)
W
4,i (cid:22) F4 W
where
(cid:48)
W
4,i
(cid:48)
W
i
F4 (cid:44)
max · bv,4
(cid:48)
4,i−1 + H4 W
(cid:48)
i−1 + µ4
(cid:44) col(cid:8)EP (4)[ wc,i], EP (4)[we,i](cid:9)
(cid:44) col(cid:8)EP [ wc,i], EP [we,i](cid:9)
(cid:34)
(cid:34)
fce(µmax) · 1T
(cid:35)
fcc(µmax)
fec(µmax) · 1
Fee(µmax)
hcc(µmax) hce(µmax) · 1T
(cid:35)
H4 (cid:44)
bv,4 (cid:44) col(cid:8)bv4,c, bv4,e · 1(cid:9)
0
0
(149)
(150)
(151)
(152)
(153)
(154)
where γc is defined in (91), and Γe,4 is defined in (146),
Moreover, the entries in (152) -- (153) are given by:
fcc(µmax) (cid:44) γc + µ4
= γc + O(µ2
fce(µmax) (cid:44) µmax · (cid:107)p(cid:107)4
(cid:17)
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
U
1λ2
U
(155)
+ µ2
·
1
1
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
max · 432α4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 UL](cid:107)2∞ ·
λL + 1
λL − 1
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
(cid:16)
max · 20α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
2 + (cid:107) ¯P [AT
max)
1 · λ4
1 UL]
U ·
∞
(λL − 1
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
U )3
1 · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:107)4∞
maxα4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
maxα(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
U · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
2(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 · λ2
(cid:17)
λL − 1
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
U
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
U
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
1λ2
U
+ 432µ4
+ 20µ2
(cid:16)
·
µmax ·
1
+
(cid:17)
hcc(µmax) (cid:44) 10µ2
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
λL + 1
(cid:16)
λL − 1
= O(µmax)
4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
max ·
+ 4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 · (cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 + σ2
= O(µ2
max)
(cid:16)
hce(µmax) (cid:44) 10(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 UL]
λL− 1
4α·(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 +4α·(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 +σ2
·
v·
1 · (cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2
v · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:17)
(cid:0)27α4 · ((cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4 + (cid:107)wo(cid:107)4) + σ4
= O(µ3
max)
bv4,c (cid:44) 2(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 ·
= constant
Fee(µmax) (cid:44) Γe,4 + µ4
max ·
(1 − λ2(A))3
× (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:107)4∞ · (cid:107) ¯P [URAT
= Γe,4 + O(µ4
max)
U · µ3
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
216N · (λ4
U + 216α4)
max
U ·
1λ2
2 ](cid:107)4∞ · 11T
∞
v4
(156)
(157)
(cid:1)
(158)
(159)
(160)
fec(µmax) (cid:44) µ4
max ·
= O(µ4
U + 8α4)
5832N · (λ4
max)
2 ](cid:107)4∞
(1 − λ2(A))3
(cid:107) ¯P [URAT
(cid:110)
27(cid:2)(λ4
(cid:111)
4(cid:107)∞ + α4 · (cid:107)wo(cid:107)4(cid:3) + σ4
U + α4) · (cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4
2 ](cid:107)4∞
(161)
v4
·
bv4,e (cid:44) 216N · (cid:107) ¯P [URAT
(1 − λ2(A))3
+ (cid:107)go
= constant
(162)
Proof: See Appendix C.
Observe from (149) that the recursion of the fourth order
moments are coupled with the second order moments con-
(cid:48)
tained in W
i−1. Therefore, we will augment recursion (149)
together with the following recursion for the second-order
moment developed in (115) of Part I [2]:
(cid:48)
i (cid:22) Γ W
W
(cid:48)
i−1 + µ2
maxbv
(163)
22
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
to form the following joint recursion:
(cid:34)
(cid:35)
(cid:34) W
W
(cid:48)
i
(cid:48)
4,i
Γ
0
H4 F4
(cid:22)
(cid:35)
(cid:35)(cid:34) W
W
(cid:48)
i−1
(cid:48)
4,i−1
(cid:35)
(cid:34)
µ2
max · bv
µ4
max · bv,4
(164)
+
The stability of the above recursion is guaranteed by the
stability of the matrices Γ and F4, i.e.,
ρ(Γ) < 1 and ρ(F4) < 1
The stability of Γ has already been established in Appendix
J of Part I [2]. Now, we discuss the stability of F4. Using
(155) -- (160) and the definition of γc in (96), we can express
F4 as
(cid:35)
γc + O(µ2
max)
O(µ4
max) O(µmax) · 1T
Γe,4 + O(µ4
max)
(cid:35)
1 − µmaxλL O(µmax)
0
Γe,4
+ O(µ2
max)
(166)
(165)
(cid:34)
(cid:34)
F4 =
=
which has a similar structure to Γ -- see expressions (116) --
(117) in Part I [2], and where in the last step we absorb
the factor 1T in the (1, 2)-th block into O(µmax). Therefore,
following the same line of argument from (278) to (295)
in Appendix J of Part I [2], we can show that F4 is also
stable when the step-size parameter µmax is sufficiently small.
Iterating (164), we get
(cid:34)
(cid:35)
(cid:34) W
W
(cid:48)
i
(cid:48)
4,i
(cid:35)
(cid:35)i(cid:34) W
W
(cid:48)
0
(cid:48)
4,0
(cid:34)
i−1(cid:88)
j=0
+
Γ
0
H4 F4
·
µ2
max·bv
µ4
max·bv,4
(167)
(cid:35)j
(cid:34)
When both Γ and F4 are stable, we have
Γ
0
H4 F4
(cid:22)
(cid:35)
(cid:48)
i
(cid:48)
4,i
(cid:34) W
(cid:34)
W
Γ
0
H4 F4
lim sup
i→∞
(cid:32)
(cid:34)
(cid:22)
=
I −
(cid:35)(cid:33)−1
(cid:34)
(cid:35)
µ2
max · bv
·
µ4
max · bv,4
max·(I−Γ)−1bv
µ2
max · (I−Γ)−1bv +µ4
(I−F4)−1H4·µ2
max·(I−F4)−1bv,4
which implies that, for the fourth-order moment, we get
−1bv
(cid:48)
4,i (cid:22) (I − F4)
lim sup
i→∞
W
−1H4 · µ2
max · (I − F4)
+ µ4
max · (I − Γ)
−1bv,4
(168)
To evaluate the right-hand side of the above expression, we
derive expressions for (I − F4)−1 and (I − Γ)−1 using the
following formula for inverting a 2×2 block matrix [45, p.48],
(cid:34)
[35, p.16]:
(cid:35)−1
(cid:34)
(cid:35)
A−1 + A−1BECA−1 −A−1BE
A B
(169)
=
C D
−ECA−1
E
where E = (D−CA−1B)−1. By (166), we have the following
expression for (I − F4)−1:
(I − F4)
−1
(cid:35)
(cid:34)
(cid:32)
(cid:34)
(cid:34)
=
=
=
0
I−
µmaxλL − O(µ2
max)
µmaxλL − O(µ2
max)
−O(µ2
O(µ2
1−µmaxλL O(µmax)
Γe,4
−O(µ2
max)
max)
max) −O(µmax)−O(µ2
I−Γe,4−O(µ2
max)
O(µmax)
I − Γe,4 − O(µ2
max)
max)
E4 =
Applying relation (169) to (170), we have
max) −
I − Γe,4 − O(µ2
(cid:18)
=(cid:0)I − Γe,4 + O(µ2
max)(cid:1)−1
(cid:34)
max) + O(µmax) − O(1)·E4
λL−O(µmax)
− E4·O(µmax)
λL−O(µmax)
O(µ2
µmaxλL − O(µ2
max)O(µmax)
max)
µmaxλL−O(µ2
−1
E4
=
1
(I − F4)
(cid:33)−1
(cid:35)−1
(cid:35)−1
(cid:19)−1
(170)
(cid:35)
(171)
(172)
Furthermore, recall from (116) -- (117) of Part I [2] for the
expression of Γ:
(cid:35)
(cid:34)
γc µmaxhc(µmax) · 1T
(cid:35)
(cid:34)
0
1 − µmaxλL O(µmax)
Γe
0
Γe
Γ =
=
+ µ2
maxψ0 · 11T
+ O(µ2
max)
1
−1 =
µmaxλL−O(µ2
Observing that Γ and F4 have a similar structure, we can
similarly get the expression for (I − Γ)−1 as
(I − Γ)
(cid:34)
max) + O(µmax) − O(1)·E2
λL−O(µmax)
− E2·O(µmax)
(cid:20)
λL−O(µmax)
max)(cid:1)−1
=(cid:0)I − Γe + O(µ2
I − Γe − O(µ2
O(µ2
µmaxλL − O(µ2
max)O(µmax)
max)
(cid:35)
(cid:21)−1
max) −
(173)
(174)
E2 =
E2
In addition, by substituting (157) -- (158) into (153), we note
that
(cid:34)
(cid:35)
H4 =
max) O(µ3
O(µ2
max)
0
0
(175)
Substituting (172), (173) and (175) into the right-hand side of
(168) and using we obtain
(cid:35)
(cid:35)
(cid:35)
lim sup
i→∞
(cid:48)
4,i
W
(cid:34)
(cid:22)
×
(cid:34)
µmaxλL−O(µ2
1
E4
(cid:35)
max) + O(µmax) − O(1)·E4
λL−O(µmax)
− E4·O(µmax)
λL−O(µmax)
max) O(µ3
O(µ2
max)
(cid:34)
0
0
(cid:34)
max) +O(µmax) − O(1)·E2
λL−O(µmax)
− E2·O(µmax)
λL−O(µmax)
max) +O(µmax) − O(1)·E4
λL−O(µmax)
− E4·O(µmax)
λL−O(µmax)
µmaxλL−O(µ2
µmaxλL−O(µ2
max·
E2
E4
1
1
+µ4
max·
×µ2
(cid:35)(cid:34)
(cid:35)
bv,c
(cid:35)(cid:34)
(cid:35)
bv,e·1
bv4,c
bv4,e·1
CHEN AND SAYED: ON THE LEARNING BEHAVIOR OF ADAPTIVE NETWORKS -- PART II: PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
23
(a)
≤
+2µ2
−µmax(pT ⊗IM )zi−1
max·
(cid:3)(pT ⊗IM )vi
max(cid:107)(pT ⊗IM )vi(cid:107)2−2µmax
(cid:3)
Taking the conditional expectation of both sides of the above
expression given Fi−1 and recalling that E[viFi−1] = 0 based
on (17), we get
(cid:13)(cid:13)4(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
(cid:111)
= E(cid:110)(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1)−Tc( ¯wc,i−1)−µmax·(pT⊗IM )zi−1
E[(cid:107) wc,i(cid:107)4Fi−1]
+E(cid:16)(cid:8)µ2
(cid:2)Tc(wc,i−1)−Tc( ¯wc,i−1)
(cid:17)
(cid:9)2(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1)−Tc( ¯wc,i−1)−µmax·(pT ⊗IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:107)(pT ⊗ IM )vi(cid:107)2(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
· E(cid:2)
(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1) − µmax · (pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1)−Tc( ¯wc,i−1)−µmax·(pT ⊗IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:107)(pT ⊗ IM )vi(cid:107)2(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
(cid:3)
· E(cid:2)
(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1)−Tc( ¯wc,i−1)−µmax·(pT ⊗IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:107)(pT ⊗ IM )vi(cid:107)2(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
(cid:3)
· E(cid:2)
(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1) − µmax · (pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:107)(pT ⊗ IM )vi(cid:107)4(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
max · E(cid:2)
(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1)−Tc( ¯wc,i−1)−µmax·(pT ⊗IM )zi−1
(cid:107)(pT ⊗IM )vi(cid:107)2(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
(cid:3)
·E(cid:2)
(180)
where step (a) uses the inequality (x + y)2 ≤ 2x2 + 2y2. To
proceed, we call upon the following bounds.
Lemma 6 (Useful bounds): The following bounds hold for
max · E(cid:107)(pT ⊗ IM )vi(cid:107)4
max·
+ 2µ4
+10µ2
+ 2µ4
+8µ2
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
max·
max·
+2µ2
(cid:3)
=
arbitrary i:
∞
(181)
1 · λ4
U ·
U )3 · (cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1λ2
≤ γc · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4
+
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1) − µmax · (pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
E(cid:2)(cid:13)(cid:13)(pT ⊗ IM )vi
µmax
(λL − 1
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
· 1T P (4)[we,i−1]
(cid:13)(cid:13)4(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
(cid:3)
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
≤ 216α4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4
+ 216α4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 ·
+ 27α4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 · (cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4 + 27α4 · (cid:107)p(cid:107)4
v4 · (cid:107)p(cid:107)4
+ σ4
(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1) − µmax · (pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
E(cid:2)(cid:13)(cid:13)(pT ⊗ IM )vi
≤ γc · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2
µmax
+
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
U · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
(cid:3)
λL − 1
· 1T P [we,i−1]
(cid:13)(cid:13)2(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
∞ · 1T · P (4)[we,i−1]
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
1 · (cid:107)wo(cid:107)4
1 · λ2
U ·
1 UL]
∞
1
(182)
1 · P [ wc,i−1]
≤ 4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
+ 4α · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
+4α(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2·(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
Proof: See Appendix E.
1 UL](cid:107)2∞ · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 +4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 · 1T P [we,i−1]
1·(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 +σ2
v·(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1
(183)
(184)
(cid:34)
(cid:35)
=
O(µ2
O(µ4
max)
max)
(176)
where the last step follows from basic matrix algebra. Recall-
(cid:48)
ing the definition of W
4,i in (150), we conclude (102) -- (103)
from (176).
APPENDIX C
PROOF OF LEMMA 4
A. Perturbation Bounds
Before pursuing the proof of Lemma 4, we first state a result
that bounds the fourth-order moments of the perturbation terms
that appear in (147), in a manner similar to the bounds we
already have for the second-order moments in (75) -- (78).
Lemma 5 (Fourth-order bounds on the perturbation terms):
Referring to (147), the following bounds hold for any i ≥ 0.
(177)
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
P (4)[zi−1] (cid:22) λ4
U ·
P (4)[s(1⊗wc,i−1)]
(cid:9)
(cid:22) 27λ4
U ·(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4·1+27λ4
U(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4·1+27·go
4
(178)
∞·11T ·P (4)[we,i−1]
(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
E(cid:8)P (4)[vi]
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:22) 216α4 · 1 · P (4)[ wc,i−1]
+ 216α4 ·
+27α4·((cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4 +(cid:107)wo(cid:107)4)·1+σ4
1 UL]
∞·11T ·P (4)[we,i−1]
(179)
v4·1
where go
4
Proof: See Appendix D.
(cid:44) P (4)[s(1 ⊗ wo)].
B. Recursion for the 4th order moment of wc,i
To begin with, note that by evaluating the squared Euclidean
norm of both sides of (147) we obtain:
(cid:107) wc,i(cid:107)2
=
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1)−Tc( ¯wc,i−1)−µmax·(pT ⊗IM )(zi−1 +vi)
(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1) − µmax · (pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)(pT ⊗ IM )vi
(cid:2)Tc(wc,i−1)−Tc( ¯wc,i−1)−µmax·(pT ⊗IM )zi−1
+ µ2
max ·
−2µmax·
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
=
(cid:3)T
· (pT ⊗ IM )vi
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
max·(cid:107)(pT ⊗IM )vi(cid:107)2−2µmax·
By further squaring both sides of the above expression, we get
(cid:107) wc,i(cid:107)4
=(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1)−Tc( ¯wc,i−1)−µmax·(pT ⊗IM )zi−1
(cid:2)Tc(wc,i−1)−Tc( ¯wc,i−1)
+(cid:8)µ2
(cid:9)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1)−Tc( ¯wc,i−1)−µmax·(pT ⊗IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:2)Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1) − µmax · (pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(cid:3)T
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1)−Tc( ¯wc,i−1)−µmax·(pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(cid:3)(pT ⊗IM )vi
−µmax·(pT ⊗IM )zi−1
·
· (pT ⊗ IM )vi
max·
· (cid:107)(pT ⊗ IM )vi(cid:107)2
−4µmax·
+2µ2
24
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
∞
(cid:111)
∞ · 1T · P (4)[we,i−1]
v4·(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1·(cid:107)wo(cid:107)4 +σ4
1
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)2
∞
+ 2µ4
max ·
1 · λ4
U ·
1 · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4
U )3 · (cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1λ2
Substituting (181) -- (184) into (180), we obtain
E[(cid:107) wc,i(cid:107)4Fi−1]
(cid:22) γc · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4
µmax
+
(λL − 1
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:110)
· 1T P (4)[we,i−1]
216α4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
+ 216α4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 ·
(cid:110)
1·(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4 +27α4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
+27α4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
γc · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2
(cid:111)
U · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
1·P [ wc,i−1]
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
max ·
λL − 1
(cid:110)
· 1T P [we,i−1]
4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
·
+4α·(cid:107) ¯P [AT
+4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:111)
1·1T P [we,i−1]
v·(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1((cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 +(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2)+σ2
µmax
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 UL](cid:107)2∞·(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 · λ2
U ·
+ 10µ2
+
1
We further call upon the following inequality to bound the last
term in (185):
(a · x + b · y)(c · x + d · y + e)
= ac · x2 + bd · y2 + (ad + bc)xy + ae · x + be · y
(cid:18)
(cid:18)
≤ ac·x2 +bd·y2 + (ad + bc)
bd+
=
1
(x2 + y2) + ae · x + be · y
2
ad+bc
y2 +ae·x+be·y
Applying the above inequality to the last term in (185) with
ad+bc
(cid:19)
(cid:19)
x2 +
ac+
2
2
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
∞
1 · (cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 + σ2
v · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1
a = γc
b =
U · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
1 · λ2
U ·
µmax
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
λL − 1
c = 4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
d = 4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 ·
e = 4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 · (cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 + 4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
x = (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2
y = 1T · P (4)[we,i−1] = (cid:107)we,i−1(cid:107)4
∞
(cid:111)
1 · λ2
U ·
U · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
µmax
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:110)
we get
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
γc · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2
+
λL − 1
(cid:110)
· 1T P [we,i−1]
(cid:111)
1·P [ wc,i−1]+4α·(cid:107) ¯P [AT
4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 UL](cid:107)2∞·(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:19)
(cid:18)
(cid:18)
+4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1((cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 +(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2)+σ2
v·(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
ac +
bd+
+ ae · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2 + be · (cid:107)we,i−1(cid:107)2
·(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4 +
ad + bc
ad + bc
×
≤
2
2
1
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
∞
1 UL]
1·1T P [we,i−1]
(cid:19)
·(cid:107)we,i−1(cid:107)4
(a)
≤
=
2
2
c +
bd +
d + bc
d + bc
(cid:18)
(cid:19)
(cid:19)
λL− 1
2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
· (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4 +
(cid:18)
(cid:16)
+ e · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2 + be · (cid:107)we,i−1(cid:107)2
1 · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
1 + 2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 · µmax
(cid:16) 4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
U ·(cid:107) ¯P [AT
U (cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1·λ2
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
+
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
U µmax
(cid:17)
U ·(cid:107) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:107)4∞ +2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
λL−1
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:16)
1λ2
2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
U · µmax
U · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
+
λL − 1
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
1·(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 +σ2
4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1·(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 +4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
+
(cid:17)
(cid:16)
1λ2
+ (cid:107)p(cid:107)4
U · µmax
1 UL]
U ·
λL− 1
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
4α·(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 +4α·(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 +σ2
·
v·
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
·(cid:107)we,i−1(cid:107)2
v·(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
∞
+
1
· (cid:107)we,i−1(cid:107)4
(cid:17)
·(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4
1·(cid:107) ¯P [AT
(cid:17)
· (cid:107)we,i−1(cid:107)4
·(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
(186)
(185)
where inequality (a) is using a = γc < 1, which is guaranteed
for sufficiently small step-sizes. Substituting (186) into (185),
we get
E[(cid:107) wc,i(cid:107)4Fi−1]
(cid:22) γc · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4
+
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
v4
+
∞
+ 2µ4
+ 10µ2
1 · λ4
U ·
U )3 · (cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1λ2
max ·
2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
λL − 1
µmax
(λL − 1
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:110)
· 1T P (4)[we,i−1]
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
216α4 · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4
max(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 ·
(cid:111)
∞·1TP (4)[we,i−1]+27α4·(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4
1 UL]
+216α4·
(cid:110)(cid:16)
+ 27α4 · (cid:107)wo(cid:107)4 + σ4
4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 +2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
U · µmax
(cid:16) 4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
U ·(cid:107) ¯P [AT
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
1 · λ2
U · µmax
U · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
1 · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
1λ2
U · µmax
U · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
1 · (cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 + 4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:17)
1 · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
(cid:17)
· (cid:107)we,i−1(cid:107)4
v · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2
λL − 1
+ 2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:16)
2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
+
λL − 1
4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
· (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2
(cid:16)
1λ2
+ (cid:107)p(cid:107)4
U · µmax
U ·
λL− 1
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
4α·(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 +4α·(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 +σ2
·
v·
1 · (cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 + σ2
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:17)
·(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4
1 UL](cid:107)4∞
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
(cid:17)
∞
+
+
1
·(cid:107)we,i−1(cid:107)2(cid:111)
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
∞
(a)
U )3 · (cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1λ2
= γc · P (4)[ wc,i−1]
µmax
+
(λL − 1
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:110)
· 1T P (4)[we,i−1]
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
216α4 · P (4)[ wc,i−1]
max(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 ·
+ 216α4 ·
+ 2µ4
1 · λ4
U ·
∞ · 1T P (4)[we,i−1]
=
v4
+
+
1 UL](cid:107)4∞
(cid:111)
+ 27α4 · (cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4 + 27α4 · (cid:107)wo(cid:107)4 + σ4
(cid:17)
1 · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
1 +2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
+ 10µ2
max·
2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
λL − 1
(cid:110)(cid:16)
4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
U · µmax
(cid:16) 4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
U ·(cid:107) ¯P [AT
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
1 · λ2
U · µmax
U · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
1λ2
U · µmax
U · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
λL − 1
+ 2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
+
λL − 1
(cid:16)
· 1T P (4)[we,i−1]
4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
· P [ wc,i−1]
(cid:16)
+ (cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1λ2
U · µmax
U ·
λL− 1
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
4α·(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 +4α·(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 +σ2
·
v·
γc + 432µ4
1 · (cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 + 4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 · (cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 + σ2
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
(cid:17)
v · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:111)
·1T P [we,i−1]
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
(cid:26)
(cid:17)
∞
+
1
1
+
(cid:26)
+ 10µ2
+ 10µ2
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
+ 432µ4
(cid:17)(cid:27)
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
1 · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
max ·
2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
λL − 1
µmax · (cid:107)p(cid:107)4
λL − 1
1 · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1λ2
U · µmax
U · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
(cid:16) 4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
(cid:16)
maxα4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 +2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
U · µmax
U ·(cid:107) ¯P [AT
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 · λ4
U ·
1 UL]
∞
(λL − 1
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
U )3
1 · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:107)4∞
maxα4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 · λ2
U · µmax
U · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
max ·
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
(cid:17)(cid:27)
+ 2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
2α(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
+
λL − 1
(cid:16)
· P [ wc,i−1]
(cid:16)
1λ2
U · µ3
10(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 UL]
λL− 1
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
4α·(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 +4α·(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 +σ2
·
v·
max · (cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 ·
(cid:16)
max · 20α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
2 + (cid:107) ¯P [AT
(cid:26)
· P (4)[ wc,i−1]
µmax · (cid:107)p(cid:107)4
(cid:0)27α4 · ((cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4 + (cid:107)wo(cid:107)4) + σ4
(cid:17)(cid:27)
1·(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 +4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:17)
· 1T · P (4)[we,i−1]
4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:1)
· 1T · P [we,i−1]
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
max · 432α4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1·(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 +σ2
λL + 1
λL − 1
1 UL](cid:107)2∞ ·
1 · λ4
U ·
(λL − 1
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
maxα4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
∞
1λ2
U )3
1 UL](cid:107)4∞
max
U ·
1λ2
1λ2
U
1λ2
U
+ 432µ4
max ·
+ µ2
∞
v4
·
1
1
γc + µ4
+
(cid:26)
+10µ2
+ 2µ4
+
1 UL](cid:107)4∞
=
+
·P (4)[ wc,i−1]
v·(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1
CHEN AND SAYED: ON THE LEARNING BEHAVIOR OF ADAPTIVE NETWORKS -- PART II: PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
25
·P (4)[ wc,i−1]
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
U · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
U
1λ2
U
(cid:17)(cid:27)
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
1λ2
U
·1T ·P (4)[we,i−1]
1 · (cid:107)wo(cid:107)2
+ 20µ2
(cid:16)
·
+
1 · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
maxα(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 · λ2
2(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
µmax ·
λL − 1
(cid:16)
λL + 1
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
λL− 1
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:17)
4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
max ·
v · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1
U · µ3
1λ2
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
· P [ wc,i−1]
+ 10µ2
1 · (cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 + 4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
(cid:17)
+ σ2
(cid:16)
10(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
λL− 1
4α·(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 +4α·(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 +σ2
·
v·
max·(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1·
(cid:0)27α4·((cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4 +(cid:107)wo(cid:107)4)+σ4
max
U ·
1λ2
∞
v4
· 1T · P [we,i−1]
(cid:1) (187)
+ 2µ4
+
(cid:17)
where step (a) is using the following relations:
(cid:107)we,i−1(cid:107)4 = 1T · P (4)[we,i−1]
(cid:107)we,i−1(cid:107)2 = 1T · P [we,i−1]
(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4 = P (4)[ wc,i−1]
(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2 = P [ wc,i−1]
Using the notation defined in (155) -- (159) and taking expec-
tations of both sides of (187) with respect to Fi−1, we obtain
EP (4)[ wc,i] (cid:22) fcc(µmax) · EP (4)[ wc,i−1]
+ fce(µmax) · 1T · EP (4)[we,i−1]
+ hcc(µmax) · EP [ wc,i−1]
+ hce(µmax) · 1T · EP [we,i−1]
+ µ4
max · bv4,c
(188)
8
(a)
2 M
DN−1we,i−1−URAT
(cid:22) Γe,4 · P (4)[we,i−1]
+
C. Recursion for the 4th order moment of we,i
We now derive an inequality recursion for E(cid:107)we,i(cid:107)4. First,
applying P (4)[·] operator to both sides of (148), we get
(cid:17)
(cid:1)(cid:105)
= P (4)(cid:104)
(cid:0)s(1⊗we,i−1)+zi−1 +vi
P (4)[we,i]
(cid:1)(cid:3)
(cid:0)s(1⊗wc,i−1)+zi−1 +vi
(1−λ2(A))3 ·P (4)(cid:2)
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [URAT
2 M](cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:3)
·P (4)(cid:2)s(1 ⊗ wc,i−1)+zi−1 +vi
∞·11T
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [URAT
(cid:3)
·P (4)(cid:2)s(1 ⊗ wc,i−1)+zi−1 +vi
(cid:22) Γe,4·P (4)[we,i−1]
(1−λ2(A))3 ·
+
(cid:22) Γe,4·P (4)[we,i−1]
+µ4
∞·11T
URAT
max·
2 M
2 ]
(c)
(b)
8
8
(1−λ2(A))3 ·
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [URAT
2 ](cid:13)(cid:13)4
∞
= Γe,4 · P (4)[we,i−1]
+
8µ4
max
(1 − λ2(A))3
·11T
26
(d)
(cid:22) Γe,4 · P (4)[we,i−1]
+
8µ4
∞
max
(cid:105)
· 11T
1
3 · 3vi
1
3 ·3zi−1 +
(1 − λ2(A))3
3 ·3s(1 ⊗ wc,i−1)+
· P (4)(cid:104) 1
(cid:12)(cid:12) ¯P [URAT
2 ](cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:110) 1
3 · P (4)(cid:2)3s(1 ⊗ wc,i−1)(cid:3) +
3 · P (4)(cid:2)3zi−1
(cid:3)(cid:111)
3 · P (4)(cid:2)3vi
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [URAT
2 ](cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:8)27 · P (4)[s(1 ⊗ wc,i−1)] + 27 · P (4)[zi−1]
+ 27 · P (4)[vi](cid:9)
(1 − λ2(A))3 ·
max ·
×
∞ · 11T
×
+
1
1
(e)
= Γe,4 · P (4)[we,i−1]
8
+ µ4
(cid:3)
2 ] · ¯P [M]
2 M] (cid:22) ¯P [UR] · ¯P [AT
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [URAT
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [URAT
(cid:13)(cid:13)∞ ≤
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [UR]
2 M](cid:13)(cid:13)∞ ≤ µmax·
where step (a) uses (145), step (b) uses (141), step (c) uses
the sub-multiplicative property (152) from Part I [2] and the
sub-multiplicative property of matrix norms:
¯P [URAT
⇒
⇒
step (d) uses the convex property (138), and step (e) uses
the scaling property in Lemma 3. Applying the expectation
operator to both sides of the above inequality conditioned on
Fi−1, we obtain
(cid:13)(cid:13)∞·
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
(cid:13)(cid:13)∞·
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [M]
2 ](cid:13)(cid:13)∞
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [UR](cid:13)(cid:13)∞·
(cid:13)(cid:13)∞
2 M]
2 ]
E(cid:2)P (4)[we,i](cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
(cid:3)
2 ](cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [URAT
(cid:22) Γe,4 · P (4)[we,i−1]
+
8µ4
max
∞
(cid:111)
+27·P (4)[zi−1]+27·E{P (4)[vi]Fi−1}
(1 − λ2(A))3
·11T ·
(cid:110)
27·P (4)[s(1⊗wc,i−1)]
In the above expression, we are using the fact that wc,i−1 and
zi−1 are determined by the history up to time i−1. Therefore,
given Fi−1, these two quantities are deterministic and known
so that
(cid:9) = P (4)[s(1⊗wc,i−1)]
(cid:9) = P (4)[zi−1]
Substituting (177) -- (179) into the right-hand side of the above
inequality, we get
E(cid:8)P (4)[s(1⊗wc,i−1)](cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
E(cid:8)P (4)[zi−1](cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
E(cid:2)P (4)[we,i]
(cid:3)
(cid:22) Γe,4 · P (4)[we,i−1]
(cid:26)
(cid:104)
8
+ µ4
(1 − λ2(A))3 ·
(cid:104)
(cid:104)
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [URAT
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
U ·(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4·1+27λ4
λ4
U ·
216α4 · 1 · P (4)[ wc,i−1]
+ 216α4 ·
27·
+ 27 ·
+ 27 ·
max ·
27λ4
·
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:105)
2 ]
∞ · 11T
(cid:105)
U(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4·1+27·go
∞ · 11T · P (4)[we,i−1]
4
∞·11T ·P (4)[we,i−1]
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
(cid:105)(cid:27)
v4 · 1
1 UL](cid:107)4∞
(cid:104)
=
(cid:104)
(cid:22)
+ 27α4 · ((cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4 + (cid:107)wo(cid:107)4) · 1 + σ4
Γe,4 + µ4
max ·
+µ4
max·
+µ4
max ·
+1T go
U + 216α4)
216N · (λ4
(1 − λ2(A))3
2 ](cid:107)4∞ · 11T(cid:105)
· (cid:107) ¯P [AT
· P (4)[we,i−1]
(cid:110)
27(cid:2)(λ4
(cid:107) ¯P [URAT
(cid:111)
· (cid:107) ¯P [URAT
5832N · (λ4
(1−λ2(A))3
216·(cid:107) ¯P [URAT
(1−λ2(A))3
2 ](cid:107)4∞
U+8α4)
4 +α4·N(cid:107)wo(cid:107)4(cid:3)+σ4
2 ](cid:107)4∞ · 11T(cid:105)
216N · (λ4
max ·
· (cid:107) ¯P [URAT
5832N · (λ4
U + 8α4)
(1 − λ2(A))3
1 UL](cid:107)4∞
·
v4 · N
2 ](cid:107)4∞·P (4)[wc,i−1]·1
U +α4)·(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4·N
· 1
U + 216α4)
· (cid:107) ¯P [AT
· P (4)[we,i−1]
(cid:107) ¯P [URAT
2 ](cid:107)4∞
(cid:110)
27(cid:2)(λ4
(cid:111)
U + α4)·(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4
(189)
2 ](cid:107)4∞
·
v4
+ µ4
(1−λ2(A))3
max ·
· P (4)[wc,i−1] · 1
max ·
+(cid:107)go
216N · (cid:107) ¯P [URAT
(1−λ2(A))3
4(cid:107)∞ +α4·(cid:107)wo(cid:107)4(cid:3) + σ4
+ µ4
Γe,4 + µ4
· 1
4 ≤ N(cid:107)go
where the last step uses 1T go
4(cid:107)∞. Using the
notation defined in (160) -- (161) and applying the expectation
operator to both sides of (189) with respect to Fi−1, we arrive
at
4 ≤ 1T go
EP (4)[we,i] (cid:22) Fee(µmax) · EP (4)[we,i−1]
+ fec(µmax) · 1 · EP (4)[ wc,i−1]
+ µ4
max · bv4,e · 1
(190)
APPENDIX D
PROOF OF LEMMA 5
First, we establish the bound for P [zi−1] in (177). To begin
with, recall the following two relations from (88) and (69) in
Part I [2]:
1 wi
φi = AT
wi = 1 ⊗ wc,,i + (UL ⊗ IM )we,i
(191)
(192)
By the definition of zi−1 in (74), we get:
P (4)[zi−1] = P (4)[s(φi−1) − s(1 ⊗ wc,i−1)]
(b)
(a)
= P (4)[s(AT
1 wi−1) − s(1 ⊗ wc,i−1)]
(cid:3)
= P (4)(cid:2)s(cid:0)1 ⊗ wc,i−1 +(AT
− s(1 ⊗ wc,i−1)(cid:3)
U · P (4)(cid:2)(AT
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
1 UL ⊗ IM )we,i−1
(cid:22) λ4
(cid:22) λ4
U ·
∞·11T ·P (4)[we,i−1]
(d)
(c)
1 UL ⊗ IM )we,i−1
(cid:1)
where step (a) substitutes (191), step (b) substitutes (192), step
(c) uses the variance relation (142), and step (d) uses property
(141).
CHEN AND SAYED: ON THE LEARNING BEHAVIOR OF ADAPTIVE NETWORKS -- PART II: PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
Next, we prove the bound for P (4)[s(1⊗ wc,i−1)]. It holds
(cid:105)
1
3 ·3·s(1 ⊗ wo)
that
P (4)[s(1 ⊗ wc,i−1)]
1
1
1
(a)
+
(cid:22)
= P (4)(cid:104) 1
3 ·3(cid:0)s(1 ⊗ wc,i−1)−s(1 ⊗ ¯wc,i−1)(cid:1)
3 ·3(cid:0)s(1 ⊗ ¯wc,i−1)−s(1 ⊗ wo)(cid:1)+
3 · P (4)(cid:2)3(cid:0)s(1 ⊗ wc,i−1) − s(1 ⊗ ¯wc,i−1)(cid:1)(cid:3)
3 · P (4)(cid:2)3(cid:0)s(1 ⊗ ¯wc,i−1) − s(1 ⊗ wo)(cid:1)(cid:3)
3 · P (4)(cid:2)3 · s(1 ⊗ wo)(cid:3)
= 33 · P (4)(cid:2)s(1 ⊗ wc,i−1)−s(1 ⊗ ¯wc,i−1)(cid:3)
+ 33 · P (4)(cid:2)s(1 ⊗ ¯wc,i−1)−s(1 ⊗ wo)(cid:3)
+ 33 · P (4)(cid:2)s(1 ⊗ wo)(cid:3)
U · P (4)(cid:2)1 ⊗ (wc,i−1 − ¯wc,i−1)(cid:3)
+
+
(c)
(b)
1
(cid:22) 27λ4
+27λ4
U ·P (4)[1⊗( ¯wc,i−1−wo)]+27 · P (4)[s(1 ⊗ wo)]
U · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4 · 1 + 27λ4
U · (cid:107) ¯wc,i−1 − wo(cid:107)4 · 1
U · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4 · 1 + 27λ4
U · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4 · 1
(d)
= 27λ4
+ 27 · P (4)[s(1 ⊗ wo)]
= 27λ4
+ 27 · P (4)[s(1 ⊗ wo)]
(cid:22) 27λ4
+27 · P (4)[s(1 ⊗ wo)]
(e)
U · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4·1+27λ4
U(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4·1
27
(cid:1)
(cid:3)
1 ULwe,i−1−1⊗ ¯wc,i−1
1 ULwe,i−1−1⊗ ¯wc,i−1
1
1
(b)
(c)
(a)
+
1 ULwe,i−1
3 ·3·1⊗wo(cid:105)
= P (4)(cid:104) 1
3 ·3(cid:0)1⊗wc,i−1 +AT
3 ·3(cid:0)1⊗ ¯wc,i−1−1⊗wo(cid:1)+
(cid:22) 27 · P (4)(cid:2)1 ⊗ wc,i−1 +AT
+27 · P (4)(cid:2)1 ⊗ ¯wc,i−1−1 ⊗ wo(cid:3)
+ 27 · P (4)(cid:2)1 ⊗ wo(cid:3)
= 27 · P (4)(cid:2)1 ⊗ wc,i−1 + AT
(cid:3)
+ 27 · P (4)(cid:2)1 ⊗ wc,i−1
(cid:3) + 27 · P (4)(cid:2)1 ⊗ wo(cid:3)
(cid:16)
8·P (4)(cid:2)1⊗ wc,i−1
(cid:3)+8·P (4)(cid:2)
(cid:3)+27·P (4)(cid:2)1⊗wo(cid:3)
+27·P (4)(cid:2)1⊗ wc,i−1
AT
1 ULwe,i−1
= 216·(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4·1+216·P (4)(cid:2)
(cid:3)
+ 27 · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4 · 1 + 27 · P (4)(cid:2)1 ⊗ wo(cid:3)
+27·(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4·1+27·P (4)(cid:2)1⊗wo(cid:3)
+27 · (cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4·1+27·P (4)(cid:2)1⊗wo(cid:3)
(cid:22) 216·(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4·1
AT
1 UL
+216·
(cid:22) 216·(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4·1
AT
1 UL
+216·
∞·11T ·P (4)[we,i−1]
∞·11T ·P (4)[we,i−1]
AT
1 ULwe,i−1
(cid:22) 27·
(f )
(d)
(e)
(cid:3)(cid:17)
= 216·(cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4·1
AT
1 UL
+216·
+27 · ((cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4 +(cid:107)wo(cid:107)4) · 1
∞·11T ·P (4)[we,i−1]
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P(cid:2)
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P(cid:2)
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P(cid:2)
(cid:3)(cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:3)(cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:3)(cid:13)(cid:13)4
(194)
1 wi−1 = φi−1
where step (a) uses the convexity property (138), step (b) uses
the scaling property in Lemma 3, step (c) uses the variance
relation (142), step (d) uses the definition of the operator
P (4)[·], and step (e) uses the bound (cid:107) wc,i(cid:107)2 ≤ γ2i
c · (cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2
from (110) of Part I [2] and the fact that γc < 1.
Finally, we establish the bound on P (4)[vi] in (179). Intro-
duce the M N × 1 vector x according to (191) -- (192):
We partition x into block form as x = col{x1, . . . , xN},
where each xk is M × 1. Then, by the definition of vi from
(73), we have
x (cid:44) 1 ⊗ wc,i−1 + AT
1 ULwe,i−1 ≡ AT
(cid:111)
E(cid:110)
P (4)[vi](cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
= E(cid:110)
P (4)(cid:2)si(x) − s(x)(cid:3)(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
= col(cid:8)E(cid:2)
E(cid:2)
α4 · (cid:107)x1(cid:107)4 + σ4
(cid:111)
(cid:107)s1,i(x1) − s1(x1)(cid:107)4Fi−1
(cid:107)sN,i(xN ) − sN (xN )(cid:107)4Fi−1
(cid:22)
(a)
v4
...
(cid:3), . . . ,
(cid:3)(cid:9)
α4 · (cid:107)xN(cid:107)4 + σ4
= α4 · P (4)[x] + σ4
v4
(193)
where step (a) uses (37). Now we bound EP (4)[x] to complete
the proof:
v4 · 1
P (4)[x] = P (4)(cid:2)1 ⊗ wc,i−1 + AT
1 ULwe,i−1
(cid:3)
where step (a) uses the convexity property (138) and the
scaling property in Lemma 3, step (b) uses the variance
relation (142), step (c) uses the convexity property (138),
step (d) uses the definition of the operator P (4)[·], step (e)
uses the variance relation (140), and step (f) uses the bound
c · (cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 from (110) of Part I [2] and γc < 1.
(cid:107) wc,i(cid:107)2 ≤ γ2i
Substituting (194) into (193), we obtain (179).
(cid:3)
APPENDIX E
PROOF OF LEMMA 6
1
γc
γc ·
(cid:13)(cid:13)4
First, we prove (181). It holds that
(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1) − µmax · (pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
= P (4)(cid:2)Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1) − µmax · (pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
= P (4)(cid:104)
+ (1 − γc) · −µmax
(cid:22) γc · P (4)(cid:2) 1
+ (1 − γc) · P (4)(cid:2)−µmax
(cid:0)Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1)(cid:1)
(cid:105)
(cid:0)Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1)(cid:1)(cid:3)
1 − γc · (pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(cid:3)
c · P (4)(cid:2)(cid:0)Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1)(cid:1)(cid:3)
1 − γc · (pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(1 − γc)4 · P (4)(cid:2)(pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
+ (1 − γc) ·
(b)
= γc ·
1
γ4
(cid:3)
µ4
max
γc
(a)
28
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
= γc · P (4)[ wc,i−1]
(d)
= γc · P (4)[ wc,i−1]
(c)
(cid:22) γc · P (4)[wc,i−1 − ¯wc,i−1]
+
µ4
max
k=1
max
max
µ4
µ4
(cid:3)
pkzk,i−1
(cid:33)4
(1 − γc)3 ·
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N(cid:88)
(cid:32) N(cid:88)
(cid:32) N(cid:88)
(1 − γc)3 · P (4)(cid:2)(pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N(cid:88)
N(cid:88)
pk(cid:80)N
l=1 pl (cid:107)zk,i−1(cid:107)4
N(cid:88)
(1 − γc)3 ·(cid:107)p(cid:107)3
1·
µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)3
(λL−1
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(1 − γc)3 ·
(1 − γc)3 ·
pk(cid:80)N
(cid:33)4
zk,i−1
l=1 pl
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)4
µ4
µ4
max
max
k=1
k=1
k=1
l=1
l=1
pl
pl
·
·
pk(cid:107)zk,i−1(cid:107)4
(e)
(cid:22) γc · P (4)[ wc,i−1]
+
+
+
= γc·P (4)[ wc,i−1]+
(f )
= γc·P (4)[ wc,i−1]+
(g)
(cid:22) γc · P (4)[ wc,i−1]
µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)3
+
(λL − 1
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
· 11T P (4)[we,i−1]
1
= γc · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4
U ·(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1·
+
µmaxλ4
U )3 · pT · λ4
U ·
1λ2
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
∞
1
U )3 ·pT ·P (4)[zi−1]
1λ2
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
∞
(λL−1
2 µmax(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
U )3
·1T P (4)[we,i−1]
where step (a) uses property (138), step (b) uses the scaling
property in Lemma 3, step (c) uses property (143), step (d)
introduces zk,i−1 as the kth M × 1 sub-vector of z1−1 =
col{z1,i−1, . . . , zN,i−1}, step (e) applies Jensen's inequality
to the convex function (cid:107)·(cid:107)4, step (f) uses the definition of the
operator P (4)[·], and step (g) uses bound (177).
Second, we prove (182). Let vk,i denote the kth M × 1
sub-vector of vi = col{v1,i, . . . , vN,i}. Then,
=
pl
l=1
k=1
pkvk,i
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)4(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
E(cid:2)(cid:13)(cid:13)(pT ⊗ IM )vi
(cid:13)(cid:13)4(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
(cid:3)
= E(cid:104)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N(cid:88)
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)4(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
(cid:105)
· E(cid:104)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N(cid:88)
(cid:33)4
(cid:32) N(cid:88)
pk(cid:80)N
(cid:33)4
(cid:32) N(cid:88)
E(cid:104)
N(cid:88)
pk(cid:80)N
1 · pT · E(cid:8)P (4)[vi](cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
(cid:9)
(cid:107)vk,i(cid:107)4 Fi−1
(cid:110)
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
216α4 · 1 · P (4)[ wc,i−1]
1 · pT ·
+ 216α4 ·
+ 27α4 · ((cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4 + (cid:107)wo(cid:107)4) · 1 + σ4
(cid:111)
∞·11T ·P (4)[we,i−1]
v4 · 1
= (cid:107)p(cid:107)3
(cid:22) (cid:107)p(cid:107)3
(cid:105)
(cid:105)
l=1 pl
l=1 pl
vk,i
≤
k=1
k=1
l=1
pl
(a)
(c)
(b)
·
(cid:13)(cid:13) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:13)(cid:13)4
= 216α4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)4
+ 216α4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 ·
+ 27α4(cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1 · (cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)4 + 27α4 · (cid:107)p(cid:107)4
+ σ4
v4 · (cid:107)p(cid:107)4
1
∞ · 1T · P (4)[we,i−1]
1 · (cid:107)wo(cid:107)4
(a)
=
γc
max
µ2
µ2
1
γc
1
γ2
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
= γc ·
= γc ·
≤ γc ·
+ (1 − γc) ·
+ (1 − γc) ·
(1 − γc)2 ·
Third, we prove (183):
+ (1 − γc) · −µmax
where step (a) applies Jensen's inequality to the convex
function (cid:107) · (cid:107)4, step (b) uses the definition of the operator
P (4)[·], and step (c) substitutes (179).
1
c · P [Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1)]
γ2
(cid:0)Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1)(cid:1)
(cid:0)Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1)(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2
1 − γc · (pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)−µmax
(cid:13)(cid:13)Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1) − µmax · (pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)γc ·
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2
1 − γc · (pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)(pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
c · (cid:107)Tc(wc,i−1) − Tc( ¯wc,i−1)(cid:107)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)(pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)(pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)(pT ⊗ IM )zi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N(cid:88)
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N(cid:88)
pk(cid:80)N
N(cid:88)
pk(cid:80)N
l=1 pl (cid:107)zk,i−1(cid:107)2
·
U · (cid:107)p(cid:107)1 · pT · P [zi−1]
1λ2
= γc · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2 +
= γc · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2
µmax
U ·
+
2(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
≤ γc · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2
µmax
U ·
+
2(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1λ2
= γc · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2 +
≤ γc · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2
µmax
U · (cid:107)p(cid:107)1 · pT · λ2
+
1λ2
2(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
+ (1 − γc) ·
(cid:22) γc · P [wc,i−1 − ¯wc,i−1] +
µmax
= γc · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2 +
2(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
µmax
2(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(cid:16) N(cid:88)
(cid:16) N(cid:88)
1 − γc ·
U ·
1λ2
l=1
µmax
2(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
(1 − γc)2 ·
U · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:107)2∞
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2
λL − 1
λL − 1
λL − 1
λL − 1
λL − 1
U ·
1λ2
pkzk,i−1
(cid:17)2
(cid:17)2
zk,i−1
l=1 pl
µ2
max
max
k=1
k=1
k=1
l=1
pl
pl
(d)
(c)
(b)
·
λL − 1
· 11T · P [we,i−1]
= γc · (cid:107) wc,i−1(cid:107)2
µmax
U ·(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
+
1λ2
2(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
λL− 1
1 UL](cid:107)2∞·1T P [we,i−1]
where steps (a) and (c) apply Jensen's inequality to the convex
function (cid:107) · (cid:107)2, step (b) uses property P [Tc(x) − Tc(y)] (cid:22)
U ·(cid:107) ¯P [AT
1·λ2
CHEN AND SAYED: ON THE LEARNING BEHAVIOR OF ADAPTIVE NETWORKS -- PART II: PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
29
c · P [x − y] from (164) in Part I [2], and step (d) substitutes
γ2
the bound in (75).
Finally, we prove (184). With the block structure vi =
col{v1,i, . . . , vN,i} defined previously, we have
(cid:105)
(cid:105)
(a)
=
pl
l=1
k=1
k=1
vk,i
pkvk,i
l=1 pl
(cid:13)(cid:13)2(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
E(cid:2)(cid:13)(cid:13)(pT ⊗ IM )vi
(cid:3)
= E(cid:104)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N(cid:88)
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
(cid:105)
· E(cid:104)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N(cid:88)
(cid:16) N(cid:88)
(cid:17)2
pk(cid:80)N
E(cid:104)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)vk,i
(cid:16) N(cid:88)
(cid:17)2
N(cid:88)
pk(cid:80)N
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2
pkE(cid:104)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)vk,i
(cid:16) N(cid:88)
(cid:17)
N(cid:88)
(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
= (cid:107)p(cid:107)1 · pT · E(cid:8)P [vi]
(cid:9)
(cid:110)
≤ (cid:107)p(cid:107)1 · pT ·
4α · 1 · P [ wc,i−1]
(cid:111)
+(cid:2)4α · ((cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2 + (cid:107)wo(cid:107)2) + σ2
(cid:3)
+ 4α · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
1 UL](cid:107)2∞ · 11T P [we,i−1]
· 1
Fi−1
l=1 pl
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi−1
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2
(cid:105)
Fi−1
≤
k=1
k=1
l=1
l=1
pl
pl
=
(b)
·
·
v
1 · P [ wc,i−1]
= 4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
+ 4α · (cid:107) ¯P [AT
+4α(cid:107) wc,0(cid:107)2·(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 UL](cid:107)2∞ · (cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 +4α(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1 · 1T P [we,i−1]
1·(cid:107)wo(cid:107)2 +σ2
v·(cid:107)p(cid:107)2
1
where step (a) applies Jensen's inequality to the convex
function (cid:107) · (cid:107)2, and step (b) substituting (77).
REFERENCES
[1] J. Chen and A. H. Sayed, "On the benefits of diffusion cooperation for
distributed optimization and learning," in Proc. European Signal Proc.
Conf. (EUSIPCO), Marakkech, Morocco, Sep. 2013, pp. 1 -- 5.
[2] J. Chen and A. H. Sayed, "On the learning behavior of adaptive networks
-- Part I: Transient analysis," to appear in IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory,
2015 [also available as arXiv:1312.7581, Dec. 2013].
[3] B. Widrow, J. M. McCool, M. G. Larimore, and C. R. Johnson Jr, "Sta-
tionary and nonstationary learning characterisitcs of the LMS adaptive
filter," Proc. IEEE, vol. 64, no. 8, pp. 1151 -- 1162, Aug. 1976.
[4] S. Jones, R. Cavin III, and W. Reed, "Analysis of error-gradient adaptive
linear estimators for a class of stationary dependent processes," IEEE
Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 318 -- 329, Mar. 1982.
[5] W. A. Gardner, "Learning characteristics of stochastic-gradient-descent
algorithms: A general study, analysis, and critique," Signal Process.,
vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 113 -- 133, Apr. 1984.
[6] A. Feuer and E. Weinstein,
"Convergence analysis of LMS filters
with uncorrelated gaussian data," IEEE Trans. Acoust., Speech, Signal
Process., vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 222 -- 230, Feb. 1985.
[7] A. Nedic and A. Ozdaglar, "Distributed subgradient methods for multi-
agent optimization," IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 54, no. 1, pp.
48 -- 61, 2009.
[8] J. N. Tsitsiklis, D. P. Bertsekas, and M. Athans, "Distributed asyn-
chronous deterministic and stochastic gradient optimization algorithms,"
IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 803 -- 812, 1986.
[9] S. S. Ram, A. Nedic, and V. V. Veeravalli,
"Distributed stochastic
subgradient projection algorithms for convex optimization," J. Optim.
Theory Appl., vol. 147, no. 3, pp. 516 -- 545, 2010.
[10] K. Srivastava and A. Nedic,
"Distributed asynchronous constrained
stochastic optimization," IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 5,
no. 4, pp. 772 -- 790, Aug. 2011.
[11] S. Kar and J. M. F. Moura, "Convergence rate analysis of distributed
gossip (linear parameter) estimation: Fundamental limits and tradeoffs,"
IEEE J. Sel. Topics. Signal Process., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 674 -- 690, Aug.
2011.
[12] S. Kar, J. M. F. Moura, and K. Ramanan, "Distributed parameter esti-
mation in sensor networks: Nonlinear observation models and imperfect
communication," IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 3575 -- 3605,
Jun. 2012.
[13] S. Kar, J. M. F. Moura, and H. V. Poor, "Distributed linear parameter
estimation: Asymptotically efficient adaptive strategies," SIAM Journal
on Control and Optimization, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 2200 -- 2229, 2013.
[14] A. G. Dimakis, S. Kar, J. M. F. Moura, M. G. Rabbat, and A. Scaglione,
"Gossip algorithms for distributed signal processing," Proc. IEEE, vol.
98, no. 11, pp. 1847 -- 1864, Nov. 2010.
[15] S. Theodoridis, K. Slavakis, and I. Yamada, "Adaptive learning in a
world of projections," IEEE Signal Process. Mag., vol. 28, no. 1, pp.
97 -- 123, Jan. 2011.
[16] D. H. Dini and D. P. Mandic,
"Cooperative adaptive estimation of
in Proc. Asilomar Conf.
distributed noncircular complex signals,"
Signals, Syst. and Comput., Pacific Grove, CA, Nov. 2012, pp. 1518 --
1522.
[17] C. G. Lopes and A. H. Sayed,
"Diffusion least-mean squares over
adaptive networks: Formulation and performance analysis," IEEE Trans.
Signal Process., vol. 56, no. 7, pp. 3122 -- 3136, Jul. 2008.
[18] F. S. Cattivelli and A. H. Sayed,
"Diffusion LMS strategies for
distributed estimation," IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 58, no. 3,
pp. 1035 -- 1048, Mar. 2010.
[19] X. Zhao and A. H. Sayed, "Performance limits for distributed estimation
over LMS adaptive networks," IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 60, no.
10, pp. 5107 -- 5124, Oct. 2012.
[20] J. Chen and A. H. Sayed, "Diffusion adaptation strategies for distributed
optimization and learning over networks," IEEE Trans. Signal Process.,
vol. 60, no. 8, pp. 4289 -- 4305, Aug. 2012.
[21] J. Chen and A. H. Sayed, "Distributed Pareto optimization via diffusion
adaptation," IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 205 --
220, Apr. 2013.
[22] A. H. Sayed, "Diffusion adaptation over networks," in Academic Press
Library in Signal Processing, vol. 3, R. Chellapa and S. Theodoridis,
editors, pp. 323 -- 454, Elsevier, 2014.
[23] S. Chouvardas, K. Slavakis, and S. Theodoridis,
"Adaptive robust
distributed learning in diffusion sensor networks," IEEE Trans. Signal
Process., vol. 59, no. 10, pp. 4692 -- 4707, Oct. 2011.
[24] O. N. Gharehshiran, V. Krishnamurthy, and G. Yin, "Distributed energy-
aware diffusion least mean squares: Game-theoretic learning," IEEE
Journal Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 821 -- 836, Jun.
2013.
[25] A. H. Sayed, "Adaptation, learning, and optimization over networks,"
Foundations and Trends in Machine Learning, vol. 7, issue 4 -- 5, NOW
Publishers, Boston-Delft, Jul. 2014., pp. 311 -- 801.
[26] A. H. Sayed, "Adaptive networks," Proc. IEEE, vol. 102, no. 4, pp.
460 -- 497, Apr. 2014.
[27] A. Nedic and A. Ozdaglar, "Cooperative distributed multi-agent opti-
mization," Convex Optimization in Signal Processing and Communica-
tions, Y. Eldar and D. Palomar (Eds.), Cambridge University Press, pp.
340 -- 386, 2010.
[28] S. P. Boyd and L. Vandenberghe, Convex Optimization, Cambridge
University Press, 2004.
[29] S. Lee and A. Nedic,
"Distributed random projection algorithm for
convex optimization," IEEE Journal Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 7,
no. 2, pp. 221 -- 229, Apr. 2013.
[30] P. Bianchi, G. Fort, and W. Hachem, "Performance of a distributed
stochastic approximation algorithm," IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 59,
no. 11, pp. 7405 -- 7418, Nov. 2013.
[31] B. Johansson, T. Keviczky, M. Johansson, and K.H. Johansson, "Subgra-
dient methods and consensus algorithms for solving convex optimization
problems," in Proc. IEEE Conf. Decision and Control (CDC), Cancun,
Mexico, Dec. 2008, IEEE, pp. 4185 -- 4190.
[32] P. Braca, S. Marano, and V. Matta, "Running consensus in wireless
sensor networks," in Proc. 11th IEEE Int. Conf. on Information Fusion,
Cologne, Germany, June 2008, pp. 1 -- 6.
[33] S. S. Stankovic, M. S. Stankovic, and D. M. Stipanovic, "Decentralized
parameter estimation by consensus based stochastic approximation,"
IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 531 -- 543, Mar. 2011.
[34] X. Zhao and A. H. Sayed,
"Probability distribution of steady-state
errors and adaptation over networks," in Proc. IEEE Statistical Signal
Processing Workshop (SSP), Nice, France, Jun. 2011, pp. 253 -- 256.
[35] A. H. Sayed, Adaptive Filters, Wiley, NJ, 2008.
[36] J. Sacks, "Asymptotic distribution of stochastic approximation proce-
dures," The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 373 --
405, Jun. 1958.
30
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. XX, NO. XX, MONTH 2015
[37] M. B. Nevelson and R. Z. Hasminskii, Stochastic Approximation and
Recursive Estimation, American Mathematical Society, 1976.
[38] T. Kailath, A. H. Sayed, and B. Hassibi, Linear Estimation, Prentice-
Hall, Inc., 2000.
[39] S. Boyd, P. Diaconis, and L. Xiao, "Fastest mixing Markov chain on a
graph," SIAM Rev., vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 667 -- 689, Dec. 2004.
[40] W. K. Hastings, "Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains
and their applications," Biometrika, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 97 -- 109, Apr.
1970.
[41] X. Zhao, S.-Y. Tu, and A. H. Sayed, "Diffusion adaptation over networks
under imperfect information exchange and non-stationary data," IEEE
Trans. Signal Process., vol. 60, no. 7, pp. 3460 -- 3475, July 2012.
[42] S. Theodoridis and K. Koutroumbas, Pattern Recognition, Academic
Press, 4th edition, 2008.
[43] B. Polyak, Introduction to Optimization, Optimization Software, NY,
[44] K. L. Chung, A Course in Probability Theory, Academic press, 2001.
[45] A. J. Laub, Matrix Analysis for Scientists and Engineers, SIAM, PA,
1987.
2005.
|
cs/0407025 | 1 | 0407 | 2004-07-10T11:16:45 | An agent framework for dynamic agent retraining: Agent academy | [
"cs.MA"
] | Agent Academy (AA) aims to develop a multi-agent society that can train new agents for specific or general tasks, while constantly retraining existing agents in a recursive mode. The system is based on collecting information both from the environment and the behaviors of the acting agents and their related successes/failures to generate a body of data, stored in the Agent Use Repository, which is mined by the Data Miner module, in order to generate useful knowledge about the application domain. Knowledge extracted by the Data Miner is used by the Agent Training Module as to train new agents or to enhance the behavior of agents already running. In this paper the Agent Academy framework is introduced, and its overall architecture and functionality are presented. Training issues as well as agent ontologies are discussed. Finally, a scenario, which aims to provide environmental alerts to both individuals and public authorities, is described an AA-based use case. | cs.MA | cs | In Challenges and Achievements in e-business and e-work,
B. Stanford-Smith, E. Chiozza, and M. Edin (eds.),
Prague, Czech Republic, IOS Press, October 2002, pp.757-764
An Agent Framework for Dynamic Agent
Retraining: Agent Academy
P. Mitkas1 , A. Symeonidis1 , D. Kechagias1 , I. Athanasiadis1 ,
G. Laleci2 , G. Kurt2 , Y. Kabak 2 , A. Acar2 , A. Dogac2
1 Intelligent Systems and Software Engineering Laboratory, ITI, CERTH, 1 s t km Thermi (cid:150) Panorama Road ,
P.O. Box 361, GR 570 01 Thermi Thessaloniki, Greece Tel: +30 310 996349 [email protected]
2 So f tware Research and Development Center, Middle East Technical University, Inonu Bulvari,
METU(ODTU) Campus, 06500, Ankara, Turkey Tel:+90 312 2105598 [email protected]
Abstract. Agent Academy (AA) aims to develop a multi-agent society that can train
new agents for specific or general tasks, while constantly retraining existing agents
in a recursive mode. The system is based on collecting information both from the
environment and
the behaviors of
the acting agents and
their
related
successes /fa i lures to generate a body of data, stored in the Agent Use Repository,
which is mined by the Data Miner module, in order to generate useful knowledge
about the application domain. Knowledge extracted by the Data Miner is used by the
Agent Training Module as to train new agents or to enhance the behavior of agents
already running.
In this paper the Agent Academy framework is introduced, and its overall
architecture and functionality are presented. Training issues as well as agent
ontologies are discussed. Finally, a scenario, which aims to provide environmental
alerts to both individuals and public authorities, is described an AA-based use case .
1. Introduction
In the recent years agent technology has found many interesting applications in e-
commerce, decision support systems and Internet applications. Several agent system
building tools and frameworks have been developed. The feature lacking so far, though, is
the ability to store, analyze and learn from the past activities of the agent society as a whole
in order to dynamically re- train individual agents at run- time. In this way functionally
unrelated agents within the society may benefit from each other(cid:146)s findings and be able to
collectively exploit the shared knowledge base thereby increasing the effectiveness of the
system. We claim that such a society-wide evaluation and constant learning approach is
essential for describing complex and ultimately useful scenarios involving agents with
different roles. In this paper, we provide the description of a framework capable of the said
functionality which
is being developed within
the scope of IST-2000-31050 Agent
Academy Project. The features of the proposed system are explained over a motivating
scenario.
Agents have proven to be particularly useful in a series of business applications. In
particular, agents have facilitated the procedure of buying and selling of goods and services
in electronic marketplaces, the handling of workflows and have assisted in personalization
by managing user profiles or by tackling production planning. As the benefits from using
agent societies in such applications become clear, so does the need for development of
high- level agent system-building tools.
There are numerous agent development platforms with various degrees of abstraction
and completeness ranging from bare bones API’s to full- fledged but less flexible building
packages. These frameworks all have their strong points and lacking features, the most
important factors being compliance to a specification (e.g. FIPA), support for the mobility
of the agents from host to host, ability to support AI oriented languages (e.g. Lisp, JESS,
etc.), support for
lightweight agents, support for advanced planning- scheduling and
combinations thereof. The feature lacking so far however is the ability to get feedback from
an agent society, which will be analyzed
in order
to dynamically
improve agents(cid:146)
intelligence at run- time. The Agent Academy Project aims to fill in this void.
2. The Agent Academy Framework
Agent Academy aims to develop a multi-agent system, which can train new agents for
specific or general tasks and re- train its own agents in a recursive mode. The main
components of the system are given in Figure 1. The system is based on collecting
information from both the environment and the behaviors of the acting agents and their
related successes/failures to generate a body of data. Then this body of data is mined
through the Data Miner in order to discover the important relationships between the
behaviors of the agents and their environment. These relationships discovered by the Data
Miner are used by the training module, in order to train new agents or to retrain (i.e.
enhance) the agents already running.
WEB
Agent
Tracking
Data
User
Profile
Agent
Request
n
o
i
t
i
s
i
u
q
c
A
a
t
a
D
Agent
Factory
Agent Academy
Agent
Use
Repository
Data
Miner
Agent
Training
Intelligent
Agent
Figure 1 Overall Architecture of the Agent Academy System
The four main components of the Agent Academy framework are described below.
Agent Factory (AF): The Agent Factory is assigned with the creation of new
(untrained) agents. User defines through an interface new agent(cid:146)s parameters, such as
functional characteristics, abilities to access entities or devices, etc. The AF initializes all
agents of the community according to user requests.
Agent Use Repository (AUR): The Agent Use Repository is a database holding all
necessary data for a specific application. This body of data consists of agent behaviors,
experience and decisions, as well as of information on the working environment and its
parameters. AUR is constantly updated and appended with information via the Data
Acquisition Module, which monitors and posts data from the operating agents.
Data Mining Module (DM): Through the data mining module a user can take
advantage of data mining techniques after applying them to the body of application data.
Results of the data mining process (in the form of decision trees, association rules and/or
artificial neural networks) are posted to the ATM in FIPA-SL format, to be transplanted
into active agents.
Agent Training Module (ATM): The Agent Training Module is charged with the task
of embedding behaviors and beliefs to working agents. In this manner it is the tool for
initially training new agents and for retraining AA produced active agents.
3. The Overall Architecture of the System
We decided
the Java Agent Development
the AA framework using
implement
to
Environment (JADE) [1], which is a FIPA compliant Agent Development Toolkit. Another
important step of the design concerning an agent based infrastructure is the setting of an
Agent Communication Language, to allow the community agents to exchange information
and services with one another, for negotiating, reasoning or co-operation. In the Agent
Academy Framework we use FIPA-ACL (FIPA Agent Communication Language). In order
to be fully FIPA compliant,
the Agent Communication Language
in
information
the
message should be represented as a consistent content expression with one of the content
languages in the FIPA Content Language Library [3], which are FIPA-SL (FIPA-Semantic
Language), FIPA-RDF
(FIPA-Resource Description Framework), FIPA-KIF
(FIPA-
Knowledge Interchange Format), and FIPA-CCL (FIPA-Constraint Choice Language).
Agent Academy uses FIPA-SL [5], which is supported by JADE, as a content language to
represent the information in ACL messages.
Another important issue about agent communication is the Ontology concept. The
model of agent communication in FIPA is based on the assumption that two agents, who
wish to converse, share a common ontology for the domain of discourse. It ensures that the
agents ascribe the same meaning to the symbols used in the message. Java Agent
Development Environment (JADE) provides a platform for easy exchange and parsing of
these messages into internal representations of the agent by supporting ontology definitions
consistent with the content language of the messages. Ontologies are defined as Java
objects representing the internal structure of the message, and provide methods to retrieve
the necessary parts of the message content. When an agent receives a Semantic Language
(SL) message, which is in string format, it is parsed in to Java objects, and then checked
with the previously defined ontologies. Then the agent extracts the components of the
message by using the methods of the ontology. When sending a message, the agent
constructs and initiates the necessary java objects and with the help of the content language
support of JADE, the Semantic Language (SL) message in string format is constructed
automatically.
In the following, the internal structure of the Agent Academy Framework is presented
with the message structures in SL between the components. The scenario begins with a
request to the Agent Factory (AF) for creating an agent. AF creates an untrained agent
(UA) with
the preliminary abilities
to communicate with other agents, adding new
behaviors to itself, being mobile if necessary. Then it sends a message to the Agent
Training Module (ATM) giving the name and the type of the agent as shown in Table 1.
Table 1 Agent Factory (AF) -Agent Training Module (ATM) interaction in SL format
(agentsToBeTrained
(agents (set (agent :name agent1
:type locationAgent))))
Upon receiving the message from Agent Factory, Agent Training Module discovers the
necessary agent behaviors, which comes from the preferences of the user who requests the
agent. ATM informs the Untrained Agent about these behaviors, which has the ability to
load itself with new behaviors, with the message format presented in Table 2.
Table 2 Agent Training Module - Untrained Agent interaction in Semantic Language (SL) Format
(loadClass
(behaviors (set (behavior :classname Class1)
(behavior :classname Class2))))
In the Agent Academy Framework, the Untrained Agent that is trained by the Agent
Training Module gains the ability to execute rules and perform reactive actions compatible
with scenario- specific roles, as a result of these rules. While the agent performs its goals
throughout its lifecycle, Data Acquisition Module collects statistical data, about the agent(cid:146)s
behavior, successes or failures and updates the Agent Use Repository accordingly (e.g.
some rules are retracted, some new ones are added). Data Miner periodically imports data
from the Agent Use Repository in order to generate associations, categorizations and
sequences by using well-known Data Mining techniques, and outputs Decision Trees,
Association Rules or Neural networks. These outputs are passed to the Agent Training
Module to be taught to the agents that are executing in their environment. To pass these
data structures, we defined SL representation formats for each of them.
The Agent Training Module re- inserts these enhanced rules to the both newly created
untrained agents and to the existing agents to train them.
To be able to execute the rules and perform reactive actions accordingly, a rule engine is
necessary. In our framework we are using Java Expert Systems Shell (JESS) [2] as the rule
engine. The beliefs of the agents are represented as JESS rules, and when a new fact
coming from the environment is asserted to the agent, these JESS rules are executed
automatically and the action that is defined to be the result of this condition is executed.
The agents created by Agent Factory gain the ability to execute JESS rules after an initial
training by the Agent Training Module. The ATM, after having received the refined rules
from the Data Mining Module as decision trees, neural networks, association rules etc,
converts them into to JESS rules and sends them to the agents to be trained, in the message
format presented in Table 3.
Table 3 Semantic Language (SL) representation for the message format between ATM and Agent
(addRule (jessRules (set (jessRule :rule (cid:147)(defrule rule_6 (and (ozone normal)) => (store ALARM_TYPE 3))(cid:148))
(jessRule :rule (cid:147)(defrule rule_5 (and (NO2NO3 normal)) => (store ALARM_TYPE 2))(cid:148)))))
Operating with the new rules sent by the Agent Training Module (ATM), behavior of
the agents would be enhanced in an iterative and recursive manner.
In
the Agent Academy Framework, different scenarios can be implemented with
different domain specific ontologies. For each ontology, there will be different databases in
the Agent Use Repository. The field names of the databases correspond to the ontology
term that the agent is internally using. Therefore the Data Miner needs to know on which
ontology term to data mine. For example, in the O3RTAA scenario (described in Section
4), the ontology terms are pressure, ozone, nitrogen, alarm type and location. The attributes
and the selection conditions that the Data Miner (DM) will consider and the attributes that
the Agent uses should match syntactically.
One solution for the ontology problem is to define the ontology among the agents, which
should be common as well as determined, prior to conducting the training protocol, while
the agents are being created. Then the exchanged messages carrying the artificial neural
network, the decision trees and other structures should also be constructed accordingly,
agreeing on the common ontology of the scenario. The input and output of the data
structures in the messages exchanged between the Artificial Neural Network and the Data
Miner Module should agree with
the
terms of
the ontology. Since both of
the
communicating agents use the same predefined ontology, the agents ascribe the same
meaning to the symbols used in the message.
Another solution is to enable the agents to manage explicit, declaratively represented
different ontologies. An ontology service for a community of agents can be specified for
this purpose. A dedicated agent, called Ontology Agent, can provide this service. The role
of the Ontology Agent can be summarized as follows [4]:
?? discovery of public ontologies in order to access them,
?? maintain a set of public ontologies (i.e. register with the Directory Facilitator of
FIPA, upload, download, and modify),
?? translate expressions between different ontologies and/or different content languages,
?? respond to query for relationships between terms or between ontologies, and,
?? facilitate the identification of a shared ontology for communication between two
agents.
With the help of the Ontology Agent, agents do not have to agree on a predefined
ontology, but mappings between different ontologies can be provided by the Ontology
Agent. Consider an agent getting the message that contains the term (cid:147)pressure(cid:148) and can not
understand it since it is using the DomainSpecificOntology (cid:147)O3RTAATurkish(cid:148), whereas
the sender agent is using the DomainSpecificOntology (cid:147)O3RTAAEnglish(cid:148). The agent can
contact the Ontology Agent, asking the meaning of (cid:147)pressure(cid:148) in (cid:147)O3RTAATurkish(cid:148). The
agent can achieve this by sending a Semantic Language (SL) message to the Ontology
agent in the following format:
(ontologyQuery (map :MessageOntology O3RTAAEnglish :MyOntology O3RTAATurkish
:term pressure))
Then the ontology agent should inform the agent with the following SL message:
(Mapping (From :term (cid:147)pressure(cid:148)) (To :term (cid:147)basinc(cid:148)))
As a summary, the Agent Academy platform creates, trains and re- trains its society of
agents in order to manage any given scenario. Such a scenario, which is the motivating
application for the development, is the O3RTAA system, which uses agents for the
collection and redistribution of environmental data.
4. The O3RTAA Scenario
The O3RTAA system aims to provide environmental alerts to both individuals (asthma
patients, allergic people etc.) and public authorities (hospitals, civil protection etc.)
depending on the levels of certain atmospheric variables, which are collected by the
Mediterranean Centre for Environmental Studies (CEAM). The system is supposed to
monitor the incoming data from the environmental sensors and make predictions as to the
effects a certain change may cause in the environment. Some changes will lead to certain
kind of alerts, which then need to be communicated effectively to parties interested in a
particular alert.
The general structure of the O3RTAA system is given in Figure 2. The agents in this
scenario are responsible for diagnosis, prediction and distribution. Each of these agent
subsystems work as follows:
Diagnosis Component: This component will be in charge of analyzing the raw data
coming in from the sensor data loggers. The main responsibility of the diagnosis agents is
to screen this raw data and to forward only the significant changes while discarding faulty
and redundant information. The human users may well input to the system through this
component. And also, all the sensed information should be logged for future learning
capability.
Prediction Component: When the diagnosis component decides that some change or
fluctuation in the monitored parameters is significant, this change is forwarded to the
prediction component. The predictor uses rule-bases and knowledge acquired from the
historical data up to that point and also the current sensor information retrieved from the
Diagnosis Component to determine what kind of hazard (i.e. alert) the change may be an
indication of.
Distribution Component: When an alarm is raised by the prediction component, this
event is sent to the distribution component which decides who will be affected by the alarm
raised based on the profiles of the users and their current locations. Once a list of users to
be informed is generated the alarm is sent to each user over the communication channel
preferred by the user (e-mail, html, voice, SMS etc.). An important thing to consider here is
that the following: According to the profile information and the urgency of the alarm, the
distribution component decides on sending or delaying an alarm. As an example, a human
authority may indicate in his profile that he wishes to receive the alarm through email and
during office hours. However if an alarm is important, this component can decide to send
an alarm at 4 A.M by a SMS (Short Message Service) to his phone number, and the email
message
later. Obviously
if
this decision
is
incorrect,
this agent will be working
inefficiently, but the importance of the alarm is decided by the Diagnosis component and
the failure in this case is of the Diagnosis Component so the diagnosis component have
have to be retrained through user feed back.
POLUTION DYNAMICS
OZONE ALARMS
(NO2NO3 , O3 , Pressure)
to Civil Protection Agencies,
from Environmental Sensors
Medical Services, Asthma Patients
Contribution Agents and
Data Management Agents
are renamed to Diagnosis
and Predictor Agents
respectively.
Automatic Network for Ambient Surveillance and Control,
once an hour checkings are provided from 25 Stations in Valencia region
Figure 2 Overall View of the O3RTAA Scenario
5. Realization of the O3RTAA scenario through the Agent Academy framework
How the Agent Academy framework handles the O3RTAA scenario can be explained
through the processing steps when a new change in the environment occurs as shown in
Figure 3.
Sensors collecting information on the environmental changes alert the Diagnosis Agent
(1) when a change occurs in the parameters of the environment (i.e. O3, NO2, pressure,
etc). The Diagnosis Agent, after validating the signal and deciding that it is significant,
records the location information of the sensor and informs the Predictor Agent (2).
The Predictor Agent in the system, after obtaining the necessary information from the
Diagnosis Agent, decides whether an alarm is to be raised and if so, what type of alarm is
necessary and gives this to the Distributor agent (13) together with the location information
to be distributed to the users.
Figure 3 Information Flow through the Agent Academy - O3RTAA Prototype
When a Predictor Agent decides it needs to update its prediction strategy, it requests a
new decision structure from the Agent Training Module as a set of Java Expert System
Shell (JESS) rules (3). Agent Training Module requests a prediction strategy from the Data
Miner. Data Miner requests previously inserted training examples related with a certain
location from the Agent Use Repository (4). This information, that is, the previously
inserted training examples related with a certain location is transferred from the Agent Use
Repository to the Data Miner (5,6).
Using data-mining algorithms, the Data Miner constructs a data structure and sends it to
the Agent Training Module (7). The content language and the ontology are predetermined
and known by both of the agents. Since the Data Miner returns the new decision strategy in
a standard language, and the Predictor Agent uses a JESS rule set, it is necessary to convert
one into the other. Therefore, the decision strategy obtained from the Data Miner is sent to
the JESS Rule converter (8,9). The Agent Training Module forwards these rules to the
Predictor Agent, which had requested them in step 3 (10).
The Predictor Agent sends these Java Expert System Shell (JESS) Rules and the current
values of environment parameters (obtained at step 2 from the Diagnosis agent and
represented as Assert statements of JESS) to its JESS Engine for execution (Steps 11,12). If
upon execution the expert system decides that there is a need to raise an alarm, the
Predictor agent sends this alarm, along with type and location information to the Distributor
Agent (13). It should be noted that the location of the change and alarm is obtained at step 2
from the Diagnosis Agent.
The User Agents hold user profile information for different subscribers. These profiles
include the types of alarms the user requires, the location of the user and the delivery
information and format such as HTML, CHTML, WML, or xHTML. If the user is mobile,
his location information is obtained from his user Agent (steps 14,15). The User agent then,
using
the Ericsson Mobile Positioning System Software Development Kit, finds
the
location of the user as latitude and longitude. The data in this specific format is converted
into a format compatible with the location information received from the Diagnosis agent
provided at step 1. Based on the location of the user and the specified alarm type in the user
profile, the users are alerted (step 16). The users provide feedback on the usefulness of the
alarm, which are collected by the Feedback Agent to be fed into Agent Use Repository
(steps 17, 18, 19). The feedback obtained from individual users affect the data in the Agent
Use Repository only when it exceeds a certain threshold. The feedback coming from the
public institutions, on the other hand, directly influences the Agent Use Repository.
6. Summary
In this paper we described the Agent Academy attempt to develop a framework through
which users can create an agent community having the ability to train and retrain its own
agents using Data Mining techniques. After presenting AA core components, we discussed
the ontology concept and the way it affects the training procedure. We described the
O3RTAA scenario, which fires environmental alarms and we realized it through the AA
perspective.
We have used a multi-agent system in realizing the O3RTAA scenario because the
components of the system are highly distributed, autonomous and communicate with each
other through messages. Furthermore the O3RTAA system components involve decision
making.
Acknowledgements
This work has been partially supported by the European Commission IST Programme,
under the contract IST-2000-31050. Authors would like to thank Mr. Miguel Alborg and
his associates in IDI-EIKON, Valencia, Spain, for their assistance on the O3RTAA scenario
and the Mediterranean Center for Environmental Studies Foundation (CEAM), Valencia,
Spain, for the provision of the environmental data.
References
[1] Java Agent Development Environment, http://jade.cselt.it/, WWW Site
[2] Java Expert System Shell, http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov/jess/ , WWW Site
[3] Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents, FIPA Content Language Library Specifications, Specification,
8 2001
[4] Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents, FIPA Ontology Service Specifications, Specification, 8 2001
[5] Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents, FIPA Semantic Language (SL) Content Language
Specifications, Specification, 8 2001
|
1711.06869 | 1 | 1711 | 2017-11-18T14:46:45 | Bio-Inspired Local Information-Based Control for Probabilistic Swarm Distribution Guidance | [
"cs.MA",
"math.OC",
"math.PR",
"math.ST",
"math.ST"
] | This paper addresses a task allocation problem for a large-scale robotic swarm, namely swarm distribution guidance problem. Unlike most of the existing frameworks handling this problem, the proposed framework suggests utilising local information available to generate its time-varying stochastic policies. As each agent requires only local consistency on information with neighbouring agents, rather than the global consistency, the proposed framework offers various advantages, e.g., a shorter timescale for using new information and potential to incorporate an asynchronous decision-making process. We perform theoretical analysis on the properties of the proposed framework. From the analysis, it is proved that the framework can guarantee the convergence to the desired density distribution even using local information while maintaining advantages of global-information-based approaches. The design requirements for these advantages are explicitly listed in this paper. This paper also provides specific examples of how to implement the framework developed. The results of numerical experiments confirm the effectiveness and comparability of the proposed framework, compared with the global-information-based framework. | cs.MA | cs | Bio-Inspired Local Information-Based Control for
Probabilistic Swarm Distribution Guidance
Inmo Jang, Hyo-Sang Shin, and Antonios Tsourdos
1
7
1
0
2
v
o
N
8
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
9
6
8
6
0
.
1
1
7
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract -- This paper addresses a task allocation problem for
a large-scale robotic swarm, namely swarm distribution guidance
problem. Unlike most of the existing frameworks handling this
problem, the proposed framework suggests utilising local infor-
mation available to generate its time-varying stochastic policies.
As each agent requires only local consistency on information
with neighbouring agents, rather than the global consistency, the
proposed framework offers various advantages, e.g., a shorter
timescale for using new information and potential to incorporate
an asynchronous decision-making process. We perform theoreti-
cal analysis on the properties of the proposed framework. From
the analysis, it is proved that the framework can guarantee the
convergence to the desired density distribution even using local
information while maintaining advantages of global-information-
based approaches. The design requirements for these advantages
are explicitly listed in this paper. This paper also provides specific
examples of how to implement the framework developed. The
results of numerical experiments confirm the effectiveness and
comparability of the proposed framework, compared with the
global-information-based framework.
Index Terms -- Swarm robotics, Distributed robot systems,
Networked robots, Markov chains.
I. INTRODUCTION
T HIS paper addresses a task allocation problem for a large-
scale multiple-robot system, called a robotic swarm.
Robotic swarms have attracted lots of attention because they
are regarded as promising solutions to handle complicated
missions that other systems may not be able to manage [1], [2].
Agents in a swarm are assumed to be homogeneous because
the swarm is usually realised through mass production [3]. In
this context, the task allocation problem can be reduced to a
problem of how to distribute a swarm of agents into given
tasks (or bins), satisfying the desired population fraction (or
swarm density) for each task. This problem is known as the
swarm distribution guidance problem [4] -- [6].
For a large number of agents, probabilistic approaches based
on Markov chains [4] -- [13] or differential equations [14] -- [18]
have been widely utilised. Since these approaches focus not on
individual agents but instead on the ensemble dynamics, they
are also called Eulerian [11] -- [13] or macroscopic frameworks
[18], [19]. In these approaches, swarm densities for each bin
are represented as system states, and a state-transition matrix
describes stochastic decision policies, i.e., the probabilities
that agents in a bin switch to another. Individual agents in
the swarm make decisions based on these policies, but in a
random, independent, and memoryless manner.
Inmo Jang, Hyo-Sang Shin, and Antonios Tsourdos are with the Centre for
Autonomous and Cyber-Physical Systems, Cranfield University, MK43 0AL,
United Kingdom (e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]).
Initially, open-loop-type frameworks have been proposed
[4] -- [7], [16] -- [18]. Agents under these frameworks are con-
trolled by time-invariant stochastic decision policies. The poli-
cies, which make a swarm converge to a desired distribution,
are pre-determined by a central controller and broadcasted
to each agent before executing the mission. Communication
between agents is hardly required during the mission, so
that
it can reduce communication complexity under these
frameworks. However, the agents only have to follow the given
policies without incorporating any feedbacks, and thus there
still remain some agents who unnecessarily and continuously
switch bins even after the swarm reaches the desired distribu-
tion. This gives rise to a trade-off between convergence rate
and long-term system efficiency [17].
There have been also some other works, called closed-loop-
type frameworks [9] -- [15]. This type of frameworks allows
agents to adaptively construct their own stochastic decision
policies at
the expense of sensing the concurrent swarm
status through interactions with other agents. Based on such
information, agents can synthesise time-inhomogeneous tran-
sition matrices to achieve certain objectives and requirements:
for example, maximising convergence rates [10], minimising
travelling costs [13], and temporarily adjusting given policies
when bins are more overpopulated or underpopulated than
certain levels [14], [15]. In particular, Bandyopadhyay et. al.
[13] recently proposed a closed-loop-type algorithm that ex-
hibits faster convergence as well as less undesirable transition
behaviours, compared with an open-loop-type algorithm. This
algorithm is expected to mitigate the trade-off raised in open-
loop-type frameworks.
To the best of our knowledge, most of the existing closed-
loop-type algorithms are based on Global Information Consis-
tency Assumption (GICA) [20]. GICA implies that necessary
information is required to be consistently known by entire
agents. We refer to such information as global, because
achieving information consistency needs agents to somehow
interact with all the others through a multi-hop fashion and
thus it "happens on a global communication timescale" [20].
This paper proposes a framework that requires Local Infor-
mation Consistency Assumption (LICA) [20]. Unlike GICA-
based algorithms, the proposed framework require only local
consistency on information with neighbouring agents, not
the global consistency. LICA can provide various alternative
advantages to the proposed framework, compared with GICA.
Firstly, it "provides a much shorter timescale for using new
information because agents are not required to ensure that this
information has propagated to the entire team before using it"
[20]. Secondly, LICA enables a foundation on which an asyn-
chronous decentralised decision-making process can be devel-
oped. Note that the timescales for achieving the information
consistency between the agents can be different depending on
their local circumstances. Considering any possibly-extrinsic
heterogeneity of agents (e.g., different sensing frequency due
to local communication delays), an asynchronous algorithm is
regarded as more realistic in coordinating a robotic swarm,
so increasing its system efficiency [21] -- [23]. Finally, LICA
makes the proposed approach additionally robust against dy-
namical changes in bins and those in agents. Given that
inclusions or exclusions of bins are perceived by neighbour-
ing agents, the proposed approach works well even without
requiring other far-away agents to know the changes.
The LICA-based framework developed in this paper utilises
local information as its feedback gains, which is motivated
from the recent GICA-based work in [13]. This framework
is inspired by the mechanism of decision-making in a fish
swarm, in which each of them adjusts its individual behaviour
based on those of neighbours [24] -- [27]. Similarly, each agent
in the framework developed uses its local status, i.e. the current
density of its associated bin relative to those of its neighbour
bins, to generate its time-varying stochastic decision policies.
The agent is not required to know any global information,
and hence the aforementioned advantages of LICA can be
exploited.
We prove that, even using local information, the proposed
framework asymptotically converges to a desired swarm dis-
tribution and it retains the advantages of existing closed-
loop-type approaches. This paper explicitly presents the de-
sign requirements for a time-inhomogeneous Markov chain
to achieve these desired features. It
is thus expected that
the user can utilise the requirements in designing their own
algorithm. In addition, three specific examples are provided
to demonstrate how to implement the proposed framework:
1) minimising travelling cost; 2) maximising convergence rate
under upper flux bounds; and 3) generation of quorum-based
policies (similar to [14], [15]).
The rest of this paper are organised as follows. Section II in-
troduces the desired features of a swarm distribution guidance
framework along with relevant definitions and notations. Sec-
tion III proposes our framework with its design requirements,
the biological inspiration, and an analysis regarding whether
the desired features are satisfied. We provide examples of how
to implement the framework for specific problems in Section
IV, and an asynchronous implementation in Section V. The
results of numerical experiments are shown in Section VI,
followed by concluding remarks in Section VII.
Notations
∅, 0, I and 1 denote the empty set, the zero matrix of
appropriate sizes, the identity matrix of appropriate sizes, and
a row vector with all elements are equal to one, respectively.
v ∈ Pn is a stochastic (row) vector such that v ≥ 0 and
v·1(cid:62) = 1. v[i] indicates the i-th element of vector v. Prob(E)
denotes the probability that event E will happen.
2
TABLE I
NOMENCLATURE
k
Symbol
Bi
A
nA
nk[i]
aj
k
xj
k
M j
k
Θ
µ(cid:63)
k
Ak
Ck
Nk(i)
ANk(i)
¯µ(cid:63)
k[i]
¯µj
k[i]
¯Θ[i]
P j
k
Sj
k
¯ξj
k[i]
Gj
k[i]
Description
The i-th bin amongst a set of nbin bins (Definition 1);
A set of agents (Definition 1);
The number of total agents at time instant k (Definition 1);
The number of agents at the i-th bin (Eqn. (4));
The j-th agent's state indicator vector (Definition 2);
Stochastic state vector of the j-th agent (Definition 4);
Stochastic decision policy of the j-th agent (Definition 4);
Desired swarm distribution (Definition 5);
Current (global) swarm distribution (Definition 3);
Physical motion constraint matrix (Definition 6);
Communicational connectivity matrix (Definition 7);
A set of (communicationally-connected) neighbour bins of
the i-th bin (Definition 7);
A set of agents in Nk(i);
Current local swarm density at the i-th bin (Eqn. (4));
Estimate of ¯µ(cid:63)
Locally-desired swarm density at the i-th bin (Eqn. (5));
Primary guidance matrix (Eqn. (10));
Secondary guidance matrix (Eqn. (10));
Primary local-feedback gain (e.g., Eqn. (6));
Secondary local-feedback gain (Eqn. (9));
k[i] by the j-th agent;
II. PRELIMINARIES
A. Definitions
This section presents necessary definitions and assumptions
for our proposed framework, which will be shown in Section
III. Since most of them are embraced from the recent existing
literature [10], [13], we here briefly provide their essential
meanings.
Definition 1 (Agents and Bins). A set of agents A are
supposed to be distributed over a prescribed region in a state
space B. The entire space is partitioned into nbin disjoint bins
(subspaces) such that B = ∪nbin
i=1 Bi and Bi ∩ Bj = ∅, ∀i (cid:54)= j.
We also regard B = {B1, ...,Bnbin} as the set of all the bins.
Each bin Bi represents a predefined range of an agent's state,
e.g., position. The number of the entire agents is time-varying,
k = A. Note
and its value at time instant k is denoted by nA
that we do not assume that the agents keep track of nA
k .
k ∈ {0, 1}nbin be the state
Definition 2 (Agent's state). Let aj
indicator vector of agent j ∈ A at time instant k. If the agent's
state belongs to bin Bi, then aj
Definition 3 (Current (global) swarm distribution). The cur-
k ∈ Pnbin is a row-stochastic
rent (global) swarm distribution µ(cid:63)
vector such that each element µ(cid:63)
k[i] is the population fraction
(swarm density) of A in bin Bi at time instant k:
(cid:88)
k[i] = 1, otherwise 0.
(1)
µ(cid:63)
k :=
1
A
aj
k.
∀j∈A
Definition 4 (Agent's stochastic state and decision policy).
k ∈
Agent j's stochastic state is a row-stochastic vector xj
Pnbin in which each element xj
the agent's state belongs to bin Bi at time instant k:
k[i] gives the probability that
xj
k[i] := Prob(aj
(2)
The probability that agent j in bin Bi at time instant k will
transition to bin Bl before the next time instant is called its
stochastic decision policy, denoted as:
k[i] = 1).
M j
k+1[l] = 1aj
k ≥ 0 and M j
k · 1(cid:62)
k[i] = 1).
k [i, l] := Prob(aj
(3)
k ∈ Pnbin×nbin is a row-stochastic matrix such
= 1(cid:62), and will be referred as
Note that M j
that M j
Markov matrix.
Definition 5 (Desired swarm distribution). The desired swarm
distribution Θ ∈ Pnbin is a row-stochastic vector such that
each element Θ[i] indicates the desired swarm density for bin
Bi.
Assumption 1. For ease of description for this paper, we
assume that Θ[i] > 0, ∀i ∈ {1, ..., nbin}. Obviously, in prac-
tice, there may exist some bins whose desired swarm densities
are zero. These bins can be accommodated by adopting any
subroutines ensuring that all agents eventually move to and
remain in any of the positive-desired-density bins, for example,
an escaping algorithm in [13, Section III.C].
Assumption 2 (The number of agents [6], [10], [13], [15],
k (cid:29) nbin so that the time evolu-
[17]). It is assumed that nA
tion of the swarm distribution is governed by the stochastic
decision policy in Equation (3). Although the finite cardinality
of the agents normally cause a residual convergence error, a
lower bound on nA
k that probabilistically guarantees a desired
convergence error is analysed in [13, Theorem 6] by exploiting
Chebyshev's equality. Note that
this theorem is generally
appliable and thus is also valid for our work.
Definition 6 (Physical motion constraint [6], [10], [13]).
Motion constraints of agents are denoted by the matrix Ak ∈
{0, 1}nbin×nbin, where Ak[i, l] = 1 if agents in bin Bi at
time instant k are allowed to transition to bin Bl by the next
time instant; Ak[i, l] = 0, otherwise. It is assumed that Ak
is symmetric and irreducible (i.e., strongly-connected); and
Ak[i, i] = 1 for all agents, bins, and time instants.
Definition 7 (Communicationally-connected). Bins Bi and Bl
are said to be communicationally-connected, if there exists at
least one agent in bin Bi who can directly communicate with
some agents in bin Bl, and vice versa. This communicational
connectivity over all the bins at time instant k is defined by the
matrix Ck ∈ {0, 1}nbin×nbin, where Ck[i, l] = 1 indicates that
bins Bi and Bl are communicationally-connected. Note that
Ck is symmetric and all its diagonal entries are set to be one.
For each bin Bi, we define the set of its (communicationally-
connected) neighbour bins as Nk(i) = {∀Bl ∈ B Ck[i, l] =
1}. The set of agents in any of bins in Nk(i) is denoted by
ANk(i) = {∀j ∈ A aj
Assumption 3 (Communicational connectivity over bins). The
physical motion constraint of a robot is, in general, more
stringent than its communicational constraint. From this, it can
k[l] = 1, ∀l : Bl ∈ Nk(i)}.
3
be assumed that if the transition of agents between bin Bi and
Bl is allowed within a unit time instant, then the both bins
are communicationally-connected, i.e., if Ak[i, l] = 1 then
Ck[i, l] = 1. Note that we set Ck[i, l] = 0 if Ak[i, l] = 0.
This implies that
the matrix Ck is irreducible, as is Ak.
The communication network over the agents is assumed to
be strongly-connected [10], [13]. Using distributed consensus
algorithms [10], [11], [28], each agent can access necessary
local information in its neighbour bins.
Assumption 4 (Pre-known Information [13]). The desired
swarm distribution Θ, the motion constraint matrix Ak (also
Ck), and other pre-determined values such as variables regard-
ing objective functions and user-design parameters (which will
be introduced later) are known by all the agents before they
begin a mission.
Assumption 5 (Agent's capability [10], [13]). Each agent can
determine the bin to which it belongs, and know the locations
of neighbour bins so that it can navigate toward any of these
bins. The agent is capable of collision avoidance behaviours
against other agents or obstacles.
B. Problem Statement
The objective of the swarm distribution guidance problem
considered in this paper is to distribute a set of agents A over
a set of bins B by the Markov matrix M j
k in a manner that
holds the following desired features:
Desired Feature 1. The swarm distribution µ(cid:63)
k asymptotically
converges to the desired swarm distribution Θ as time instant
k goes to infinity.
Desired Feature 2. Transitions of the agents between the bins
are controlled in a way that M j
k becomes close to I as µ(cid:63)
k
converges to Θ. This implies that the agents are settled down
after Θ is achieved, and thus unnecessary transitions can be
reduced. Moreover, the agents identify and compensate any
partial loss or failure of the swarm distribution.
Desired Feature 3. For each agent
the infor-
mation required for generating time-varying stochastic deci-
sion policies is not global information (e.g., µ(cid:63)
k) but locally
available information within ANk(i). Thereby, the resultant
time-inhomogeneous Markov process is based on LICA, and
has benefits such as a shorter timescale for obtaining new
information (than GICA), the potential for an asynchronous
process, etc.
Remark 1. One of our main contributions is to provide
Desired Feature 3 as well as to retain Desired Features 1 and 2
by additionally adopting Assumption 3, which can be elicited
from other assumptions in the existing literature.
in bin Bi,
III. A CLOSED-LOOP-TYPE FRAMEWORK USING LOCAL
INFORMATION
This section proposes a LICA-based framework for the
swarm distribution guidance problem. The framework is differ-
ent from the recent closed-loop-type algorithms in [10], [13]
in the sense that they utilise the global information (e.g., the
4
current swarm distribution in Equation (1)) for constructing a
time-inhomogeneous Markov matrix, whereas ours uses the
local information in Equation (7). We present, in spite of
using such relatively insufficient information, how the desired
features described in the previous section can be achieved
in the proposed framework. Before that, we introduce the
biological idea, which is about decision-making mechanisms
of a fish swarm, that inspires this framework to particularly
attain Desired Feature 3. In addition, we explicitly provide
the design requirements for a Markov matrix in order for
prospective users to easily incorporate their own specific
objectives into this framework.
A. The Biological Inspiration
Fig. 1. Examples of how to calculate ¯µ(cid:63)
k[23] =
nk[23]/(nk[13] + nk[22] + nk[23] + nk[24] + nk[33]). In the proposed
framework, agents in the bin only need to obtain the local
information
from other agents in its neighbour bins (shaded). Note that each square
indicates each bin, and the red arrow between two bins Bi and Bl means
that Ak[i, l] = 1.
k[i]: for bin B23, ¯µ(cid:63)
For a swarm of fishes, it has commonly been assumed
that
their crowdedness limits their perception ranges over
other members, and their cardinality restricts the capacity for
individual recognition [25]. How fishes end up with collective
behaviours is different from the ways of other social species
such as bees and ants, which are known to use recruitment
signals for the guidance of the entire swarm [29], [30]. Thus,
in biology domain, a question naturally has arisen about
the mechanism of fishes' decision-making in an environment
where local
information is only available and information
transfer between members does not explicitly happen [24] --
[27], [31], [32].
It has been experimentally shown that fishes' swimming
activities vary depending on their perceivable neighbours.
According to [31], fishes have the tendency to maintain their
statuses (e.g., position, speed, and heading angle) relative to
those of other nearby fishes, which results in their organised
formation structures. In addition, it is presented in [32] that
spatial density of fishes has influences on both the minimum
distances between them and the primary orientation of the fish
school.
Based on this knowledge, the works in [24] -- [27] suggest
individual-based models to further understand the collective
behavioural mechanisms of fishes: for example, their repelling,
attracting, and orientating behaviours [24], [26]; how the den-
sity of informed fishes affects the elongation of the formation
structure [25]; and group-size choices [27]. The common and
fundamental characteristic of these models is that every agent
maintains or adjusts its personal status with consideration of
those of other individuals within its limited perception range.
As inspired by the understanding of fishes, we believe
that there must be an enhanced swarm distribution guidance
approach in which each agent only needs to keep its relative
status by using local information available from its nearby
neighbours. In this approach, a global
information is not
necessary to be known by agents, and thereby the correspond-
ing requirement of extensive information sharing over all the
agents can be alleviated.
B. Fundamental Idea of the Proposed Approach
Suppose that each agent in bin Bi is required to keep its
k[i], which we referred to as the current local
local status ¯µ(cid:63)
swarm density at bin Bi, at the value of the corresponding
locally-desired swarm density ¯Θ[i]. They are respectively
defined as follows:
¯µ(cid:63)
k[i] :=
,
(4)
nk[i]
(cid:80)∀l:Bl∈Nk(i) nk[l]
(cid:80)∀l:Bl∈Nk(i) Θ[l]
Θ[i]
.
where nk[i] is the number of agents such that aj
k[i] = 1; and
¯Θ[i] :=
(5)
k[i] as an estimate of ¯µ(cid:63)
We use the term ¯µj
k[i] by agent j, which
can be obtained through a distributed information consensus
algorithm [10], [11], [28].
each agent j in bin Bi:
(i) only need to estimate the difference of ¯µ(cid:63)
The fundamental idea of the proposed approach is to make
k[i] and
¯Θ[i], which are both locally-available information within
Nk(i); and
(ii) more reluctant to deviate from the current bin as the
k [i, i] → 1 and
difference becomes smaller (i.e., M j
k [i, l] → 0 ∀l as ¯µj
M j
k[i] → ¯Θ[i]).
Our proposed framework utilises the difference between
k[i] and ¯Θ[i] as a local-information-based feedback gain,
¯µj
denoted by ¯ξj
k[i], which is a scalar in (0, 1] that monotonically
k[i] converges to ¯Θ[i]. For instance, this paper
decreases as ¯µj
uses
¯ξj
k[i] :=
¯Θ[i]−¯µj
¯Θ[i]
k[i]
)α
if ¯Θ[i] − ¯µj
k[i] ≤ ¯Θ[i]
k[i]
¯Θ[i]−¯µj
if (
)α < ξ
¯Θ[i]
otherwise
(6)
(
ξ
1
where α > 0 and ξ > 0 are design parameters. We call
this gain primary local-feedback gain because it is utilised to
control the primary guidance matrix P j
k (shown in the next
subsection).
Remark 2. Equation (4) is equivalent to the i-th element of
the following vector:
¯µk(i) =
1
ANk(i)
aj
k.
(7)
(cid:88)
∀j∈ANk (i)
Namely, ¯µ(cid:63)
k[l] = ¯µk(i)[l] if l = i. Here, we intentionally
introduce Equation (7) for ease of comparison with the infor-
mation required for feedback gains in the existing literature
1 2 3 4 … 10 11 12 13 14 … 20 21 22 23 24 … 30 31 32 33 34 … 40 ... … … … … … 91 92 93 94 … 100 (cid:40)
(e.g., Equation (1)). From this, it is implied that, in order for
each agent in bin Bi to estimate ¯µk(i)[i] (i.e., the current
k[i]), the set of other agents whose
local swarm density ¯µ(cid:63)
information is necessary is restricted within ANk(i). That is,
each agent needs to have neither a large perception radius
nor an extensive information consensus process over the entire
agents.
C. A LICA-based Closed-loop-type Framework
This subsection presents our closed-loop-type framework
based on locally-available information feedbacks. The basic
form of the stochastic decision policy for agent j in bin Bi is
such that
M j
k [i, l] :=
(1 − ωj
(1 − ωj
k[i])P j
k[i])P j
k [i, l] + ωj
k [i, l]
k[i]Sj
k[i, l]
if l = i
∀l (cid:54)= i.
(8)
k[i] ∈ [0, 1) is the weighting factor to have different
k [i, l] ∈ P
Here, ωj
weights on the agent's primary decision policy P j
and secondary decision policy Sj
k[i, l] ∈ P. It is defined as
k[i]
k[i] := exp(−τ jk) · Gj
ωj
(9)
k[i] ∈ [0, 1] is secondary
where τ j is a design parameter; and Gj
local-feedback gain, which is based on the difference between
k[i] and ¯Θ[i]. Note that ωj
¯µj
k[i],
while diminishing as time instant k goes to infinity.
Equation (8) can be represented in matrix form as
k[i] is mainly affected by Gj
k = (I − W j
M j
k Sj
k,
k )P j
k ∈ Pnbin×nbin and Sj
k + W j
(10)
k ∈ Pnbin×nbin are row-
where P j
stochastic matrices, called primary guidance matrix and sec-
k ∈ Rnbin×nbin is a
ondary guidance matrix, respectively. W j
diagonal matrix such that diag(W j
k[nbin]).
The stochastic state vector of agent j is governed by the
Markov process:
k[1], ..., ωj
k ) = (ωj
xj
k+1 = xj
kM j
k .
(11)
For now, we claim that, in order for this Markov system to
k must satisfy the following
achieve Desired Features 1-3, P j
requirements.
Requirement 1. P j
i.e.,
nbin(cid:88)
k is a matrix with row sums equal to one,
k [i, l] = 1,∀i.
P j
(R1)
l=1
k needs to be row-stochastic, for which it should
k [i, l] ≥ 0, ∀i, l. Note that this constraint is
In fact, P j
further hold that P j
implied by (R4), which will be introduced later.
Requirement 2. All diagonal elements are positive, i.e.,
k [i, i] > 0,∀i.
P j
(R2)
Requirement 3. The stationary distribution of P j
desired swarm distribution Θ, i.e.,
k is the
Θ[i]P j
k [i, l] = Θ[l],∀l.
(R3)
nbin(cid:88)
i=1
5
k [i, l] = Θ[l]P j
With consideration of (R1), this requirement can be fulfilled
k [l, i], ∀i. A Markov process satisfying
by Θ[i]P j
this property is said to be reversible.
Requirement 4. P j
P j
P j
k is irreducible such that
if Ck[i, l] = 1.
k [i, l] > 0
otherwise.
k [i, l] = 0
(R4)
k converges to
k[i] → ¯Θ[i] (or ¯ξj
k becomes close to I as ¯µj
Note that Ck is already assumed to be irreducible in Assump-
tion 3.
Requirement 5. P j
¯Θ, i.e.,
k [i, i] → 1 as ¯µj
P j
(R5)
Depending on the objectives of a user, P j
k[i] and
Gj
k[i] can be designed differently under given specific con-
straints. As long as P j
k holds (R1)-(R5) for all time instant
k and all agent j ∈ A, the aforementioned desired features
are achieved. Note that (R1)-(R4) are associated with Desired
Feature 1, whereas (R5) is with Desired Feature 2. The detailed
analysis will be described in the next subsection.
k[i] → 0), ∀i.
k, ¯ξj
k , Sj
Every agent executes the following algorithm at every time
instant. The detail regarding Line 6-8 will be presented in
Section IV, which shows examples of how to implement this
framework.
Algorithm 1 Decision making of agent j at time instant k
1: Identify the current bin Bi;
2: Identify neighbour bins Nk(i) (and Ck[i, l] ∀l);
3: Compute ¯Θ[i] using (5);
4: Obtain ¯µj
// Obtain the local information
k[i];
// Generate the stochastic decision policy
k[i] (using (6));
k [i, l] ∀l;
k[i, l] ∀l;
k[i];
k[i] using (9);
k [i, l] ∀l using (8);
5: Compute ¯ξj
6: Compute P j
7: Compute Sj
8: Compute Gj
9: Compute ωj
10: Compute M j
// Individually behave based on the policy
11: Generate a random number z ∈ unif[0, 1];
12: Select bin Bq such that
k [i, l] ≤ z <(cid:80)q
(cid:80)q−1
l=1 M j
l=1 M j
13: Move to the selected bin;
k [i, l];
D. Analysis
We first show that the Markov process in Equation (11)
holds Desired Feature 1 under the assumption that P j
k sat-
isfies the requirements (R1)-(R4) for each time instant. The
stochastic state of agent j at time instant k ≥ k0, governed by
the Markov process from an arbitrary initial state xj
, can be
k0
written as:
xj
k = xj
k0
k0+1 ··· M j
M j
U j
k0,k := xj
M j
k0
k−1.
(12)
k0
For ease of analysis, we assume that every agent j knows any
necessary information correctly, i.e., ¯µj
k[i] = ¯µ(cid:63)
k[i].
Theorem 1. Provided that the requirements (R1)-(R4) are sat-
isfied for all time instants k ≥ k0, it holds that limk→∞ xj
k =
Θ pointwise for all agents, irrespective of the initial condition.
6
k0,k = xj
· limk→∞ U j
Proof. This claim can be proved by following similar steps in
proving [13, Theorem 4]. The claim is true if limk→∞ xj
k =
· 1(cid:62)Θ = Θ. In order for that,
xj
k0
the matrix product U j
k0,k should (i) be strongly ergodic and
(ii) have Θ as its unique limit vector, i.e., limk→∞ U j
k0,k =
1(cid:62)Θ. We will show that the two conditions are valid under
the assumption that (R1)-(R4) are satisfied.
k0
k, ∀k; and (c) M j
Lemma 5 in Appendix describes the characteristics of M j
k
and U j
k0,k, which will be used for the rest of this proof. From
this lemma, (a) U j
k0,k is primitive (thus, regular); (b) there
exists a positive lower bound γ for M j
k is
asymptotically homogeneous. Then, from [33, Theorem 4.15,
p.150] it follows that U j
k0,k is strongly ergodic, which fulfils
the condition (i).
Let ek ∈ Pnbin be the unique stationary distribution vector
k = ek). Due to the prior
corresponding to M j
condition (b) and the fact
k is irreducible for
∀k ≥ k0, it follows from [33, Theorem 4.12, p.149] that
the asymptotical homogeneity of M j
k with respect to Θ (i.e.,
k = Θ) is equivalent to limk→∞ ek = e and
limk→∞ ΘM j
Θ = e, where e is a limit vector. According to [33, Corollary,
p.150], under the prior conditions (b) and (d), if U j
k0,k is
strongly ergodic with its unique limit vector v, then v = e.
Hence, it turns out that the unique limit vector of U j
k0,k is Θ
k0,k = 1(cid:62)Θ). Thereby, the condition (ii) is also
(i.e, limk→∞ U j
fulfilled.
k (i.e., ekM j
that (d) M j
k, Gj
Theorem 1 implies that the stochastic state of any agent
eventually converges to the desired swarm distribution, regard-
less of Sj
k[i] and (R5). In other words, even if (R5) is not
satisfied, the Markov system can converge to Θ. However, the
system induces unnecessary transitions of agents even after
being close enough to the desired swarm distribution, which
means that Desired Feature 2 does not hold.
For now, we present that Desired Feature 2 can be obtained
by (R5) and Theorem 2, which will be described later. Suppose
that, for every bin Bi, ¯µ(cid:63)
k[i] converges to and eventually
reaches ¯Θ[i] at some time instant k. The following shows
that at this moment it also holds that µ(cid:63)
k reaches Θ. From
k[i] = ¯Θ[i] ∀i, it
Equations (4)-(5) and the supposition of ¯µ(cid:63)
follows that 1/ ¯Θ[i] · nk[i] =(cid:80)∀j:Bj∈Nk(i) nk[j] ∀i. This can
be rearranged as:
nk · B := nk · (Ck − X) = 0
(13)
where X ∈ Rnbin×nbin is a diagonal matrix such that
diag(X) = (1/ ¯Θ[1], 1/ ¯Θ[2], ..., 1/ ¯Θ[nbin]); Ck is the com-
municational connectivity matrix (in Definition 7); and nk ∈
Rnbin is a row vector such that the i-th element indicates nk[i],
i.e., the number of agents in bin Bi at time instant k.
Lemma 1. Given nbin bins communicationally-connected as
a tree-type topology, the rank of its corresponding matrix B
in Equation (13) is nbin − 1.
(a) Tree-type
(b) Strongly-connected
Fig. 2. Examples of simple bin topologies to help Lemma 1 & 2: (a) tree-
type; (b) strongly-connected. The red line in (b) indicates a newly-added route
between bin B1 and B4 based on the topology in (a).
Proof. The matrix B ∈ Rnbin×nbin can be linearly decom-
posed into ne of the same-sized matrices B(i,j), where ne is
the number of edges in the underlying graph of Ck. Here,
B(i,j) ∈ Rnbin×nbin is a matrix such that B(i,j)[i, i] =
−Θ[j]/Θ[i] and B(i,j)[j, j] = −Θ[i]/Θ[j]; B(i,j)[i, j] =
B(i,j)[j, i] = 1; and all the other entries are zero. For example,
consider that four bins are given and connected as shown in
Figure 2(a). Clearly, B = B(1,2) + B(2,3) + B(2,4), where
− Θ[2]
Θ[1]
1
B =
− Θ[1]+Θ[3]+Θ[4]
1
Θ[2]
1
0
1
− Θ[2]
Θ[3]
0
0
1
0
− Θ[2]
Θ[4]
,
0
0
B(1,2) =
B(2,3) =
B(2,4) =
1
− Θ[2]
Θ[1]
1
0
0
1
− Θ[1]
Θ[2]
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 − Θ[3]
0
0
Θ[2]
1
0
0
0
0 − Θ[4]
0
0
Θ[2]
0
1
0
1
− Θ[2]
Θ[3]
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0 − Θ[2]
Θ[4]
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
,
,
.
1
1
It is trivial that the rank of every B(i,j) is one, and the matrix
has only one linearly independent column vector, denoted by
v(i,j). Without loss of generality, we consider v(i,j) ∈ Rnbin
as a column vector such that the i-th entry is − 1
Θ[i], the j-th
Θ[j], and the others are zero: for an instance, v(1,2) =
entry is
[− 1
Θ[2] , 0, 0](cid:62).
Θ[1] ,
It is obvious that v(i,j) and v(k,l) are linearly independent
when the bin pairs {i, j} and {k, l} are different. This implies
that the number of linearly independent column vectors of B
is the same as that of edges in the topology. Hence, for a tree-
type topology of nbin bins, since there exist nbin − 1 edges,
the rank of the corresponding matrix B is nbin − 1.
Lemma 2. Given a strongly-connected topology of bins, the
rank of its corresponding matrix B is not affected by adding
a new edge that directly connects any two existing bins.
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Proof. We will show that this claim is valid even when a
tree-type topology is given, as it is a sufficient condition for
strong-connectivity. Given the tree-type topology in Figure
2(a), suppose that bin B1 and B4 are newly connected. Then,
the new topology becomes as shown in Figure 2(b), and it has
new corresponding matrix Bnew, where Bnew = B + B(1,4).
As explained in the proof of Lemma 1, the rank of B(1,4) is one
and it has only linearly independent vector v(1,4). However,
this vector can be produced as a linear combination of the
existing v vectors of B (i.e., v(1,4) = v(1,2) + v(2,4)). Thus,
the rank of Bnew retains that of B. Without loss of generality,
this implies that the rank of B of a given strongly-connected
topology is not affected by adding a new edge that directly
connects any two existing bins.
Thanks to Lemma 1 and 2, we end up with the following
k to Θ.
corollary and theorem:
Corollary 1. Given nbin bins that are communicationally
strongly-connected, the rank of its corresponding B is nbin−1.
Theorem 2. Given nbin bins that are communicationally
k to ¯Θ is equivalent to
strongly-connected, convergence of ¯µ(cid:63)
convergence of µ(cid:63)
Proof. From Equation (5), it can be said that Θ·B = 0. When
k[i] is assumed to converge to ¯Θ[i] at some time instant k for
¯µ(cid:63)
every bin Bi, Equation (13) is valid (i.e., nk · B = 0). Since
the nullity of B is one, due to Corollary 1, there is only one
linearly-independent row-vector a ∈ Rnbin such that a·B = 0.
Hence, it is obvious that nk = · Θ, where is an arbitrary
k = Θ[i], ∀i :
scalar value. This implies that µ(cid:63)
Bi ∈ B. Therefore, convergence of µ(cid:63)
k to Θ is equivalent to
convergence of ¯µ(cid:63)
k[i] = nk[i]/nA
k to ¯Θ.
From this theorem and (R5), Desired Feature 2 finally holds.
k satisfies (R5), it can be said from Theorem
k converges to Θ. And this is also
k, which satisfies Desired
Corollary 2. If P j
2 that P j
the case for the Markov process M j
Feature 2.
k becomes I as µ(cid:63)
In order for each agent j in bin Bi to generate the time-
varying stochastic decision policy M j
k [i, l] in Equation (8), the
agent only needs to obtain its local information within ANk(i).
Therefore, Desired Feature 3 is also achieved.
Remark 3 (Robustness against dynamic changes of agents
and those of bins). The proposed framework is robust with
against dynamic changes in the number of agents and bins.
Similarly to what is claimed in [13, Remark 8], as each agent
behaves based on its current bin location and local information
in a memoryless manner, Desired Features 1-3 in the proposed
framework won't be affected by inclusion or exclusion of
agents in a swarm. Furthermore, provided changes on bins
are perceived by at least nearby agents in the corresponding
neighbour bins, robustness against those changes can be hold
in the proposed framework. This is because agents in bin
Bi utilise only local
k[i],
and are not required to know any information from other
far-away bins. Moreover, the proposed framework does not
need to recalculate Θ, reflecting such changes on bins, so
information such as ¯Θ[i] and ¯µj
that (cid:80)∀i Θ[i] = 1 because computing ¯Θ[i] in (5) includes
7
normalisation of Θ.
IV. IMPLEMENTATION EXAMPLES
A. Example I: Minimising Travelling Expenses
This section provides examples on implementations of the
framework proposed. In particular, this subsection addresses
a problem of minimising travelling expenses of agents during
convergence to a desired swarm distribution.
This problem can be defined as: given a cost matrix
Ek ∈ Rnbin×nbin in which each element Ek[i, l] represents
the travelling expense of an agent from bin Bi to Bl, find P j
such that
k
nbin(cid:88)
nbin(cid:88)
min
Ek[i, l]P j
k [i, l]
i=1
subject to (R1)-(R5) and
l=1
M Θ[l]f ( ¯ξj
k[i], ¯ξj
k[l])f (Ek[i, l]) ≤ P j
k [i, l]
if Ck[i, l] = 1, ∀i (cid:54)= l
k[i], ¯ξj
where M ∈ (0, 1] is a design parameter. f ( ¯ξj
is set by
f ( ¯ξj
k[i], ¯ξj
k[l]) = max( ¯ξj
k[i], ¯ξj
k[l])
k[l]) ∈ (0, 1]
(15)
k[i] or ¯ξj
k[l] and diminishes as ¯ξj
the value monotonically increases with regard to
so that
increase of either ¯ξj
k[i] and
¯ξj
k[l] simultaneously reduces. This value controls the lower
bound of P j
k [i, l] in Equation (14). Θ[l] enables agents in bin
Bi to be distributed over its neighbour bins in proportion to the
desired swarm distribution. f (Ek[i, l]) ∈ (0, 1] is a scalar that
monotonically decreases as Ek[i, l] increases (see Equation
(29) for instances), encouraging agents in bin Bi to avoid
spending higher transition expenses. Note that we assume that
Ek is symmetric; Ek[i, l] > 0 if Ak[i, l] = 1; and its diagonal
entries are zero.
Corollary 3. The optimal matrix P j
given by: ∀i, l ∈ {1, ..., nbin} and i (cid:54)= l,
k of the problem (P1) is
(P1)
(14)
(cid:40)
P j
k [i, l] =
and ∀i = l,
M Θ[l]f ( ¯ξj
0
k[i], ¯ξj
k[l])f (Ek[i, l])
k [i, i] = 1 −(cid:88)
P j
∀l(cid:54)=i
if Ck[i, l] = 1
otherwise
(16)
P j
k [i, l].
(17)
Proof. We can prove this by following the proof of [13,
Corollary 1]. Suppose that the problem is only subject to (R4)
and (14), without (R1)-(R3) and (R5). Then, the off-diagonal
elements of an optimal matrix should be their corresponding
lower bounds in (14) if Ck[i, l] = 1. The diagonal elements of
the matrix do not affect the objective function due to the fact
that Ek[i, i] = 0,∀i. Accordingly, the matrix P j
k that holds
(16) and (17) is also an optimal matrix for the simplified
problem.
Let us now consider
k[i], ¯ξj
(cid:80)∀l(cid:54)=i Θ[l] < 1, P j
(R1)-(R3) and (R5). Since M ,
k[l]) and f (Ek[i, l]) are upper-bounded by 1 and
k [i, i] in (17) is always positive for all i,
which fulfils (R2). It is also obvious that (R1) is satisfied by
f ( ¯ξj
Equation (17). From Equation (16), it holds that Θ[i]P j
k [i, l] =
Θ[l]P j
k [l, i], complying with (R3). Since (R1)-(R4) are satis-
fied, the Markov process is converging to a desired distribution
due to Theorem 1. Noting that f ( ¯ξj
k[l]) diminishes as
k → ¯Θ), (R5) is also fulfilled
¯ξj
k gets close to zero (i.e., ¯µj
by Equation (17). Hence, P j
k is the optimal solution for the
problem (P1).
k[i], ¯ξj
For reducing unnecessary transitions of agents during this
process, it is favourable that agents in bin Bi such that ¯µj
k[i] ≤
¯Θ[i] (i.e., underpopulated) do not deviate. To this end, we set
Sj
k = I and Gj
k[i] as follows [13]:
Gj
k[i] :=
exp(β( ¯Θ[i] − ¯µj
exp(β ¯Θ[i] − ¯µj
k[i]))
k[i])
.
(18)
that (cid:80)∀l(cid:54)=i P j
k [i, l] ≤ (cid:80)∀l:Bl∈Nk(i)\Bi
The gain value is depicted in Figure 3(a) with regard to β.
Remark 4 (Increase of Convergence Rate). Due to the fact
Θ[l] from Equation
(16), the total outflux of agents from bin Bi becomes smaller as
the bin has fewer connections with other bins. This eventually
makes the convergence rate of the Markov process slower.
Adding an additional variable into P j
k [i, l] in (16) does not
affect the obtainment of Desired Features 1-3 as long as P j
k
satisfies (R1)-(R5). Thus, in order to enhance the convergence
rate under the requirements, one can add
Θ := min{
(cid:80)∀s:Bs∈Nk(l)\Bl
Θ[s]
Θ[s]
1
,
}
(19)
into P j
k [i, l], as follows:
1
(cid:80)∀s:Bs∈Nk(i)\Bi
ΘM Θ[l]f ( ¯ξj
0
k[i], ¯ξj
k[l])f (Ek[i, l])
P j
k [i, l] =
if Ck[i, l] = 1
otherwise,
(20)
which can be substituted for Equation (16).
Algorithm 2 Subroutine of Algorithm 1 (Line 6 -- 8) for P1
1: Compute P j
2: Set Sj
3: Compute Gj
k [i, l] ∀l using (16) (or (20)) and (17);
k[i, l] = 0,∀l (cid:54)= i
k[i, i] = 1 and Sj
k[i] using (18);
B. Example II: Maximising Convergence Rate within Upper
Flux Bounds
This subsection presents an example in which the specific
objective is to maximise the convergence rate under upper
bounds regarding transitions of agents between bins, denoted
by upper flux bounds. The bounds can be interpreted as safety
constraints in terms of collision avoidance and congestion:
higher congestions may induce higher collisions amongst
agents, which may bring unfavourable effects on system
performance. A similar problem is addressed by an open-loop-
type algorithm in [17], where transitions of agents are limited
only at a desired swarm distribution. This restriction is not for
considering the aforementioned safety constraints, but rather
8
for mitigating the trade-off between convergence rate and long-
term system efficiency.
For the sake of imposing upper flux bounds during the entire
process, we consider the following one-way flux constraint:
∀i,∀l (cid:54)= i.
k [i, l] ≤ c(i,l),
nk[i]P j
(21)
This means that the number of agents moving from bin Bi
to Bl is upper-bounded by c(i,l). The bound value is assumed
to be very small with consideration of mission environments
such as the number of agents, the number of bins, and their
topology. Otherwise, all the agents can be distributed over
the bins very soon so that the upper flux bounds become
meaningless, and thus the corresponding problem can be
trivial.
Regarding the convergence rate of a Markov chain, there
are respective analytical methods depending on whether it
is time-homogeneous or time-inhomogeneous. For a time-
homogeneous Markov chain, if the matrix is irreducible, the
second largest eigenvalue of the matrix is used as an index
indicating its asymptotic convergence rate [34, p.389]. In
contrast, for a time-inhomogeneous Markov chain, coefficients
of ergodicity can be utilised as a substitute for the second
largest eigenvalue, which is not useful for this case [35].
Particularly, this paper uses the following proper coefficient
of ergodicity, amongst others:
Definition 8. (Coefficient of Ergodicity [33, pp. 136 -- 137]).
Given a stochastic matrix M ∈ Pn×n, a (proper) coefficient
of ergodicity 0 ≤ τ (M) ≤ 1 can be defined as:
M[i, s] − M[l, s].
τ (M) := max∀s
max∀i,∀l
(22)
A coefficient of ergodicity is said to be proper if τ (M) = 0
if and only if M = 1(cid:62) · v, where v ∈ Pn is a row-stochastic
vector.
p.137]: τ (M1M2 ···Mr) ≤ (cid:81)r
The convergence rate of a time-inhomogeneous Markov
chain Mk ∈ Pn×n, ∀k > 1 can be maximised by minimising
τ (Mk) at each time instant k, thanks to [33, Theorem 4.8,
k=1 τ (Mk). Hence, the ob-
jective of the specific problem considered in this subsection
can be defined as: find P j
k such that
min τ (P j
k )
(23)
subject to (R1)-(R5) and (21).
Remark 5 (Advantages of the coefficient of ergodicity in (22)).
Other proper coefficients in [33, p. 137] such as
τ1(M) = 1 − min
min (M[i, s],M[l, s])
(cid:88)
τ2(M) = 1 −(cid:88)
∀s
i,l
or
(M[i, s]) .
min∀i
∀s
may have the trivial case such that τ1(P j
k ) = 1)
for some time instant k, when they are applied to this problem.
This is because, given a strongly-connected topology Ck, there
may exist a pair of bins Bi and Bl such that P j
k [i, s] = 0
k [l, s] = 0, ∀s. To avoid this trivial case, the work in
or P j
k ) = 1 (or τ2(P j
[13] instead utilises τ1((P j
k )dCk ) as the proper coefficient of
ergodicity, where dCk denotes the diameter of the underlying
graph of Ck. However, this implies that agents in bin Bi are
required to additionally access the information from other bins
beside Nk(i), causing additional communicational costs. The
coefficient of ergodicity in (22) does not suffer this issue. Note
that τ (M) ≤ τ1(M) ≤ τ2(M) [33, p. 137].
Finding the optimal solution for the problem (23) is another
challenging issue, which can be called fastest mixing Markov
chain problem. Since the purpose of this section is to show an
example of how to implement our proposed framework, we
heuristically address this problem at this moment.
k ) = max∀i,∀s(P j
Suppose that matrix P j
k satisfying (R1)-(R5) is given,
and the topology of bins is not fully-connected. Since the
matrix is non-negative and there exists at
least one zero-
the coefficient of ergodicity
value entry in each column,
can be said as τ (P j
k [i, s]). Assuming that
k [i, l] ≤ 1/Nk(i), which is generally true due
max∀l(cid:54)=i P j
that each diagonal
to the smallness of c(i,l),
element of P j
k is the largest value in each row. Thus, we can
say that τ (P j
k ) = max∀i P j
k [i, i]. The objective function of
this problem can be said as maxmin∀i
k [i, l] because
minimising the maximum diagonal element of a stochastic
matrix is equivalent to maximising the minimum row-sum of
its off-diagonal elements.
(cid:80)∀l(cid:54)=i P j
turns out
it
We turn now to the constraints (R1)-(R5) and (21). In order
to comply with (R3), we initially set P j
k[i, l],
where Qj
k is a symmetric matrix that we will design now.
The constraint (21), (R4), and the symmetricity of Qk are
integrated into the following constraint: ∀i, ∀l (cid:54)= i,
k [i, l] = Θ[l]Qj
min(
c(i,l)
nk[i]Θ[l]
,
c(l,i)
nk[l]Θ[i]
) ≥ Qj
k[i, l] > 0
if Ck[i, l] = 1
For (R2) and (R5), we set the diagonal entries of P j
k as
Qj
k[i, l] = 0
otherwise.
(24)
This can be rewritten, with consideration of
(R1)
(i.e.,
∀i.
k[i],
(cid:80)nbin
l=1 Θ[l]Qj
k [i, i] ≥ 1 − ¯ξj
P j
(cid:88)
k[i, l] = 1,∀i), as
Θ[l]Qj
∀l(cid:54)=i
9
Q[i], ¯(cid:48)
Q[l]} (Line 4). After curtailing Qj
possible, we temporarily take (cid:48)
Q[i, l] as the maximum value
of {¯(cid:48)
k[i, l] by applying
(cid:48)
Q[i, l], we obtain the corresponding lowering factor again
(Line 5 -- 6). The minimum value is taken for both maintaining
Qj
k symmetric and satisfying (25) (Line 7). Then, the corre-
sponding stochastic decision policy is generated based on the
resultant Qj
k[i] = 0 for all
time instants, all bins, and all agents, so M j
k (Line 9 -- 10). Note that we set Gj
k = P j
k .
Algorithm 3 Subroutine of Algorithm 1 (Line 6) for P1
nk[l]Θ[i] ), ∀Bl ∈ Nk(i) \ {Bi};
¯ξj
k[i]
, 1);
1: P j
2: Qj
nk[i]Θ[l] ,
k to satisfy (25)
3: ¯(cid:48)
4: (cid:48)
5: Qj
k satisfying (24)
c(l,i)
// Initialise P j
k [i, l] = 0, ∀l ∈ {1, 2, ..., nbin};
k
// Compute Qj
k[i, l] = min( c(i,l)
(cid:80)∀l(cid:54)=i Θ[l]Qj
Q[i], ¯(cid:48)
(cid:80)∀l(cid:54)=i Θ[l]Qj
k [i, i] = 1 −(cid:80)∀l(cid:54)=i P j
// Lower Qj
Q[i] = min(
Q[i, l] = max(¯(cid:48)
k[i, l] := (cid:48)
6: ¯Q[i] = min(
7: Q[i, l] = min(¯Q[i], ¯Q[l]), ∀Bl ∈ Nk(i) \ {Bi};
k[i, l], ∀Bl ∈ Nk(i) \ {Bi};
8: Qj
Q[l]), ∀Bl ∈ Nk(i) \ {Bi};
k[i, l], ∀Bl ∈ Nk(i) \ {Bi};
k[i, l], ∀Bl ∈ Nk(i) \ {Bi};
// Compute P j
k
k [i, l] = Θ[l]Qj
k[i, l] := Q[i, l]Qj
Q[i, l]Qj
¯ξj
k[i]
k [i, l];
, 1);
k[i,l]
k[i,l]
9: P j
10: P j
C. Example III: Local-information-based Quorum Model
This subsection shows that
the proposed framework is
able to incorporate a quorum model, which is introduced in
[14], [15]. In this model, if a bin is overpopulated above
a certain level of predefined threshold called quorum, the
probabilities that agents in the bin move to neighbour bins
are temporarily increased, rather than following given P j
k .
This feature eventually brings an advantage to the convergence
performance of the swarm.
follows: ∀i, l ∈ {1, ..., nbin} and ∀j ∈ A,
To this end, we set the secondary guidance matrix Sj
k as
k[i],
∀i.
(25)
Sj
k[i, l] :=
1/Nk(i)
0
if Ck[i, l] = 1
otherwise.
(26)
Then, the reduced problem can be defined as: find Qj
that
k such
maxmin∀i
Θ[l]Qj
k[i, l]
(P2)
This matrix makes agents in a bin equally disseminated over
its neighbour bins. In addition, the secondary feedback gain
Gj
k[i] is defined as
k[i, l] ≤ ¯ξj
(cid:88)
∀l(cid:54)=i
(cid:40)
(cid:32)
subject to (24) and (25).
The algorithm for this problem is shown in Algorithm 3.
If we neglect (25), an optimal solution can be obtained by
making Qj
k[i, l] equal to its upper bound of (24) (Line 2).
However, this solution may not hold (25). Thus, we lower the
entries of Qj
k to satisfy (25), while keeping them symmetric
and as higher as possible (Line 3 -- 9). In details, Line 3 (or
Line 6) ensures the constraint (25) for each bin Bi in a way
that, if this is not the case, obtains the necessary lowering
factor ¯(cid:48)
k as higher as
Q[i] (or ¯Q[i]). In order to keep Qj
(cid:16)
(cid:17)(cid:33)−1
Gj
k[i] :=
1 + exp
γ(qi − ¯µj
k[i]
¯Θ[i]
)
,
(27)
where γ > 0 is a design parameter, and qi > 1 is the quorum
for bin Bi. The value of the gain is shown in Figure 3(b),
k[i]/ ¯Θ[i] becomes higher
varying depending on γ and qi. As ¯µj
than the quorum, Gj
k[i, l] becomes
more dominant than P j
k [i, l]). The steepness of the function at
the quorum value is regulated by γ.
k[i] gets close to 1 (i.e., Sj
The existing quorum models in [14], [15] require each agent
k[i], which implies that the total number of agents
to know µ(cid:63)
10
k[i]) as R+
1. We refer to a set of bins where agents are ready to use
their respective local information (e.g., ¯µj
k , and a
set of the other bins as R−
k . It is assumed that each agent
j in bin Bi ∈ R+
k also knows the local information of its
neighbour bin Bl ∈ Nk(i) if Bl ∈ R+
k . As shown in Line 2, the
agent follows an existing procedure as long as all information
required to generate P j
k[l]
for Algorithm 2, and ¯(cid:48)
Q[l] for Algorithm 3). On the
contrary, if any local information of its neighbour bin Bl ∈
Nk(i) is not available, the probability to transition to the bin
is set as zero (Line 3). In the meantime, each agent for whom
necessary local information is not ready does not deviate but
remains at the bin it belonged to. Equivalently, it can be said
that P j
k [i, l] is available (e.g., ¯µj
Q[i] and ¯(cid:48)
k [i, l] = 0, ∀l (cid:54)= i (Line 6).
k [i, i] = 1 and P j
k[i] and ¯µj
Hereafter, for the sake of differentiation from the original
P j
k generated in a synchronous environment, let us refer to the
matrix resulted by Algorithm 5 as asynchronous primary guid-
ance matrix, denoted by ¯P j
k . Accordingly, the asynchronous
Markov matrix can be defined as:
k := (I − W j
¯M j
k + W j
k ) ¯P j
k Sj
k.
Here, we show that this asynchronous Markov process also
and (3)(cid:80)nbin
converges to the desired swarm distribution.
Lemma 3. The matrix ¯Pk, for every time instant k, satisfies
the following properties: (1) row-stochastic; (2) all diagonal
elements are positive, and all other elements are non-negative;
trivial that (cid:80)nbin
i=1 Θ[i] ¯P j
Proof. The matrix ¯P j
6 in Algorithm 5. Furthermore, given that P j
the property (2) is valid for ¯P j
∀i.
k [i, l] = Θ[l],∀l.
k is row-stochastic because of Line 4 and
k satisfies (R2),
k [i, i] for
k [i, i] ≥ P j
Let us now turn to the property (3). For ∀Bi ∈ R−
k , it is
k [l, i] = Θ[i] because of Line 6. For
k [i, l] =
k [i, l] for ∀Bl ∈
P j
k [i, l].
k [i, i] +(cid:80)∀l:Bl∈R−
l=1 Θ[l] ¯P j
∀Bi ∈ R+
k [l, i] = 0 for ∀Bl ∈ R−
¯P j
R+
k \ {Bi} and (iii) ¯P j
(cid:88)
nbin(cid:88)
We apply the findings into the following equation:
(cid:88)
k , it turns out from Algorithm 5 that (i) ¯P j
k ; (ii) ¯P j
k [i, i] = P j
k because ¯P j
k [i, l] = P j
∀l:Bl∈R−
k [l, i] =
Θ[l] ¯P j
Θ[l] ¯P j
k [l, i]
l=1
k
k
+
∀l:Bl∈R+
k \{Bi}
Θ[l] ¯P j
k [l, i] + Θ[i] ¯P j
k [i, i].
(28)
The first term of the right hand side becomes zero because of
(i). Due to (ii) and the fact that Θ[i]P j
k [i, l] = Θ[l]P j
k [l, i]
∀l,
k \{Bi} P j
k [i, l].
The last term becomes Θ[i]P j
P j
k [i, l]
because of (iii). Putting all of them together, Equation (28)
k [i, i] +
the second term becomes Θ[i](cid:80)∀l:Bl∈R+
is equivalent to Θ[i](cid:80)∀l:Bl∈R+
k [i, l] = Θ[i](cid:80)nbin
Θ[i](cid:80)∀l:Bl∈R−
k [i, i] + Θ[i](cid:80)∀l:Bl∈R−
k [i, l] + Θ[i]P j
k [i, l] = Θ[i].
k \{Bi} P j
l=1 P j
P j
k
k
Lemma 4. If the union of a set of underlying graphs of
{ ¯Pk1 , ¯Pk1+1, ..., ¯Pk2−1} is strongly-connected, then the matrix
product ¯Pk1,k2 := ¯Pk1
¯Pk1+1 ··· ¯Pk2−1 is irreducible.
(a) P1
(b) the Quorum Model
Fig. 3. The secondary feedback gains Gj
k[i] depending on the associated
design parameters: (1) for P1 (Eqn. (18)); (2) for the quorum model (Eqn.
(27))
nA
k should be tracked in real time. It could be possible that
some agents in a swarm unexpectedly become faulted by
internal or external effects during a mission, which hinders
for other alive agents from keeping track of nA
k in a timely
manner. On the contrary, this requirement is not the case for
the quorum model in this subsection, and it works by using
the local information available from ANk(i).
Algorithm 4 Subroutine of Algorithm 1 (Line 7-8) for the
quorum-based method
1: Compute Sj
2: Compute Gj
k[i, l] ∀l using (26);
k[i] using (27);
V. ASYNCHRONOUS IMPLEMENTATION
A synchronous process induces extra time delays and inter-
agent communications to make entire agents, who may have
different timescales for obtaining new information and make
decisions, remain in sync. Such unnecessary waiting time and
communications may cause unfavourable effects on mission
performance or even may not be realisable in practice [23].
In the previous sections, it was assumed that a swarm of
agents act synchronously at every time instant. Here we show
that the proposed framework allows agents to operate in an
asynchronous manner, assuming that the union of underlying
graphs of the corresponding Markov matrices across some time
intervals is frequently and infinitely strongly-connected.
Suppose that an algorithm to compute P j
k that satisfies (R1)-
(R5) in a synchronous environment is given (e.g., Algorithm 2
or 3). We propose an asynchronous implementation, as shown
in Algorithm 5, which substitutes for Line 6 in Algorithm
k [i, l] (Substi-
k & isnonempty(R+
Algorithm 5 Asynchronous Construction of P j
tute for Line 6 of Algorithm 1)
1: if Bi ∈ R+
k \ {Bi}) then
2:
3:
4:
5: else
P j
k [i, i] = 1; P j
6:
7: end if
Compute P j
k [i, l] = 0, ∀Bl ∈ R−
P j
k ;
P j
k [i, l];
k [i, i] = 1 −(cid:80)∀l(cid:54)=i P j
k [i, l] as usual, ∀Bl ∈ R+
k [i, l] = 0, ∀l (cid:54)= i;
k \ {Bi};
-2-1.5-1-0.500.511.5200.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91 = 1 = 5 = 10 = 100(underpopulated) (overpopulated) 00.511.522.533.5400.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91qi = 2, = 1qi = 2, = 10qi = 2, = 100qi = 1.5, = 10(underpopulated) (overpopulated) k=k1
k=k1
graph of (cid:80)k2−1
γ(cid:80)k2−1
Proof. Since the union of a set of underlying graphs of
{ ¯Pk1, ¯Pk1+1, ..., ¯Pk2−1} is strongly-connected, the underlying
¯Pk is also strongly-connected. Noting that
every ¯Pk, ∀k ∈ {k1, k1 + 1, ..., k2 − 1} is a nonnegative
nbin × nbin matrix and its diagonal elements are positive (by
Lemma 3), it follows from [36, Lemma 2] that ¯Pk1,k2 ≥
¯Pk, where γ > 0. This implies that the underlying
graph of ¯Pk1,k2 is strongly-connected, and thus the matrix
¯Pk1,k2 is irreducible.
Theorem 3. Suppose that
there exists an infinite se-
quence of non-overlapping time intervals [ki, ki+1), i =
the union of underlying graphs
0, 1, 2, ...,
of { ¯Pki, ¯Pki+1, ..., ¯Pki+1−1} in each interval
is strongly-
connected. Let the stochastic state of agent j at time in-
stant k ≥ k0, governed by the corresponding Markov pro-
cess from an arbitrary state xj
k0,k :=
k0
xj
k = Θ
k0
pointwise for all agents, irrespective of the initial condition.
Proof. Thanks to Lemma 3 and 4, the matrix product ¯Pki,ki+1
for each time interval [ki, ki+1) satisfies (R1)-(R4). Therefore,
one can prove this theorem by similarly following the proof
of Theorem 1.
¯U j
k−1. Then, it holds that limk→∞ xj
k0+1 ··· ¯M j
¯M j
, be xj
k = xj
k0
such that
¯M j
k0
VI. NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS
A. Effects of Primary Local-feedback Gain ¯ξj
k[i]
Depending on the shape of primary feedback gain ¯ξj
k[i], the
performance of the proposed framework changes, especially
with respect
to convergence rate, fraction of transitioning
agents, and residual convergence error. Let us first investigate
the effect of changes in the feedback gain using Algorithm 2
with Equation (20).
We consider a scenario where a set of 2, 000 agents are
supposed to be distributed over an arena consisting of 10× 10
bins, as depicted in Figure 1. There are vertical and horizontal
paths between adjacent bins. Note that the agents are allowed
to move at most 3 paths away within a unit time instant. All
the agents start from a bin, which reflects the fact that they
are generally deployed from a base station at the beginning
of a mission. The desired swarm distribution Θ is uniform-
randomly generated at each scenario. The agents are assumed
to estimate necessary information correctly, e.g. ¯µj
k[i].
For the rigorous validation, the performance of the proposed
algorithm will be compared with that of the GICA-based
algorithm [13]. To this end, f (Ek[i, l]) is set to be the same
as the corresponding coefficient in [13, Corollary 1]:
k[i] = ¯µ(cid:63)
f (Ek[i, l]) := 1 −
Ek[i, l]
Ek,max + E
(29)
where Ek,max is the maximum element of the travelling
expense matrix Ek, and E is a user-design parameter. Ek[i, l]
is defined as a linear function based on the distance between
bin Bi and Bl:
Ek[i, l] := E1 · ∆s(i,l) + E0
(30)
where ∆s(i,l) is the minimum required number of paths from
Bi to Bl; E1 and E0 are user-design parameters. The agents
11
(a) Primary Local-feedback Gain
Fraction
(b)
Agents
of Transitioning
(c) Convergence Error
(d) Convergence Error (zoomed-in)
k[i] with different setting of α: (a) the value of ¯ξj
Fig. 4. Performance comparison depending on the primary local-feedback
gain ¯ξj
k[i]; (b) the fraction
of transitioning agents; (b) the convergence performance; (d) the convergence
performance (zoomed-in for time instant between 2000 and 4000)
are assumed to follow any shortest route when they transition
between two bins. The design parameters are set as follows:
E1 = 1 and E0 = 0.5 in (30); E = 0.1 in (29); ξ = 10−9
in (6); M = 1 in (20); β = 1.8× 105 in (18); and τ j = 10−6
in (9).
As a performance index for the closeness between the cur-
k and Θ, we use Hellinger Distance,
rent swarm distribution µ(cid:63)
i.e.,
(cid:19)2
µ(cid:63)
k[i]
,
(cid:118)(cid:117)(cid:117)(cid:116)nbin(cid:88)
i=1
(cid:18)(cid:112)Θ[i] −(cid:113)
DH (Θ, µ(cid:63)
k) :=
1√
2
Hellinger Distance is known as a "concept of measuring
similarity between two distributions" [37] and is utilised as
a feedback gain in the existing work [13].
More importantly, to examine the effects of the shape of
¯ξj
k[i], we set α in (6) as 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1 and 1.2.
Figure 4 reveals that the convergence rate can be traded off
against the fraction of transitioning agents and the residual
convergence error. As ¯ξj
k[i] becomes more concave, i.e. the
value of α decreases, the summation of off-diagonal entries
of P j
k becomes higher, leading to more transitioning agents,
but a faster convergence rate. At the same time, a higher value
k[i] even at a low value of ¯Θ[i]−µj
k[i] gives rise to unnec-
of ¯ξj
essarily higher off-diagonal entries of P j
k . Hence, the swarm
tends to be prevented from converging to the desired swarm
distribution properly, resulting in higher residual convergence
error.
B. Comparison with a GICA-based Method
Let us now compare the LICA-based method for (P1) with
the GICA-based method in [13]. The scenario considered is the
same as the one in the previous subsection except for α = 0.6.
00.20.40.60.81Primary feedback gain when = 100.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91Primary feedback gain with varying = 0.2 = 0.4 = 0.6 = 0.8 = 1.0 = 1.205001000150020002500300035004000Time Instant0510152025Fraction of Transitioning Agents (%) = 0.2 = 0.4 = 0.6 = 0.8 = 1.0 = 1.2Time Instant05001000150020002500300035004000Convergence Error ( DH(Θ, µk*) )00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91α = 0.2α = 0.4α = 0.6α = 0.8α = 1.0α = 1.2Time Instant350036003700380039004000Convergence Error ( DH(Θ, µk*) )00.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.08α = 0.2α = 0.4α = 0.6α = 0.8α = 1.0α = 1.2 12
(a) Convergence Error
(b) Fraction of Transitioning Agents
(c) Cumulative Travel Expenses
Fig. 5. Performance comparison between the proposed method (LICA) with the existing method (GICA): (a) the error between the current swarm status and
the desired status, shown as Hellinger Distance; (b) the fraction of agents who transitions between any two bins; (c) the cumulative travel expenses of all the
agents from the beginning.
method and those by the compared method are 1.72× 104 and
1.96 × 104, respectively, and their ratio is 0.878. This is also
confirmed by the statistical result in Figure 6(b). A possible
explanation is that when some of the bins do not meet their
desired swarm densities, the entire agents in the GICA-based
method would obtain higher feedback gains, which might lead
to unnecessary transitions. On the contrary, this is not the case
in the LICA-based method since agents are only affected by
their neighbour bins.
C. Robustness in Asynchronous Environments
This subsection investigates the effects of asynchronous
environments in the proposed LICA-based method for (P1)
and compares them with those in the GICA-based method
in [13]. Hence, a realistic scenario where an asynchronous
process is required is considered: in the scenario, it is assumed
that agents in some bins cannot communicate for some reason
(such bins are called blocked) and thus other agents in normal
bins have to perform their own process without waiting them.
The proportion of blocked bins to the entire bins is set to
be different values, i.e. 0%, 10%, 20% and 30%. At each time
instant, the corresponding proportion of bins are randomly
selected as blocked bins. For the proposed framework, the
asynchronous implementation in Section V is built upon
Algorithm 2. In the GICA-based method, for the comparison
purpose only, it is assumed that agents in normal bins obtain
µj
k without interacting with agents in the blocked bins.
k = µ(cid:63)
The rest of scenario setting are the same as those in Section
VI-B.
Figure 7 illustrates the performance of each method: con-
vergence rate, fraction of transitioning agents, and cumula-
tive travel expenses. As the proportion of the blocked bins
increases, the GICA-based method tends to have faster con-
vergence speed, whereas it loses Desired Feature 2 and thus
increases cumulative travelling expenses (as shown in Figure
7(a), 7(b), and 7(c), respectively). On the contrary, the LICA-
based method shows a graceful degradation in terms of Desired
Feature 2 (as shown in Figure 7(b)). A possible explanation
for these results could be that higher feedback gains due to the
communication disconnection induce faster convergence per-
formance in each method than the normal situation. This effect
(a) Converged Time Instants
(b) Cumulative Travel
Expenses
Fig. 6. Performance comparison (Monte-Carlo experiments) between the
proposed method (LICA) and the existing method (GICA): (a) the required
k) ∈ {0.30, 0.28, ..., 0.12, 0.10} (i.e.,
time instants to converge to DH (Θ, µ(cid:63)
convergence rate); (2) the ratio of the cumulative travel expenses by LICA to
those by GICA until converging to DH (Θ, µ(cid:63)
k) = 1.
Note that Θ in Remark 4 can control convergence rate, but is
not discussed in [13]. For the fair comparison, Θ is applied
to both the methods.
We conduct 100 runs of Monte Carlo experiments. Figure
5 presents the results of one representative scenario and the
statistical results of the Monte Carlo experiments are shown
in Figure 6. According to Figure 5(a), the convergence rate
of the proposed method is slower at the initial phase, but
similar to that of the the GICA-based method as reaching
k) = 0.10. This is confirmed by the statistical results
DH (Θ, µ(cid:63)
in Figure 6(a), where the ratio of the required time instants
k) ∈ {0.30, 0.28, ..., 0.12, 0.10} in
for converging to DH (Θ, µ(cid:63)
the LICA-based method to those of the GICA-based method
is presented. At this point, it is worth noting that these con-
vergence rate results are presented in respect to time instants
of each Markov process. As the LICA-based framework may
have a much shorter timescale, its convergence performance in
practice could be better than that of the GICA-based method.
Figure 5(c) shows that the cumulative travel expenses are
smaller in the proposed method. The expenses by the proposed
050100150200250300350400Time Instant00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91Convergence Error (DH(, k*))LICAGICA050100150200250300350400Time Instant0510152025Fraction of Transitioning Agents (%)LICAGICA050100150200250300350400Time Instant00.511.522.5Cumulative Travel Expenses104LICAGICA0.30.280.260.240.220.20.180.160.140.120.1Convergence Error (DH(, k*))0.70.80.911.11.21.31.4Ratio of Required Time Instants for Convergence (LICA/GICA)1LICA/GICA0.740.760.780.80.820.840.860.880.90.92Ratio of Cumulative Travel Expenses until DH = 0.1 13
(a) Convergence Error
(b) Fraction of Transitioning Agents
(c) Cumulative Travel Expenses
Fig. 7. Performance comparison in communication-disconnected situations: (a) the error between the current swarm status and the desired status, shown as
Hellinger Distance; (b) the fraction of agents who transitions between any two bins; (c) the cumulative travel expenses of all the agents from the beginning.
(a) Convergence Error
(b) Fraction of Transitioning Agents
(c) Maximum Number of Transitioning Agents via
Each Path (for P2)
Fig. 8. Comparison results between the method for P2 and the quorum-based model: (a) the error between the current swarm status and the desired status,
shown as Hellinger Distance, at each time instant; (b) the fraction of agents who transition between any two bins at each time instant. (c) The maximum
number of transitioning agents via each path in the method for P2 (Case 1: A = 10, 000 and c(i,l) = 20, ∀i (cid:54)= l; Case 2: A = 100, 000 and c(i,l) = 200,
∀i (cid:54)= l)
is dominant for the GICA-based method because it affects
the entire agents, who use global information. However, in
the LICA-based framework, the communication disconnection
only locally influences so that its effectiveness is relatively
modest.
D. Demonstration of Example II and III
This subsection demonstrates the LICA-based method for
(P2) (i.e., Algorithm 3) and the quorum model (i.e., Algorithm
4). For the former, we consider a scenario where 10, 000 agents
and an arena consisting of 10 × 10 bins are given. The arena
is as depicted in Figure 1, where the agents are allowed to
move only one path away within a unit time instant. For each
one-way path, the upper flux bound per time instant is set as
20 agents (i.e., c(i,l) = 20, ∀i (cid:54)= l). All the agents start from a
bin, and the desired swarm distribution is uniform-randomly
generated.
For the latter, we build the quorum model upon the LICA-
based method for (P2). This can be a good strategy for a user
who wants to achieve not only faster convergence rate but
also lower unnecessary transitions after equilibrium, which are
regulated by the upper flux bounds. Thus, in the same scenario
described above, we will demonstrate the combined algorithm
k and Gj
that computes Sj
k by Algorithm
3. We set qi = 1.3 and γ = 30 for (27); α = 1 and ξ = 10−9
for (6); and τ j = 10−6 for (9).
k by Algorithm 4 and P j
Figure 8(a) and 8(b) presents that the both approaches make
the swarm converge to the desired swarm distribution. It is
observed that the number of transitioning agents in the method
for (P2) are restricted because of the upper flux bound during
the entire process. Meanwhile, the quorum-based method very
quickly disseminates the agents, who are initially at one bin,
over other bins, and thus the fraction of transitioning agents
is very high at the initial phase. After that, the population
fraction by the quorum-based method drops and remains as
low as that by the method for (P2).
Figure 8(c) presents the maximum value amongst the num-
ber of transitioning agents via each (one-way) path. The
red line indicates the actual result by the method for (P2),
while the green line indicates the corresponding probabilistic
value (i.e., max∀i max∀l(cid:54)=i nk[i]P j
k [i, l]). It is shown that the
stochastic decision policies reflect the given upper bound,
meanwhile this bound is often violated in practice due to the
finite cardinality of the agents. However, the result in the same
scenario with setting A = 100, 000 and c(i,l) = 200, ∀i (cid:54)= l
(denoted by Case 2), depicted by the blue and magenta lines
in Figure 8(c), suggests that such violation can be mitigated
050100150200250300350400450Time Instant00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91Convergence Error (DH(, k*))LICA (Blocked 0%)LICA (Blocked 10%)LICA (Blocked 20%)LICA (Blocked 30%)GICA (Blocked 0%)GICA (Blocked 10%)GICA (Blocked 20%)GICA (Blocked 30%)050100150200250300350400450Time Instant051015202530Fraction of Transitioning Agents (%)LICA (Blocked 0%)LICA (Blocked 10%)LICA (Blocked 20%)LICA (Blocked 30%)GICA (Blocked 0%)GICA (Blocked 10%)GICA (Blocked 20%)GICA (Blocked 30%)050100150200250300350400450Time Instant02468101214Cumulative Travel Expenses104LICA (Blocked 0%)LICA (Blocked 10%)LICA (Blocked 20%)LICA (Blocked 30%)GICA (Blocked 0%)GICA (Blocked 10%)GICA (Blocked 20%)GICA (Blocked 30%)05001000150020002500300035004000Time Instant00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91 Swarm Distribution (DH(, k*))P2P2 + Quorum05001000150020002500300035004000Time Instant01020304050607080Fractions of Transitioning Agents (%)P2P2 + Quorum05001000150020002500300035004000Time Instant0510152025303540Max (# Transitions of Agents for Each Path) - Case 1050100150200250300350400Max (# Transitions of Agents for Each Path) - Case 2Actual (Case 1)Probabilistic (Case 1)Actual (Case 2)Probabilistic (Case 2) as the number of given agents increases.
VII. CONCLUSION
This paper poposed a LICA-based closed-loop-type frame-
work for probabilistic swarm distribution guidance. Since the
feedback gains can be generated based on local information,
agents have shorter and different timescales for using new
information, and can incorporate an asynchronous decision-
making process. Even using local information, the proposed
framework converges to a desired density distribution, while
maintaining scalability, robustness, and long-term system effi-
ciency. Furthermore, the numerical experiments have showed
that the proposed framework is suitable for a realistic envi-
ronment where communication between agents is partially and
temporarily disconnected. This paper has explicitly presented
the design requirements for the Markov matrix to hold all these
advantages, and has provided specific problem examples of
how to implement this framework.
Future works include optimisation of ¯ξj
k[i], which can miti-
gate the trade-off between convergence rate and residual error.
In addition, it is expected that the communication cost required
for the proposed framework can be reduced by incorporating
a vision-based local density estimation [38].
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors gratefully acknowledge that this research was
supported by International Joint Research Programme with
Chungnam National University (No. EFA3004Z). Thanks to
Sangjun Bae for supportive discussions.
APPENDIX
A. Regarding the Convergence Analysis in Theorem 1
Definition 9 (Irreducible). A matrix is reducible if and only
if its associated digraph is not strongly connected. A matrix
that is not reducible is irreducible.
Definition 10 (Primitive). A primitive matrix is a square
nonnegative matrix A such that for every i, j there exists k > 0
such that Ak[i, j] > 0.
Definition 11 (Regular). A regular matrix is a stochastic
matrix such that all the entries of some power of the matrix
are positive.
Definition 12.
[33, pp.92, 149] [13] (Asymptotic Homogene-
ity) "A sequence of stochastic matrices Mk ∈ Mn×n, k ≥ k0,
is said to be asymptotically homogeneous (with respect to
d) if there exists a row-stochastic vector d ∈ Pn such that
limk→∞ dMk = d."
Definition 13.
[33, pp.92, 149] [13] (Strong Ergodicity)
The matrix product Uk0,k := Mk0Mk0+1 ···Mk−1, formed
from a sequence of stochastic matrices Mr ∈ Pn×n, r ≥
is said to be strongly ergodic if for each i, l, r we
k0,
limr→∞ Uk0,r[i, l] = v[l], where v ∈ Pn is a row-
get
stochastic vector. Here, v is called its unique limit vector (i.e.,
limr→∞ Uk0,r = 1(cid:62)v).
Lemma 5. Given the requirements (R1)-(R4) are satisfied, M j
k
in Equation (11) has the following properties:
14
1) row-stochastic;
2) irreducible;
3) all diagonal elements are positive, and all other elements
4) there is a positive lower bound γ such that 0 < γ ≤
k [i, l] (Note that min+ refers to the minimum
are non-negative;
i,l M j
min+
of the positive elements);
5) asymptotically homogeneous with respect to Θ.
In addition, U j
k0,k in Equation (12) has the following
properties:
6) irreducible;
7) all diagonal elements are positive, and all other elements
are non-negative;
8) primitive [39, Lemma 8.5.4, p.541]
k ·1(cid:62) = (I − W j
k )P j
k · 1(cid:62) = 1(cid:62). P j
thus M j
k ≥ 0, and P j
Proof. This lemma can be proved by similarly following the
mathematical development for [13, Theorem 4]. M j
k is row-
k ·1(cid:62) + W j
k ·1(cid:62) =
stochastic because M j
k Sj
(I − W j
k ) · 1(cid:62) + W j
k is irreducible and
ωj
is always less than 1,
k is also irreducible
k[i]
(i.e., M j
k [i, l] > 0 if P j
k [i, l] > 0). The property 3) is true
because diag(I − W j
k is also a non-
negative matrix such that its diagonal elements are positive.
The property 4) is implied by either the property 2) or 3). From
k = 0 (because
the definition of W j
of exp(−τ jk)), and thereby limk→∞ M j
k = limk→∞ P j
k .
Hence, limk→∞ ΘM j
k = Θ, and the property
5) is valid.
k , it follows that limk→∞ W j
k = limk→∞ ΘP j
k ) > 0, W j
k0,k. It
Let us now turn to U j
is irreducible due to the
r [i, l] > 0 for some r ∈ {k0, ..., k − 1} and
fact that if M j
∀i, l ∈ {1, ..., nbin}, then the corresponding element U j
k0,k[i, l]
is greater or equal to the product of positive diagonal elements
r [i, l] and the property 2). The property 7) is true
and M j
because U j
k0,k is a product of nonnegative matrices where all
diagonal entries are positive. It follows from [39, Lemma 8.5.4,
p.541] that U j
k0,k is primitive: "if a square matrix is irreducible,
nonnegative and all its main diagonal entries are positive, then
the matrix is primitive".
REFERENCES
[1] M. Brambilla, E. Ferrante, M. Birattari, and M. Dorigo, "Swarm
Robotics: a Review from the Swarm Engineering Perspective," Swarm
Intelligence, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1 -- 41, 2013.
[2] A. Kolling, P. Walker, N. Chakraborty, K. Sycara, and M. Lewis,
"Human Interaction With Robot Swarms: A Survey," IEEE Transactions
on Human-Machine Systems, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 9 -- 26, 2016.
[3] E. Sahin, "Swarm Robotics: From Sources of Inspiration to Domains of
Application," in Swarm Robotics. Berlin: Springer, 2005, pp. 10 -- 20.
[4] B. Acikmese and D. S. Bayard, "A Markov Chain Approach to Proba-
bilistic Swarm Guidance," in American Control Conference, Montreal,
Canada, 2012, pp. 6300 -- 6307.
[5] -- -- , "Probabilistic Swarm Guidance for Collaborative Autonomous
Agents," in American Control Conference, Portland, OR, USA, 2014,
pp. 477 -- 482.
[6] -- -- , "Markov Chain Approach to Probabilistic Guidance for Swarms
of Autonomous Agents," Asian Journal of Control, vol. 17, no. 4, pp.
1105 -- 1124, 2015.
[7] I. Chattopadhyay and A. Ray, "Supervised Self-Organization of Homo-
geneous Swarms Using Ergodic Projections of Markov Chains," IEEE
Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics),
vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 1505 -- 1515, 2009.
15
[32] C. Becco, N. Vandewalle, J. Delcourt, and P. Poncin, "Experimental
Evidences of a Structural and Dynamical Transition in Fish School,"
Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, vol. 367, pp. 487 --
493, 2006.
[33] E. Seneta, Non-negative Matrices and Markov Chains, ser. Springer
Series in Statistics. New York, NY: Springer New York, 1981.
[34] Y. Bestaoui Sebbane, Planning and Decision Making for Aerial Robots,
ser. Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineer-
ing. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2014, vol. 71.
[35] I. C. F. Ipsen and T. M. Selee, "Ergodicity Coefficients Defined by Vector
Norms," SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications, vol. 32,
no. 1, pp. 153 -- 200, jan 2011.
[36] A. Jadbabaie, Jie Lin, and A. Morse, "Coordination of Groups of Mobile
Autonomous Agents using Nearest Neighbor Rules," IEEE Transactions
on Automatic Control, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 988 -- 1001, 2003.
[37] J. Chung, P. Kannappan, C. Ng, and P. Sahoo, "Measures of Distance
between Probability Distributions," Journal of Mathematical Analysis
and Applications, vol. 138, no. 1, pp. 280 -- 292, 1989.
[38] S. A. M. Saleh, S. A. Suandi, and H. Ibrahim, "Recent Survey on Crowd
Density Estimation and Counting for Visual Surveillance," Engineering
Applications of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 41, pp. 103 -- 114, 2015.
[39] R. A. Horn and C. R. Johnson, Matrix Analysis, 2nd ed. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2012.
[8] N. Demir and B. Acikmese, "Probabilistic Density Control for Swarm
of Decentralized ON-OFF Agents with Safety Constraints," in American
Control Conference, Chicago, IL, USA, 2015, pp. 5238 -- 5244.
[9] R. Luo, N. Chakraborty, and K. Sycara, "Supervisory Control for Cost-
Effective Redistribution of Robotic Swarms," in IEEE International
Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), San Diego, CA,
USA, 2014, pp. 596 -- 601.
[10] N. Demir, U. Eren, and B. Ac¸kmee, "Decentralized Probabilistic Density
Control of Autonomous Swarms with Safety Constraints," Autonomous
Robots, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 537 -- 554, 2015.
[11] S. Bandyopadhyay, S.-J. Chung, and F. Y. Hadaegh, "Inhomogeneous
Markov Chain Approach To Probablistic Swarm Guidance Algorithms,"
in 5th Int. Conf. on Spacecraft Formation Flying Missions and Tech-
nologies (SFFMT), Munich, Germany, 2013.
[12] D. Morgan, G. P. Subramanian, S. Bandyopadhyay, S.-J. Chung, and
F. Y. Hadaegh, "Probabilistic Guidance of Distributed Systems using
Sequential Convex Programming," in IEEE/RSJ International Confer-
ence on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Chicago, IL, USA, 2014, pp.
3850 -- 3857.
[13] S. Bandyopadhyay, S.-J. Chung, and F. Y. Hadaegh, "Probabilistic and
Distributed Control of a Large-Scale Swarm of Autonomous Agents,"
IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 1103 -- 1123, 2017.
[14] A. Halasz, M. A. Hsieh, S. Berman, and V. Kumar, "Dynamic Redis-
tribution of a Swarm of Robots among Multiple Sites," in IEEE/RSJ
International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, San Diego,
CA, USA, 2007, pp. 2320 -- 2325.
[15] M. A. Hsieh, A. Halasz, S. Berman, and V. Kumar, "Biologically
Inspired Redistribution of a Swarm of Robots among Multiple Sites,"
Swarm Intelligence, vol. 2, no. 2-4, pp. 121 -- 141, 2008.
[16] S. Berman, A. Halasz, M. Ani Hsieh, and V. Kumar, "Navigation-based
Optimization of Stochastic Strategies for Allocating a Robot Swarm
among Multiple Sites," in 47th IEEE Conference on Decision and
Control, Cancun, Mexico, 2008, pp. 4376 -- 4381.
[17] S. Berman, A. Halasz, M. A. Hsieh, and V. Kumar, "Optimized
Stochastic Policies for Task Allocation in Swarms of Robots," IEEE
Transactions on Robotics, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 927 -- 937, 2009.
[18] T. W. Mather and M. A. Hsieh, "Macroscopic Modeling of Stochastic
Deployment Policies with Time Delays for Robot Ensembles," The
International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 590 --
600, 2011.
[19] K. Lerman, A. Martinoli, and A. Galstyan, "A Review of Probabilistic
Macroscopic Models for Swarm Robotic Systems," in Swarm Robotics.
Berlin: Springer, 2005, pp. 143 -- 152.
[20] L. B. Johnson, H.-L. Choi, and J. P. How, "The Role of Information As-
sumptions in Decentralized Task Allocation: A Tutorial," IEEE Control
Systems, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 45 -- 58, 2016.
[21] S. Xue, C. Sun, J. Zeng, Y. Jin, and R. Cheng, "Effect of Communication
Modes to Swarm Robotic Search," The Open Electrical & Electronic
Engineering Journal, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 240 -- 244, 2014.
[22] B. I. Koh, A. D. George, R. T. Haftka, and B. J. Fregly, "Parallel
Asynchronous Particle Swarm Optimization," International Journal for
Numerical Methods in Engineering, vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 578 -- 595, 2006.
[23] L. Johnson, S. Ponda, H.-L. Choi, and J. How, "Asynchronous
Decentralized Task Allocation for Dynamic Environments," in In-
fotech@Aerospace 2011, St.Louis, MO, USA, 2011.
[24] I. D. Couzin, J. Krause, R. James, G. D. Ruxton, and N. R. Franks,
"Collective Memory and Spatial Sorting in Animal Groups." Journal of
theoretical biology, vol. 218, no. 1, pp. 1 -- 11, 2002.
[25] I. D. Couzin, J. Krause, N. R. Franks, and S. A. Levin, "Effective
Leadership and Decision-making in Animal Groups on the Move,"
Nature, vol. 433, no. 7025, pp. 513 -- 516, 2005.
[26] J. Gautrais, C. Jost, and G. Theraulaz, "Key Behavioural Factors in a
Self-Organised Fish School Model," Annales Zoologici Fennici, vol. 45,
no. 5, pp. 415 -- 428, 2008.
[27] D. J. Hoare, I. D. Couzin, J. G. J. Godin, and J. Krause, "Context-
dependent Group Size Choice in Fish," Animal Behaviour, vol. 67, no. 1,
pp. 155 -- 164, 2004.
[28] S. Bandyopadhyay and S.-J. Chung, "Distributed Estimation using
Bayesian Consensus Filtering," American Control Conference, pp. 634 --
641, 2014.
[29] T. D. Seeley, The Wisdom of the Hive.
Cambridge, Massachusetts:
Havard University Press, 1995.
[30] L. Keller, M. J. B. Krieger, and J.-B. Billeter, "Ant-like Task Allocation
and Recruitment in Cooperative Robots," Nature, vol. 406, no. 6799,
pp. 992 -- 995, 2000.
[31] B. L. Partridge, "The Structure and Function of Fish Schools," Scientific
American, vol. 246, no. 6, pp. 114 -- 123, 1982.
|
1709.03297 | 1 | 1709 | 2017-09-11T08:48:19 | Cellular Automaton Based Simulation of Large Pedestrian Facilities - A Case Study on the Staten Island Ferry Terminals | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI"
] | Current metropolises largely depend on a functioning transport infrastructure and the increasing demand can only be satisfied by a well organized mass transit. One example for a crucial mass transit system is New York City's Staten Island Ferry, connecting the two boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan with a regular passenger service. Today's demand already exceeds 2500 passengers for a single cycle during peek hours, and future projections suggest that it will further increase. One way to appraise how the system will cope with future demand is by simulation. This contribution proposes an integrated simulation approach to evaluate the system performance with respect to future demand. The simulation relies on a multiscale modeling approach where the terminal buildings are simulated by a microscopic and quantitatively valid cellular automata (CA) and the journeys of the ferries themselves are modeled by a mesoscopic queue simulation approach. Based on the simulation results recommendations with respect to the future demand are given. | cs.MA | cs |
CELLULAR AUTOMATON BASED SIMULATION OF LARGE PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES --
A CASE STUDY ON THE STATEN ISLAND FERRY TERMINALS
Luca Crociani
University of Milano-Bicocca
Complex Systems and Artificial Intelligence Research Center, University of Milano-Bicocca,
Milan, Italy
Telephone: +39 0264487857
FAX: +39 0264487839
[email protected]
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Luca_Crociani
Gregor Lämmel (corresponding author)
German Aerospace Center (DLR)
Institute of Transportation Systems
Rutherfordstrasse 2, 12489 Berlin, Germany
Telephone: +49 30 67055-9141
FAX: +49 30 67055-291
[email protected]
http://www.dlr.de/ts
H. Joon Park
New York City Department of Transportation
55 Water Street, 6th Floor
New York, NY 10041
Telephone: +1 212-839-7757
FAX: +1 212-839-7777
[email protected]
http://nyc.gov/dot
Giuseppe Vizzari
University of Milano-Bicocca
Complex Systems and Artificial Intelligence Research Center, University of Milano-Bicocca,
Milan, Italy
Telephone: +39 0264487865
FAX: +39 0264487839
[email protected]
http://www.lintar.disco.unimib.it/GVizzari/
Submission date: October 15, 2018
5,985 words + 4 figures + 2 tables = 7,485 words
Abstract
Current metropolises largely depend on a functioning transport infrastructure and the increasing
demand can only be satisfied by a well organized mass transit. One example for a crucial mass
transit system is New York City's Staten Island Ferry, connecting the two boroughs of Staten Island
and Manhattan with a regular passenger service. Today's demand already exceeds 2500 passengers
for a single cycle during peek hours, and future projections suggest that it will further increase. One
way to appraise how the system will cope with future demand is by simulation.
This contribution proposes an integrated simulation approach to evaluate the system per-
formance with respect to future demand. The simulation relies on a multiscale modeling approach
where the terminal buildings are simulated by a microscopic and quantitatively valid cellular au-
tomata (CA) and the journeys of the ferries themselves are modeled by a mesoscopic queue simu-
lation approach.
Based on the simulation results recommendations with respect to the future demand are
given.
Crociani et al.
1
INTRODUCTION
The functioning of today's metropolises heavily depends on the performance of their transport
infrastructure. In recent decades the demand in public transit has increased enormously and this
demand is expected to increase even further.
One example of a public transit infrastructure that has to deal with a growing demand
is the Staten Island Ferry in New York City: it connects the two boroughs of Staten Island and
Manhattan with a regular passenger service. Currently, the fleet consists of five boats doing 109
trips and carrying 70 000 passengers on a typical weekday. During rush hours, it runs on a four-
boat schedule, with 15 minutes between departures. Various development on Staten Island's north
shore is projecting a significant increase in ridership on the Staten Island Ferry. To cope with
the projected future demand the New York City Department of Transportation needs to develop
effective strategies that allow for improved passenger flows aboard the ferries and in the terminals.
Those strategies include lower level boarding and the reconstruction of the waiting areas in both
terminals St. George (on Staten Island) and Whitehall (in Manhattan). In addition to an expert
evaluation of the potential interventions, the elaboration of what-if scenarios based on computer
simulation is also important to support decisions on this topic.
This work presents a computer simulation model for the Staten Island Ferry to: (i) repro-
duce the status quo (for validation) and (ii) appraise the terminal performance with the projected
future demand and give recommendations to improve the operation procedures of the terminals.
RELATED WORKS
There are some case studies simulating terminal buildings: Morrow (1) propose an approach where
individual persons (agents) choose their path through the environment based on a randomized cost
function, with an application on San Francisco's Transbay Terminal: results indicate locations
where high pedestrian densities might occur. In this approach the terminal layout is iteratively
adapted and after each modification a simulation is carried out to appraise the overall performance.
Lämmel et al. (2) introduce a model capable to simulate large scenarios in reasonable time frames
on a fictive scenario about New York City's Grand Central Terminal. The approach combines two
simulation models of different granularity (i.e. the surrounding area is simulated by fast but less
precise queuing model (3) and the terminal itself by the much more precise but more demanding
ORCA model (4, 5)). This multiscale approach has the advantage of being microscopic precise
where needed and computational fast for areas where possible.
This idea has been investigated since the early 2000s: first approaches combine macro-
scopic and microscopic models for vehicular traffic (6, 7, 8). Later models combine mesoscopic
and microscopic approaches (9, 10, 11). Works in pedestrian domain include (12, 13). Recently, a
multiscale approach for inter- and multi-model traffic has been demonstrated (14).
There is a variety of pedestrian simulation models, and they can be classified according to
their granularity. Macroscopic models consider pedestrians as streams of densities similar to the
flow of liquids or gas (15, 16). Those models are suitable for the simulation of high density situa-
tions, but individual trajectories are hard to reproduce and thus macroscopic models are unsuitable
for complex pedestrians scenarios where pedestrians following arbitrary paths. This kind of situa-
tion can be instead reproduced by microscopic models as they are constructed from the individual
traveler's point of view and thus each traveler follows his/her own path trough the environment.
Microscopic models can be distinguished by the way they represent space and time. Some micro-
scopic models rely on a continuous representation of space (e.g. force based models (17, 18) or
Crociani et al.
2
velocity based models (4, 19)). Others discretize time and space into a grid-based structure (e.g.
cellular automata (CA) (20, 21)). Most microscopic models have a step-based time representation,
where the step is a fixed amount of time, although works that propose an adaptive step-size to
speed up computation exist (22). A pseudo-continuous time representation can be achieved by an
events-based simulation approach. They only compute the movement of pedestrians for points in
time where needed and thus considerable speed ups in computing time are possible (23).
A basic requirement for any simulation model is that the flow-speed-density relation (often
depicted in a so-called fundamental diagram) is adequately reproduced. There is a large body
of empirical work that investigates the fundamental diagrams in the pedestrian context (see, e.g.
(24, 25, 26)). Theoretical foundations for the calibration of a simple CA model against arbitrary
empirical fundamental diagrams are given in (27). Implementations are given in (23, 28, 29).
In terminal operations a basic pedestrian activity involves waiting. There is only little
research that investigates methods to simulate the concept of waiting. Ongoing research suggests
that the concept of waiting can be adequately modeled by simple heuristics (30).
FERRY TERMINAL OPERATION AND FACILITIES
Staten Island Ferry operates with travel time of approximately 25 minutes along a route between
Whitehall Terminal in downtown Manhattan, New York and St. George Terminal in Staten Island,
New York. It carried weekday and weekend daily passengers of approximately 70,400 and 45,290,
respectively, at both terminals in 2015. There are three classes of ferry vessel: Barberi Class of
approximately 5,200-passenger capacity, Molinari Class of approximately 4,400-passenger capac-
ity, and Kennedy Class of approximately 3,000-passenger capacity. The larger ferries are used
during peak hours. During the weekday PM peak period, ferry service interval is increased from
30-minute service to 20-minute service and 15-minute service. The waiting areas have a capacity
of 3,530 passengers for the St. George Ferry Terminal and 10,771 passengers for the Whitehall
Ferry Terminal (31). Ferry ridership was increased during summer months (Jun, July, and August).
Based on 2015 average weekday peak hour ridership of summer period, a single landing cycle in
2015 showed hourly passenger volumes of approximately 2,256 to 2,727 during weekday PM peak
hour (4-5 PM). Previous Staten Island ferry terminal study indicated that nearly every landing cy-
cle with a throughput of more than 2,600 passengers had a duration in excess of eight minutes
and an adverse impact on the operating schedule. When throughput volumes were between 2,000
and 2,600, approximately half of the landing cycles were completed within eight minutes (31, 32).
Current ferry embarking and disembarking operation is different because of coast guard security
process. Ferry embarking process allows only main concourse level access from waiting areas
while its disembarking process operates with lower and main concourse level exits. It is more crit-
ical to improve embarking process when considering passenger entering and exiting process and
substantial future demand increase. Therefore, this study is focused on Staten Island ferry pas-
senger operation at Whitehall Terminal during weekday PM peak period. With the additional 880
passenger volume generated by redevelopment of adjacent areas such as St. George and Stapleton
Waterfront Developments, there would regularly be over 2,000 passengers on a single ferry and an
average throughput of over 3,600 passengers during a single landing cycle in 2017 (32). Passenger
volumes of this magnitude can be expected to consistently cause delays of over five minutes. These
delays will be compounded over the course of the peak period as these volumes are expected to
occur over multiple successive sailings.
Crociani et al.
3
FIGURE 1 2015 Existing PM Passengers During Landing Cycle at Whitehall Terminal
MODEL DESCRIPTION
The approach adopted for this work is characterized by the fact that a multi-scale representation of
the environment is adopted to try to preserve the good computational properties of an agent based
model adopting a coarse grained spatial representation, and employing a connected CA model for
simulating portions of the environment requiring a higher degree of fidelity.
The overall system is currently implemented in the MATSim1 framework and uses its model
and network representation of the environment for the part where the pedestrian interactions are
not enough significant to generate the need of a microscopic simulation. The CA model is then
used to model the inside of the two ferry terminals, where the particular layout of the scene affects
the space utilization of pedestrians and their traveling times. A technical explanation of the CA
model is provided in (29). Its usage with a multi-scale approach, with an example application, is
described more thoroughly here (33). In this paper we will provide a brief presentation allowing
to understand the functioning of the system, in order to focus more on the case study.
Microscopic Model
The model is a 2-dimensional Cellular Automaton with a square-cells grid representation of the
space. The 0.4 × 0.4 m2 size of the cells describes the average space occupation of a person (34)
and reproduces a maximum pedestrian density of 6.25 persons/m2, that covers the values usually
1www.matsim.org
Crociani et al.
4
observable in the real world. A cell of the environment can be basically of type walkable or of
type obstacle, meaning that it will never be occupied by any pedestrians during the simulation. By
means of three simple mechanisms, the model is able to reproduce validated pedestrian flows for
the case of 1-directional and 2-directional flows (see (29)).
Intermediate targets can also be introduced in the environment to mark the extremes of a
particular region (e.g. rooms or corridors), and so decision points for the route choice of agents.
Final goals of the discrete environment are its open edges, i.e., the entrances/exits of the discrete
space that will be linked to roads. Since the concept of region is fuzzy and the space decomposition
is a subjective task that can be tackled with different approaches, the configuration of their position
in the scenario is not automatic and it is left to the user.
Employing the floor field approach (21) and spreading one field from each target, either
intermediate or final, allows to build a network representing this portion of the simulated environ-
ment. In this graph, each node denotes one target and the edges identify the existence of a direct
way between two targets (i.e. passing through only one region). To allow this, the floor field dif-
fusion is limited by obstacles and cells of other targets. An example of such an environment with
the overlain network is shown in Fig. 2, which illustrates the implementation of the case study
scenario. The open borders of the microscopic environment are the nodes that will be connected
to the other network of the mesoscopic model and the overall network will be used for the path
planning by the agents.
To integrate the network with the one of the mesoscopic model and to allow the reasoning
at the strategic level, each edge a of the graph is firstly labeled with its length la, describing the
distance between two targets δi, δj in the discrete space. This value is computed using the floor
fields as:
la(δ1, δ2) = Avg (F Fδ1(Center(δ2)), F Fδ2(Center(δ1)))
(1)
where F Fδ(x, y) gives the value of the floor field associated to a destination δ in position
(x, y); Center(δ) describes the coordinates of the central cell of δ and Avg computes the average
between the two values and provides a unique distance. Together with the average speed of pedes-
.
trians in the discrete space, la is used to calculate the free speed travel time of the link T f ree
a = la
sa
Special targets
To allow the representation of the boarding/disembarking procedures, but also in general of auto-
matic doors or turnstiles that impose additional times to be crossed by people, a special instance
of intermediate target has been introduced in the microscopic model, that is denoted as delaying
target. When a pedestrian reaches a cell of this special object, it asks the respective quantity of
time that needs to wait before to continue. This quantity can be either static, to model the time an
automatic door needs to open, or generated according to a predefined distribution. This allows to
model, for example, observed average times needed by commuters to pass through turnstiles.
This type of target is used as well to implement the schedule of the ferries and the man-
agement of the disembarking and boarding process. In this case, a time schedule is associated
to the target and it describes the time windows in which the modeled gate is open or close. The
waiting time for pedestrians, thus, is calculated according to the configured time schedule, making
them wait in the area in front of the target until the next opening time. In addition, to qualitatively
improve the dynamics generated by the model in the waiting areas, once a pedestrian achieves
Crociani et al.
5
FIGURE 2 A simplified representation of the modeled scenario. Possible paths for pedestri-
ans are overimposed in the microscopic environments. Dashed blue links emphasizes paths
to Whitehall terminal, while dashed red the ones to St. George.
such a long waiting time from this target, it enters in a waiting state of behavior. In this state, the
pedestrian speed is lowered (i.e. they do not move all time steps) and the choice of movement is
a bit randomized, meaning that they are still attracted by the current target, but they also wander
inside the waiting area.
Flow in bottlenecks
As stated before, the model has been already calibrated to produce quantitatively valid fundamental
diagrams of 1-directional and 2-directional flows in corridor-like settings. For sake of space, this
validation is not discussed here and it is referred to (29, 33) for a detailed analysis. Nonetheless,
the dynamics simulated in the application scenario is affected by many bottlenecks and thus the
pedestrian flow in presence of physical restrictions must be discussed. This is empirically analyzed
by testing a benchmark scenario composed of a rectangular room divided by a wall at the middle of
WhitehallTerminalSt. GeorgeTerminal Crociani et al.
6
FIGURE 3 Average flow achieved in the bottleneck tests.
the y-axis, with a central opening configuring a bottleneck of width ω. A set of simulations is then
configured by varying ω in the discrete range [0.4,5.2] with ∆ω = 0.4m. Results are generated
with the same set of parameters used to reproduce fundamental diagrams (see (29)).
The scenario is configured with 350 agents generated at the same time from one extreme
of the scenario and having to reach the other part. At each second of the simulation, the outflow
from the bottleneck is gathered and all measurements are then averaged. Outflow data is stored
only once the simulation is in a steady state, i.e., all agents have reached the bottleneck and this
generates a stable outflow. In this case it has been observed that for all tested ω, the simulations
are in a steady state between 5 and 35 seconds of the simulation time. Average steady state flows
for simulations are shown in Fig. 3.
Mesoscopic Model
The MATSim model is used for this component of the system. The standard simulation approach
in MATSim employs a queuing model based on (35). Originally, the model was designed for the
simulation of vehicular traffic, but it has been adapted for pedestrians (36).
The basic network structure of the environment is modeled as a graph whose links describe
urban streets, while nodes describe their intersections. In our context "streets" also include side
walks, ramps, corridors, and so on. Links behave like FIFO queues controlled by the following
parameters:
• the length of the link l;
• the area of the link A;
• the free flow speed v;
• the free speed travel time tmin, given by l/v;
• the flow capacity F C;
Crociani et al.
• the storage capacity SC.
7
The overall dynamics follows therefore the rules defined with these parameters. An agent
is able to enter to a link l until the number of agents inside l is below its storage capacity. Once
the agent is inside, it travels at speed v and it cannot leave the link before tmin. The congestion
is managed with the flow capacity parameter F C, which is used to lock the agents inside the link
to not exceed it: this mechanism basically increases the actually experienced travel time whenever
the level of density in the link increases, incorporating in the model dynamics empirical evidences
(i.e. pedestrians' fundamental diagram).
Considering this representation of the environment, agents plan their paths through this
graph structure trying to reproduce a plausible real-world pedestrians' behavior. A reasonable
assumption is that pedestrians try to minimize the walking distance when planning their paths: the
shortest path among two nodes is straightforward to compute, but it is well known that this choice
neglects congestion. In other words, the shortest path is not necessarily the fastest one. Commuters
who repeatedly walk between two locations (e.g. from a particular track in a large train station to
a bus stop outside the train station) have reasonably all the opportunities to iteratively explore
alternative paths to identify the fastest, although not necessarily the shortest. If all commuters
display that same behavior, they might reach a state where it is no longer possible to find any faster
path.
If this is the case, then the system has reached a state of a Nash (37) equilibrium with respect
to individual travel times. This behavior can be emulated by applying an iterative best-response
dynamic(38) and has been widely applied in the context of vehicular transport simulations (see,
e.g, (39, 40, 41)). Albeit, in theory there are multiple Nash equilibria, moreover it is still unclear
how close real-world travel patterns are to a Nash equilibrium after all, the referenced approaches
have proved to reproduce real-world traffic flow fair enough. It must be noted that the Nash equi-
librium is not actually the system optimum: the latter does not minimize individual travel times but
the system (or average) travel time. Like the Nash equilibrium, the system optimum can also be
achieved by an iterative best response dynamic, but based on the marginal travel time instead of the
individual travel time. The marginal travel time of an individual traveler corresponds to the sum of
the travel time experienced by her/him (internal costs) and the delay that he/she impose to others
(external costs). While it is straightforward to determine the internal costs (i.e. travel time), the
external costs calculation is not so obvious. An approach for the marginal travel time estimation
and its application to a microscopic simulation model has been proposed in (29).
CONNECTING THE MODELS
Both the mesoscopic and the microscopic model are mapped on the same global network of links
and nodes; a link can either be in a congested or non congested state. Initially, all links are consid-
ered as non congested, and they switch from this state to congested once the observed travel time
along the link is longer than the free speed travel time. Vice versa, a link in the congested state
switches to non congested as soon as the first pedestrian is able to walk along the link in free speed
travel time. Every pedestrian that leaves a given link while it is in the congested state imposes
external costs to the others. The amount of the external costs corresponds to the time span from
the time when the pedestrian under consideration leaves the congested link till the time when the
link switches to the non congested state again.
In this work, the iterative search of equilibrium/optimum follows the logic of the iterative
Crociani et al.
8
best response dynamic and it is described by the following tasks:
1. Compute plans for all agents
2. Execute the multi-scale simulation
3. Evaluate executed plans of the agents
4. Select a portion of the agents population and re-compute their plans
5. Jump to step 2, if the stop criterion has not been reached
The stopping criterion is implemented as a predetermined number of iterations defined by
the user. This is due to the fact that the number of iterations needed for the system to reach a
relaxed state depends on the complexity of the scenario and is not known a-priori. In the described
scenario, one hundred iterations gives a good compromise between relaxation and runtime.
Initial plan computation is performed with a shortest path algorithm. In the subsequent
iterations the agents try to find better plans based on the experienced travel costs. Depending on
the cost function, the agents learn more convenient paths either for them individually (relaxation
towards a Nash equilibrium) or for the overall population (relaxation towards the system optimum).
SCENARIO SETUP
The scenario of the Staten Island Ferry has been modeled as illustrated in Fig. 2. According to the
object of the analysis presented in this paper, only floors used for the boarding process has been
modeled. The two terminals are connected with a long link (about 8km) simulated with the queue
model, which implements the ferry travel. The time needed for this is configured to be 25 minutes.
Configuration of the environment and population demand
The microscopic environments representing the terminals are shown in Fig. 4 and they were mod-
eled based on existing CAD drawings. Each building contains one waiting area that provide access
to the boat slips by means of multiple access point, which have been modeled as scheduled target.
Existing rules for the management of the terminals imposes that boarding and disembarking are
performed sequentially, so no cross-flows can arise in the setting. In addition, up to two gates
can be open simultaneously for the boarding process. Similarly, only one corridor among the two
available is used for the disembarking in both terminals. Each of these corridors terminates with a
set of doors that leads to the entrance side of the building. These set of doors have been designed
as delaying targets, imposing an average delay of 3s to pedestrians. Finally, the schedule of the
ferries also avoids a contemporary arrival of more boats.
With reference to Fig.4, the simulated case study has been configured to use the boat slip
n. 2 for Whitehall and n.4 for St. George terminal. Considering the current and forecast data about
Staten Island Ferry passengers, two demands of the scenario have been configured:
• observed peak from Whitehall: demand representing a current peak of passengers com-
ing from Manhattan during summer time, simulated with purpose of validation of the
simulation scenario. The population is configured using the existing average monthly
counting of passengers related to the observed process.
Crociani et al.
9
(a)
(b)
FIGURE 4 Screenshots illustrating the configuration of the microscopic environments rep-
resenting the ferry terminals. Blue circles represents pedestrians directed to Whitehall, while
red ones move to St. George. Arrows indicates their possible paths.
• projection 2017: demand representing the peak of 3,600 passengers forecast for the next
year. This demand is again divided in two equal groups among boarding and disembark-
ing passengers.
In order to reproduce the observed peak scenario, door n. 1 is used for the Whitehall access
to boarding ramps and door n. 3 for St. George. Since the projection scenario is much more
demanding, the boarding process is simulated with two doors per terminal, using n. 1 and 2 in
Whitehall and n. 3 and 4 for the other.
SIMULATION RUNS
The simulation runs investigate the boarding operations of both terminals St. George (SG) and
Whitehall (WH). The iterative algorithm explained earlier is used to achieve the Nash Equilibria
of each demand scenario, which in this case represents an optimal distribution of passengers flow
among the available doors of the waiting areas and among the boarding ramps connecting terminals
with the ferries. 30 iterations are run per each scenario, which were sufficient to reach a NE state.
The analysis of the terminal operations focuses only on traveling times of commuters inside the
boarding areas, either from the time when they cross gates of the waiting areas until the entrance
to the ferry -- for boarding -- or from the time they go out from the ferry until they cross the doors
leading out from the boarding area.
Observed Peak from Whitehall
The base case scenario has the aim to validate the simulation model, so it can be used to ap-
praise future projections. To this purpose, timing data of boarding/disembarking processes have
been gathered with an on-field observation during the peak hour in Whitehall in late afternoon.
In particular, two full processes have been observed starting from the Whitehall terminal, where
about 1400 passengers were embarking and 850 were disembarking. After that, the disembark-
ing/boarding process has been observed in St. George terminal, where the 1400 passengers dis-
Crociani et al.
10
WH debarking WH boarding
850
54s
Measure
Passengers
Min
Max ( = total) 232s (266s)
Avg
Var
SD
75th perc.
95th perc.
149s
2,331
48
191s
222s
1400
77s
375s (364s)
204s
6,737
82
274s
332s
SG debarking SG boarding
1400
33s
400s (262s)
214s
10,723
104
302s
378s
400
56s
119s (83s)
83s
293
17
97s
110s
TABLE 1 Travel time analysis inside the boarding areas for the first scenario. We use the
maximum travel time to describe the process total time. Real world observed total times are
in parenthesis.
WH debarking WH boarding
Measure
1800
Passengers
48s
Min
Max ( = total) 418s
244s
Avg
10,061
Var
SD
100
330s
75th perc.
95th perc.
398s
1800
62s
558s
181s
10,376
102
221s
440s
SG debarking SG boarding
1800
33s
499s
267s
17,460
132
381s
471s
1800
62s
279s
165s
4,107
65
220s
265s
TABLE 2 Travel time analysis inside boarding areas for the projection 2017 scenario
embarked and additional 400 have embarked. Simulated and observed results of this scenario are
shown in Table 1. It is shown that there are no big differences between simulated and observed
times. The less precise output of our simulation scenario is provided with the disembarking pro-
cess in St. George, but it is due to the fact that the observed disembarking was performed using
also the ground floor of the terminal, not considered in the simulation system. This information
already emphasizes that the total time for the land cycles in Whitehall is critical to ensure current
schedule of ferries to be respected (32).
Projection 2017
Projections indicate that the average throughput during a single landing cycle will exceed 3,600
passengers by 2017 (32). The second simulation run investigates the expected impact of the in-
creased demand on the ferry operations. For that reason the demand is set to 1,800 passengers for
each of the terminals and a similar analysis as for the previous case has been performed. Results
are given in Table 2. As expected the boarding time increases heavily, even if two doors are used
to manage the boarding in parallel in both terminals. The boarding time for St. George is still less
than 5 minutes, while for Whitehall it takes more than 9 minutes to board the ferry. The whole
landing cycle for Whitehall takes more than 16 minutes. This is a strong indication that the current
Crociani et al.
11
layout of terminal buildings is not suited to cope with projected future demand.
CONCLUSION
The paper has presented the application of a multiscale modeling approach, based on a microscopic
and quantitatively valid cellular automata (CA) and a mesoscopic queue simulation approach, to
simulate the terminals St. George (on Staten Island) and Whitehall (in Manhattan) of New York
City's Staten Island Ferry. The paper discussed related works and the application context, then the
model was introduced as well as the advancements proposed to better fit this scenario. Finally,
results of the simulations carried out in the current and planned demand scenario respectively to
validate the model and to evaluate the adequacy of the current layout and boarding procedure to
face the planned growth of the demand. Results show that the authorities will need perform some
modification, either in the terminal layout or in the boarding procedures, to assure an acceptable
boarding time and overall landing cycle. Future works are aimed at supporting this decision eval-
uating alternative what-if scenarios by means of the presented modeling approach.
References
[1] Morrow, E., Efficiently Using Micro-Simulation to Inform Facility Design -- A Case Study
in Managein Complexity. In Pedestrian and Evacuation Dynamics 2010 (R. Peacock,
E. Kuligowski, and J. Averill, eds.), Springer, Berlin, 2011, pp. 855 -- 863.
[2] Lämmel, G., A. Seyfried, and B. Steffen, Large-scale and microscopic: a fast simulation
approach for urban areas. Annual Meeting Preprint 14-3890, Transportation Research Board,
Washington, D.C., 2014.
[3] Lämmel, G., D. Grether, and K. Nagel, The representation and implementation of time-
dependent inundation in large-scale microscopic evacuation simulations. Transportation Re-
search Part C: Emerging Technologies, Vol. 18, No. 1, 2010, pp. 84 -- 98.
[4] van den Berg, J., S. Guy, M. Lin, and D. Manocha, Reciprocal n-body collision avoidance.
In Robotics Research: The 14th International Symposium ISRR, Springer, Vol. 70, 2011, pp.
3 -- 19.
[5] Curtis, S. and D. Manocha, Pedestrian Simulation using Geometric Reasoning in Veloc-
ity Space. In Pedestrian and Evacuation Dynamics 2012 (U. Weidmann, U. Kirsch, and
M. Schreckenberg, eds.), Springer, Cham, 2014, pp. 875 -- 890.
[6] Helbing, D., A. Hennecke, V. Shvetsov, and M. Treiber, Micro- and Macro-Simulation of
Freeway Traffic. Mathematical and Computational Modelling, Vol. 35, 2002, pp. 517 -- 547.
[7] Bourr, E. and J.-B. Lesort, Mixing Microscopic Representations of Traffic Flow: Hybrid
Model Based on Lighthill-Whitham-Richards Theory. Transportation Research Record, Vol.
1852, 2003, pp. 193 -- 200.
[8] Espié, S., D. Gattuso, and F. Galante, A HYBRID TRAFFIC MODEL COUPLING MACRO
AND BEHAVIOURAL MICRO SIMULATION. Annual Meeting Preprint 06-2013, Trans-
portation Research Board, Washington D.C., 2006.
Crociani et al.
12
[9] Burghout, W., H. Koutsopoulos, and I. Andréasson, Hybrid Mesoscopic-Microscopic Traffic
Simulation. Transportation Research Record, Vol. 1934, 2005, pp. 218 -- 225.
[10] Burghout, W. and J. Wahlstedt, Hybrid Traffic Simulation with Adaptive Signal Control.
Transportation Research Record, Vol. 1999, 2007, pp. 191 -- 197.
[11] Joueiai, M., L. Leclercq, J. van Lint, and S. Hoogendoorn, Multiscale traffic flow model
based on the mesoscopic Lighthill-Whitham and Richards models. Transportation Research
Record, Vol. 2591, 2015, pp. 98 -- 106.
[12] Chooramun, N., P. Lawrence, and E. Galea, Implementing a Hybrid Space Discretisation
within an Agent Based Evacuation Model. In Pedestrian and Evacuation Dynamics 2010
(R. Peacock, E. Kuligowski, and J. Averill, eds.), Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York,
2011, pp. 449 -- 458.
[13] Anh, N., Z. Daniel, N. Du, A. Drogoul, and V. An, A Hybrid Macro-Micro Pedestrians
Evacuation Model to Speed Up Simulation in Road Networks. In AAMAS 2011 Workshops
(F. Dechesne, ed.), Springer, LNAI 7068, 2012, pp. 371 -- 383.
[14] Lämmel, G., M. Chraibi, A. Kemloh Wagoum, and B. Steffen, HYBRID MULTI- AND
INTER-MODAL TRANSPORT SIMULATION: A CASE STUDY ON LARGE-SCALE
EVACUATION PLANNING. Transportation Research Record, forthcoming.
[15] Henderson, L., The Statistics of Crowd Fluids. Nature, Vol. 229, No. 5284, 1971, pp. 381 --
383.
[16] Helbing, D., A fluid dynamic model for the movement of pedestrians. arXiv preprint cond-
mat/9805213, 1998.
[17] Helbing, D. and P. Molnár, Social force model for pedestrian dynamics. Physical review E,
1995.
[18] Chraibi, M., A. Seyfried, and A. Schadschneider, Generalized centrifugal-force model for
pedestrian dynamics. Phys. Rev. E, Vol. 82, No. 4, 2010, p. 46111.
[19] Tordeux, A., M. Chraibi, and A. Seyfried, Collision-free speed model for pedestrian dy-
namics. In Traffic and Granular Flow '15 (V. L. Knoop and W. Daamen, eds.), Springer
International Publishing, 2016.
[20] Blue, V. and J. Adler, Emergent Fundamental Pedestrian Flows from Cellular Automata
Microsimulation. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research
Board, Vol. 1644, 1998, pp. 29 -- 36.
[21] Burstedde, C., K. Klauck, A. Schadschneider, and J. Zittartz, Simulation of pedestrian dy-
namics using a two-dimensional cellular automaton. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its
Applications, Vol. 295, No. 3 - 4, 2001, pp. 507 -- 525.
[22] von Sivers, I. and G. Köster, Dynamic Stride Length Adaptation According to Utility And
Personal Space. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 2014, p. 30.
Crociani et al.
13
[23] Lämmel, G. and G. Flötteröd, A CA model for bidirectional pedestrian streams. Procedia
Computer Science, Vol. 52, 2015, pp. 950 -- 955.
[24] Older, S., Movement of pedestrians on footways in shopping streets. Traffic Engineering and
Control, Vol. 10, 1968, pp. 160 -- 163.
[25] Pushkarev, B. and J. M. Zupan, Capacity of walkways. Transportation Research Record, Vol.
538, 1975, pp. 1 -- 15.
[26] Zhang, J., W. Klingsch, A. Schadschneider, and A. Seyfried, Ordering in bidirectional pedes-
trian flows and its influence on the fundamental diagram. Journal of Statistical Mechanics:
Theory and Experiment, , No. 02, 2012, p. 9.
[27] Flötteröd, G. and G. Lämmer, Bidirectional pedestrian fundamental diagram. Transportation
Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 71, No. 0, 2015, pp. 194 -- 212.
[28] Lämmel, G., J. Park, and J. Zhang, Pedestrian Modeling Using Cellular Automata Simulation
for Urban Street Segments with High Pedestrian Trip Generators. Annual Meeting Preprint
16-0698, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2016.
[29] Crociani, L. and G. Lämmel, Multidestination Pedestrian Flows in Equilibrium: A Cellular
Automaton-Based Approach. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, Vol. 31,
No. 2016, 2016, pp. 432 -- 448.
[30] Seitz, M., S. Seer, S. Klettner, and G. Köster, How do we wait? Fundamentals, characteristics,
and modeling implications. In Traffic and Granular Flow '15, Springer, 2015.
[31] SBS, St. George Waterfront Redevelopment Final Environmental Impact Statement. New
York City Department of Small Business Services, August 2013.
[32] NYCDOT, St. George Redevelopment EIS- Staten Island Ferry Operational Impacts Analysis.
New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT), March 2013.
[33] Crociani, L., G. Lämmel, and G. Vizzari, Multi-Scale Simulation for Crowd Management: A
Case Study in an Urban Scenario. ABMUS 2016, 2016.
[34] Weidmann, U., Transporttechnik der Fussgänger - Transporttechnische Eigenschaftendes
Fussgängerverkehrs (Literaturstudie). Literature Research 90, Institut füer Verkehrsplanung,
Transporttechnik, Strassen- und Eisenbahnbau IVT an der ETH Zürich, 1993.
[35] Simon, P., J. Esser, and K. Nagel, Simple queueing model applied to the city of Portland.
International Journal of Modern Physics, Vol. 10, No. 5, 1999, pp. 941 -- 960.
[36] Lämmel, G., H. Klüpfel, and K. Nagel, The MATSim Network Flow Model for Traffic Simu-
lation Adapted to Large-Scale Emergency Egress and an Application to the Evacuation of the
Indonesian City of Padang in Case of a Tsunami Warning. In Pedestrian Behavior (H. Tim-
mermans, ed.), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2009, chap. 11, pp. 245 -- 265.
[37] Nash, J., Non-cooperative games. The Annals of Mathematics, Vol. 54, No. 2, 1951, pp. 286 --
295.
Crociani et al.
14
[38] Cascetta, E., A stochastic process approach to the analysis of temporal dynamics in trans-
portation networks. Transportation Research B, Vol. 23B, No. 1, 1989, pp. 1 -- 17.
[39] Gawron, C., An Iterative Algorithm to Determine the Dynamic User Equilibrium in a Traffic
Simulation Model. International Journal of Modern Physics C, Vol. 9, No. 3, 1998, pp. 393 --
407.
[40] Raney, B. and K. Nagel, Iterative Route Planning for Large-Scale Modular Transportation
Simulations. Future Generation Computer Systems, Vol. 20, No. 7, 2004, pp. 1101 -- 1118.
[41] Krajzewicz, D., J. Erdmann, M. Behrisch, and L. Bieker, Recent Development and Appli-
cations of SUMO - Simulation of Urban MObility. International Journal On Advances in
Systems and Measurements, Vol. 5, No. 3&4, 2012, pp. 128 -- 138.
|
1207.0852 | 1 | 1207 | 2012-07-03T22:30:34 | Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning: How to Model Decision-Makers That Anticipate The Future | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.GT"
] | This paper introduces a novel framework for modeling interacting humans in a multi-stage game. This "iterated semi network-form game" framework has the following desirable characteristics: (1) Bounded rational players, (2) strategic players (i.e., players account for one another's reward functions when predicting one another's behavior), and (3) computational tractability even on real-world systems. We achieve these benefits by combining concepts from game theory and reinforcement learning. To be precise, we extend the bounded rational "level-K reasoning" model to apply to games over multiple stages. Our extension allows the decomposition of the overall modeling problem into a series of smaller ones, each of which can be solved by standard reinforcement learning algorithms. We call this hybrid approach "level-K reinforcement learning". We investigate these ideas in a cyber battle scenario over a smart power grid and discuss the relationship between the behavior predicted by our model and what one might expect of real human defenders and attackers. | cs.MA | cs |
Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning: How
To Model Decision-Makers That Anticipate The
Future
Ritchie Lee, David H. Wolpert, James Bono, Scott Backhaus, Russell Bent, and
Brendan Tracey
Abstract This paper introduces a novel framework for modeling interacting hu-
mans in a multi-stage game. This “iterated semi network-form game” framework
has the following desirable characteristics: (1) Bounded rational players, (2) strate-
gic players (i.e., players account for one another’s reward functions when predict-
ing one another’s behavior), and (3) computational tractability even on real-world
systems. We achieve these benefits by combining concepts from game theory and
reinforcement learning. To be precise, we extend the bounded rational “level-K rea-
soning” model to apply to games over multiple stages. Our extension allows the
decomposition of the overall modeling problem into a series of smaller ones, each
of which can be solved by standard reinforcement learning algorithms. We call this
hybrid approach “level-K reinforcement learning”. We investigate these ideas in a
cyber battle scenario over a smart power grid and discuss the relationship between
Ritchie Lee
Carnegie Mellon University Silicon Valley, NASA Ames Research Park, Mail Stop 23-11, Moffett
Field, CA, 94035 e-mail: [email protected]
David H. Wolpert
Santa Fe Institute, 1399 Hyde Park Rd., Santa Fe, NM 87501
Los Alamos National Laboratory, MS B256, Los Alamos, NM, 87545
e-mail: [email protected]
James Bono
American University, 4400 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington DC 20016
e-mail: [email protected]
Scott Backhaus
Los Alamos National Laboratory, MS K764, Los Alamos, NM 87545
e-mail: [email protected]
Russell Bent
Los Alamos National Laboratory, MS C933, Los Alamos, NM 87545 e-mail: [email protected]
Brendan Tracey
Stanford University, 496 Lomita Mall, Stanford, CA 94305 e-mail: [email protected]
1
2
Lee, R. et al.
the behavior predicted by our model and what one might expect of real human de-
fenders and attackers.
1 Introduction
We are interested in modeling something that has never been modeled before: the
interaction of human players in a very complicated time-extended domain, such as a
cyber attack on a power grid, when the players have little or no previous experience
with that domain. Our approach combines concepts from game theory and computer
science in a novel way. In particular, we introduce the first time-extended level-K
game theory model [9, 31, 37]. We solve this model using reinforcement learning
(RL) algorithms [38] to learn each player’s policy against the level K − 1 policies
of the other players. The result is a non-equilibrium model of a complex and time-
extended scenario where bounded-rational players interact strategically. Our model
is computationally tractable even in real-world domains.
1.1 Overview and Related Work
The foundation of our approach is the use of a “semi-Bayes net” to capture the func-
tional structure of a strategic game. A semi-Bayes net is essentially a Bayes net [21]
where the conditional probability distributions for nodes representing player deci-
sions are left unspecified. Combining a semi-Bayes net with utility functions for the
players yields a “semi network-form game” (or semi net-form game) [24], which
takes the place of the extensive-form game [30] used in conventional game the-
ory.1 In this paper, we extend the semi net-form game framework to a repeated-time
structure by defining an “iterated semi net-form game”. The conditional probability
distributions at the player decision nodes are specified by combining the iterated
semi net-form game with a solution concept, e.g., the level-K RL policies used in
this paper. The result is a Bayes net model of strategic behavior.
Like all Bayes nets, our model describes the conditional dependence relation-
ships among a set of random variables. In the context of a strategic scenario, con-
ditional dependencies can be interpreted to describe, for example, the information
available to a player while making a strategic decision. In this way, semi net-form
games incorporate a notion similar to that of “information sets” found in extensive-
1 The “semi-” modifier refers to a restricted category of models within a broader class of models
called network-form games. A key difference between the semi-network form game used here
and the general formulation of network-form games is that the general formulation can handle
unawareness – situation where a player does not know of the possibility of some aspect of the
game [42]. Unawareness is a major stumbling block of conventional game theoretic approaches
in part because it forces a disequilibrium by presenting an extreme violation of the common prior
assumption [16].
Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning
3
form games. However, information in semi net-form games takes on the nature of
information in statistics, thereby opening it to formal analysis by any number of
statistical tools [22, 33] as opposed to information sets which uses an informal no-
tion. Just as information sets are the key to capturing incomplete information in
extensive-form games, conditional dependence relationships are the key to captur-
ing incomplete information in semi net-form games.2 In our example of a cyber
battle, the cyber defender (power grid operator) has access to the full system state,
whereas the cyber attacker only has access to the part of the system that has been
compromised. Representing this in the semi net-form game diagram means the de-
fender’s decision node has the full system state as its parent, while the attacker’s
decision node only has a subset of the state as its parent. As a consequence, the
attacker cannot distinguish between some of the system states. In the language of
extensive-form games, we say that all states mapping to the same attacker’s obser-
vation belong to the same information set.
It is important to recognize that the semi net-form game model is independent
of a solution concept. Just as a researcher can apply a variety of equilibrium con-
cepts (Nash equilibrium, subgame perfect equilibrium, quantal response equilib-
rium [27, 28], etc.) to the same extensive-form game, so too can various solution
concepts apply to the same semi net-form game. In this paper we focus on the use
of level-K RL policies, however, there is no way in which the semi net-form games
model is dependent on that concept. One could, in principle, apply Nash equilib-
rium, subgame perfect equilibrium, quantal response equilibrium, etc. to a semi net-
form game, though doing so may not result in a computationally tractable model or
a good description of human behavior.
In the remainder of this introduction, we describe three characteristics whose
unique combination is the contribution of our paper. The first is that players in our
model are strategic; that their policy choices depend on the reward functions of
the other players. This is in contrast to learning-in-games and co-evolution mod-
els [14, 20] wherein players do not use information about their opponents’ reward
function to predict their opponents’ decisions and choose their own actions. On this
point, we are following experimental studies [5], which routinely demonstrate the
responsiveness of player behavior to changes in the rewards of other players.
Second, our approach is computationally feasible even on real-world problems.
This is in contrast to equilibrium models such as subgame perfect equilibrium
and quantal response equilibrium. We avoid the computational problems associ-
ated with solving for equilibria by using the level-K RL policy model, which is a
non-equilibrium solution concept. That is, since level-K players are not forced to
have correct beliefs about the actions of the other players, the level-K strategy of
2 Harsanyi’s Bayesian games [17] are a special case of extensive form games in which nature
first chooses the game, and this move by nature generally belongs to different information sets
for the different players. This structure converts the game of incomplete information to a game
of imperfect information, i.e. the players have imperfectly observed nature’s move. In addition to
the fact that Harsanyi’s used extensive form games in his work while we’re using semi network-
form games, our work also differs in what we are modeling. Harsanyi focused on incomplete
information, while our model incorporates incomplete information and any other uncertainty or
stochasticity in the strategic setting.
4
Lee, R. et al.
player i does not depend on the actual strategy of i’s opponents. As a result, this
means that the level-K RL policies of each of the players can be solved indepen-
dently. The computational tractability of our model is also in contrast to partially
observable Markov decision process- (POMDP-) based models (e.g. Interactive-
POMDPs [15]) in which players are required to maintain belief states over belief
states thus causing a quick explosion of the computational space. We circumvent
this explosion of belief states by formulating policies as mappings from a player’s
memory to actions, where memory refers to some subset of a player’s current and
past observations, past actions, and statistics derived from those variables. This for-
mulation puts our work more squarely in the literature of standard RL [18, 38]. As a
final point of computational tractability, our approach uses the policy representation
instead of the strategic representation of player decisions. The difference is that the
policy representation forces player behavior to be stationary – the time index is not
an argument of the policy – whereas in the strategic representation strategies are
non-stationary in general.
Third, since our goal is to predict the behavior of real human players, we
rely heavily on the experimental game theory literature to motivate our modeling
choices. Using the policy mapping from memories to actions, it is straightforward
to introduce experimentally motivated behavioral features such as noisy, sampled
or bounded memory. The result of the RL, then, is an optimal strategy given more
realistic assumptions about the limitations of human beings.3 This is in contrast to
the literature on coevolutionary RL [13, 29], where the goal is to find optimal strate-
gies. For example, the work in [8] uses RL to design expert checkers strategies. In
those models, behavioral features motivated by human experimental data are not
included due to the constraining effect they have on optimal strategies. Hence, RL
in our model is used as a description of how real humans behave. This use for RL
has a foundation in neurological research [12, 25], where it has provided a useful
framework for studying and predicting conditioning, habits, goal-directed actions,
incentive salience, motivation and vigor [26]. The level-K model is itself another
way in which we incorporate experimentally motivated themes. In particular, by
using the level-K model instead of an equilibrium solution concept, we avoid the
awkward assumption that players’ predictions about each other are always correct
[5, 19, 32].
We investigate all of this for modeling a cyber battle over a smart power grid. We
discuss the relationship between the behavior predicted by our model and what one
might expect of real human defenders and attackers.
3 One can imagine an extension where the RL training is modified to reflect bounded rationality,
satisfying [35], etc. For example, to capture satisficing, the RL may be stopped upon achieving the
satisficing level of utility. Note that we do not pursue such bounded rational RL here.
Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning
1.2 Roadmap
5
This chapter is organized as follows. In Section 2, we provide a review of semi
network-form games and the level-K d-relaxed strategies solution concept [24].
This review is the starting point for the theoretical advances of this paper found
in Section 3. In Section 3 we extend the semi net-form games formalism to iterated
semi network-form games, which enables interactions over a time-repeated struc-
ture. This is also where we introduce the level-K RL solution concept. Section 3 is
the major theoretical contribution of this paper. In Section 4, we apply the iterated
semi net-form game framework to model a cyber battle on a smart power distribu-
tion network. The goal of Section 4 is to illustrate how an iterated semi net-form
game is realized and how the level-K RL policy solution concept is implemented.
In this section we describe the setting of the scenario and lay out the iterated semi
net-form game model, including observations, memories, moves and utility func-
tions for both players. We also describe the details of the level-K RL algorithm we
use to solve for players’ policies. This section concludes with simulation results and
a possible explanation for the resulting behaviors. Section 5 provides a concluding
discussion of the iterated semi net-form games framework and future work.
2 Semi Network-Form Games Review
In this section, we provide a brief review of semi net-form games. For a rigorous
treatment, please refer to Lee and Wolpert [24].
2.1 Framework Description
A “semi network-form game” (or semi net-form game) uses a Bayes net [21] to
serve as the underlying probabilistic framework, consequently representing all parts
of the system using random variables. Non-human components such as automation
and physical systems are described using “chance” nodes, while human components
are described using “decision” nodes. Formally, chance nodes differ from decision
nodes in that their conditional probability distributions are prespecified. In contrast,
each decision node is associated with a utility function which maps an instantiation
of the net to a real number quantifying the player’s utility. In addition to know-
ing the conditional distributions at the chance nodes, we must also determine the
conditional distributions at the decision nodes to fully specify the Bayes net. We
will discuss how to arrive at the players’ conditional distributions over possible ac-
tions, also called their “strategies”, later in Section 2.2. The discussion is in terms of
countable spaces, but much of the discussion carries over to the uncountable case.
We describe a semi net-form game as follows:
6
Lee, R. et al.
An (N -player) semi network-form game is described by a quintuple (G, X, u, R, π)
where
1. G is a finite directed acyclic graph represented by a set of vertices and a set of
edges. The graph G defines the topology of the Bayes network, thus specifying
the random variables as well as the relationships between them.
2. X is a Cartesian product of the variable space of all vertices. Thus X contains all
instantiations of the Bayes network.
3. u is a function that takes an instantiation of the Bayes network as input and out-
puts a vector in RN , where component i of the output vector represents player
i’s utility of the input instantiation. We will typically view it as a set of N utility
functions where each one maps an instantiation of the network to a real number.
4. R is a partition of the vertices into N + 1 subsets. The first N partitions contain
exactly one vertex, and are used to associate assignments of decision nodes to
players. In other words, each player controls a single decision node. The N + 1
partition contains the remainder of the vertices, which are the chance nodes.
5. π is a function that assigns to every chance node a conditional probability distri-
bution [21] of that node conditioned on the values of its parents.
Specifically, Xv is the set of all possible states at node v, ui is the utility function
of player i, R(i) is the decision node set by player i, and π is the fixed set of distri-
butions at chance nodes. Semi net-form game is a general framework that has broad
modeling capabilities. As an example, a normal-form game [30] is a semi net-form
game that has no edges. As another example, let v be a decision node of player i that
has one parent, v(cid:48) . Then the conditional distribution P(Xv Xv(cid:48) ) is a generalization
of an information set.
2.2 Solution Concept: Level-K D-Relaxed Strategies
In order to make meaningful predictions of the outcomes of the games, we must
solve for the strategies of the players by converting the utility function at each deci-
sion node into a conditional probability distribution over that node. This is accom-
plished using a set of formal rules and assumptions applied to the players called a
solution concept. A number of solution concepts have been proposed in the game
theory literature. Many of which show promise in modeling real human behavior in
game theory experiments, such as level-K thinking, quantal response equilibrium,
and cognitive hierarchy. Although this work uses level-K exclusively, we are by
no means wedded to this equilibrium concept. In fact, semi net-form games can
be adapted to use other models, such as Nash equilibrium, quantal response equi-
librium, quantal level-K, and cognitive hierarchy. Studies [5, 43] have found that
performance of an equilibrium concept varies a fair amount depending on the game.
Thus it may be wise to use different equilibrium concepts for different problems.
Level-K thinking [11] is a game theoretic solution concept used to predict the
outcome of human-human interactions. A number of studies [2, 4, 5, 10, 11, 43] have
Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning
7
shown promising results predicting experimental data in games using this method.
The concept of level-K is defined recursively as follows. A level K player plays
(picks his action) as though all other players are playing at level K − 1, who, in
turn, play as though all other players are playing at level K − 2, etc. This process
continues until level 0 is reached, where the player plays according to a prespecified
prior distribution. Notice that running this process for a player at K ≥ 2 results in
ricocheting between players. For example, if player A is a level 2 player, he plays
as though player B is a level 1 player, who in turn plays as though player A is a
level 0 player. Note that player B in this example may not be a level 1 player in
reality – only that player A assumes him to be during his reasoning process. Since
this ricocheting process between levels takes place entirely in the player’s mind,
no wall clock time is counted (we do not consider the time it takes for a human
to run through his reasoning process). We do not claim that humans actually think
in this manner, but rather that this process serves as a good model for predicting
the outcome of interactions at the aggregate level. In most games, the player’s level
K is a fairly low number for humans; experimental studies [5] have found K to be
somewhere between 1 and 2.
In [24], the authors propose a novel solution concept called “level-K d-relaxed
strategies” that adapts the traditional level-K concept to semi network-form games.
The algorithm proceeds as follows. To form the best response of a decision node
v, the associated player i = R−1 (v) will want to calculate quantities of the form
argmax xv [E(ui xv , x pa(v) )], where ui is the player’s utility, xv is the variable set by
the player (i.e., his move), and x pa(v) is the realization of his parents that he observes.
We hypothesize that he (behaves as though he) approximates this calculation in sev-
eral steps. First, he samples M candidate moves from a “satisficing” distribution (a
prior distribution over his moves). Then, for each candidate move, he estimates the
expected utility resulting from playing that move by sampling M (cid:48) times the posterior
probability distribution over the entire Bayes net given his parents and his actions
(which accounts for what he knows and controls), and computing the sample ex-
pectation uK
i . Decision nodes of other players are assumed to be playing at a fixed
conditional probability distribution computed at level K − 1. Finally, the player picks
the move that has the highest estimated expected utility. In other words, the player
performs a finite-sample inference of his utility function using the information avail-
able to him, then picks (out of a subset of all his moves) the move that yields the
highest expected utility. For better computational performance, the algorithm reuses
certain sample sets by exploiting the d-separation property of Bayes nets [21]. The
solution concept was used to model pilot behavior in a mid-air encounter scenario,
and showed reasonable behavioral results.
3 Iterated Semi Network-Form Games
In the previous section, we described a method to model a single-shot scenario.
That is, a scenario in which each player makes a single decision. However, most
8
Lee, R. et al.
real-world scenarios are not single-shot. Rather, what is typically seen is that the
outcome is determined by a series of decisions made by each player over a time-
repeated structure. One way to model time extension is to ignore the structure, create
a large “rolled-out” net4 that explicitly enumerates the repeated nodes, then apply
level-K d-relaxed strategies described in Section 2.2. The problem with such an
approach is that the roll-out causes a linear explosion in the number of decision
nodes with the number of time steps. Since the computational complexity of level-
K d-relaxed strategies is polynomial (to the K th power) in the number of decision
nodes [24], the algorithm becomes prohibitively slow in solving scenarios with more
than a few time steps.
In this section, we extend the semi network-form game from Section 2 to an
“iterated semi network-form game” (or iterated semi net-form game) in order to ex-
plicitly model the repeated-time structure of the game. Then we introduce a novel
solution concept called “level-K reinforcement learning” that adapts level-K think-
ing to the iterated semi network-form game setting.
3.1 Construction of an Iterated Semi Network-Form Game
We describe the extended framework by building up the components incrementally.
A “semi Bayes net” is like a standard Bayes net, in that a semi Bayes net has a topol-
ogy specified by a set of vertices and directed edges, and variable spaces that define
the possible values each vertex can take on. However, unlike a standard Bayes net,
some nodes have conditional probability distributions (CPDs) specified, whereas
some do not. The nodes that do not have their CPDs specified are decision nodes
with one node assigned to each player. A pictorial example of a semi Bayes net is
shown in Figure 1(a). The dependencies between variables are represented by di-
rected edges. The oval nodes are chance nodes and have their CPDs specified; the
rectangular nodes are decision nodes and have their CPDs unspecified. In this paper,
the unspecified distributions will be set by the interacting players and are specified
by the solution concept.
We create two types of semi Bayes nets: a “base semi Bayes net” and a “kernel
semi Bayes net”. A “base semi Bayes net” specifies the information available to all
the players at the start of play, and is where the policy decisions of the game are
made. Note that even though the game is time-extended, players only ever make
one real decision. This decision concerns which policy to play, and it is made at
the beginning of the game in the base semi Bayes net. After the policy decision is
made, action decisions are merely the result of evaluating the policy at the current
state. In contrast, the “kernel semi Bayes net” specifies both how information from
the past proceeds to future instances of the players during play, and how the state of
nature evolves during play. In particular, it specifies not only what a player currently
4 Here we are violating the definition of a semi net-form game that each player can only control a
single decision node. One way to deal with this is to treat past and future selves as different players,
but having the same utility function.
Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning
9
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Fig. 1 Example construction of an iterated semi Bayes net with a base net and two kernels, i.e.
T = 2, by repeatedly applying the “gluing” procedure. (a) A base semi Bayes net. (b) A kernel
semi Bayes net being “glued” to a base semi Bayes net. (c) A second kernel semi Bayes net being
appended to the net. (d) The final semi iterated Bayes net with T = 2. The numeric subscript
indicates the time step to which each variable belongs.
observes, but also what they remember from their past observations and past actions.
For example, the kernel semi Bayes net describes how the policy chosen in the base
semi Bayes net is propagated to a player’s future decision nodes, where a player’s
action choices are merely the result of evaluating that policy. From these two, we
construct an “iterated semi Bayes net” by starting with the base semi Bayes net
D0 A0 S0 OA,0 OD,0 CPD specified CPD unspecified D1 S0 D0 A0 S1 OA,1 OD,1 A1 D0 A0 S0 OA,0 OD,0 Gluing Function D1 S0 D0 A0 S1 OA,1 OD,1 A1 OA,0 OD,0 D2 S1 D1 A1 S2 OA,2 OD,2 A2 Gluing Function D1 S0 D0 A0 S1 OA,1 OD,1 A1 S2 OA,2 OD,2 D2 A2 OA,0 OD,0 10
Lee, R. et al.
then repeatedly appending the kernel semi Bayes net to it T times. Each append
operation uses a “gluing” procedure that merges nodes from the first semi Bayes net
to root nodes with the same spaces in the second semi Bayes net. Figure 1 illustrates
how we build up an iterated semi Bayes net with a base net and two kernels, i.e.
T = 2. Finally, we create an “iterated semi net-form game” by endowing an iterated
semi Bayes net with a reward function, one for each player, defined at each time
instant. The reward function takes as input an instantiation of the net at a particular
(discrete) time and outputs a reward metric representing how happy the player is
with that instantiation.5
3.2 Solution Concept: Level-K Reinforcement Learning
We introduce a novel solution concept for iterated semi net-form games that com-
bines level-K thinking and reinforcement learning. Instead of considering all possi-
ble combinations of actions at individual decision nodes, we simplify the decision
space by assuming that the players make only a single decision – what policy to play
for the rest of the net. That is, the players pick a policy in the base semi Bayes net,
and then executes that policy over all repetitions of the kernel semi Bayes net. This
assumption allows us to convert the problem of computing a combination of actions
over all time steps to one where we calculate a player’s policy only once and reuse
it T times. By reusing the policy, the computational complexity becomes indepen-
dent of the total number of time steps. Formally, each unspecified node of a player
contains two parts: A policy and an action. The policy is chosen in the base stage
and is passed unchanged from the player’s node in the base semi Bayes net to the
player’s node in the kernel semi Bayes net for all time steps. At each time step, the
action component of the node is sampled from the policy based on the actual values
of the node’s parents. We point out that the utility of a particular policy depends on
the policy decisions of other players because the reward functions of both players
depend on the variables in the net.
The manner in which players make decisions given this coupling is specified
by the solution concept. In this work we handle the interaction between players by
extending standard level-K thinking from action space to policy space. That is, in-
stead of choosing the best level K action (assuming other players are choosing the
best level K − 1 action), players choose the best level K policy (assuming that other
players choose their best level K − 1 policy). Instead of prespecifying a level 0 distri-
bution over actions, we now specify a level 0 distribution over policies. Notice that
from the perspective of a level K player, the behavior of the level K − 1 opponents is
identical to a chance node. Thus, to the player deciding his policy, the other players
are just a part of his environment. Now what remains to be done is to calculate the
best response policy of the player. In level-K reinforcement learning, we choose the
5 We use the term reward function to conform to the language used in the RL literature. This is
identical to the game theoretic notion of instantaneous utility (as opposed to the total utility, i.e.
the present discounted value of instantaneous utilities).
Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning
11
utility of a player to be the sum of his rewards from each time step. In other words,
the player selects the policy which leads to the highest expected infinite sum of dis-
counted rewards. Noting this together with the fact that the actions of other players
are identical to a stochastic environment, we see that the optimization is the same as
a single-agent reinforcement learning problem where an agent must maximize his
reward by observing his environment and choosing appropriate actions. There are
many standard reinforcement learning techniques that can be used to solve such a
problem [3, 18, 38]. The techniques we use in this paper are described in detail in
Section 4.4.2.
For example, in a two-player iterated semi network-form game, the level 1 policy
of player A is trained using reinforcement learning by assuming an environment that
includes a player B playing a level 0 policy. If A is instead at level 2, his environment
includes player B using a level 1 policy. Player A imagines this level 1 policy as
having been reinforcement learned against a level 0 player A. To save computation
time, it is assumed that how player B learns his level 1 distribution and how A
imagines B to learn his level 1 distribution are identical.
4 Application: Cyber-Physical Security of a Power Network
4.1 Introduction
We test our iterated semi net-form game modeling concept on a simplified model
of an electrical power grid controlled by a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisi-
tion (SCADA) system [39]. A SCADA system forms the cyber and communication
components of many critical cyber physical infrastructures, e.g., electrical power
grids, chemical and nuclear plants, transportation systems, and water systems. Hu-
man operators use SCADA systems to receive data from and send control signals to
physical devices such as circuit breakers and power generators in the electrical grid.
These signals cause physical changes in the infrastructure such as ramping elec-
trical power generation levels to maintain grid stability or modifying the electrical
grid’s topology to maintain the grid’s resilience to random component failures. If
a SCADA system is compromised by a cyber attack, the human attacker may alter
these control signals with the intention of degrading operations or causing perma-
nent, widespread damage to the physical infrastructure.
The increasing connection of SCADA to other cyber systems and the use of com-
puter systems for SCADA platforms is creating new vulnerabilities of SCADA to
cyber attack [7]. These vulnerabilities increase the likelihood that the SCADA sys-
tems can and will be penetrated. However, even when a human attacker has gained
some control over the physical components, the human operators still have some
SCADA observation and control capability. The operators can use this capability to
anticipate and counter the attacker moves to limit or deny the damage and maintain
continuity of the infrastructure’s operation. Traditional cyber security research on
12
Lee, R. et al.
cyber systems has focused on identifying vulnerabilities and how to mitigate those
vulnerabilities. Here, instead, we assume that an attacker has penetrated the system,
and we want to predict the outcome.
The SCADA attack and the defense by the SCADA operator can be modeled
as a machine-mediated, human-human adversarial game. In the remainder of this
section, we construct an iterated semi network-form game to model just such an
interaction taking place over a simplified model of a SCADA-controlled electrical
grid. The game is simulated using the level-K reinforcement learning solution con-
cept described earlier. We explore how the strategic thinking embodied in level-K
reinforcement learning affects the player performance and outcomes between play-
ers of different level K .
4.2 Scenario Model
Figure 2 shows a schematic of our simplified electrical grid infrastructure. It con-
sists of a single, radial distribution circuit [40] starting at the low-voltage side of a
transformer at a substation (node 1) and serving customers at nodes 2 and 3. Node 2
represents an aggregation of small consumer loads distributed along the circuit–such
load aggregation is often done to reduce model complexity when simulating electri-
cal distribution systems. Node 3 represents a relatively large, individually-modeled
distributed generator located near the end of the circuit.
Fig. 2 Schematic drawing of the three-node distribution circuit consisting of three nodes i. The
voltage at each node is Vi ; the real and reactive power injections are pi and qi , respectively; the
line reactance and resistance are xi and ri , respectively; and the real and reactive power flows in
the distribution lines are Pi and Qi , respectively.
In this figure, Vi , pi , and qi are the voltage and real and reactive power injec-
tions at node i. Pi , Qi , ri , and xi are the real power flow, reactive power flow, re-
sistance, and reactance of circuit segment i. These quasi-static power injections,
power flows, voltages, and line properties are related by the nonlinear AC power
flow equations [23]. Our focus in this work is on the game theoretic aspects of the
model, therefore, we use a linearized description of the electrical power flow, i.e.,
V1V3V2P1, Q1P2, Q2p2, q2p3, q3r1, x1r2, x2 Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning
13
(1)
(2)
the LinDistFlow equations [40]
P2 = − p3 , Q2 = −q3 , P1 = P2 + p2 , Q1 = Q2 + q2
V2 = V1 − (r1 P1 + x1 Q1 ), V3 = V2 − (r2 P2 + x2 Q2 ).
Here, all terms have been normalized by the nominal system voltage V0 [23].
In this model, we assume that the circuit configuration is constant with ri = 0.03
and xi = 0.03. To emulate the normal fluctuations of consumer real load, p2 is drawn
from a uniform distribution over the range [1.35, 1.5] at each time step of the game.
The consumer reactive power is assumed to scale with real power, and we take
q2 = 0.5 p2 at each step of the game. The node 3 real power injection p3 = 1 is
also taken as constant implying that, although the distributed generator at node 3 is
controllable (as opposed to a fluctuating renewable generator), its output has been
fixed. Node 3 is then a reasonable model of an internal combustion engine/generator
set burning diesel or perhaps methane derived from landfill gas. Such distributed
generation is becoming more common in electrical distribution systems.
In our simplified game, the SCADA operator (defender) has one objective, i.e.,
keeping the voltages V2 and V3 within appropriate operating bounds (described in
more detail below). To accomplish this the operator normally has two controls: 1)
he can change the voltage V1 at the head of the circuit, and 2) he can adjust the
reactive power output q3 of the distributed generator at node 3. However, we assume
that the system has been compromised, and the attacker has taken control of q3
while the defender retains control of V1 . In this circumstance, the attacker may
use the injection of reactive power q3 to modify all the Qi causing the voltage V2 to
deviate significantly from 1.0. Excessive deviation of V2 or V3 can damage customer
equipment [23] or perhaps initiate a cascading failure beyond the circuit in question.
In the language of an iterated semi network-form game, the change in V1 is the
decision variable of the defender, q3 is the decision variable of the attacker, and V2 ,
V3 , and the rest of the system state are determined by the LinDistFlow equations
and probability distribution described above.
4.2.1 Players’ Decision Spaces
In this scenario, the defender maintains control of V1 which he can adjust in dis-
crete steps via a variable-tap transformer [23], however, hardware-imposed limits
constrain the defender’s actions at time t to the following domain
DD,t = {min(vma x , V1,t + δv), V1,t , max(vmin , V1,t − δv)}
where δv is the voltage step size for the transformer, and vmin and vma x represent
the absolute min and max voltage the transformer can produce. In simple terms,
the defender may leave V1 unchanged or move it up or down by δv as long as V1
stays within the range [vmin , vma x ]. In our model, we take vmin = 0.90, vma x = 1.10,
and δv = 0.02. Similarly, hardware limitations of the generator at node 3 constrain
(3)
14
Lee, R. et al.
the attacker’s range of control of q3 . In reality, the maximum and minimum values
of q3 can be a complicated function [23] of the maximum real power generation
capability p3,ma x and the actual generation level p3 . To keep the focus on the game
theoretic aspects of the model, we simplify this dependence by taking the attacker’s
q3 control domain to be
DA,t = {−q3,ma x , . . . , 0, . . . , q3,ma x },
with q3,ma x = p3,ma x . To reduce the complexity of the reinforcement learning com-
putations, we also discretize the attacker’s move space to eleven equally-spaced set-
tings with −q3,ma x and +q3,ma x as the end points. Later, we study how the behavior
and performance of the attacker depends on the size of the assets under his control
by varying p3 from 0 to 1.8.
(4)
4.2.2 Players’ Observed Spaces
The defender and attacker make observations of the system state via the SCADA
system and the attacker’s compromise of node 3, respectively. Via the SCADA sys-
tem, the defender retains wide system visibility of the variables important to his
operation of the system, i.e., the defender’s observed space is given by
ΩD = [V1 , V2 , V3 , P1 , Q1 , MD ].
Because he does not have access to the full SCADA system, the attacker’s observed
space is somewhat more limited
ΩA = [V2 , V3 , p3 , q3 , MA ].
(6)
Here, MD and MA each denote real numbers that represent a handcrafted summary
metric of the respective player’s memory of the past events in the game. These are
described in Section 4.2.4.
(5)
4.2.3 Players’ Rewards
The defender desires to maintain a high quality of service by controlling the voltages
V2 and V3 near the desired normalized voltage of 1.0. In contrast, the attacker wishes
to damage equipment at node 2 by forcing V2 beyond normal operating limits. Both
the defender and attacker manipulate their controls in an attempt to maximize their
(cid:33)2
(cid:32) V3 − 1
(cid:33)2 −
(cid:32) V2 − 1
own average reward, expressed through the following reward functions
RD = −
,
RA = Θ(V2 − (1 + )) + Θ((1 − ) − V2 ).
(8)
(7)
Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning
15
Here, represents the halfwidth of the nominally good range of normalized voltage.
For most distribution systems under consideration, ∼ 0.05. Θ(·) is the step function.
4.2.4 Players’ Memory Summary Metrics
(9)
MD,t =
1
m + 1
sign(V1,n − V1,n−1 ) sign(V3,n − V3,n−1 )
The defender and attacker use memory of the system evolution in an attempt to
estimate part of the state that is not directly observable. In principle, player memo-
ries should be constructed based on specific application domain knowledge or inter-
views with such experts. However, in this initial work, we simply propose a memory
summary metric for each player that potentially provides him with additional, yet
t(cid:88)
imperfect, system information. We define the defender memory summary metric to
be
n=t−m
If the attacker has very limited q3 capability, both p3 and q3 are relatively constant,
and changes in V3 should follow changes in V1 , which is directly controlled by the
defender. If all V3 changes are as expected, then MD = 1. The correlation between
V1 and V3 changes can be broken by an attacker with high q3 capability because
large changes in q3 can make V1 and V3 move in opposite directions. If attacker
actions always cause V1 and V3 to move in opposite directions, then MD = −1. This
correlation can also be broken by variability in the (unobserved) p2 and q2 . The
attacker could use this ( p2 , q2 ) variability, which is unobserved by the attacker, to
mask his actions at node 3. Such masking is more important in a setting where the
defender is uncertain of the presence of the attacker, which we will address in future
work.
As with the defender memory summary metric, the intent of MA is to estimate
some unobserved part of the state. Perhaps the most important unobserved state
variable for the attacker is V1 which reveals the vulnerability of the defender and
would be extremely valuable information for the attacker. If the attacker knows the
rules that the defender must follow, i.e., Equation (3), he can use his observations to
(cid:32) ∆V3,n − ∆q3,n x2 /V0
(cid:32)
(cid:33)(cid:33)
t(cid:88)
infer V1 . One mathematical construct that provides this inference is
floor
δv
n=t−m
If the attacker increases q3 by ∆q3,t = q3,t − q3,t−1 , he would expect a proportional
increase in V3 by ∆V3,t = V3,t − V3,t−1 ∼ ∆q3 x2 /V0 . If V3 changes according to this
reasoning, then the argument in MA is zero. However, if the defender adjusts V1 at
the same time step, the change in V3 would be modified. If ∆V3,t is greater or lower
than the value expected by the attacker by ∆V/N , the argument in MA is +1 or -1,
respectively. The sum then keeps track of the net change in V1 over the previous m
time steps. Note also that the stochastic load ( p2 , q2 ) will also cause changes in V3
and, if large enough, it can effectively mask the defender behavior from the attacker.
MA,t =
sign
.
(10)
16
4.3 Iterated Semi Network-Form Game Model
Lee, R. et al.
We model the scenario described in Section 4.2 as an iterated semi net-form game
set in the graph shown in Figure 3. The figure shows the net for 2 time steps with
the numeric subscript on each variable denoting the time step to which it belongs.
The system state S = [P2 , Q2 , P1 , V1 , V2 , V3 ] is a vector that represents the current
state of the power grid network. The vector comprises of key system variables
with their relationships defined in Equations (1) and (2). The observation nodes
OD = [V1 , V2 , V3 , P1 , Q1 ] and OA = [V2 , V3 , p3 , q3 ] are vectors representing the part
of the system state that is observed by the defender and attacker, respectively. We
compute these observation nodes by taking the system state S , and passing through
unchanged only the variables that the player observes. Each player’s observation is
incorporated into a memory node (MD and MA for the defender and attacker, respec-
tively) that summarizes information from the player’s past and present. The memory
nodes6 are given by MD,t = [OD , MD,t , DD,t−1 ] and MA,t = [OA,t , MA,t , DA,t−1 ]. Now,
the defender uses his memory MD to set the decision node DD , which adjusts the
setting of the voltage-tap transformer (up to one increment in either direction) and
sets the voltage V1 . On the other hand, the attacker uses his memory MA to set the
decision node DA , which sets q3 . Finally, the decisions of the players are propagated
to the following time step to evolve the system state. In our experiments we repeat
this process for T = 100 time steps.
4.4 Computing the Solution Concept
We compute the level-K policies of the players following the level-K reinforcement
learning solution concept described in Section 3.2. First, we form the base of the
level-K hierarchy by defining level 0 policies for the defender and attacker. Then,
we describe the details of how we apply reinforcement learning to bootstrap up to
levels K > 0. A level 0 policy represents a prior on the player’s policy, i.e., it defines
how a non-strategic player would play. In this work, we handcrafted level 0 policies
based on expert knowledge of the domain. In future work, we would like to devise
an automated and somewhat “principled” way of setting the level 0 policies.
4.4.1 Level 0 Policies
Often, level 0 players are assumed to choose their moves randomly from their move
spaces DD,t and DA,t . However, we do not believe this to be a good assumption, es-
pecially for SCADA operators. These operators have training which influences how
6 To be technically correct, we must also include the variables carried by the memory nodes MD
and MA for the sole purpose of calculating MD and MA , respectively. However, for simplicity, we
are not showing these variables explicitly.
Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning
17
Fig. 3 The iterated semi net-form game graph of the cyber security of a smart power network
scenario. The graph shows 2 time steps explicitly. In our experiments we choose the number of
time steps T = 100. We use subscripts D and A to denote node association with the defender
and attacker, respectively, and the numeric subscript to denote the time step. The system state S
represents the current state of the power grid network. The players make partial observations O of
the system and use them to update their memories M . The memories are used to pick their action
D.
they control the system when no attacker is present, i.e., the “normal” state. In con-
trast, a random-move assumption may be a reasonable model for a level 0 attacker
that has more knowledge of cyber intrusion than of manipulation of the electrical
grid. However, we assume that our level 0 attacker also has some knowledge of the
electrical grid.
If there is no attacker present on the SCADA system, the defender can maximize
his reward by adjusting V1 to move the average of V2 and V3 closer to 1.0 without
any concern for what may happen in the future. We take this myopic behavior as
representative of the level 0 defender, i.e.,
πD (V2,t , V3,t ) = arg minDD,t
(V2,t + V3,t )
2
− 1
(11)
DD,1 S0 MA,0 MD,0 DD,0 DA,0 S1 OA,1 OD,1 MA MD MA,1 MD,1 DA,1 S2 OA,2 OD,2 MA,2 MD,2 DD,2 DA,2 OA,0 OD,0 18
Lee, R. et al.
For the level 0 attacker, we adopt a drift-and-strike policy which requires some
knowledge of the physical circuit and power flow equations. We propose that the
attacker “drifts” in one direction by steadily increasing (or decreasing) q3 by one
increment at each time step. The level 0 attacker decides the direction of the drift
based on V2 , i.e., the attacker drifts to larger q3 if V2 < 1. The choice of V2 to decide
the direction of the drift is somewhat arbitary. However, this is simply assumed level
0 attacker behavior. The drift in q3 causes a drift in Q1 and, without any compen-
sating move by the defender, a drift in V2 . However, a level 0 defender compensates
by drifting V1 in the opposite sense as V2 in order to keep the average of V2 and V3
close to 1.0. The level 0 attacker continues this slow drift until, based on his knowl-
edge of the power flow equations and the physical circuit, he detects that a sudden
large change in q3 in the opposite direction of the drift would push V2 outside the
range [1 − ε, 1 + ]. If the deviation of V2 is large enough, it will take the defender
a number of time steps to bring V2 back in range, and the attacker accumulates re-
ward during this recovery time. More formally this level 0 attacker policy can be
expressed as
Level0Attacker()
1 V ∗ = maxq∈DA,t V2 − 1;
if V ∗ > θA
2
then return arg maxq∈DA,t V2 − 1;
3
if V2 < 1
4
then return q3,t−1 + 1;
5
return q3,t−1 − 1;
6
Here, θA is the threshold parameter that triggers the strike. Throughout this work,
we have used θA = 0.07 > to indicate when an attacker strike will accumulate
reward.
4.4.2 Reinforcement Learning Details
The training environment of a level-K player consists of all nodes that he does not
control, including all chance nodes and the decision nodes of other players, which
are assumed to be playing with a level K − 1 policy. This leaves us with a standard
single-agent reinforcement learning problem, where given an observation, the player
must choose an action to maximize some notion of cumulative reward. We follow
loosely the SARSA reinforcement learning setup in [38]. First, we choose the opti-
mization objective to be his expected sum of discounted single-step rewards (given
by Equations 7 and 8). To reduce the output space of the player, we impose an ε-
greedy parameterization on the player’s policy space. That is, the player plays what
he thinks is the “best” action with probability 1 − ε, and plays uniformly randomly
over all his actions with probability ε. Playing all possible actions with nonzero
probability ensures sufficient exploration of the environment space for learning. At
the core of the SARSA algorithm is to learn the “Q-function”, which is a map-
ping from observations and actions to expected sum of discounted rewards (also
known as “Q-values”). Given an observation of the system, the Q-function gives the
Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning
19
long-term reward for playing a certain action. To maximize the reward gathered, the
player simply plays the action with the highest Q-value at each step.
To learn the Q-function, we apply the one-step SARSA on-policy algorithm
in [38].7 However, since the players’ input spaces are continuous variables, we can-
not use a table to store the learned Q-values. For this reason, we approximate the
Q-function using a neural-network [3, 34]. Neural networks are a common choice
because of its advantages as a universal function approximator and being a compact
representation of the policy.
To improve stability and performance, we make the following popular modifi-
cations to the algorithm: First, we run the algorithm in semi-batch mode, where
training updates are gathered and updated at the end of the episode rather than fol-
lowing each time step. Second, we promote initial exploration using optimistic starts
(high initial Q-values) and by scheduling the exploration parameter ε to a high rate
of exploration at first, then slowly decreasing it as the training progresses.
4.5 Results and Discussion
Level-K reinforcement learning was performed for all sequential combinations of
attacker and defender pairings, i.e., D1/A0, D2/A1, A1/D0, and A2/D1. Here, we
refer to a level K player using a shorthand where the letter indicates attacker or
defender and the number indicates the player’s level. The pairing of two players
is indicated by a “/”. The training was performed for q3,ma x in the range 0.2 to
1.8. Subsequent to training, simulations were run to assess the performance of the
different player levels. The player’s average reward per step for the different pairs is
shown in Figure 4 as a function of q3,ma x . Figure 5 shows snapshots of the players’
behavior for the pairings D0/A0, D1/A0, and D0/A1 for q3,ma x =0.7, 1.2, and 1.6.
Figure 6 shows the same results but for one level higher, i.e., D1/A1, D2/A1, and
D1/A2.
D0/A0
Figures 5(b), (e), and (h) show the interaction between the two level 0 policies, and
Figures 4(a) and (d) show the average player performance. These initial simulations
set the stage for interpreting the subsequent reinforcement learning. For q3,ma x < 0.8,
the black circles in Figure 4(d) show that A0 is unable to push V2 outside of the
range [1 − , 1 + ]. The explanation is found in Figure 5(b). With V2 < 1 and say
q3,ma x = 0.7, A0’s drift will have saturated at q3 = q3,ma x = 0.7. However, with θA =
0.07, A0 will not strike by changing q3 = −q3,ma x = −0.7 unless he projects such
a strike could drive V2 below 0.93. A0’s limited q3 -strike capability is not enough
7 Singh et al. [36] describes the characteristics of SARSA when used in partially observable situa-
tions. SARSA will converge to a reasonable policy as long as the observed variables are reasonably
Markov.
20
Lee, R. et al.
overcome the threshold and the system becomes locked in a quasi-steady state. In
the midrange of A0’s capability (0.8 ≤ q3 ≤ 1.4), the drift-and-strike A0 policy is
effective (Figure 5(e)). However, A0 is only successful for strikes that force V2 <
0.95. In addition, there are periods of time when V2 ∼ 1.0 and A0 is unable to decide
on a drift direction. However, these become fewer (and A0’s average reward grows)
as q3,ma x approaches 1.4 (Figure 4(d)). For q3,ma x ≥ 1.6, A0 is able to successfully
strike for V2 < 0.93 and V2 > 1.07, and A0 drives the system into a nearly periodic
oscillation (Figure 5(h)) with a correspondingly large increase in A0’s discounted
average reward (Figure 4(d)). The reduction in D0’s performance closely mirrors
the increase in A0’s performance as q3 increases. However, it is important to note
that D0 enables much of A0’s success by changing V1 to chase the V2 and V3 . The
adjustments in V1 made by D0 in Figures 5(b), (e), and (h) bring the system closer
to the voltage limits just as A0 gains a large strike capability.
D1 Training Versus A0
The red triangles in Figure 4(a) and the black circles in Figure 4(e) show dramatic
improvement in the performance of D1 over D0 when faced with A0. In the mid-
dle range of A0’s capability (0.8 ≤ q3,ma x ≤ 1.4), Figure 5(d) shows that D1 stops
changing V1 to chase the immediate reward sought by D0. Instead, D1 maintains
a constant V1 = 1.02 keeping V2 ∼ 1.0 and A0 uncertain about which direction to
drift. By keeping V1 > 1.0, D1 also corrects the error of D0 whose lower values of
V1 helped A0 push V2 and V3 below 1 − . With V1 = 1.02, the average of V2 and V3
are significantly higher than 1.0, but D1 accepts the immediate decrement in average
reward to avoid a much bigger decrement he would suffer from an A0 strike. The
effect of this new strategy is also reflected in the poor A0 performance as seen from
the black circles in Figure 4(e). The behavior of D1 for q3,ma x ≥ 1.6 in Figure 5(g)
becomes complex. However, it appears that D1 has again limited the amount that he
chases V2 and V3 . In fact, D1 moves V1 in a way that decreases his immediate re-
ward, but this strategy appears to anticipate A0’s moves and effectively cuts off and
reverses A0 in the middle of his drift sequence. We note that this behavior of the
defender makes sense because he knows that the attacker is there waiting to strike.
In real life, a grid operator may not realize that a cyber attack is even taking place.
To capture this phenomenon motivates follow-on work in uncertainty modeling of
the attacker’s existence.
A1 Training Versus D0
A cursory inspection of Figures 5(c), (f), and (i) might lead one to believe that the
A1 training has resulted in A1 simply oscillating q3 back and forth from +q3,ma x to
−q3,ma x . However, the training has resulted in rather subtle behavior, which is most
easily seen in Figure 5(c). The largest change A1 (with q3,ma x = 0.7) can indepen-
dently make in V2 is ∼ 0.04. However, A1 gains an extra 0.02 of voltage change by
Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning
21
leveraging (or perhaps convincing) D1 to create oscillations of V1 in-phase with his
own moves. For this strategy to be effective in pushing V2 below 1 − , the V1 oscil-
lations have to take place between 1.0 and 1.02, or lower. When the synchronization
of the V1 and A1 oscillations are disturbed such as at around step 50 in Figure 5(c),
A1 modifies his move in the short term to delay the move by D0 and re-establish the
synchronization. A1 also appears to have a strategy for “correcting” D0’s behavior
if the oscillations take place between levels V1 that are too high. Near step 40 in
Figure 5, A1 once again delays his move convincing D0 to make two consecutive
downward moves of V1 to re-establish the “correct” D0 oscillation level. Similar
behavior is observed out to q3,ma x = 1.4. At q3,ma x = 1.6, A1 has enough capability
that he can leverage in-phase D0 oscillations to exceed both the V2 lower and upper
voltage limits. This improved performance is reflected in the dramatic increase in
A1’s average reward (A1/D0; see red triangles in Figure 4(d)).
D1/A1
In the hierarchy of level-K reinforcement learning, D1/A1 is similar to D0/A0 in that
they do not train against one another, but this match up sets the stage for interpreting
the level-2 trainings. Figures 5(a), (d), and (g) show that the D1/A0 training results
in a D1 that does not chase V2 and V3 , keeps V2 near 1.0, and accepts a lower current
reward to avoid large A0 strikes. In Figures 6(b), (e), and (h), D1 continues to avoid
responding to the oscillatory behavior of A1, V2 generally does not cross beyond the
acceptable voltage limits. However, V3 is allowed to deviate significantly beyond the
bounds. The result is that D1’s average reward versus A1 does not show much if any
improvement over D0’s versus A1 (red triangles and black circles, respectively, in
Figure 4(b)). However, D1 is quite effective and reducing the performance of A1
(Figures 4(e) red triangles) relative to the performance of A1 in D0/A1, at least
for the intermediate values of q3,ma x (Figure 4(d) red triangles). The results for A1
are clearer. Figures 6(b), (e), and (h) show the oscillatory behavior of A1 while
Figures 4(a), (b), (d), and (e) show that the switch from A0 to A1 when facing D1
improves the attacker’s performance while degrading the performance of D1.
D2 Training Versus A1
The results of this training start out similar to the training for D1. Figure 6(a) shows
that, at q3,ma x = 0.7, D2 performs better if he does not make many changes of V1
thereby denying A1 the opportunity to leverage his moves to amplify the swings of
V2 . For the higher values of q3,ma x in Figures 6(d) and (g), D2 learns to anticipate the
move pattern of A1 and moves in an oscillatory fashion, but one that is out of phase
with the moves of A1. Instead of amplifying the swings of V2 , D2’s moves attenuate
these swings. This new behavior results in across-the-board improvement in D2’s
average discounted reward over D1 (blue squares versus red triangles in Figure 4(b)
22
Lee, R. et al.
and a significant reduction in A1 performance (red triangles in Figure 4(e) versus
Figure 4(f)).
A2 Training Versus D1
A2 shows no perceptible increase in performance over A1 when matched against
D1 (blue squares versus red triangles in Figure 4(e)). The same general observation
can be made for A2 and A1 when matched against any of D0, D1, or D2. Fig-
ures. 4(b) and (c) show that the defenders perform nearly the same against A1 or
A2, and Figures 4(e) and (f) show no significant change in attacker performance
when switching from A1 to A2. This may indicate that policies embodied in A2 (or
A1) may be approaching a fixed point in performance.
D2/A2
The similarities in the performance of A1 and A2 make the analysis of this interac-
tion nearly the same as that of D2/A1.
5 Conclusions and Future Work
In this paper, we introduced a strategic, computationally-tractable, experimentally-
motivated model for predicting human behavior in novel and complex time-extended
scenarios. This model consists of an iterated semi net-form game combined with a
level-K RL solution concept. We applied this model to predict behavior on a cyber
battle on a smart power grid. As discussed in the results section, the predictions of
this model are promising in that they match expectations for how a “real world”
cyber battle would unfold.
We can vary parameters of the model that both concern the kind of cyber battle
taking place (e.g., degree of compromise) and that describe the players (e.g., level
0 distributions, their level K ). We can also vary the control algorithm. We can then
evaluate the expected “social welfare” (i.e., the happiness metric of the system de-
signer) for all such variations. In this way our framework can be used to increase
our understanding of existing and proposed control algorithms to evaluate their ro-
bustness under different cyber attack scenarios and/or model mis-specification. In
the near future, with additional advances in our computational algorithms, we hope
to be able to solve the model in real-time as well. This raises the possibility of using
our framework to do real-time control rather than choose among some small set of
proposed control algorithms, i.e., to dynamically predict the attacker’s policy and
respond optimally as the cyber battle unfolds.
Despite the significant modeling advances presented here, there are several im-
portant ways in which the realism of this paper’s model can be improved. Some of
Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning
23
these improvements have already been formalized, but they were left out of this doc-
ument for the purposes of space and clarity. For example, the iterated semi net-form
game framework easily models the situation where players have uncertainty about
the environment they are facing. This includes uncertainty about the utility func-
tions and the rationality (or levels) of the other players. This naturally corresponds
to the Bayesian games setting within the extensive form games formalism. This also
includes uncertainty about whether or not the other players exist. In fact, the semi
net-form game formalism is unique in that it can even be extended to handle “un-
awareness” – a situation where a player does not know of the possibility of some
aspect of the game. For example, it would be unawareness, rather than uncertainty,
if the defender did not know of the possibility that an attacker could take control of
a portion of the smart power grid. These types of uncertainty and unawareness will
be presented and explored in future work.
Another important modeling advance under development is related to the abil-
ity of players to adapt their policies as they interact with their opponents and make
observations of their opponents’ actual behavior. The level-K RL solution concept
is particularly well-suited to relatively short-term interactions, like the cyber battle
analyzed above. However, as interactions draw out over a longer time-frame, we
would expect the players to incorporate their opponent’s actual behavior into their
level-K model of their opponent. One possibility for achieving this type of adapta-
tion is based on a player using a Bayesian variant of fictitious play to set the level
0 distribution of their opponent. In other words, we use the past behavior to update
the level 0 distribution of the opponent.
This discussion raises an important question about what happens when the strate-
gic situation is not novel and/or the players have previously interacted. Is the level-
K RL model developed here still appropriate? The answer is probably no. In such
an interacted environment, we should expect the players to have fairly accurate
beliefs about each other. Furthermore, these accurate beliefs should lead to well-
coordinated play. For example, in the power grid this would mean that the attacker
and defender have beliefs that correspond to what the other is actually doing rather
than corresponding to some independent model of the other’s behavior. In the very
least, we should not expect the players to be systematically wrong about each other
as they are in the level-K model. Rather, in this interacted environment, player be-
havior should be somewhere between the completely non-interacted level-K models
and a full-on equilibrium, such as Nash equilibrium or quantal response equilibrium.
The analysis of interacted, one-shot games found in Bono and Wolpert [1, 41] should
provide a good starting point for developing a model of an interacted, time-extended
game.
Perhaps the most important next step for this work is the process of estimating
and validating our model using real data on human behavior. We specifically need
data to estimate the parameters of the utility functions and the level K of the play-
ers as well as any parameters of their level 0 strategies. After fitting our model to
data, we will validate our model against alternative models. The difficult part about
choosing alternative models with which to compare our model is that extensive-form
games and equilibrium concepts are computationally intractable in the types of do-
24
Lee, R. et al.
mains for which our model is designed. Therefore, feasible alternative models will
likely be limited to simplified versions of the corresponding extensive-form game
and agent-based simulations of our iterated semi net-form game.
For the smart grid cyber battle analyzed in this paper, there are several options
for gathering data. One is to conduct conventional game-theoretic experiments with
human subjects in a laboratory setting. Unfortunately, estimating our model, espe-
cially with the modeling advances discussed above, will require more data than is
practical to collect via such conventional experimental methods which involve ac-
tual power grid operators in realistic settings. An alternative method for collecting
the large amount of data required is via “crowd-sourcing”. In other words, it should
be possible to deploy an internet-application version of our smart grid cyber battle
to be played by a mixture of undergraduates, researchers, and power engineers. The
data from these experiments would then be used to estimate and validate our model.
The methodologies presented here, and the proposed future extensions, also ap-
ply to many other scenarios. Among these are several projects related to cyber secu-
rity as well as the Federal Aviation Administration’s NextGen plan for modernizing
the National Airspace System. To encompass this range of applications, we are de-
veloping libNFG as a code base for implementing and exploring NFGs [24]. The
development of this library is ongoing, and modeling advances, like those men-
tioned above, will be implemented as they become an accepted part of the modeling
framework. The libNFG library will ultimately be shared publicly and will enable
users to fully customize their own iterated semi net-form game model and choose
from a range of available solution concepts and computational approaches.
Acknowledgements This research was supported by the NASA Aviation Safety Program SSAT
project, and the Los Alamos National Laboratory LDRD project Optimization and Control Theory
for Smart Grid.
References
1. Bono, J., Wolpert, D.H.: Decision-theoretic prediction and policy design of gdp slot auctions.
Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1815222. (2011)
2. Brunner, C., Camerer, C.F., Goeree, J.K.: A correction and re-examination of ’stationary con-
cepts for experimental 2x2 games’. American Economic Review (2010)
3. Busoniu, L., Babuska, R., De Schutter, B., Damien, E.: Reinforcement learning and dynamic
programming using function approximators. CRC Press (2010)
4. Camerer, C.F.: An experimental test of several generalized utility theories. Journal of Risk and
Uncertainty. 2(1), 61–104 (1989)
5. Camerer, C.F.: Behavioral game theory: experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton Uni-
versity Press (2003)
6. Camerer, C., Ho, T.H., Chong, J.K.: A cognitive hierarchy model of games. Quarterly Journal
of Economics. 119(3), 861–898 (2006)
7. C ´ardenas, A., Amin, A., Sastry, S.: Research challenges for the security of control systems.
Proceedings of the 3rd conference on Hot topics in security. pp. 6:1–6:6, Berkeley, CA, USA,
2008. USENIX Association.
Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning
25
8. Chellapilla, K., Fogel, D.B.: Evolving an expert checkers playing program without using hu-
man expertise. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation. 5(4), 422–428 (2001)
9. Costa-Gomes, M., Crawford, V.: Cognition and behavior in two-person guessing games: An
experimental study. American Economic Review 96(5), 1737–1768 (2006)
10. Costa-Gomes, M.A., Crawford, V.P., Iriberri, N.: Comparing models of strategic thinking in
Van Huyck, Battalio, and Beil’s coordination games. Journal of the European Economic As-
sociation (2009)
11. Crawford, V.P.: Level-k thinking. Plenary lecture. 2007 North American Meeting of the Eco-
nomic Science Association. Tucson, Arizona (2007)
12. Dayan, P., Balleine, B.W.: Reward, motivation, and reinforcement learning. Neuron. 36(2),
285–298 (2002)
13. Fogel, D.B.: Evolutionary computation: Toward a new philosophy of machine intelligence.
IEEE Press, 3 edition (2006)
14. Fudenberg, D., Levine, D.K.: The theory of learning in games. MIT Press (1998).
15. Gmytrasiewicz, P. J., Doshi, P.: A framework for sequential planning in multi-agent settings.
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 24, 49–79 (2005)
16. Halpern, J.Y., Rego, L.C.: Extensive games with possibly unaware players. http://www.cs.
cornell.edu/home/halpern/papers/aamas06.pdf Working paper (2007)
17. Harsanyi, J.: Games with Incomplete Information Played by Bayesian Players, I-III. Part I.
The Basic Model. Management Science. 14(3) (1967)
18. Kaelbling, L.P., Littman, M.L., Moore, A.W.: Reinforcement learning: A survey. Journal of
Artificial Intelligence Research, 4, 237–285 (1996)
19. Kagel, J.H., Roth, A.E.: The handbook of experimental economics. Princeton University Press
(1995)
20. Kandori, M., Mailath, M., Rob, R.:Learning, mutation, and long run equilibria in games.
Econometrica. 61(1), 29–53 (1993)
21. Koller, D., Friedman, N.: Probabilistic graphical models: principles and techniques. MIT Press
(2009)
22. Kullback, S.:Information theory and statistics. John Wiley and Sons, New York (1959).
23. Kundur, P.: Power system stability and control. McGraw-Hill, New York (1993)
24. Lee, R., Wolpert, D.H.: Game theoretic modeling of pilot behavior during mid-air encounters.
Chapter in Decision making with multiple imperfect decision makers. Intelligent Systems
Reference Library Series. Springer (2011)
25. Maia, T.: Reinforcement learning, conditioning, and the brain: Successes and challenges. Cog-
nitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience. 1530-7026. 9(4), 343–364. Springer, New York
(2009)
26. Maia, T.V., Frank, M.J.: From reinforcement learning models to psychiatric and neurological.
Nature Neuroscience. 14, 154–162 (2011)
27. McKelvey, R., Palfrey, T.R.: Quantal response equilibria for normal form games. Games and
Economic Behavior. 10(1), 6–38 (1995)
28. McKelvey, R., Palfrey, T.R.: Quantal response equilibria for extensive form games. Experi-
mental Economics. 10.1023/A:1009905800005, 1, 9–41 (1998).
29. Moriarty, D.E., Schultz, A.C., Grefenstette, J.J.: Evolutionary algorithms for reinforcement
learning. The Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research. 11, 241–276 (1999)
30. Myerson, R.B.: Game theory: Analysis of conflict. Harvard University Press (1997)
31. Nagel, R.: Unraveling in guessing games: An experimental study. The American Economic
Review, 85(5), 1313–1326 (1995)
32. Plott, C.R., Smith, V.L.: The handbook of experimental economics. North-Holland, Oxford,
UK (2008)
33. Robert, C.P., Casella, G.: Monte Carlo statistical methods 2nd ed. Springer (2004)
34. Rummery, G.A., Niranja, M.: Online Q-learning using connectionist systems. Technical report
CUED/F-INFENG/TR 166. Engineering department, Cambridge University (1994)
35. Simon, H.A.: Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review.
63(2), 129–138 (1956)
26
Lee, R. et al.
36. Singh, S.P., Jaakkola, T., Jordan, M.I.: Learning without state-estimation in partially observ-
able Markovian decision problems. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on
Machine Learning, pp. 284-292, San Francisco (1994)
37. Stahl, D.O., Wilson, P.W.: On players’ models of other players: Theory and experimental
evidence. Games and Economic Behavior, 10(1), 218–254 (1995)
38. Sutton, R.S., Barto, A.G.: Reinforcement learning: An introduction. MIT Press (1998)
39. Tomsovic, K., Bakken, D.E., Venkatasubramanian, V., Bose, A.: Designing the next generation
of real-time control, communication, and computations for large power systems. Proceedings
of the IEEE 93(5), 965–979 (2005)
40. Turitsyn, K., Sulc, P., Backhaus, S., Chertkov, M.: Options for control of reactive power by
distributed photovoltaic generators. Proceedings of the IEEE. 99(6), 1063–1073 (2011)
41. Wolpert, D.H., Bono, J.W.: Distribution-valued solution concepts. Working paper (2011)
42. Wolpert, D.H.: Unawareness, information theory, and multiagent influence diagrams. Working
paper (2012)
43. Wright, J.R., Leyton-Brown, K.: Beyond equilibrium: Predicting human behavior in normal
form games. Twenty-Fourth Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-10) (2010)
Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning
27
Fig. 4 Average reward per step averaged over 50 episodes as a function of q3,ma x for all pairings
of the defender (D) and attacker (A) through level 2. (a) Reward of D0, D1, and D2 when matched
against A0. (b) Same as (a) but for A1. (c) Same as (a) and (b) but for A2. (d) Reward of A0, A1,
and A2 when matched against D0. (e) Same as (d) but for D1. (f) Same as (d) and e) but for D2.
In general, we observe that as q3,ma x increases, the defender’s average reward decreases and the
attacker’s average reward increases.
0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.00.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9A0/D2 A1/D2 A2/D2 Q3,max0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.00.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9A0/D1 A1/D1 A2/D1 0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0A-Reward 0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9A0/D0 A1/D0 A2/D0 0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0D-Reward -8-7-6-5-4-3-2-10D0/A0 D1/A0 D2/A0 0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-10D0/A1 D1/A1 D2/A1 0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-10D0/A2 D1/A2 D2/A2 a)b)c)d)e)f) 28
Lee, R. et al.
Fig. 5 Simulations of system voltages for level 0 and level 1 that show the evolution in level
1 attacker (A1) and level 1 defender (D1) policies after reinforcement learning training session
against their level 0 counterparts D0 and A0. (a) D1 versus A0, (b) D0 versus A0, and (c) D0 versus
A1 for q3,ma x = 0.7. (d) D1 versus A0, (e) D0 versus A0, and (f) D0 versus A1 for q3,ma x = 1.2. (g)
D1 versus A0, (h) D0 versus A0, and (i) D0 versus A1 for q3,ma x = 1.6. In the center column (D0
versus A0), the attacker becomes increasingly capable of scoring against the defender as q3,ma x is
increased. In the left column (D1 versus A0), the defender is successful at avoiding attacks by not
chasing small immediate rewards from voltage centering. In the right column (D0 versus A1), the
attacker successfully leverages the level 0 defender’s move to help him score.
01020304050607080901000.950.960.970.980.9911.011.021.031.041.05V1V2V3D0/A0--Q3,max=0.701020304050607080901000.940.960.9811.021.041.06V1V2V3D1/A0--Q3,max=0.701020304050607080901000.920.940.960.9811.021.041.061.081.1V1V2V3D0/A1--Q3,max=0.701020304050607080901000.90.920.940.960.9811.021.041.061.081.1V1V2V3D0/A0--Q3,max=1.201020304050607080901000.960.9811.021.041.061.081.1V1V2V3D1/A0--Q3,max=1.201020304050607080901000.90.9511.051.11.15V1V2V3D0/A1--Q3,max=1.201020304050607080901000.850.90.9511.051.11.151.21.25V1V2V3D0/A0--Q3,max=1.601020304050607080901000.850.90.9511.051.1V1V2V3D1/A0--Q3,max=1.601020304050607080901000.90.9511.051.11.151.21.25V1V2V3D0/A1--Q3,max=1.6a)b)c)d)e)f)g)h)i) Counter-Factual Reinforcement Learning
29
Fig. 6 Simulations of system voltages for level 1 and level 2 that show the evolution in level
2 attacker (A2) and level 2 defender (D2) policies after reinforcement learning training session
against their level 1 counterparts D1 and A1. (a) D2 versus A1, (b) D1 versus A1, and (c) D1 versus
A2 for q3,ma x = 0.7. (a) D2 versus A1, (b) D1 versus A1, and (c) D1 versus A2 for q3,ma x = 1.2. (g)
D2 versus A1, (h) D1 versus A1, and (i) D1 versus A2 for q3,ma x = 1.6.
01020304050607080901000.940.960.9811.021.041.061.081.1V1V2V301020304050607080901000.90.9511.051.11.15V1V2V301020304050607080901000.90.9511.051.11.151.21.25V1V2V301020304050607080901000.940.960.9811.021.041.061.08V1V2V301020304050607080901000.90.9511.051.11.15V1V2V301020304050607080901000.850.90.9511.051.11.151.2V1V2V301020304050607080901000.940.960.9811.021.041.061.081.11.121.14V1V2V301020304050607080901000.90.9511.051.11.15V1V2V301020304050607080901000.850.90.9511.051.11.151.21.25V1V2V3a)b)c)d)e)f)g)h)i)D1/A1--Q3,max=0.7D1/A1--Q3,max=1.2D1/A1--Q3,max=1.6D2/A1--Q3,max=0.7D2/A1--Q3,max=1.2D2/A1--Q3,max=1.6D1/A2--Q3,max=0.7D1/A2--Q3,max=1.2D1/A2--Q3,max=1.6 |
1806.06464 | 2 | 1806 | 2018-07-31T21:36:26 | Learning Policy Representations in Multiagent Systems | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI",
"cs.LG",
"cs.NE",
"stat.ML"
] | Modeling agent behavior is central to understanding the emergence of complex phenomena in multiagent systems. Prior work in agent modeling has largely been task-specific and driven by hand-engineering domain-specific prior knowledge. We propose a general learning framework for modeling agent behavior in any multiagent system using only a handful of interaction data. Our framework casts agent modeling as a representation learning problem. Consequently, we construct a novel objective inspired by imitation learning and agent identification and design an algorithm for unsupervised learning of representations of agent policies. We demonstrate empirically the utility of the proposed framework in (i) a challenging high-dimensional competitive environment for continuous control and (ii) a cooperative environment for communication, on supervised predictive tasks, unsupervised clustering, and policy optimization using deep reinforcement learning. | cs.MA | cs | Learning Policy Representations in Multiagent Systems
Aditya Grover 1 Maruan Al-Shedivat 2 Jayesh K. Gupta 1 Yura Burda 3 Harrison Edwards 3
8
1
0
2
l
u
J
1
3
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
2
v
4
6
4
6
0
.
6
0
8
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract
Modeling agent behavior is central to understand-
ing the emergence of complex phenomena in mul-
tiagent systems. Prior work in agent modeling
has largely been task-specific and driven by hand-
engineering domain-specific prior knowledge. We
propose a general learning framework for model-
ing agent behavior in any multiagent system using
only a handful of interaction data. Our framework
casts agent modeling as a representation learning
problem. Consequently, we construct a novel ob-
jective inspired by imitation learning and agent
identification and design an algorithm for unsu-
pervised learning of representations of agent poli-
cies. We demonstrate empirically the utility of
the proposed framework in (i) a challenging high-
dimensional competitive environment for continu-
ous control and (ii) a cooperative environment for
communication, on supervised predictive tasks,
unsupervised clustering, and policy optimization
using deep reinforcement learning.
1. Introduction
Intelligent agents rarely act in isolation in the real world and
often seek to achieve their goals through interaction with
other agents. Such interactions give rise to rich, complex
behaviors formalized as per-agent policies in a multiagent
system (Ferber, 1999; Wooldridge, 2009). Depending on the
underlying motivations of the agents, interactions could be
directed towards achieving a shared goal in a collaborative
setting, opposing another agent in a competitive setting, or
be a mixture of these in a setting where agents collaborate
in teams to compete against other teams. Learning useful
representations of the policies of agents based on their inter-
actions is an important step towards characterization of the
agent behavior and more generally inference and reasoning
in multiagent systems.
1Stanford University 2Carnegie Mellon University 3OpenAI.
Correspondence to: Aditya Grover <[email protected]>.
Proceedings of the 35 th International Conference on Machine
Learning, Stockholm, Sweden, PMLR 80, 2018. Copyright 2018
by the author(s).
In this work, we propose an unsupervised encoder-decoder
framework for learning continuous representations of agent
policies given access to only a few episodes of interaction.
For any given agent, the representation function is an en-
coder that learns a mapping from an interaction (i.e., one or
more episodes of observation and action pairs involving the
agent) to a continuous embedding vector. Using such em-
beddings, we condition a policy network (decoder) and train
it simultaneously with the encoder to imitate other interac-
tions involving the same (or a coupled) agent. Additionally,
we can explicitly discriminate between the embeddings cor-
responding to different agents using triplet losses.
For the embeddings to be useful, the representation function
should generalize to both unseen interactions and unseen
agents for novel downstream tasks. Generalization is well-
understood in the context of supervised learning where a
good model is expected to attain similar train and test per-
formance. For multiagent systems, we consider a notion of
generalization based on agent-interaction graphs. An agent-
interaction graph provides an abstraction for distinguishing
the agents (nodes) and interactions (edges) observed during
training, validation, and testing.
Our framework is agnostic to the nature of interactions in
multiagent systems, and hence broadly applicable to com-
petitive and cooperative environments. In particular, we
consider two multiagent environments: (i) a competitive
continuous control environment, RoboSumo (Al-Shedivat
et al., 2018), and (ii) a ParticleWorld environment
of cooperative communication where agents collaborate to
achieve a common goal (Mordatch & Abbeel, 2018). For
evaluation, we show how representations learned by our
framework are effective for downstream tasks that include
clustering of agent policies (unsupervised), classification
such as win or loss outcomes in competitive systems (super-
vised), and policy optimization (reinforcement). In the case
of policy optimization, we show how these representations
can serve as privileged information for better training of
agent policies. In RoboSumo, we train agent policies that
can condition on the opponent's representation and achieve
superior win rates much more quickly as compared to an
equally expressive baseline policy with the same number of
parameters. In ParticleWorld, we train speakers that
can communicate more effectively with a much wider range
of listeners given knowledge of their representations.
Learning Policy Representations in Multiagent Systems
i
2. Preliminaries
In this section, we present the necessary background and
notation relevant to the problem setting of this work.
Markov games. We use the classical framework of Markov
games (Littman, 1994) to represent multiagent systems.
A Markov game extends the general formulation of par-
tially observable Markov decision processes (POMDP) to
the multiagent setting. In a Markov game, we are given
a set of n agents on a state-space S with action spaces
A1,A2,··· ,An and observation spaces O1,O2,··· ,On
respectively. At every time step t, an agent i receives an
i ∈ Ai
observation o(t)
: Oi × Ai → [0, 1].
based on a stochastic policy π(i)
Based on the executed action, the agent receives a reward
r(t)
. The
i
state dynamics are determined by a transition function
T : S ×A1 ×···×An → S. The agent policies are trained
t=1 r(t)
to maximize their own expected reward ¯ri = (cid:80)H
i ∈ Oi and executes an action a(t)
: S × Ai → R and the next observation o(t+1)
i
over a time horizon H.
Extended Markov games. In this work, we are interested
in interactions that involve not all but only a subset of agents.
For this purpose, we generalize Markov games as follows.
First, we augment the action space of each agent with a
NO-OP (i.e., no action). Then, we introduce a problem pa-
rameter, 2 ≤ k ≤ n, with the following semantics. During
every rollout of the Markov game, all but k agents deter-
ministically execute the NO-OP operator while the k agents
execute actions as per the policies defined on the original
observation and action spaces. Accordingly, we assume that
each agent receives rewards only in the interaction episode
it participates in. Informally, the extension allows for multi-
agent systems where all agents do not necessarily have to
participate simultaneously in an interaction. For instance,
this allows to consider one-vs-one multiagent tournaments
where only two players participate in any given match.
To further introduce the notation, consider a multiagent sys-
tem as a generalized Markov game. We denote the set of
agent policies with P = {π(i)}n
i=1, interaction episodes
with E = {EMj}m
j=1 where Mj ⊆ {1, 2,··· , n},Mj =
k is the set of k agents participating in episode EMj . To sim-
plify presentation for the rest of the paper, we assume k = 2
and, consequently, denote the set of interaction episodes
between agents i and j as Eij. A single episode, eij ∈ Eij,
consists of a sequence of observations and actions for the
specified time horizon, H.
Imitation learning. Our approach to learning policy repre-
sentations relies on behavioral cloning (Pomerleau, 1991) --
a type of imitation learning where we train a mapping from
observations to actions in a supervised manner. Although
there exist other imitation learning algorithms (e.g., inverse
reinforcement learning, Abbeel & Ng, 2004), our frame-
work is largely agnostic to the choice of the algorithm, and
we restrict our presentation to behavioral cloning, leaving
other imitation learning paradigms to future work.
3. Learning framework
The dominant paradigm for unsupervised representation
learning is to optimize the parameters of a representation
function that can best explain or generate the observed data.
For instance, the skip-gram objective used for language and
graph data learns representations of words and nodes pre-
dictive of representations of surrounding context (Mikolov
et al., 2013; Grover & Leskovec, 2016). Similarly, autoen-
coding objectives, often used for image data, learn represen-
tations that can reconstruct the input (Bengio et al., 2009).
In this work, we wish to learn a representation function
that maps episode(s) from an agent policy, π(i) ∈ Π to a
real-valued vector embedding where Π is a class of repre-
sentable policies. That is, we optimize for the parameters
θ for a function fθ : E → Rd where E denotes the space of
episodes corresponding to a policy and d is the dimension of
the embedding. Here, we have assumed the agent policies
are black-boxes, i.e., we can only access them based on
interaction episodes with other agents in a Markov game.
Hence, for every agent i, we wish to learn policies using
Ei = ∪jE(i)
ij refers the episode data for inter-
actions between agent i and j, but consisting of only the
observation and action pairs of agent i. For a multiagent sys-
tem, we propose the following auxiliary tasks for learning a
good representation of an agent's policy:
ij . Here, E(i)
1. Generative representations. The representation should
be useful for simulating the agent's policy.
2. Discriminative representations. The representation
should be able to distinguish the agent's policy with
the policies of other agents.
Accordingly, we now propose generative and discriminative
objectives for representation learning in multiagent systems.
3.1. Generative representations via imitation learning
Imitation learning does not require direct access to the re-
ward signal, making it an attractive task for unsupervised
representation learning. Formally, we are interested in learn-
φ : S×A → [0, 1] for an agent i given access
ing a policy π(i)
to observation and action pairs from interaction episode(s)
involving the agent. For behavioral cloning, we maximize
the following (negative) cross-entropy objective:
(cid:105)
(cid:88)
(cid:104)o,a(cid:105)∼e
(cid:104)
Ee∼Ei
log π(i)
φ (ao)
where the expectation is over interaction episodes of agent i
and the optimization is over the parameters φ.
Learning Policy Representations in Multiagent Systems
i=1 -- interaction episodes, λ -- hyperparameter.
Algorithm 1 Learn Policy Embedding Function (fθ)
input {Ei}n
1: Initialize θ and φ
2: for i = 1, 2, . . . , n do
3:
4:
5:
Sample a positive episode pe ← e+ ∼ Ei
Sample a reference episode re ← e∗ ∼ Ei\e+
Compute Im loss ← − (cid:80)
log πφ,θ(ao, e∗)
(cid:104)o,a(cid:105)∼e+
for j = 1, 2, . . . , n do
if j (cid:54)= i then
Sample a negative episode ne ← e− ∼ Ej
Compute Id loss ← dθ(e+, e−, e∗)
Set Loss ← Im loss + λ · Id loss
Update θ and φ to minimize Loss
6:
7:
8:
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14: end for
output θ
end if
end for
Learning individual policies for every agent can be compu-
tationally and statistically prohibitive for large-scale multi-
agent systems, especially when the number of interaction
episodes per agent is small. Moreover, it precludes gener-
alization across the behaviors of such agents. On the other
hand, learning a single policy for all agents increases sam-
ple efficiency but comes at the cost of reduced modeling
flexibility in simulating diverse agent behaviors. We offset
this dichotomy by learning a single conditional policy net-
work. To do so, we first specify a representation function,
fθ : E → Rd, with parameters θ, where E represents the
space of episodes. We use this embedding to condition the
policy network. Formally, the policy network is denoted by
πφ,θ : S × A × E → [0, 1] and φ are parameters for the
function mapping the agent observation and embedding to a
distribution over the agent's actions.
The parameters θ and φ for the conditional policy network
are learned jointly by maximizing the following objective:
n(cid:88)
i=1
1
n
Ee1∼Ei,
e2∼Ei\e1
(cid:88)
(cid:104)o,a(cid:105)∼e1
log πφ,θ(ao, e2)
(1)
For every agent, the objective function samples two distinct
episodes e1 and e2. The observation and action pairs from
e2 are used to learn an embedding fθ(e2) that conditions
the policy network trained on observation and action pairs
from e1. The conditional policy network shares statistical
strength through a common set of parameters for the policy
network and the representation function across all agents.
3.2. Discriminative representations via identification
An intuitive requirement for any representation function
learned for a multiagent system is that the embeddings
should reflect characteristics of an agent's behavior that dis-
tinguish it from other agents. To do so in an unsupervised
manner, we propose an objective for agent identification
based on the triplet loss directly in the space of embeddings.
To learn a representation for agent i based on interaction
episodes, we use the representation function fθ to com-
pute three sets of embeddings: (i) a positive embedding
for an episode e+ ∼ Ei involving agent i, (ii) a negative
embedding for an episode e− ∼ Ej involving a random
agent j (cid:54)= i, and (iii) a reference embedding for an episode
e∗ ∼ Ei again involving agent i, but different from e+.
Given these embeddings, we define the triplet loss:
dθ(e+, e−, e∗) =
(1 + exp{(cid:107)re − ne(cid:107)2 − (cid:107)re − pe(cid:107)2})
−2
(2)
where pe = fθ(e+), ne = fθ(e−), re = fθ(e∗). Intuitively,
the loss encourages the positive embedding to be closer
to the reference embedding than the negative embedding,
which makes the embeddings of the same agent tend to
cluster together and be further away from embeddings of
other agents. We note that various other notions of distance
can also be used. The one presented above corresponding
to a squared softmax objective (Hoffer & Ailon, 2015).
3.3. Hybrid generative-discriminative representations
Conditional imitation learning encourages fθ to learn repre-
sentations that can learn and simulate the entire policy of the
agents and agent identification incentivizes representations
that can distinguish between agent policies. Both objectives
are complementary, and we combine Eq. (1) and Eq. (2) to
get the final objective used for representation learning:
(cid:104)o,a(cid:105)∼e+
(cid:88)
(cid:88)
(cid:124)
j(cid:54)=i
(cid:124)
λ
log πφ,θ(ao, e∗)
−
(cid:123)(cid:122)
imitation
(cid:125)
Ee−∼Ej [dθ(e+, e−, e∗)]
(cid:123)(cid:122)
agent identification
(3)
(cid:125)
n(cid:88)
i=1
1
n
Ee+∼Ei,
e∗∼Ei\e+
where λ > 0 is a tunable hyperparameter that controls
the relative weights of the discriminative and generative
terms. The pseudocode for the proposed algorithm is given
in Algorithm 1. In experiments, we parameterize the condi-
tional policy πθ,φ using neural networks and use stochastic
gradient-based methods for optimization.
4. Generalization in MAS
Generalization is well-understood for supervised learning --
models that shows similar train and test performance exhibit
good generalization. To measure the quality of the learned
representations for a multiagent system (MAS), we intro-
duce a graphical formalism for reasoning about agents and
their interactions.
Learning Policy Representations in Multiagent Systems
E
F
G
A
B
C
D
(a) Agent-Interaction Graph
(b) The RoboSumo environment.
(c) The ParticleWorld environment.
Figure 1: An example of a graph used for evaluating generalization in a multiagent system (a). Illustrations for the
environments used in our experiments: competitive (b) and cooperative (c).
4.1. Generalization across agents & interactions
In many scenarios, we are interested in generalization of
the policy representation function fθ across novel agents
and interactions in a multiagent system. For instance, we
would like fθ to output useful embeddings for a downstream
task, even when evaluated with respect to unseen agents and
interactions. This notion of generalization is best understood
using agent-interaction graphs (Grover et al., 2018).
The agent-interaction graph describes interactions between
a set of agent policies P and a set of interaction episodes I
through a graph G = (P, I).1 An example graph is shown
in Figure 1a. The graph represents a multiagent system con-
sisting of interactions between pairs of agents, and we will
especially focus on the interactions involving Alice, Bob,
Charlie, and Davis. The interactions could be competitive
(e.g., a match between two agents) or cooperative (e.g., two
agents communicating for a navigation task).
We learn the representation function fθ on a subset of the
interactions, denoted by the solid black edges in Figure 1a.
At test time, fθ is evaluated on some downstream task of
interest. The agents and interactions observed at test time
can be different from those used for training. In particular,
we consider the following cases:
Weak generalization.2 Here, we are interested in the gen-
eralization performance of the representation function on
an unseen interaction between existing agents, all of which
are observed during training. This corresponds to the red
edge representing the interaction between Alice and Bob in
Figure 1a. From the context of an agent-interaction graph,
the test graph adds only edges to the train graph.
Strong generalization. Generalization can also be evalu-
ated with respect to unseen agents (and their interactions).
This corresponds to the addition of agents Charlie and Davis
in Figure 1a. Akin to a few shot learning setting, we observe
a few of their interactions with existing agents Alice and
1If we have more than two participating agents per interaction
episode, we could represent the interactions using a hypergraph.
2Also referred to as intermediate generalization by Grover et al.
(2018).
Bob (green edges) and generalization is evaluated on unseen
interactions involving Charlie and Davis (blue edges). The
test graph adds both nodes and edges to the train graph.
For brevity, we skip discussion of weaker forms of general-
ization that involves evaluation of the test performance on
unseen episodes of an existing training edge (black edge).
4.2. Generalization across tasks
Since the representation function is learned using an un-
supervised auxiliary objective, we test its generalization
performance by evaluating the usefulness of these embed-
dings for various kinds downstream tasks described below.
Unsupervised. These embeddings can be used for cluster-
ing, visualization, and interpretability of agent policies in
a low-dimensional space. Such semantic associations be-
tween the learned embeddings can be defined for a single
agent wherein we expect representations for the same agent
based on distinct episodes to be embedded close to each
other, or across agents wherein agents with similar policies
will have similar embeddings on average.
Supervised. Deep neural network representations are es-
pecially effective for predictive modeling. In a multiagent
setting, the embeddings serve as useful features for learning
agent properties and interactions, including assignment of
role categories to agents with different skills in a collab-
orative setting, or prediction of win or loss outcomes of
interaction matches between agents in a competitive setting.
Reinforcement. Finally, we can use the learned represen-
tation functions to improve generalization of the policies
learned from a reinforcement signal in competitive and coop-
erative settings. We design policy networks that, in addition
to observations, take embedding vectors of the opposing
agents as inputs. The embeddings are computed from the
past interactions of the opposing agent either with the agent
being trained or with other agents using the representation
function (Figure 2). Such embeddings play the role of privi-
leged information and allow us to train a policy network that
uses this information to learn faster and generalize better to
opponents or cooperators unseen at training time.
00101Speaker 1ListenerNEWStarget landmark110100Speaker 2 Learning Policy Representations in Multiagent Systems
et
πA
previous
interactions
Table 1: Intra-inter clustering ratios (IICR) and accuracies
for outcome prediction (Acc) for weak (W) and strong (S)
generalization on RoboSumo.
et−1
et−1
et−1
et−1
πt−1
ψ
Emb-Im
Emb-Id
Emb-Hyb
IICR (W)
0.24
0.25
0.22
IICR (S) Acc (W) Acc(S)
0.60
0.56
0.56
0.23
0.27
0.21
0.71
0.67
0.73
πt
ψ
fθ
Figure 2: Illustration of the proposed model for optimizing a
policy πψ that conditions on an embedding of the opponent
policy πA. At time t, the pre-trained representation func-
tion fθ computes the opponent embedding based on a past
interaction et−1. We optimize πψ to maximize the expected
rewards in its current interactions et with the opponent.
5. Evaluation methodology & results
We evaluate the proposed framework for both compet-
itive and collaborative environments on various down-
stream machine learning tasks. In particular, we use the
RoboSumo and ParticleWorld environments for the
competitive and collaborative scenarios, respectively. We
consider the embedding objectives in Eq. (1), Eq. (2),
and Eq. (3) independently and refer to them as Emb-Im,
Emb-Id, and Emb-Hyb respectively. The hyperparam-
eter λ for Emb-Hyb is chosen by grid search over λ ∈
{0.01, 0.05, 0.1, 0.5} on a held-out set of interactions.
In all our experiments, the representation function fθ is spec-
ified through a multi-layer perceptron (MLP) that takes as
input an episode and outputs an embedding of that episode.
In particular, the MLP takes as input a single (observa-
tion, action) pair to output an intermediate embedding. We
average the intermediate embeddings for all (observation,
action) pairs in an episode to output an episode embedding.
To condition a policy network on the embedding, we sim-
ply concatenate the observation fed as input to the network
with the embedding. Experimental setup and other details
beyond what we state below are deferred to the Appendix.
5.1. The RoboSumo environment
For the competitive environment, we use RoboSumo (Al-
Shedivat et al., 2018) -- a 3D environment with simulated
physics (based on MuJoCo (Todorov et al., 2012)) that al-
lows agents to control multi-legged 3D robots and compete
against each other in continuous-time wrestling games (Fig-
ure 1b). For our analysis, we train a diverse collection of
25 agents, some of which are trained via self-play and oth-
ers are trained in pairs concurrently using Proximal Policy
Optimization (PPO) algorithm (Schulman et al., 2017).
We start with a fully connected agent-interaction graph
(clique) of 25 agents. Every edge in this graph corresponds
to 10 rollout episodes involving the corresponding agents.
The maximum length (or horizon) of any episode is 500
time steps, after which the episode is declared a draw. To
evaluate weak generalization, we sample a connected sub-
graph for training with approximately 60% of the edges
preserved for training, and remaining split equally for vali-
dation and testing. For strong generalization, we preserve
15 agents and their interactions with each other for training,
and similarly, 5 agents and their within-group interactions
each for validation and testing.
5.1.1. EMBEDDING ANALYSIS
To evaluate the robustness of the embeddings, we compute
multiple embeddings for each policy based on different
episodes of interaction at test time. Our evaluation metric
is based on the intra- and inter-cluster Euclidean distances
between embeddings. The intra-cluster distance for an agent
is the average pairwise distance between its embeddings
computed on the set of test interaction episodes involving
the agent. Similarly, the inter-cluster distance is the average
pairwise distance between the embeddings of an agent with
those of other agents. Let Ti = {t(i)
c=1 denote the set of
test interactions involving agent i. We define the intra-inter
cluster ratio (IICR) as:
c }ni
(cid:80)ni
n(cid:80)
1
1
n2
i
a=1
(cid:80)ni
b (cid:107)2
a − t(i)
b=1 (cid:107)t(i)
ni(cid:80)
nj(cid:80)
a − t(j)
b (cid:107)2
(cid:107)t(i)
.
i=1
j(cid:54)=i
ninj
a=1
b=1
(cid:80)n
i=1
n(cid:80)
1
n(n−1)
1
n
IICR =
The intra-inter clustering ratios are reported in Table 1. A
ratio less than 1 suggests that there is signal that identi-
fies the agent, and the signal is stronger for lower ratios.
Even though this task might seem especially suited for the
agent identification objective, we interestingly find that the
Emb-Im attains lower clustering ratios than Emb-Id for
both weak and strong generalization. Emb-Hyb outper-
forms both these methods. We qualitatively visualize the
embeddings learned using Emb-Hyb by projecting them on
the leading principal components, as shown in Figures 3a
and 3b for 10 test interaction episodes of 5 randomly se-
lected agents in the weak and strong generalization settings
respectively.
5.1.2. OUTCOME PREDICTION
We can use these embeddings directly for training a classi-
fier to predict the outcome of an episode (win/loss/draw).
For classification, we use an MLP with 3 hidden layers
Learning Policy Representations in Multiagent Systems
(a) RoboSumo: Weak
(b) RoboSumo: Strong
(c) ParticleWorld: Weak (d) ParticleWorld: Strong
Figure 3: Embeddings learned using Emb-Hyb for 10 test interaction episodes of 5 agents projected on the first three
principal components for RoboSumo and ParticleWorld. Color denotes agent policy.
Figure 4: Average win rates of the newly trained agents against 5 training agent and 5 testing agents. The left two charts
compare baseline with policies that make use of Emb-Im, Emb-Id, and Emb-Hyb (all computed online). The right two
charts compare different embeddings used at evaluation time (all embedding-conditioned policies use Emb-Hyb). At each
iteration, win rates were computed based on 50 1-on-1 games. Each agent was trained 3 times, each time from a different
random initialization. Shaded regions correspond to 95% CI.
of 100 units each and the learning objective minimizes the
cross entropy error. The input to the classifier are the embed-
dings of the two agents involved in the episode. The results
are reported in Table 1. Again, imitation based methods
seem more suited for this task with Emb-Hyb and Emb-Im
outperforming other methods for weak and strong general-
ization respectively.
5.1.3. POLICY OPTIMIZATION
Here we ask whether embeddings can be used to improve
learned policies in a reinforcement learning setting both in
terms of end performance and generalization. To this end,
we select 5 training, 5 validation, and 5 testing opponents
from the pool of 25 pre-trained agents. Next, we train a new
agent with reinforcement learning to compete against the
selected 5 training opponents; the agent is trained concur-
rently against all 5 opponents using a distributed version of
PPO algorithm, as described in Al-Shedivat et al. (2018).
Throughout training, we evaluate new agents on the 5 testing
opponents and record the average win and draw rates.
Using this setup, we compare a baseline agent with
MLP-based policy with an agent whose policy takes 100-
dimensional embeddings of the opponents as additional in-
puts at each time step and uses that information to condition
its behavior on the opponent's representation. The embed-
dings for each opponent are either computed online, i.e.,
based on an interaction episode rolled out during training at
a previous time step (Figure 2), or offline, i.e., pre-computed
before training the new agent using only interactions be-
tween the pre-trained opponents.
Figure 4 shows the average win rates against the set of train-
ing and testing opponents for the baseline and our agents
that use different types of embeddings. While every new
agent is able to achieve almost 100% win rate against the
training opponents, we see that the agents that condition
their policies on the opponent's embeddings perform better
on the held-out set of opponents, i.e., generalize better, with
the best performance achieved with Emb-Hyb. We also
note that embeddings computed offline turn out to lead to
better performance than if computed online3. As an ablation
test, we also evaluate our agents when they are provided
an incorrect embedding (either all zeros, Emb-zero, or
an embedding selected for a different random opponent,
Emb-rand) and observe that such embeddings lead to a
degradation in performance4.
3Perhaps, this is due to differences in the interactions of the
opponents between themselves and with the new agent that the
embedding network was not able to capture entirely.
4Performance decrease is most significant for Emb-zero,
which is an out-of-distribution all-zeros vector.
first eigenvectorsecond eigenvectorthird eigenvectorfirst eigenvectorsecond eigenvectorthird eigenvectorfirst eigenvectorsecond eigenvectorthird eigenvectorfirst eigenvectorsecond eigenvectorthird eigenvector010002000Iteration0.250.500.751.00WinrateTrainPPOPPO+Emb-ImPPO+Emb-IdPPO+Emb-Hyb0100020000.20.40.60.8Test010002000Iteration0.250.500.751.00WinrateTrainPPOPPO+Emb-onlinePPO+Emb-offlinePPO+Emb-zeroPPO+Emb-rand0100020000.250.500.751.00Test Learning Policy Representations in Multiagent Systems
Figure 5: Win, loss, and draw rates plotted for the first agent in each pair. Each pair of agents was evaluated after each
training iteration on 50 1-on-1 games; curves are based on 5 evaluation runs. Shaded regions correspond to 95% CI.
Table 2: Intra-inter clustering ratios (IICR) for weak (W)
and strong (S) generalization on ParticleWorld. Lower
is better.
IICR (W)
IICR (S)
Figure 6: Win rates for agents specified in each row at
computed at iteration 1000.
Finally, to evaluate strong generalization in the RL set-
ting, we pit the newly trained baseline and agents with
embedding-conditional policies against each other. Since
the embedding network has never seen the new agents, it
must exhibit strong generalization to be useful in such set-
ting. The results are give in Figures 5 and 6. Even though
the margin is not very large, the agents that use Emb-Hyb
perform the best on average.
5.2. The ParticleWorld environment
For the collaborative setting, we evaluate the framework on
the ParticleWorld environment for cooperative com-
munication (Mordatch & Abbeel, 2018; Lowe et al., 2017).
The environment consists of a continuous 2D grid with 3
landmarks and two kinds of agents collaborating to navigate
to a common landmark goal (Figure 1c). At the beginning
of every episode, the speaker agent is shown the RGB color
of a single target landmark on the grid. The speaker then
communicates a fixed length binary message to the listener
agent. Based on the received messages, the listener agent
the moves in a particular direction. The final reward, shared
across the speaker and listener agents, is the distance of the
listener to the target landmark after a fixed time horizon.
The agent-interaction graph for this environment is bipar-
tite with only cross edges between speaker and listener
agents. Every interaction edge in this graph corresponds
to 1000 rollout episodes where the maximum length of any
episode is 25 steps. We pretrain 28 MLP parameterized
speaker and listener agent policies. Every speaker learns
through communication with only two different listeners
Emb-Im
Emb-Id
Emb-Hyb
0.58
0.50
0.54
0.86
0.82
0.85
Table 3: Average train and test rewards for speaker policies
on ParticleWorld.
Train
Test
−11.66 −18.99
MADDPG
−11.68 −17.75
MADDPG + Emb-Im
−11.68 −17.68
MADDPG + Emb-Id
MADDPG + Emb-Hyb −11.77 −17.20
and vice-versa, giving an extremely sparse agent-interaction
graph. We explicitly encoded diversity in these speakers
and listener agents by masking bits in the communication
channel. In particular, we masked 1 or 2 randomly selected
bits for every speaker agent in the graph to give a total of
(cid:1) = 28 distinct speaker agents. Depending on the
(cid:0)7
(cid:1) +(cid:0)7
2
1
neighboring speaker agents in the agent-interaction graph,
the listener agents also show diversity in the learned policies.
The policies are learned using multiagent deep deterministic
policy gradients (MADDPG, Lowe et al., 2017).
In this environment, the speakers and listeners are tightly
coupled. Hence we vary the setup used previously in the
competitive scenario. We wish to learn embeddings of lis-
teners based on their interactions with speakers. Since the
agent-interaction graph is bipartite, we use the embeddings
of listener agents to condition a shared policy network for
the respective speaker agents.
5.2.1. EMBEDDING ANALYSIS
For the weak generalization setting, we remove an outgoing
edge from every listener agent in the original graph to obtain
the training graph. In the case of strong generalization, we
set aside 7 listener agents (and their outgoing edges) each
for validation and testing while the representation function
is learned on the remaining 14 listener agents and their
interactions. The intra-inter clustering ratios are shown
01000Iteration0.00.51.0RateEmb-Hybvs.PPOWinLossDraw01000Emb-Hybvs.Emb-Im01000Emb-Hybvs.Emb-Id01000Emb-Imvs.PPO01000Emb-Imvs.Emb-Id01000Emb-Idvs.PPO1234PPO+Emb-Hyb-4PPO+Emb-Id-3PPO+Emb-Im-2PPO-10.670.610.570.480.620.440.500.420.550.490.550.360.510.440.360.32 Learning Policy Representations in Multiagent Systems
in Table 2, and the projections of the embeddings learned
using Emb-Hyb are visualized in Figure 3c and Figure 3d
for weak and strong generalization respectively. In spite of
the high degree of sparsity in the training graph, the intra-
inter clustering ratio for the test interaction embeddings is
less than unity suggesting an agent-specific signal. Emb-id
works particularly well in this environment, achieving best
results for both weak and strong generalization.
5.2.2. POLICY OPTIMIZATION
Here, we are interested in learning speaker agents that can
communicate more effectively with a much wider range of
listeners given knowledge of their embeddings. Referring
back to Figure 2, we learn a policy πψ for a speaker agent
that conditions on the representation function fθ for the
listener agents. For cooperative communication, we con-
sider interactions with 14 pre-trained listener agents split
as 6 training, 4 validation, and 4 test agents.5 Similar to
the competitive setting, we compare performance against
a baseline speaker agent that does not have access to any
privilege information about the listeners. We summarize
the results for the best validated models during training and
100 interaction episodes per test listener agent across 5 ini-
tializations in Table 3. From the results, we observe that
online embedding based methods can generalize better than
the baseline methods. The baseline MADDPG achieves the
lowest training error, but fails to generalize well enough and
incurs a low average reward for the test listener agents.
6. Discussion & Related Work
Agent modeling is a well-studied topic within multiagent
systems. See Albrecht & Stone (2017) for an excellent
recent survey on this subject. The vast majority of literature
concerns with learning models for a specific predictive task.
Predictive tasks are typically defined over actions, goals,
and beliefs of other agents (Stone & Veloso, 2000).
In
competitive domains such as Poker and Go, such tasks are
often integrated with domain-specific heuristics to model
opponents and learn superior policies (Rubin & Watson,
2011; Mnih et al., 2015). Similarly, intelligent tutoring
systems take into account pedagogical features of students
and teachers to accelerate learning of desired behaviors in a
collaborative environment (McCalla et al., 2000).
In this work, we proposed an approach for modeling agent
behavior in multiagent systems through unsupervised rep-
resentational learning of agent policies. Since we sidestep
any domain specific assumptions and learn in an unsuper-
vised manner, our framework learns representations that are
5None of the methods considered were able to learn a non-
trivial speaker agent when trained simultaneously with all 28 lis-
tener agents. Hence, we simplified the problem by considering the
14 listener agents that attained the best rewards during pretraining.
useful for several downstream tasks. This extends the use of
deep neural networks in multiagent systems to applications
beyond traditional reinforcement learning and predictive
modeling (Mnih et al., 2015; Hoshen, 2017).
Both the generative and discriminative components of our
framework have been explored independently in prior work.
Imitation learning has been extensively studied in the single-
agent setting and recent work by Le et al. (2017) proposes an
algorithm for imitation in a coordinated multiagent system.
Wang et al. (2017) proposed an imitation learning algorithm
for learning robust controllers with few expert demonstra-
tions in a single-agent setting that conditions the policy
network on an inference network, similar to the encoder
in our framework. In another recent work, Li et al. (2017)
propose an algorithm for learning interpretable representa-
tions using generative adversarial imitation learning. Agent
identification which represents the discriminative term in
the learning objective is inspired from triplet losses and
Siamese networks that are used for learning representations
of data using distance comparisons (Hoffer & Ailon, 2015).
A key contribution of this work is a principled methodology
for evaluating generalization of representations in multia-
gent systems based on the graphs of the agent interactions.
Graphs are a fundamental abstraction for modeling rela-
tional data, such as the interactions arising in multiagent
systems (Zhou et al., 2016a;b; Chen et al., 2017; Battaglia
et al., 2016; Hoshen, 2017) and concurrent work proposes
to learn such graphs directly from data (Kipf et al., 2018).
7. Conclusion & Future Work
In this work, we presented a framework for learning rep-
resentations of agent policies in multiagent systems. The
agent policies are accessed using a few interaction episodes
with other agents. Our learning objective is based on a novel
combination of a generative component based on imitation
learning and a discriminative component for distinguish-
ing the embeddings of different agent policies. Our overall
framework is unsupervised, sample-efficient, and domain-
agnostic, and hence can be readily extended to many en-
vironments and downstream tasks. Most importantly, we
showed the role of these embeddings as privileged infor-
mation for learning more adaptive agent policies in both
collaborative and competitive settings.
In the future, we would like to explore multiagent systems
with more than two agents participating in the interactions.
Semantic interpolation of policies directly in the embedded
space in order to obtain a policy with desired behaviors
quickly is another promising direction. Finally, it would be
interesting to extend and evaluate the proposed framework to
learn representations for history dependent policies such as
those parameterized by long short-term memory networks.
Learning Policy Representations in Multiagent Systems
Acknowledgements
We are thankful to Lisa Lee, Daniel Levy, Jiaming Song, and
everyone at OpenAI for helpful comments and discussion.
AG is supported by a Microsoft Research PhD Fellowship.
MA is partially supported by NIH R01GM114311. JKG
is partially supported by the Army Research Laboratory
through the Army High Performance Computing Research
Center under Cooperative Agreement W911NF-07-2-0027.
References
Abbeel, P. and Ng, A. Y. Apprenticeship learning via inverse
reinforcement learning. In International Conference on
Machine Learning, 2004.
Al-Shedivat, M., Bansal, T., Burda, Y., Sutskever, I., Mor-
datch, I., and Abbeel, P. Continuous adaptation via meta-
learning in nonstationary and competitive environments.
In International Conference on Learning Representations,
2018.
Albrecht, S. V. and Stone, P. Autonomous agents modeling
other agents: A comprehensive survey and open problems.
arXiv preprint arXiv: 1709.08071, 2017.
Battaglia, P., Pascanu, R., Lai, M., Rezende, D. J., et al.
Interaction networks for learning about objects, relations
and physics. In Advances in Neural Information Process-
ing Systems, 2016.
Bengio, Y. et al. Learning deep architectures for ai. Foun-
dations and trends R(cid:13) in Machine Learning, 2(1):1 -- 127,
2009.
Chen, M., Zhou, Z., and Tomlin, C. J. Multiplayer reach-
avoid games via pairwise outcomes. IEEE Transactions
on Automatic Control, 62(3):1451 -- 1457, 2017.
Ferber, J. Multi-agent systems: An introduction to dis-
tributed artificial intelligence, volume 1. Addison-Wesley
Reading, 1999.
Hoshen, Y. VAIN: Attentional multi-agent predictive mod-
In Advances in Neural Information Processing
eling.
Systems, 2017.
Kingma, D. P. and Ba, J. Adam: A method for stochastic
optimization. In International Conference on Learning
Representations, 2015.
Kipf, T., Fetaya, E., Wang, K.-C., Welling, M., and Zemel,
R. Neural relational inference for interacting systems. In
International Conference on Machine Learning, 2018.
Le, H. M., Yue, Y., and Carr, P. Coordinated multi-agent im-
itation learning. In International Conference on Machine
Learning, 2017.
Li, Y., Song, J., and Ermon, S. Inferring the latent struc-
ture of human decision-making from raw visual inputs.
In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems,
2017.
Littman, M. L. Markov games as a framework for multi-
agent reinforcement learning. In International Confer-
ence on Machine Learning, 1994.
Lowe, R., Wu, Y., Tamar, A., Harb, J., Abbeel, P., and Mor-
datch, I. Multi-agent actor-critic for mixed cooperative-
competitive environments. In Advances in Neural Infor-
mation Processing Systems, 2017.
McCalla, G., Vassileva, J., Greer, J., and Bull, S. Active
In Intelligent tutoring systems, pp.
learner modelling.
53 -- 62. Springer, 2000.
Mikolov, T., Sutskever, I., Chen, K., Corrado, G. S., and
Dean, J. Distributed representations of words and phrases
and their compositionality. In Advances in Neural Infor-
mation Processing Systems, 2013.
Mnih, V., Kavukcuoglu, K., Silver, D., Rusu, A. A., Veness,
J., Bellemare, M. G., Graves, A., Riedmiller, M., Fidje-
land, A. K., Ostrovski, G., et al. Human-level control
through deep reinforcement learning. Nature, 518(7540):
529 -- 533, 2015.
Grover, A. and Leskovec, J. node2vec: Scalable feature
learning for networks. In SIGKDD Conference on Knowl-
edge Discovery and Data Mining, 2016.
Mordatch, I. and Abbeel, P. Emergence of grounded com-
positional language in multi-agent populations. In AAAI
Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2018.
Grover, A., Al-Shedivat, M., Gupta, J. K., Burda, Y., and
Edwards, H. Evaluating generalization in multiagent
systems using agent-interaction graphs. In International
Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Sys-
tems, 2018.
Pomerleau, D. A. Efficient training of artificial neural net-
works for autonomous navigation. Neural Computation,
3(1):88 -- 97, 1991.
Rubin, J. and Watson, I. Computer poker: A review. Artifi-
cial intelligence, 175(5-6):958 -- 987, 2011.
Hoffer, E. and Ailon, N. Deep metric learning using triplet
network. In International Workshop on Similarity-Based
Pattern Recognition, pp. 84 -- 92. Springer, 2015.
Schulman, J., Wolski, F., Dhariwal, P., Radford, A., and
Klimov, O. Proximal policy optimization algorithms.
arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06347, 2017.
Learning Policy Representations in Multiagent Systems
Stone, P. and Veloso, M. Multiagent systems: A survey from
a machine learning perspective. Autonomous Robots, 8
(3):345 -- 383, 2000.
Todorov, E., Erez, T., and Tassa, Y. MuJoCo: A physics
engine for model-based control. In International Confer-
ence on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2012.
Wang, Z., Merel, J., Reed, S., Wayne, G., de Freitas, N.,
and Heess, N. Robust imitation of diverse behaviors.
In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems,
2017.
Wooldridge, M. An introduction to multiagent systems. John
Wiley & Sons, 2009.
Zhou, Z., Bambos, N., and Glynn, P. Dynamics on linear in-
fluence network games under stochastic environments. In
International Conference on Decision and Game Theory
for Security, 2016a.
Zhou, Z., Yolken, B., Miura-Ko, R. A., and Bambos, N. A
game-theoretical formulation of influence networks. In
American Control Conference, 2016b.
Learning Policy Representations in Multiagent Systems
A. Experimental Setup
RoboSumo Environment
To limit the scope of our study, we restrict agent morpholo-
gies to only 4-leg robots. During the game, observations of
each agent were represented by a 120-dimensional vector
comprised of positions and velocities of its own body and
positions of the opponent's body; agent's actions were 8-
dimensional vectors that represented torques applied to the
corresponding joints.
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
Agent policies are parameterized as multi-layer perceptrons
(MLPs) with 2 hidden layers of 90 units each. For the
embedding network, we used another MLP network with 2
hidden layers of 100 units each to give an embedding of size
100. For the conditioned policy network we also reduce the
hidden layer size to 64 units each.
POLICY OPTIMIZATION
For learning the population of agents, we use the distributed
version of PPO algorithm as described in (Al-Shedivat et al.,
2018) with 2 × 10−3 learning rate, = 0.2, 16,000 time
steps per update with 6 epochs 4,000 time steps per batch.
TRAINING
For our analysis, we train a diverse collection of 25 agents,
some of which are trained via self-play and others are trained
in pairs concurrently, forming a clique agent-interaction
graph.
9
8
10
7
1
6
2
5
3
4
ParticleWorld Environment
The overall continuous observation and discrete action space
for the speaker agents are 3 and 7 dimensions respectively.
For the listener agents, the observation and action spaces
are 15 and 5 dimensions respectively.
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
Agent policies and shared critic (i.e., a value function) are
parameterized as multi-layer perceptrons (MLPs) with 2
hidden layers of 64 units each. The observation space for
the speaker is small (3 dimensions), and a small embedding
of size 5 for the listener policy gives good performance.
For the embedding network, we again used an MLP with 2
hidden layers of 100 units each.
POLICY OPTIMIZATION
For learning the initial population of listener and agent poli-
cies, we use multiagent deep deterministic policy gradi-
ents (MADDPG) as the base algorithm (Lowe et al., 2017).
Adam optimizer (Kingma & Ba, 2015) with a learning rate
of 4 × 10−3 was used for optimization. Replay buffer size
was set to 106 timesteps.
TRAINING
We first train 28 speaker-listener pairs using the MADDPG
algorithm. From this collection of 28 speakers, we train
another set of 28 listeners, each trained to work with a
speaker pair, forming a bipartite agent-interaction graph.
We choose the best 14 listeners for later experiments.
Speaker
Listener
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Figure 7: An example clique agent interaction graph with
10 agents.
Figure 8: An example bipartite agent interaction graph with
5 speakers and 5 listeners.
|
1610.08804 | 1 | 1610 | 2016-10-27T14:35:22 | The Composition and Formation of Effective Teams. Computer Science meets Psychology | [
"cs.MA"
] | Nowadays the composition and formation of effective teams is highly important for both companies to assure their competitiveness and for a wide range of emerging applications exploiting multiagent collaboration (e.g. crowdsourcing, human-agent collaborations). The aim of this article is to provide an integrative perspective on team composition, team formation and their relationship with team performance. Thus, we review the contributions in both the computer science literature and the organisational psychology literature dealing with these topics. Our purpose is twofold. First, we aim at identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the contributions made by these two diverse bodies of research. Second, we pursue to identify cross-fertilisation opportunities that help both disciplines benefit from one another. Given the volume of existing literature, our review is not intended to be exhaustive. Instead, we have preferred to focus on the most significant contributions in both fields together with recent contributions that break new ground to spur innovative research. | cs.MA | cs | The Composition and Formation of Effective Teams. Computer
Science meets Psychology
Ewa Andrejczuk1
V´ıctor Mar´ın-Puchades2
,
3, Rita Berger2, Juan A. Rodriguez-Aguilar1, Carles Sierra1 and
6
1
0
2
t
c
O
7
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
4
0
8
8
0
.
0
1
6
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
1IIIA-CSIC, Campus UAB, 08193 Bellaterra, Catalonia, Spain
E-mail: {ewa,jar,sierra}@iiia.csic.es,
2University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]
3Change Management Tool S.L., Barcelona, Spain
Abstract
Nowadays the composition and formation of effective teams is highly important for both
companies to assure their competitiveness and for a wide range of emerging applications exploiting
multiagent collaboration (e.g. crowdsourcing, human-agent collaborations). The aim of this
article is to provide an integrative perspective on team composition, team formation and their
relationship with team performance. Thus, we review the contributions in both the computer
science literature and the organisational psychology literature dealing with these topics. Our
purpose is twofold. First, we aim at identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the contributions
made by these two diverse bodies of research. Second, we pursue to identify cross-fertilisation
opportunities that help both disciplines benefit from one another. Given the volume of existing
literature, our review is not intended to be exhaustive. Instead, we have preferred to focus on the
most significant contributions in both fields together with recent contributions that break new
ground to spur innovative research.
1 Introduction
The latter part of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st centuries have witnessed a significant
transformation from work organized around individual jobs to team-based work structures
together with a focus on organisational efficiency (Kozlowski and Bell, 2013). This is due to the
increasing complexity of tasks, which in many cases cannot be performed by single individuals
(Ramezan, 2011). Additionally, changes in technology facilitate workers in distinct locations to
communicate and collaborate at low or no cost. On that account, team composition and formation
research is of interest to many fields of science, primarily to organisational psychology. Moreover, it
has also substantially pervaded the field of computer science, mainly within the area of multiagent
systems (MAS). Indeed, research in MAS has considered a variety of application domains (e.g.
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) operations (Haque et al., 2013), teamwork in social networks
(Lappas et al., 2009) or RoboCup rescue teams (Ramchurn et al., 2010)) wherein agents face the
challenge of performing tasks that are either too complex for one single agent or limited in time,
thus requiring several agents to collaborate.
Nevertheless, research on team composition and team formation in computer science (CS) and
organisational psychology (OP) has evolved separately. On the one hand, MAS literature has
typically disregarded significant OP findings, with the exception of several recent, preliminary
attempts (such as Farhangian et al. (2015b), Hanna and Richards (2015), Andrejczuk et al.
2
ewa andrejczuk et al.
(2016)). Thus, this body of research has focused on algorithms that help automate team
formation and composition. On the other hand, the OP literature has mainly focused on
empirically investigating the factors that influence team performance to develop heuristics that
help organisations handcraft their teams. OP has disregarded the algorithmic results developed by
computer scientists to automate team composition and formation. Despite the common research
interests shared by MAS and OP, to the best of our knowledge there has been no effort in the
literature to bridge the knowledge produced by both research disciplines.
Against this background, the aim of this article is to survey both disciplines, to analyse and
compare the strengths and weaknesses of their contributions, and to identify research gaps and
opportunities by bringing together the knowledge of the two research strands on team composition
and formation. Our analysis also pursues to identify cross-fertilisation opportunities that help
both disciplines benefit from one another.
In order to structure our analysis, we have identified several dimensions that help us dissect
the contributions from both research fields:
1. WHO is concerned? The properties of the agents involved.
2. WHAT is the problem? The features of the task to complete by a team.
3. WHY do we do it? The objective function to optimise when composing/forming a team.
4. HOW do we do it? The organisation and/or coordination structure adopted by the team in
charge of performing a particular task.
5. WHEN do we do it? The dynamics of the stream of tasks to be completed by agent teams.
6. WHERE do we do it? The context wherein team composition/formation occurs.
Our analysis of the literature indicates that Computer Science (CS) and Organisational
Psychology (OP) exhibit some similarities. Indeed, one of the crucial findings in both OP and
CS is that team members have to be heterogeneous to maximize team performance. When
modeling agents, CS and OP agree on considering two main approaches: either there is complete
information about the properties of each agent; or agents are capable of learning about their
teammates through repeated interactions. Regarding tasks, both OP and CS research largely
focus on finding team members whose properties make them capable of performing a given task
based on its requirements. In other words, they are both concerned with matching agents (or
whole teams) with tasks.
However, there are important differences between the contributions made by OP and CS that
stem from the fact that OP does consider the whole complexity of: humans as team members,
tasks, the context where teams perform tasks (understood as the internal and external factors
influencing teamwork), and the dynamics of the actual-world scenarios where tasks appear to be
serviced. Thus, OP assumes that human capabilities are necessarily dynamic (evolve along time)
so that teams can successfully perform tasks in dynamic real-world scenarios and in a variety
of contexts. Furthermore, OP observes that the quality of human resources (e.g. motivation,
satisfaction, commitment), the ability of individuals to learn new capabilities, and the context
constraining team performance significantly influence team performance. Finally, OP research
also focused on identifying correlations between task types and team types to compose the best
team depending on the type of each particular task. All these findings contributed by OP research
offer interesting opportunities for cross-fertilisation.
The rest of the paper is organised as follows. Section 2 introduces some fundamental
terminology to make clear what we mean by team composition, team formation and teamwork.
Thereafter, the paper is organized around two main sections. Section 3 reviews the MAS
contributions to team composition and team formation. Next, section 4 surveys the contributions
in the organisational psychology literature. Rangapuram2015Finally, section 5 identifies the main
similarities and differences between the two bodies of research. Furthermore, it also discusses
cross-fertilisation opportunities between both fields that may spur future research.
Organisational Psychology
The composition and formation of Effective Teams. Computer Science meets
3
2 Background
We introduce the fundamental terminology used in this survey. We refer to:
1. Team Composition as the process of deciding which agents will be part of a team,
2. Team Formation as the process of learning by agents to work together in a team and through
this learning decide the roles and internal organisation of a team,
3. Teamwork as the process of performing a task by a composed and formed team.
While there is a common understanding of teamwork within both OP and CS, the scientists
do not agree on the notion of team formation. In computer science it is mostly understood as
the process of deciding which agents will be a part of a team (here called team composition).
Our definition of team formation is in line with the organisational psychology literature
(Kozlowski and Bell, 2013, p.16).
Another discrepancy between the computer science and the organisational psychology liter-
ature is the notion of skill and competence. Typically in computer science all kinds of agents'
competences are called skills, while in OP the definition is more complex. In OP a prominent
conceptualization of competence was given by Roe (Roe, 2002, p.195). He defines competence as
"a learned ability to adequately perform a task, duty or role". Following his definition competences
"integrate knowledge, skills, personal values, and attitudes and are build on knowledge and skills
and are acquired through work experience and learning by doing" (Bartram and Roe, 2005).
Hence, competences include abilities and behaviours, as well as knowledge that is fundamental
to the use of a skill. An example may consist of a programming task. In order to effectively write
a script one needs good logical and analytical competences as well as the skill to write a program
in a specific language. Hence, Java is a skill. Although, underlying the ability to use that skill
effectively is a competence.
3 Team composition and formation from a computer science perspective
Team composition and formation are critical issues for co-operative multiagent systems. In this
section we survey the most recent and representative approaches in the MAS literature to the
team composition and formation problems along the dimensions identified in the introduction
above.
3.1 WHO is concerned?
The question behind team composition and formation is how to create a multiagent system as a
group of heterogeneous agents (such as humans, robots, software agents or even animals) and how
to organize their activities. Team members must observe the environment and interact with one
another in order to perform tasks or solve problems that are beyond their individual capabilities.
The algorithms to create these teams take inspiration from human teamwork. We observe people
working together on daily activities as well as on research and business projects. For instance,
there are sport teams (e.g. football, basketball), police squads, search and rescue teams formed
by dogs and humans, and we start to witness human-robot cooperation in houses, hospitals, or
even in space missions (Hoffman and Breazeal, 2004).
In general, MAS research focuses on the interaction among intelligent agents. In the team
formation literature, the focus is on the interaction of cooperative and heterogeneous agents.
That is, agents who share a common goal, and have different individual properties. Therefore,
in this section, we would like to account for the different ways previous research has dealt with
these questions. We will classify individual properties according to two dimensions:
1. Capacity: individual and social capabilities of agents; and
2. Personality: individual behaviour models.
4
ewa andrejczuk et al.
3.1.1 Capacity: individual and social capabilities of agents
In many domains, a capability is defined as a particular skill required to perform an action. The
capacity dimension has been exploited by numerous previous works, like Robust Team Formation
(Crawford et al., 2016; Okimoto et al., 2015) or Online Team Formation (Anagnostopoulos et al.,
2012). In these works, agents are assumed to have multiple binary skills (i.e., the agent either has a
required skill or not). This is a simplistic way to model an agent's capabilities since it ignores any
skill degree. In real life, capabilities are not binary since every individual (e.g. human or robot)
shows different action performance. This is why some works propose a more realistic approach by
defining graded agent capabilities, for instance by defining skill levels (Chalkiadakis and Boutilier,
2012).
On a different vein, Rangapuram et al. (2015) builds a weighted, undirected graph where the
weight between each pair of agents reflects their degree of compatibility to jointly solve tasks.
These weights are updated along multiple encounters between agents. In a somehow related
vein, Peleteiro et al. (2015) try to capture the quality of the solutions of team tasks via a model
that besides using skills and compatibility between agents (called the strength of collaboration
synergies within coalitions), calculates the reputation of teams (coalitions) as a whole and of
single agents. These reputation values are used by the team composition process.
Typically, the capabilities of agents are assumed to be known, though there exist models
that consider that an agent can learn the capability levels of other agents. For instance,
Liemhetcharat and Veloso (2014) had the insight that repeated interactions allow to discover
the capabilities of other agents. They call "synergy" to the degree of performance of a team.
Agents learn a model of synergy via repeated interactions. Such synergy values are then used by
individual agents to learn the capabilities of others, and hence to subsequently compose teams
with improved performance. However, in open environments (that is, when new agents and tasks
are dynamically introduced), agents need more sophisticated procedures to decide which team to
join. For instance, Chen et al. (2015) propose an ad-hoc team formation framework that considers
learning other agents' capabilities in the context of unknown tasks. In order to solve a new
task, agents would prefer to team up with unknown agents instead of with agents whose known
capabilities do not adjust to the task. They observe that learning the capabilities of others in the
context of agent and task openness improves team composition and task resolution.
3.1.2 Personality: Individual behaviour models
Personality is key to understand people's behaviour, cognition and emotion. The use of personality
models in agents helps to create more realistic complex scenarios. Indeed, autonomy is related to
how individuals behave and what makes them behave differently, even when facing the very same
situation. Personality provides a mechanism for behaviour selection that is independent of social
background (such as beliefs or morality). Very recently some MAS contributions have started
to consider the notion of personality, i.e. individual behaviour model, to compose heterogeneous
teams. For instance, Hanna and Richards (2015) study the influence of two agent personality
traits: extraversion and agreeableness, both expressed as verbal and non-verbal communication
skills. They construct pairs of human users and Intelligent Virtual Agents (IVAs) and analyse
how the personality traits influence the development and maintenance of a Shared Mental Model
(SMM). The results confirm the importance of providing IVAs with these personality traits to
succeed in jointly solving tasks. On a different vein, Andrejczuk et al. (2016) use personality traits
to partition a group of humans into psychologically-balanced and gender-balanced heterogeneous
teams with the purpose of increasing the overall performance of the resulting teams.
Marcolino et al. (Marcolino et al., 2013; Nagarajan et al., 2015; Marcolino et al., 2016) propose
a new approach for action selection. A task is a sequence of actions to be decided at execution
time. To choose which action to execute next, every heterogeneous agent within a team votes for
its preferred candidate action. Agents vote according to a probability distribution over actions
Organisational Psychology
The composition and formation of Effective Teams. Computer Science meets
5
that varies for each agent. This can be understood as a way of modeling an agent's personality,
motivations and beliefs (causing him to behave in a certain way).
In a series of papers, Farhangian et al. (2015b,a) use the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)
Myers Briggs et al. scheme to model different agent personality types. Farhangian et al. (2015a)
is the only previous work to our knowledge that uses both individuals' skills and personality types
(measured by MBTI and Belbin (Belbin, 1993) personality tests) to compose teams. These two
dimensions are used to simulate human team composition in a business environment.
Another aspect covered by the existing literature is the individual agent knowledge about
the other team members' personalities, that is, about their behaviour models. These works go
beyond many "ad-hoc" team composition systems where information details about the behaviour
of individual agents is absent. Barrett et al. (2013) focus on how a new member in a team behaves
in order to cooperate well with the other team members whose behaviors are unknown. Each agent
is endowed with a learning mechanism for building models of the behaviours of many distinct types
of other agents via repeated interactions. A similar setting is presented by Agmon et al. (2014),
though they consider that there are only two types of agents: a best response agent (choosing
his action based on the current state of the world), and an ad-hoc agent (has a better awareness
of the teams possible actions and the resulting joint utility). There is no a-priori model, hence,
similarly to Barrett et al. (2013), an ad-hoc agent needs to decide his behaviour by observing his
peers.
In summary, team composition and formation research has focused so far on
Analysis.
cooperative, heterogeneous agents that have a set of properties. These properties can be
categorized into two groups: capacity and personality. To our knowledge, besides Farhangian et al.
(2015a), there has been no further attempts to combine capabilities and personality for team
composition and formation in the area of MAS. Besides that, we observe that the capabilities of
agents are always static, but the behaviour model may change with agents' interactions. While
the capabilities of humans change over time, the MAS literature typically does not consider
dynamic capabilities for software agents. Finally, when modeling agents' properties, many existing
approaches typically assume extensive a-priori information about teammates. This is a strong
limitation for real-life settings. Notice that in many companies there is no central and extensive
knowledge about all employees' capabilities.
3.2 WHAT is the problem? The notion of task
In its most general sense, a task is a course of action to achieve a goal. The execution of a
task is then usually equated to the execution of an action plan. Action plans can be rather
complex as they may take into account concurrency of actions, time constraints, action order,
or environment uncertainty. However, in the team formation literature it is often the case that
simplifying assumptions are made and tasks are assumed to be solved by simple action plans. For
instance, an action plan can be seen as a set of actions, or even as a set of competences. In this
latter case the idea behind is that the task can be successfully solved by a team of individuals
with expertise in a number of different fields. In this section, we review which concepts of task
have been proposed in team formation and team composition. We identify two main approaches:
•
Individual-based, i.e. capacity or personality (see section 3.1);
• Plan-based, e.g. the set of actions or subtasks.
Next we discuss each approach in detail.
Individual-based approaches
3.2.1
Sometimes teams work less effectively than initially expected due to several reasons: a bad balance
of their capacities, bad personal relations, or difficult social situations. Hence, in order to make
6
ewa andrejczuk et al.
sure a task is performed the most effectively, the large body of literature defines the action plan
of the task as a set of requirements for agent individual characteristics. It is assumed that the
task can be fulfilled if the task requirements are a subset of the capabilities of team members. We
categorise existing work on team composition with the purpose to solve a task into two categories
of individual properties: capacity and personality.
Capacity. The capabilities of team members are crucial while performing a task. For instance,
it is obvious that in order to develop an online Java application, the collective team knowledge
has to include Java, Java EE, front-end tools, and database and server knowledge. In the MAS
literature (as discussed in Subsection 3.1.1), the majority of research work expresses capabilities
as binary (they are present or they are not) (Anagnostopoulos et al., 2012; Chen et al., 2015;
Crawford et al., 2016; Okimoto et al., 2015). The main shortcoming of the binary approach is
the restrictive assumption that if an agent has a capability, his expertise level is sufficient to
perform a given task, which implies that the quality of the task performed is not relevant.
In many cases, the definition of a task is indirectly connected to the agents' capabilities.
Peleteiro et al. (2015) propose a model where a task is defined as a tuple that contains the
specification of the task (i.e. its subtasks) and the deadline by which the task has to be completed.
Each subtask is then matched with one capability. A contract net algorithm is used to compose
a team of agents that covers all the required capabilities while maximizing the reputation of
the team, thus leading to the best expected performance. In Chalkiadakis and Boutilier (2012),
a project is defined as a set of tasks, where each task has a complexity level (e.g. moderate
or ambitious). Agents' capabilities are graded (e.g. a good carpenter). Tasks are matched with
agents' capabilities. The probability of an agent succeeding at performing a task depends on the
capability degree of the agent performing the task and the complexity level of the task. These
probabilities are learned through repeated interactions between agents, and then used by them
to self-organise as teams. Finally, in Roles and Teams Hedonic Games (RTHG) (Spradling et al.,
2013) each agent expresses his preferences over both his own roles within a team and on the set of
roles needed in the team. This way, agents themselves jointly select a set of required capabilities
to perform a given task.
Personality Similarly, personalities of team members are crucial for performing tasks. Accord-
ing to Wilde (2009), different types of tasks require different personalities in a team. In detail,
people with different personalities approach tasks in a diverse way, resulting in better and faster
solutions. Along this line, Andrejczuk et al. (2016) propose a team composition algorithm that
groups agents into different teams so that the personalities in each team are as disparate as
possible and gender is balanced.
In (Farhangian et al., 2015b), the nature (structure) of a task is quantitatively characterized:
from extremely structured to extremely open-ended. While structured tasks are straightforward
and do not require planning, open-ended tasks require creativity and imagination from team
members. In another article, Farhangian et al. (2015a) try to capture the dynamics of tasks by
matching the required levels of creativity, urgency, social interaction and complexity of a task to
personalities of agents. For instance, teams composed of differing attitude tendencies (associated
with different personalities) are believed to outperform teams composed of like-minded people
when tackling tasks requiring a high level of creativity.
Finally, Hanna and Richards (2015) show that when performing a task, the personality of
team members influences their success. They analyse the influence of an Intelligent Virtual Agent
(IVA) communication style (expressing its personality) on human-IVA cooperation. The task is
a collaborative game that involves dodging a sequence of obstacles to reach a target.
Organisational Psychology
The composition and formation of Effective Teams. Computer Science meets
7
3.2.2 Plan-based approaches
The notion of task in plan-based approaches is normally understood either as a set of actions or
as a sequence of actions. Well organized teamwork can shorten the time required for completing
a particular task by distributing a set of actions across team members. Both Barrett et al. (2013)
and Agmon et al. (2014) employ an indirect planning method driven by the most informed agents
to solve a set of actions. Barrett et al. (2013) introduce an ad-hoc team agent that learns its
teammates' models (i.e. their predictable action selection) and chooses its own actions so that
they collectively maximize the likelihood of success. In detail, they use Monte Carlo sampling
to simulate the long term effects of collective actions. As an extension to the previous work, in
Agmon et al. (2014) the actions selected by ad-hoc agents influence the actions that the other
team members will choose. Each agent has a set of possible actions that it may choose in order to
solve each subtask. The ad-hoc agents need to predict the actions of its teammates (conditioned in
this case to its own actions) and behave based on these predictions with the purpose of influencing
the collective selection of actions in the team to reach a joint optimal solution.
Among the approaches considering a task as a sequence of actions, in Marcolino et al. (2013) a
team of agents jointly playing the computer game Go plan which action to take next by voting on
the possible alternatives from a discrete set of possible actions. Authors prove that under certain
conditions of opinion diversity, aggregating the decisions of a team of heterogeneous agents is a
better planning strategy than the decision of a team built with copies of the most competent
agent (called the strongest agent). This shows that diversity improves the planning capacity of
a team solving a complex task like Go. In Marcolino et al. (2016), the authors use the same
technique to suggest a user a number of optimal solutions for their next action decision. The
application domain of their algorithm is house design. Various design alternatives are proposed
to the user in order to select one for further study.
Finally, Rochlin et al. (2016) deal with self-interested agents in a team that select one agent
to accomplish the task of purchasing a jointly desired item with the lowest possible cost. By
doing so, the team assigns the execution of the plan to a single member of the team, becoming
the buyer. The buyer's strategy decides whether to maintain the search looking for better deals
(search for a further action), or stop looking and buy at the lowest price found so far, bearing
the incurred buyer's overhead. This strategy balances the expectation of finding a better price
(considering the price distribution built during the search) and the team policy to reimburse the
cost of the task solution finding to the buyer.
In conclusion, tasks are solved by the execution of action plans. How complex these
Analysis.
action plans are depends on the focus of the reviewed contributions. Individual-based approaches
understand action plans as sets of requirements on a team members' capacity and personality.
These approaches assume that the joint capabilities of agents in a team must be enough to solve
a given task. Contrarily, plan-based approaches regard tasks as sets of actions or sequences
of actions that are assigned to the individual members of a team. All these works propose
algorithms that determine which action will be executed and by whom. However, plan-based
approaches have a very simplistic notion of plan. The majority of models do not consider time
constraints, action dependencies, action failure, plan robustness, or dynamic changes in a task
requirements. Therefore, the vast literature on planning has not yet been integrated into team
formation methods.
3.3 WHY do we do it? The objective(s)
The motivation of individual efforts or actions is to attain or accomplish a certain state of affairs:
its goal. A necessary condition for a team to exist is that all team members are committed to
a joint goal. Therefore, in Computer Science an agent team is typically built of at least two
cooperative agents that share a common goal; by teaming up, these goals can be achieved in a
more effective way. This is the main motivation of team composition and formation. A large body
8
ewa andrejczuk et al.
of literature proposes team composition algorithms to attain at least one of the following team
objectives:
1. minimizing overall cost (e.g. cooperation cost, team cost);
2. maximizing social utility; or
3. maximizing the quality of an outcome.
In this section we describe the literature on team composition per objective.
3.3.1 Minimizing overall cost
Team cost efficiency has received some attention in the literature. There are various costs
associated with team composition and formation problems (e.g. communication costs or agent
service costs). For instance, some results balancing cost and quality were obtained by Kargar et al.
(2012). They propose algorithms for composing a competent team in a social network. When
composing a team, those algorithms minimize team members' costs and communication costs
within the team. Kargar et al. (2012) require that agents have the necessary competences to
perform a task, but do not require any specific motivation from them.
A similar approach is presented in Crawford et al. (2016) and Okimoto et al. (2015). These
works propose a model for robust team composition and go a step further with respect to
Kargar et al. (2012) since they minimize the overall cost among k-robust teams (see Section 3.4.1
for a definition of a k-robust team). That is, this model assumes that up to k agents within a team
may eventually fail without affecting the achievement of the task. Thus, it assumes more realistic
conditions than Kargar et al. (2012). However, likewise Kargar et al. (2012), agents' motivations
to work together in a team are not considered.
3.3.2 Maximizing social welfare
A second objective considered in the team composition and formation literature is maximizing
social welfare. That is, maximizing the utility function of a team, as a whole, while performing a
task. The utility obtained is then allocated to the individual members of the team. For instance,
Chalkiadakis and Boutilier (2012) propose a Bayesian Reinforcement Learning framework where
agents learn from iterated coalition compositions. Agents can choose between exploration (select
coalitions to learn more about new agent types) and exploitation (rely on known agents).
Exploitation enables agents to maximize their utility function by performing tasks with reliable
agents (discovered during the exploration phase).
Paradoxically, the agent motivation to maximize its individual welfare may reduce the overall
team cost and additionally increase the overall quality of the performed task. For instance, in
Rokicki et al. (2015) a human team competition mechanism improves cost efficiency and the
quality of a solution in a team-based crowdsourcing scenario. In conventional crowdsourcing
reward schemes, the payment of online workers is proportional to the number of accomplished
tasks (pay-per-task). Rokicki et al. examine the possibility of getting much higher rewards by
introducing strategies (e.g. random or self-organised) for team composition. Their mechanism
triggers the competition among human teams as the reward is only given to the top-5 performing
teams or individuals. Their evaluation shows substantial performance boosts (30% in the best
scenario) for team-based settings without decreasing the quality of the outcome.
The objective of maximizing social welfare is also considered in many ad-hoc settings, like
the one proposed by Agmon et al. (2014). Agmon et al. consider a framework with two types of
agents: best-response and ad-hoc agents forming teams. On the one hand, best-response agents
have limited knowledge and assume that the environment and their teammates will behave as
observed in the past. On the other hand, ad-hoc agents have a more complete view of a team
actions, agents' joint utilities and their action costs. Using such information, ad-hoc agents try
to influence joint decisions. In Agmon et al. (2014) the authors consider that ad-hoc agents know
Organisational Psychology
The composition and formation of Effective Teams. Computer Science meets
9
with uncertainty their teammates' behaviour. The paper analyses the impact on optimal solutions
of ad-hoc agents misidentifying their teammates' types.
The study of self-interested agents that co-operate in a team has also attracted the interest
of researchers in MAS. An interesting example of this approach is presented in Farhangian et al.
(2015b), where self-interested agents need to maximize the welfare of all team members in order
to maximize their own benefit. Hence, they indirectly aim at maximizing the utility of the team.
Similarly, in Chen et al. (2015) agents repetitively decide which team to join by balancing both
rewards from completing tasks and learning opportunities from more qualified agents. That
is, each agent consider whether to sacrifice short-term rewards to acquire new knowledge that
benefits himself and the whole community in the long run.
3.3.3 Maximizing quality
The last range of models propose a number of methods where agents try to maximize the quality
of solutions whilst minimising the time to achieve them, namely to maximize team performance.
Recent organisational psychology studies prove that team members' diversity is a key factor to
increase team performance Wilde (2009). As mentioned in Section 3.1 Marcolino et al. (2013)
present a setting where agents in a team vote together to decide on the next joint action to
execute that maximises the team's solution quality. The authors prove that a diverse team can
overcome a stronger team (i.e. a team built of copies of the strongest agent) if at least one agent
has a higher probability of taking the best action in at least one world state than the probability
that the best agent has of taking that action in that state. The attempt of capturing heterogeneity
is also used in Andrejczuk et al. (2016). There, instead of looking for a single heterogeneous team,
Andrejczuk et al. partition a group of agents into psychologically-balanced and gender-balanced
heterogeneous teams with the purpose of increasing the overall performance of the resulting
teams.
Hanna and Richards (2015) also use personality to investigate the influence of Intelligent
Virtual Agents (IVA) on team collaboration. Their findings reveal that team performance boosts
when the human and the IVA in a team have a shared mental model. Building a shared mental
model is directly related to the psychological traits of IVA.
Peleteiro et al. (2015) introduce a decision making mechanism that on top of improving the
quality, aims at increasing the quantity of completed tasks. It uses reputation and adaptation
mechanisms to allow agents in a competitive environment to autonomously join and preserve
coalitions (teams). In terms of team performance, they show that coalitions keep a high percentage
of tasks serviced on time despite a high percentage of unreliable workers. Moreover, coalitions
and agents demonstrate that they successfully adapt to a varying distribution of incoming tasks.
Liemhetcharat and Veloso (2012) developed a model to learn and analyze capabilities of
agents and synergies among them to solve the team composition problem using previous joint
experiences. They define a synergy model as a graph where the distance between agents is an
indicator of how well they work together. Their main contribution is that their algorithm learns
from only a partial set of agent interactions in order to learn the complete synergy model. In a
subsequent article (Liemhetcharat and Veloso, 2014), the authors study the learning agent team
formation problem with the goal of maximizing the mean performance of a team after K learning
instances. There, learning agent pairs have heterogeneous rates of coordination improvement,
and hence the allocation of training instances has a larger impact on the performance of the final
team.
The notion of fairness is also considered in the context of team performance. An example of
this approach is given in Rochlin et al. (2016). Rochlin et al. analyze the correlation between
efficiency and fairness in teams consisting of self-interested agents. They prove that the more fair
the team the more efficient its members are.
10
ewa andrejczuk et al.
In summary, the computer science literature has focused on team co-operation with
Analysis.
various objectives that can be categorized as at least one of the following: minimizing overall cost,
maximizing social utility, or maximizing team(s) performance. The models minimizing overall cost
compose teams based on individual competences, though do not take into account individual
motivations to complete the assigned task. This is a rather strong assumption, especially when
it comes to mixed teams or human teams, making the existing approaches rather unrealistic.
The literature focusing on maximizing social welfare considers both agent competences and
motivation. The motivation increases by using competence mechanisms (like in crowdsourcing
teams), or by giving agents the freedom to select their collaborators (like in learning agent team
formation or in ad-hoc teams). To maximise team performance, one of the crucial findings in both
Organisational Psychology and Computer Science is that team members must be heterogeneous.
Further variables that have been used by computer scientists in the area of MAS to compose
teams are: agent reputation, personality of humans and agents, synergy between team members,
and feeling of fairness among team members.
3.4 HOW do we do it? The organisation
In the existing literature, the societal structure of teams is considered crucial for effective
teamwork. There are two aspects to be considered, one is which agents will be members of a
team and second, how teams will be organized to solve tasks. Thus, the different approaches in
the literature can be classified depending on the functionality that they tackle:
• Team Composition: the process of deciding which agents will be part of a team. It can be an
external decision or an autonomous decision by the agents themselves; and
• Team Formation: the process of learning to decide the roles and internal organisation of a
team. This organisation can be imposed or be the result of self organisation. In any case, the
resulting organisations can be categorized as hierarchical or egalitarian.
Next, we look into these two dimensions in detail.
3.4.1 Team Composition.
Although team composition in MAS has mainly focused on building teams of software agents,
that is agent teams, there is a growing number of works considering either mixed teams
(Hanna and Richards, 2015), where agents and humans cooperate to achieve common goals
(Ramchurn et al., 2016), or human environments, where people are supported by software
(Jennings et al., 2014). In MAS, we distinguish between two groups of methods (or processes) to
compose team(s), namely:
1. Exogenous Team Composition: there is an algorithm external to the agents that determines
the composition of teams.
2. Endogenous Team Composition: agents themselves decide in a distributed manner the
composition of a team.
Exogenous Team Composition. The team composition process uses the task requirements
(i.e. constraints on teams that can be formed, such as team size (Rahwan et al., 2011);
competences and personality as discussed in section 3.1) in order to build teams that are
capable of solving the task with particular properties. For instance, Crawford et al. (2016) and
Okimoto et al. (2015) consider a degree of fault-tolerance to build k-robust teams. A team is k-
robust if removing any k members from the team, does not affect the completion of the task. As
mentioned before, Liemhetcharat and Veloso (2012) propose a learning algorithm that constructs
a synergy graph from observations of the performance of pairs and triples of agent. A synergy
value represents how well a pair of agents work together. The authors use this learned synergy
Organisational Psychology
The composition and formation of Effective Teams. Computer Science meets
11
graph as well as agent capabilities to solve the team composition problem. Their method selects
teams that are capable and that maximize their internal synergy.
Similarly, Rangapuram et al. (2015) consider the competences of agents and their compatibility
in order to identify a team that is both competent and compatible. Agent compatibility, expressed
as a social network, can be understood as a set of preferences on team composition, such as: the
inclusion of a certain team leader, or restrictions on team size, problem solving cost or agent
locality (in a social or geographical sense).
In many systems, capabilities of agents are not widely known. Chen et al. (2015) study an
ad-hoc setting where agents need to co-operate with to recognize their capabilities. Agents bid
for subtasks (parts of tasks) that they want to perform, though the final decision belongs to the
exogenous algorithm that assigns each subtask to the best qualified agent bidding on the task.
composition of multiple
teams. For
Some
approaches deal with the
instance,
Anagnostopoulos et al. (2012) use competences and communication cost in a context where tasks
sequentially arrive and teams have to be composed to perform them. Each task requires a specific
set of competences and the team composition algorithm is such that the workload per agent
is fair across teams. Furthermore, Andrejczuk et al. (2016) compose multiple teams according
to a balance of agents' personalities and genders. Their goal is to partition a set of agents into
multiple teams such that each team is internally balanced and the problem solving capabilities
of the teams in the partition are similar. Besides the use of personality traits, Farhangian et al.
(2015a) use competences and a task specification with the purpose of composing a single team.
Aside from competences and personality, team composition can also take into account
agents' preferences on teams. Indeed, hedonic coalition formation employs each agent's hedonic
preferences on its coalitions to yield a coalition structure, namely multiple teams. The defining
feature of a hedonic preference is that every agent only cares about which agents are in its own
team (coalition). Spradling et al. (2013) introduce a new model of hedonic coalition formation
game, the so called Roles and Teams Hedonic Games (RTHG). In this model, agents view
coalitions as a number of available roles and have two levels of preferences: on the set of roles
that are available in a coalition, and on their own role within each coalition.
Finally, there is recent, relevant work on mixed teams by Hanna and Richards (2015), which
composes a team as a pair consisting of a human and an Intelligent Virtual Agent (IVA). The
pair play a collaborative game that involves passing a sequence of obstacles to reach a target.
Endogenous Team Composition. The second group of methods for organizing teams has an
endogenous nature. They incorporate algorithms enabling agents to decide on team composition
by themselves. In detail, agents are equipped with negotiation and decision-making mechanisms
that they employ to agree among themselves on a team structure. Therefore, team composition
occurs without explicit external command.
Farhangian et al. (2015b) propose a model in which there are two types of agents: requesters
in charge of tasks that seek for contributors to compose teams, and contributors that vote
for the tasks they want to perform. Each requester runs an auction-based (first-price sealed-
bid) algorithm with the purpose of composing teams with the highest chance to increase social
wealth. Contributors issue bids pursuing to join the most useful requesters, namely the ones
that are most likely to reward them. Peleteiro et al. (2015) follow the similar approach but also
employ reputation and adaptation mechanisms to allow agents in a competitive environment to
autonomously join and preserve teams (as coalitions). Agents bid for tasks and each team is
constructed and led by a mediator agent.
Similarly, in Chalkiadakis and Boutilier (2012) each agent builds its beliefs about its peers
based on prior outcomes of interactions between them, and decides on coalitional actions (which
coalition to join and what task to perform). Then, agents negotiate between them to form teams
taking into account their own beliefs on the probability of success when being in a team.
12
ewa andrejczuk et al.
There exist also mixed approches, where researchers explore both, exogenous and endogenous
methods to compose teams. For instance, Rokicki et al. (2015) propose strategies for groupsourc-
ing (team-based crowdsourcing), ranging from team formation processes where individuals are
randomly assigned to teams, to strategies requiring self-organisation where individuals participate
in team building. Their results show that balanced teams (that is teams with the balanced number
or agents in each team) combined with individual rewards for most effective team members
outperforms the other strategies.
Analysis. The majority of researchers focuses on exogenous methods to compose teams.
However, there are many actual-world application domains (e.g. co-working, or crowdsourcing)
where endogenous team composition and formation are more appropriate for deployment.
Most of the literature on exogenous team composition assumes that there exists a centralized,
detailed knowledge about all agents. This knowledge is required in order to compose teams
based on agents' capabilities, personality, or even preferences. Endogenous methods are best
for dynamic environments, where team composition and formation processes are continuously
performed. Furthermore, it is a good setup for agents that learn other agents' capabilities through
repeated interactions.
3.4.2 Team Formation
We identify two main team organisation structures to build effective teams:
1. Hierarchical; and
2. Egalitarian.
We describe each team organisation structure in the following sub-sections.
Hierarchical. A hierarchical structure considers a team leader who is responsible for and makes
the decisions affecting the team. This structure is the traditional setting when it comes to business
units.
As mentioned in subsection 3.4.1, Farhangian et al. (2015b) consider two types of people within
teams: requesters and contributors. Requesters adopt a leading function, they start a project and
recruit the required people. Contributors perform the tasks assigned by requesters. The overall
team behaviour is determined by the personality of agents in teams.
In Peleteiro et al. (2015), each coalition is led by a mediator. This agent is responsible for
leading a coalition by selecting suitable agents to be part of a coalition (called worker agents)
and by evaluating the performance of workers while the coalition operates.
Agmon et al. (2014) consider ad-hoc settings with two types of agents: best-response agents
and ad-hoc agents. In such settings a task consists of a set of actions, and each team becomes
responsible for performing a task. Each best-response agent selects its next action based on its
own local world view. Each ad-hoc agent acts to bring out the best in its teammates by "leading"
them to the optimal joint action. This is an arresting example of a hierarchical structure, where
agents are not aware of each other's roles, and hence of a team's structure. Nonetheless, an ad-hoc
agent has more knowledge than a best-response agent, and thus it exploits such information to
lead its team. This may happen in a business setting, where both senior and junior staff form a
team. Even though there is no clear division of roles, the senior employee uses his experience to
make decisions that are best for the team in a long–term period (and may not look best from a
short–time perspective).
Egalitarian. An egalitarian structure assumes that all workers in a team are equally informed
and have the same rights. The leadership within a team is shared and existing team roles result
from the team's task requirements. An example of this structure in real-life scenario might be a
Organisational Psychology
The composition and formation of Effective Teams. Computer Science meets
13
team of doctors that need to join their specialized knowledge to perform a complicated surgery
on a patient.
A large part of the MAS literature focuses on the egalitarian setting, trying to benefit from
leaderless teams that cooperate to complete tasks. We find this team structure in Groupsourcing
(Rokicki et al., 2015), Robust Teams (Okimoto et al., 2015; Crawford et al., 2016), Ad-hoc
teams (Chalkiadakis and Boutilier, 2012; Chen et al., 2015; Barrett et al., 2013), Mixed Teams
(Hanna and Richards, 2015), or Learning Teams (Liemhetcharat and Veloso, 2012, 2014).
A particular case of egalitarian structure involves members that decide collectively, usually
by voting, on the appropriate course of action while performing an assigned task. The real life
example for this organisation structure might be a start-up with few people that make all decisions
by discussion. Marcolino et al. (2013); Nagarajan et al. (2015) and Marcolino et al. (2016) study
egalitarian structures whose agents vote to decide at every step of a task in order to choose the
best course of action. They prove that teams consisting of heterogeneous agents that vote their
actions are more efficient than homogeneous teams built out of the copies of the strongest agent
in a team. This is because the spectrum of possible actions is wider for heterogeneous teams.
Finally, some team composition models can produce both types of team structures. For
instance,
in Roles and Teams Hedonic Games model (Spradling et al., 2013), the resulting
structure of the teams can be either hierarchical or egalitarian depending on the relationships
between roles. Typically teams in (Rangapuram et al., 2015) are egalitarian, though the presented
model includes many natural requirements that can lead to a hierarchical structure (such as
inclusion of a designated team leader and/or a group of given experts).
Analysis. The team organisation structures in the MAS literature can be grouped into
hierarchical and egalitarian. The majority of MAS research focuses on egalitarian structures
because of simplicity reasons. In particular, there is no need for defining a role structure together
with its relationship and agent-role assignments. Although structuring teams and organisations
largely helps reduce complexity of interactions, by separating responsibilities, most research in
team formation does not consider a clear role division. Moreover, notice that in most business
settings teams work following a hierarchical structure.
3.5 WHEN do we do it? The dynamics
The literature on team composition and formation mostly considers that tasks are static in the
sense that their requirements do not change during their execution. However, the dynamics of
task arrival is considered by many. That is, there could be multiple tasks to be solved concurrently
and new tasks may arrive in an asynchronous, localized manner. The different works consider
different issues in this dynamic process. For instance, the number of tasks to be serviced, task
and team members localization, team size per task or time limitations. Normally, if there is only
one task is to be completed, the focus will be on composing the best team for the task. On a
repeated task arrival setting, the use of a history of team work experiences is key to compose
new teams. Hence, the literature can be classified depending on two main aspects:
1. The succession of tasks,
2. The simultaneity of tasks.
The simplest case is a one-shot task. There is neither succession nor simultaneity, and hence
the problem of team composition is normally reduced to finding the best team for the only task.
When tasks come in sequence without simultaneity, then the problem can be reduced to finding
the best team for each task while using the learned experiences in the composition of each new
team. If tasks come in succession and can be simultaneous, the need to deal with multiple teams
acting at the same time becomes a key issue. The succession of possibly simultaneous tasks is the
most complex framework in which memory becomes again a key element.
We discuss each aspect in detail.
14
ewa andrejczuk et al.
3.5.1 Non Successive and non simultaneous tasks
In this case we face a one-shot task resolution. This is the simplest case for the team composition
and formation problems. There is no long-term strategy used to compose and form teams. Thus,
agents do not learn from past experiences and we cannot talk about the notion of community in
this setup.
Team Composition. As mentioned above, in the team composition problem, we are looking for
only one team, the best possible one to perform the task. The majority of models that consider
non successive and non simultaneous tasks are simplistic. They assume that once the team is
composed it has the needed properties and will perform the task well. For instance, Kargar et al.
(2012) use agents' capabilities and team coordination cost to compose the most effective team.
Similarly, Crawford et al. (2016) and Okimoto et al. (2015) use agents' capabilities to compose
k-robust teams (see Section 3.4.1 for a definition of a k-robust team). In Rangapuram et al.
(2015), besides agents' capabilities, the team composition model also introduces various types of
constraints (the inclusion of a specific group of agents in a team, team size, budget limitations,
and maximum geographical distance between agents and between agents and tasks). This last
model is more realistic, though it disregards past experiences.
In the teamwork phase, agents solve the task once and for all. Hence, one-shot
Teamwork.
tasks may cause self-interested behaviours, such as in Rochlin et al. (2016). There, as mentioned
in Section 3.2.2, one agent (called buyer) from the team is delegated to accomplish the task of
purchasing a jointly desired item with the lowest possible cost. This agent operates on a one-
time setting, that is, there is a single agent deciding on behalf of the team, and hence, there is
no need for that agent to behave in an altruistic manner. Authors study the notion of fairness
and its influence on effectiveness. They show that the selected buyer is less motivated to do the
task if the cost of the goods is to be divided equally among the team members. In this case,
the purchasing costs are fully assumed by the purchasing agent. Therefore, they study different
methods to reimburse the purchasing costs incurred by the buyer to improve its effectiveness.
Hanna and Richards (2015) study the co-operation between a human and an IVA (Intelligent
Virtual Agent) in a one-shot task setting. Given that past experiences cannot be used, they
experimentally show, by comparing many one-shot task instances, that the more informative
the communication between the two agents, the better the performance of the team. The
communication behavior of an IVA is directly related to its psychological traits.
On a different vein, many models assume that given a one-shot task, agents will behave
according to their knowledge and capabilities in order to benefit the whole team. In Barrett et al.
(2013) and in Agmon et al. (2014), team agents are pre-designed to co-operate when solving a
collective task. Then, one of the agents is replaced by an ad-hoc agent that shares the teams
goals, though does not know its teammates behaviours. The ad-hoc agent cannot control its
teammates, and yet it tries to improve the teams performance by learning to predict other
agents actions and thus selecting its own actions to achieve an overall optimal team behaviour.
Marcolino et al. (2013) and Nagarajan et al. (2015) perform a one-shot task study, where team
agents vote for a team action leading to the task resolution. The action voted for is sampled from
a fixed probability distribution over those actions appropriate in a particular world state (no
learning involved). The higher the probability of an action the more preferred it is by the agent.
A plurality voting mechanism is used to select the team action. Authors show that a diverse team
(with different probability distributions) can outperform a uniform team (made out of copies of
the best agent) and that breaking ties in favour of the best agent's opinion in a diverse team is
the optimal voting rule 1.
1Notice though that the authors make the strong assumption that there is a known rank of the best
actions to take at any time.
Organisational Psychology
The composition and formation of Effective Teams. Computer Science meets
15
3.5.2 Non Successive and simultaneous tasks
In non successive and simultaneous tasks, the composition and formation problem becomes more
complex as it now considers a set of one-shot tasks. There is still no use of the past experiences
as the tasks are non successive.
Team Composition. Researchers in the area of MAS propose algorithms to compose the
best set of teams, one per simultaneous task, instead of looking for the best team for a task.
For instance, Andrejczuk et al. (2016) partition a set of agents into gender- and psychologically-
balanced problem-solving teams that have to solve different instances of the same task. The
authors use a greedy technique to balance the psychological traits of the members of teams so
that each team gets the full range of problem-solving capabilities.
In Roles and Teams Hedonic Games (RTHG) (Spradling et al., 2013) authors propose a
heuristic optimization method to partition a set of agents, again to solve different instances
of the same task. The method treats as votes agents' role preferences on team role structures.
Firstly, the role structures of the teams will be those receiving the highest social welfare (as the
summation of the agent individual utilities to play any of the roles in the structure). Secondly,
the algorithm selects the agent with the highest utility for a remaining role in the most voted
team role structure, recomputes the role structure preferences without that agent's preferences,
and keeps staffing teams until the partition is complete. For instance, an agent may prefer to be
a programmer in a two-agent team including a designer, but would not like to play any role in
a team without a designer. Hence, an agents role preference is not taken in isolation, but in the
context of the teams' composition. Authors define Nash stable and individually stable solutions
for RTHG in terms of possible local moves that agents could make within a given coalition
partition and prove that every instance of RTHG has an individually stable partition that can
be obtained with the use of local search movements (change of role within a coalition or coalition
swaps). In our literature search, we could not find approaches dealing with different simultaneous
non successive tasks.
Teamwork. Similarly to team composition, Rokicki et al. (2015) deal with the Teamwork
problem over different and simultaneous instances of the same task. Agents may change their
strategy during team formation in order to reach a better solution. They classify human behaviour
during team self-organisation in crowdsourcing tasks in two types. First, a number of users choose
to join one of the leading teams, instead of selecting a weaker one and compete for a lower award.
Second, small teams merge to form stronger teams and thus have a higher chance of achieving
an award.
3.5.3 Successive and non simultaneous tasks
When tasks are successive and non simultaneous, the algorithms for team composition and
formation deal with a task that has to be assigned to a team, and in many cases solved, before
new tasks arrive. A successive setting can discover phenomena which we believe are important,
but which are not captured when the attention is limited to static, non successive tasks. If in
the system of the same set of agents, teams are created and dismantled depending on the task,
the agents may behave very differently than in a non successive settings. For instance, a person
will behave in a different manner if she repeatedly borrows a car from her friends, than when she
simply rents a car. The successive setting has its advantages: it lets agents learn from the past
experiences and build their beliefs based on this knowledge.
In Anagnostopoulos et al. (2012), the first task arrives at the first time
Team Composition.
step and is assigned to a newly composed team of experts before the arrival of the second task.
This procedure repeats until all tasks are assigned. Authors propose an algorithm to compose
a set of teams to handle a set of these incoming tasks. The goal is to form a new competent
16
ewa andrejczuk et al.
team upon arrival of each task, so that the workload in the whole system is balanced. There is
no learning involved in this process. Contrarily, in Liemhetcharat and Veloso (2012) a learning
algorithm is proposed that constructs a synergy graph from observations of the performance of
pairs and triples of agent in solving previous tasks. The synergy tells how well a pair of agents
work together and they use this learned synergy graph as well as agents' capabilities to solve the
team composition problem for the next task. Their method selects teams that are capable and
maximize their internal synergy.
Teamwork. To the best of our knowledge, there are no contributions on teamwork that consider
successive and non simultaneous tasks.
3.5.4 Successive and simultaneous tasks
When tasks are successive and simultaneous, the algorithms for team composition and formation
deal with a set of tasks arriving, possibly overlapping in time that have to be assigned to newly
composed teams.
In Farhangian et al. (2015b), tasks arrive in any order, possibly over-
Team Composition.
lapping in time. A team is composed for each incoming task and after execution agents assign
performance values to each one of the other team members. These values are public and used
by the community to compose teams for future tasks. Chalkiadakis and Boutilier (2012) present
several learning algorithms to approximate the optimal Bayesian solution to the repeated team
composition. Similarly, Peleteiro et al. (2015) compute, after teamwork, both individual agent
and coalition (team) reputation values to be used in the composition of future teams.
Finally, in Chen et al. (2015), for each new task arriving agents decide which team to join
balancing exploitation (rewards from completing tasks learned from previous task solving) and
exploration (learning opportunities from more qualified agents leading to future rewards).
Teamwork. To our knowledge, there are no contributions considering successive and simulta-
neous teamwork.
Analysis. One time settings (i.e. non successive tasks) are usually simplified models that do not
take into consideration the history of agent interactions. One-shot tasks may cause self-interested
behaviours, where agents look for at least a fair split of costs associated with teamwork. However,
the majority of the literature on team composition and teamwork considering this setting assume
that the agents will always behave accordingly to their capabilities and knowledge. The successive
tasks provide us with more realistic and complex scenarios. The tasks arrive either in order, one
after another, or overlapping in time. The majority of the literature uses this setting to let
agents build their beliefs based on the past experiences and compose new teams according to
these beliefs. Regarding teamwork, there are no contributions that explore successive settings. In
other words, the state of the art does not acknowledge the memory of agents as important while
executing tasks.
3.6 WHERE do we do it? The context
The context is understood as the circumstances that form the setting for the team composition
and formation processes. We observe that the concept of context in the reviewed computer science
literature has not played a major role so far. Contrarily, according to the organisational psychology
literature (Guzzo and Dickson, 1996), it is one of the most important variables while composing
and forming teams (see Section 4.6). There are different categorizations of context. One of them
is proposed by Kozlowski and Bell (2013), which classifies contexts as follows:
Organisational Psychology
The composition and formation of Effective Teams. Computer Science meets
17
• Organisational Context: technology used, organisation structure, leadership, culture, and
climate.
• Team Context: normative expectations, shared perceptions, and compatible knowledge
(generated by and emerge from individual interactions).
Individual Context: attributes, interactions, and responses.
•
In the MAS literature there are very few works that consider the social context while composing
teams. In Rangapuram et al. (2015), while composing teams, the context is exemplified as a social
network that encodes the previous collaborations among experts. The idea behind it is that the
teams that have worked together previously are expected to have less communication overhead
and work more effectively as a team. Similarly, Peleteiro et al. (2015) propose to express social
context by the reputation measure. There, upon task completion, the contractor rates the quality
of the service provided by a team and, also teams rate their own workers. Finally, this rating
information is maintained and aggregated by a reputation module. Liemhetcharat and Veloso
(2012) propose to model a social context by using the learned synergy graph (that measures
how well agents work with one another) and hence, solve the team composition problem.
Anagnostopoulos et al. (2012) include the coordination costs by means of a social network over
the set of agents and assume a metric distance function on the edges of the network. On top
of modeling preferences based on social context (such as past interactions, compatibility in
collaborating, distance in a companys hierarchy), the function may include any other kind of
context, (for instance geographical proximity between agents or between task and agents within
a team).
Analysis To the best of our knowledge, there are only few works in MAS literature that
recognize the context as an important variable. Besides Anagnostopoulos et al. (2012), which
considers both social and geographical contexts, the methods in the literature only consider the
social context (if analyzed at all).
4 Team composition and formation from an organisational psychology
perspective.
In this section we discuss all above aspects in detail answering the questions asked in the
introduction of this paper.
4.1 WHO is concerned?
In this section we are going to survey the literature on Organisational Psychology that deals with
the characteristics of humans composing teams.
We will use the structure as in section 3.1.
4.1.1 Capacity.
In OP, the most important capacity of team members that is related to team performance is
their cognitive ability. Hence, the main goal is to study how cognitive abilities influence team
performance. Cognitive ability refers to the 'capacity to understand complex ideas, learn from
experience, reason, solve problems, and adapt' (Devine and Philips, 2001, p.507). Hence, cognitive
ability in OP is a much wider concept than capacity in multiagent systems as on top of skills
widely used in MAS systems, it contains many other properties such as experience, competences,
age or even gender.
Moreover, in contrast to computer science, where capabilities are static, psychologists deal with
the dynamism of human capacity. Humans learn new capabilities and increase their level every
day for whole live (see more in (Laal and Salamati, 2012, p.399-403) for the concept of the lifelong
learning). There are diverse tests and methods to examine humans capacity, such as: intelligence
or cognitive competences tests, assessment centers or social and behavioural competence tests.
18
ewa andrejczuk et al.
Regarding team composition, on the one hand Bell and Devine and Philips (2001) found
that mean team values of cognitive ability are correlated with team performance. Moreover,
she also found that the lowest and the highest team members' cognitive abilities are correlated
with team performance in lab and field settings. In addition, Devine and Philips (2001) found
that the variance of team members' cognitive ability did not help predict team performance.
These authors also found that the mean value is twice more informative in predicting than the
lowest and the highest members scores. On the other hand, Devine and Philips (2001) found
that cognitive ability influences team performance differently depending on contextual variables
(such as working normative procedures or human resources policies). These findings suggest
that, when composing a team, organisations and managers should not only take into account
the members' cognitive ability, but also the context in which the team will operate. This will be
further discussed in Section 4.6. Other researched individual characteristics like the effect of age
and gender have produced some mixed results when analyzing their relation with performance
(Chmiel, 2008). Diversity is needed for innovation but can cause as well conflict and imbalance
(Unsworth and West, 2000).
Finally, similarly to computer science literature, the concept of team properties is understood
as a sum of humans' individual properties.
4.1.2 Personality
In addition to the before-mentioned individual properties, the literature has examined the role of
personality. The most prominent approaches have been the "Big Five" personality traits theory
(Mount et al., 1998), Schutz's theory of fundamental interpersonal relations orientation (FIRO)
(Schutz, 1958) and the Myers Briggs Type Indicator method (White, 1984). They have been used
to find the personality traits and types associated with team performance. Regarding the "Big
Five" theory, meta-analytic research has found that certain levels of conscientiousness, openness
to experience and agreeableness are good performance predictors (Mount et al., 1998).
Another approach is that of the theory of fundamental interpersonal relations orientations
(FIRO) (Schutz, 1958). The idea is that humans have several needs (i.e. need for inclusion, control
and affection) and that groups with team members that have compatible needs will perform better
than those with incompatible ones. Nevertheless, research has found mixed support for this theory
(West, 2012b).
Some companies have also tried to base their team formation on cognitive styles of
the members, by using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) assessment instrument
-(Myers Briggs et al.), which is a questionnaire that measures cognitive styles along four dimen-
sions: Extraversion - Introversion, Sensing - Intuition, Thinking - Feeling, and Judging -
Perceiving. Nevertheless, there is not enough rigorous research evidence showing its relationship
with team performance (West, 2012b).
There are also novel approaches created with the purpose of team composition and formation.
For instance, the Post-Jungian Personality Theory, which is a modified version of (MBTI) (Wilde,
2013). It operates on the same dimensions as MBTI. The main novelty of this approach is its
use of the numerical data generated by the instrument (Wilde, 2011). The results of this method
seem promising as within a decade this novel approach tripled the fraction of Stanford teams
awarded national prizes by the Lincoln Foundation (Wilde, 2009). However, the method is not
properly validated and tested, which makes it disregarded by psychologists.
4.1.3 Analysis.
Several correlations have been found between cognitive ability and team performance. The
personality is also present while composing teams, although the correlation between personality
and team performance is not clearly explained. The most widely used test to measure personality
is the "Big Five". Organisational Psychology studies show that besides cognitive ability and
personality, experience and gender are further properties to consider for team composition (West,
Organisational Psychology
The composition and formation of Effective Teams. Computer Science meets
19
2012a). Indeed, research findings on this topic suggest that diversity in those characteristics can
have an effect on team performance and innovation (West, 2012a). Additionally, some further
research has also paid attention to values and has found collectivism and teamwork preferences
2 to be additional good team performance predictors (Bell).
4.2 WHAT is the problem?
When it comes to team composition, the organisational psychology literature has focused on
defining task classifications. These classifications have been employed to study the relation
between task types and team performance. Hence, in this section we will review the most known
task classifications and its influence on team performance.
Two of the most widely discussed task classifications are those of McGrath (1984), Hackman
(1990); Hackman and Lawler (1971) and Hackman and Oldham (1975). While the classification
of McGrath (1984) is based on the cognitive requirements of tasks, the classification in Hackman
(1990); Hackman and Lawler (1971); Hackman and Oldham (1975) is based on the motivation
characteristics of tasks (i.e. autonomy, task variety, task significance, task identity and task
feedback). The research on team composition show that the classification based on the motivation
characteristics predicts more accurately the team performance (Podsakoff et al., 1997).
Hackman (1990) defines a task classification based on motivational requirements composed by
seven work task types:
top management;
task force;
1.
2.
3. professional support task;
4. performing task;
5. human service task;
6.
7. production task.
customer service task;
The classification of McGrath (1984) based on cognitive requirement proposes three dimensions
that characterize each task type:
1. Choose-Execute;
2. Conceptual-Behavioral;
3. Conflict-Cooperation.
Technically speaking each task type becomes a 3-tuple with qualitative values for each dimension.
For instance, a routine task would be very executive, medium behavioral and low conflicting.
After analyzing seventeen classifications in the literature Wildman et al. (2012) came out with
a different classification as follows:
1. Managing others;
2. Advising others;
3. Human service;
4. Negotiation;
5. Psychomotor action;
6. Defined problem solving;
7.
Ill-defined problem solving.
As an alternative perspective, Navarro et al. (2011) propose a task classification based on the task
context (namely task complexity, interdependencies between subtasks in a task, and uncertainty
about the dynamics of the environment where the task is executed and the lack of information).
Their results show that in order to achieve acceptable performance, the greater the complexity,
2Teamwork preferences refer to team members preferences on other team members to work with.
20
ewa andrejczuk et al.
interdependence and uncertainty, the stronger the requirements on the maturity of teams (e.g.
joint experience, cohesion) and on the diversity of team members' capabilities. For instance,
to carry out highly interdependent tasks, all team members should possess coordination skills
(maturity) and some of them the capacity to take decisions (diversity). Taking into account
other task context characteristic (i.e. uncertainty and interdependence) their study results show,
the greater the uncertainty and interdependence of task types, the more diverse the competences
for team members to cope with complexity. From the other hand, if the team is overqualified for
the task to perform, the motivation of team members decreases and the quality of the outcome
is lower or the task is not completed at all.
4.2.1 Analysis.
The OP literature provides many different classifications of task types, where the most important
are the classifications based on the motivation of individuals, the cognitive abilities and the task
context. Provided the amount of classifications and the apparent lack of consensus among them,
we believe that choosing among the several classifications previously presented in order to apply
them to the study of team composition is a hard decision. Nevertheless, such decision must
be made in order to move forward with the understanding of how a task type can influence
team composition. In an attempt to advice researchers, notice that the research show that the
classification based on the motivation characteristics predicts more accurately team performance.
From OP perspective team performance cannot be assessed by simply measuring how long
it takes for the group to finish a certain task or by counting the number of right answers to
predefined and clear questions, which is a common approach in computer science. OP rather
analyzes joint team objectives and the team composition and formation setting (such as not
realistic deadlines, a number of individuals in a team, the level of stress in a team or the quality
of the outcome).
The current research on organisational psychology focus has moved from task analysis so not
many results are present. Although task types are defined, different task instances constantly
appear because of technological development. That makes it very difficult to keep the pace. That
is why the focus on OP moved to competences (understood as cognitive ability, see Section
skills2). This is why not much work has appeared after defining task taxonomy. At the same time
task complexity increased and hence, teams are getting more and more important. Moreover,
a clear mapping between cognitive ability of individuals and task types is needed. As a major
benefit such mapping would ease team composition.
4.3 WHY do we do it?
In OP the main objective for team composition and formation is to maximize team performance.
When measuring it, the research on OP suggests that we should go beyond mere economic criteria,
the quality of decision-making processes or other traditional performance indicators (Komaki;
Hackman).
An important difference with respect to the computer science literature is that team
performance is considered from two perspectives: objective and subjective. On the one hand,
objective team performance refers to the features of the outcome of a team (e.g. quality,
delivery time, cost, sustainability). On the other hand, subjective team performance refers to
the quality of human resources in a team (e.g. motivation, satisfaction, commitment, illness
rate, stress) (Quijano et al., 2008). Therefore, while the first one refers to the delivered output
of a team (what customers obtain), the latest one focuses on the inner development of
team members. Objective and subjective team performance are significantly correlated (e.g.
Quijano et al. (2008)). Therefore, and not surprisingly, the organisational psychology literature
considers both types of performances when tackling team composition and team formation
(e.g. Meneses and Navarro (2015)). The subjective and objective performance of a team are
determined by the several aspects of the context (discussed in Section 4.6), together with
Organisational Psychology
The composition and formation of Effective Teams. Computer Science meets
21
individual characteristics, the task and the team processes. Following Navarro et al. (2011) the
subjective and objective performance of a team are determined by the adjustment between the
maturity level of the team (e.g. in terms of group development, potential, etc.) and the groups
tasks characteristics.
Analysis. An important difference with respect to the computer science literature is that
team performance is considered from two perspectives: objective and subjective. Objective
and subjective team performance are significantly and directly correlated. Therefore, and not
surprisingly, the organisational psychology literature considers both types of performances when
tackling team composition and team formation. The computer science literature can benefit from
the concept of subjective team performance that currently disregarded. Therefore, current team
composition models, which mainly focus on the objective team performance, need to be extended.
4.4 HOW do we do it? The organisation
Similarly to Section 3.4 on computer science, we divide the organisation into two aspects: team
composition and team formation.
4.4.1 Team Composition.
The organisational psychology research on team composition has been very influenced by task
classification. For several authors, there is a relationship between task type and team type
(structure). For example, according to Hackman (1990), there are seven team types based on
the task type to perform:
top management;
task force;
1.
2.
3. professional support;
4. performing groups;
5. human service;
6.
customer service;
7. production teams.
Devine (2002) and Delgado Pina et al. (2008) highlighted that team performance depends on
a good matching between team type and task type.
On the other hand, there are multiple team type classifications in the literature based on
other criteria (Devine, 2002; Marks et al., 2001; Gibson and Kirkman, 1999): motivation-based,
cognitive-based or context-based (see section 4.2), though none of them has been widely used
or accepted. Also, there is agreement that team diversity must be exploited while composing
teams. Diversity refers to the degree or level to which the members of a group differ or
contrast in one or more properties. Diversity has been shown to have an impact on team
performance (Mathieu et al., 2008). In their review, Mathieu et al. (2008) point out the vastness
of the literature featuring team diversity and draw attention to four main diversity dimensions:
demographic, personality, functional background, and attitudes and values.
Horwitz and Horwitz (2007) conducted a meta-analysis to understand the relationships
between team diversity and team performance. For this, they differentiated between two classes of
diversity: bio-demographic and task-related. The former refers to diversity in individual properties
that are observable and not learned (e.g. personality, gender, age, ethnicity), whereas the latter
regards diversity in acquired capabilities, such as education or expertise. Using meta-analytic
techniques, they found task-related diversity to be positively correlated to both qualitative and
quantitative measures of team performance. However, they did not find a clear relationship
between bio-demographic diversity and team performance. Although pointing out the small
number of studies supporting these latest findings, their preliminary results seem to give more
22
ewa andrejczuk et al.
importance to the diversity of acquired team member properties, such as the type of education
or knowledge expertise.
Finally, another factor influencing team performance is team size. Among researchers the size
of a team is one of the most frequently studied parameter when analyzing team performance.
There is a disparity in the literature due to the fact that appropriate team size is dependent on
the task and the social context in which the team operates. Some studies have found team size to
be unrelated to performance Martz et al. (1992) or that increasing team size actually improves
performance without limit Campion et al. (1993). However, other studies show that there is an
inverse relationship between the size of the team and its performance (Oyster, 1999; Bartol, 1977).
Among others, Oyster (1999) and Bartol (1977) show that team size is important when
analyzing team performance. Yet, they have offered different recommendations concerning the
best size for various types of tasks to achieve acceptable performance. Oyster (1999) states that
the right number of people in a team depends on the kind of tasks team members need to perform.
They believe that for teams ranging from four to six, all the team members' competences can be
fully used, but for larger teams some members' competences are under-used and this provokes
that teams split up. According to the studies of Bartol (1977), the optimal number of members for
problem-solving tasks is five. He states that there is a limit to the team size, which, if exceeded,
causes a drop in the performance of the team. Bartol (1977) says that in the case of a team
containing more than six people there is a tendency to split the team into two, which brings
about negative effects. The cause is twofold: high coordination cost and loss of motivation by
team members Oyster (1999).
4.4.2 Team Formation.
Once a team has been composed, there are different processes that the team carries out to
execute the task and achieve the collective goal. Several classifications of team processes have
been proposed in the literature, from which, the most recent and overarching one is the one
proposed by Marks et al. (2001) and Salas et al. (2005); Goodwin et al. (2009). Typically the
research investigated the ways of implementing team processes and of measuring how well
teams perform. To begin with, Marks et al. (2001) distinguish between three broad types of
processes: action-orientated, transition-orientated and interpersonal. The first ones refer to
actions that team members undertake to accomplish goals, namely team monitoring, systems
monitoring, monitoring progress towards goals and coordinating activities. Regarding transition-
orientated processes, these are actions related to planning and/or evaluating in order to guide in
attaining team goals, that is goal specification, mission analysis, formulation and planning, and
strategy formulation. Finally, interpersonal processes are those intended to manage interpersonal
relationships. They comprise motivating/confidence building, conflict management and affect
management (Marks et al., 2001). On the other hand, Salas et al. (2005) built upon previous
research and narrowed down the main processes into "Big Five" team processes: team orientation,
backup behaviour, team leadership, adaptability and mutual performance monitoring.
Another important aspect is that team climate influences the effectiveness of processes. A
team climate is defined by the degree to which a team of persons possesses certain core properties
that are needed for the team to work effectively. These properties include the interrelationship
among team members, the identification of each person with the team and its social values, the
coordination of team resources, behaviours and technologies, as well as the desire of each team
member to achieve the objectives of the team (Meneses and Navarro, 2015). A good climate
assures the sharing of resources, mutual rewards and information exchange. It promotes a high
level of openness, safety, and a mix of upward, downward and horizontal communication processes
that help to increase team performance (Kozlowski and Ilgen; Mathieu et al., 2007; Rico et al.,
2010; Knapp, 2010).
A team climate that is conductive to learning requires shared perceptions of work settings
(James et al., 2008; Brodbeck, 2003; Ramirez-Heller et al., 2014). According to Brodbeck (2003)
Organisational Psychology
The composition and formation of Effective Teams. Computer Science meets
23
and Ramirez-Heller et al. (2014), a team climate conductive to learning is characterized as one
in which:
1. There is empathy, support, as well as a common understanding among its members, conveying
an atmosphere of mutual trust,
2. There is a regular contact as well as informal and formal communication processes among its
members,
3. There exists a common agreement with the goals and objectives to be achieved, and these
shared goals are clear, realistic and feasible,
4. There is a prevailing notion of democracy and equality among its members, with no one
having particular control over the others,
5. Members perceive a personal development as the team enhances their creativity and provides
general support in fulfilling their individual plans.
Analysis. Regarding team composition, there is a strong relationship between task type and
team type (structure). The type of the team depends on the features of the task to perform and
so very often team types are derived from task types. Besides task type, team diversity plays
an important role when composing teams. Regarding the "optimal" team size, it is a complex
question and future research is needed to determine the impact of team size on team performance,
such as the nature of the task, the internal motivations, and the context. Some preliminary results
show that the more complex the task, the larger the size of the team needs to be, but limited
to an optimal size of six members. Regarding team formation, several different team processes
classifications have been proposed, though no agreement has been reached. Finally, having a good
team climate seems key to achieve good performance.
4.5 WHEN do we do it? The dynamics
Humans learn with every interaction. Our memory recollection and capability improvement
cannot be removed or stopped. Hence, the organisational psychology research usually deals with
complex scenarios, those of simultaneous and successive tasks, see Section 4.5. In organisational
psychology, the dynamic properties of a team are referred to as emergent states. Emergent states
develop during teamwork and have an effect on the outcomes. Several examples of emergent
states (Mathieu et al., 2008) are team confidence, team empowerment, cohesion, team climate,
collective cognition or trust between team members.
The development of emergent states is closely connected to the process of team learning
behaviours. As members of a team interact with one another and perform tasks, they learn from
their experiences. That is, they learn by asking questions, seeking feedback, experimenting, reflect-
ing on results, and discussing errors or unexpected outcomes of previous actions (Edmondson,
1999). These complex tasks allow team members to acquire, share, combine and apply knowledge
(Olivera and Argote, 1999; Kozlowski and Ilgen). They also lead to the development of shared
understanding and meaning as well as to the acquisition of mutual knowledge, skills, and
performance capabilities (Garavan and McCarthy, 2008). All these developments enhance team
performance (Edmondson, 1999; Zellmer-Bruhn, 2006).
Analysis. Unlike computer science, the reviewed organisational psychology literature does
not study simple scenarios such as non successive and non simultaneous tasks. Typically,
organisational psychology analyzes complex and realistic scenarios as human learning capabilities
need to be considered. Moreover, on top of including the social network and memory about the
outcomes of past experiences, the researchers in organisational psychology deal with the dynamics
of individuals' capabilities (as humans learn new capabilities and forget not used ones).
24
ewa andrejczuk et al.
4.6 WHERE do we do it? The context
From a systemic perspective teams are part of the structure of an organisation and therefore they
operate within this organisation. In the same way, an organisation is part of the environment.
The environment creates demands and requirements for an organisation and influences the
organisation's system. In turn, the organisation tries to address these requirements by influencing
the operations of its teams and their performance in diverse ways.
Research results suggest that context plays an important role in the performance of teams
(Guzzo and Dickson, 1996; Hackman, 1990). Hackman (1990) between others propose and analyse
many contextual factors that have to be considered when composing a team:
• The uncertainty on the level of complexity of the tasks and the degree of dynamics of the
environment. Both aspects influence the uncertainty within the organisation and therefore
its teams need to operate with incomplete knowledge. The uncertainty about external
factors is determined by the available information about the customers, the suppliers, or
other competing organisations. The uncertainty about internal factors is determined by
the dynamics of tasks, organisational rules and objectives. In such an uncertain context,
teamwork is more challenging and paradoxically teams may perform better than in a stable
and predictable context.
• The vision and mission of an organisation that determine the main rules and norms to be
followed and what is to be considered as good performance.
• The set of values, policies and strategies of the organisation. For instance, organisations
supporting individual values will hinder teamwork and team performance will thus be
poor. This is because teamwork is based on shared values, mutual support, constructive
collaboration, mutual trust, coordination mechanisms and synergies, which are collective
values. On top of it, an organisation promoting internal competition will lead to individual
strategies of withholding information and self-interested behaviours.
• The organisational benefits such as the reward or the training systems. Diverse motivational
theories are available to explain the relevance of the reward systems for increased perfor-
mance. For example, teams will perform better with an appropriate reward system.
• The resources and assistance made available to the team. It is obviously easier for the team
to achieve good performance when operating in a context of resource abundance.
• The organisational climate. A context with a perceived climate of control and low level
of autonomy for the team will hinder successful teamwork and performance. As teamwork
requires an individual engagement with the team, a climate is needed that facilitates
information sharing or team skills development.
• The cultural context. The definition of a team changes across cultures: in cultures valuing
individualism teams are seen more as a set of people each contributing to a different subtask,
whereas in cultures valuing collectivism teams are seen as having shared goals, values and
responsibility for the whole task. Research results show that teams perform better in a
collective cultural context.
In contrast with computer science approaches, the context where teams solve tasks
Analysis.
plays an important role in the organisational psychology literature. The context is understood
as internal and external factors influencing teamwork. The internal context can be characterised
as dimensions of the organisation, such as vision and mission, values, policies and strategies, or
organisational benefit system. The external context can be characterized as dimensions of the
environment in which the organisation operates, that is the culture, the available resources, and
the uncertainty about other players behaviour.
5 Discussion
Computer Science (CS) and Organisational Psychology (OP) have followed rather disparate
approaches when it comes to team composition and team formation. However, some similarities
and differences can be drawn and several new research questions can be formulated from a cross
reading of the two literature corpus. In Table 1 a comparison of the main papers in CS can be
found.
Article Title
Team Process
Agmon et al. (2014)
Formation
Individual
Properties
Personality
Anagnostopoulos et al.
(2012)
Andrejczuk et al. (2016)
Composition
Capacity
Composition
Personality
Barrett et al. (2013)
Formation
Personality
Chalkiadakis and Boutilier
(2012)
Chen et al. (2015)
Composition
Capacity
Composition
Capacity
Crawford et al. (2016)
Composition
Capacity
Farhangian et al.
(2015b)
Farhangian et al. (2015a) Composition
Composition
Personality
Capacity and
Personality
Personality
Hanna and Richards
(2015)
Kargar et al. (2012)
Formation
Composition
Capacity
The task
Plan-based
Individual-
based
Individual-
based
Plan-based
Individual-
based
Individual-
based
Individual-
based
Individual-
based
Individual-
based
Individual-
based
Individual-
based
The Objec-
tive
Maximizing
social welfare
Maximizing
the quality
Maximizing
the quality
Maximizing
the quality
Maximizing
social welfare
Maximizing
social welfare
Minimizing
cost
Maximizing
social welfare
Minimizing
cost
Maximizing
the quality
Minimizing
cost
Team Com-
position
Exogenous
Team Organ-
isation
Hierarchy
Exogenous
Egalitarian
Exogenous
Egalitarian
Exogenous
Egalitarian
Endogenous
Egalitarian
Exogenous
Egalitarian
Exogenous
Egalitarian
Endogenous
Hierarchy
Exogenous
Egalitarian
Exogenous
Egalitarian
Exogenous
Egalitarian
The dynamics
The context
and
Non Successive and
Non Simultaneous
Successive and Non
Simultaneous
Non Successive and
Simultaneous
Non Successive and
Non Simultaneous
Successive
Simultaneous
Successive
Simultaneous
Non Successive and
Non Simultaneous
Successive
Simultaneous
Non Successive and
Non Simultaneous
Non Successive and
Non Simultaneous
Non Successive and
Non Simultaneous
and
and
N/A
and
Social
Geographical
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Article Title
Team Process
Individual
Properties
Capacity
The task
Individual-
based
Plan-based
Liemhetcharat and Veloso
(2012)
Marcolino et al. (2013)
Composition
Formation
Personality
Nagarajan et al. (2015)
Formation
Personality
Plan-based
Marcolino et al. (2016)
Formation
Personality
Plan-based
Okimoto et al. (2015)
Composition
Capacity
Peleteiro et al. (2015)
Composition
Capacity
Rangapuram et al.
(2015)
Rochlin et al. (2016)
Rokicki et al. (2015)
Spradling et al. (2013)
Composition
Capacity
Formation
Composition
and Formation
Composition
and Formation
N/A
N/A
Capacity
Individual-
based
Individual-
based
Individual-
based
Plan-based
N/A
Individual-
based
Table 1 Comparison of the computer science contributions reviewed in this paper.
The Objec-
tive
Maximizing
the quality
Maximizing
the quality
Maximizing
the quality
Maximizing
the quality
Minimizing
cost
Maximizing
the quality
Maximizing
the quality
Maximizing
the quality
Maximizing
social welfare
N/A
Team Com-
position
Exogenous
Team Organ-
isation
Egalitarian
Exogenous
Egalitarian
Exogenous
Egalitarian
Exogenous
Egalitarian
Exogenous
Egalitarian
Endogenous
Hierarchy
Exogenous
N/A
/
Egalitarian
Hierarchy
Hierarchy
Exogenous,
Endogenous
Exogenous
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
The dynamics
The context
Successive and Non
Simultaneous
Non Successive and
Non Simultaneous
Non Successive and
Non Simultaneous
Successive and Non
Simultaneous
Non Successive and
Non Simultaneous
Successive
Simultaneous
Non Successive and
Non Simultaneous
Non Successive and
Non Simultaneous
Non Successive and
Simultaneous
Non Successive and
Simultaneous
and
Social
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Social
Social
N/A
N/A
N/A
5.1 Similarities in both approaches
When modeling agents' properties in CS, there are two main approaches. There is either extensive
a-priori information about teammates given as input or ad-hoc scenarios where agents learn their
teammates' capabilities. In OP a number of tests are proposed to acquire a-priori information
about teammates, such as intelligence or cognitive competences tests, assessment centres or
social and behavioural competence tests. Also, similar to CS, OP studies allow to learn human
capabilities from their repeated interactions.
To maximize team performance, one of the crucial findings in both OP and CS is that team
members have to be heterogeneous.
Regarding the tasks that are executed by agent teams, both OP and CS focus rather on team
members' properties required to perform a task than on a detailed planning of the task execution.
5.2 Differences in both approaches
The first difference we find between CS and OP is with respect to the complexity of individual
team members. Organisational psychology focuses on humans with all their intrinsic complexity
while CS focuses on a limited set of human-like properties to build software agents. In CS the
agent properties have been categorized as personality and capacity. In OP, although human
properties can also be categorized as personality and capacity, capacity is a much wider concept.
It contains not only skills, but also other properties, such as competences, experience, gender
or age. Moreover, while in OP the human capabilities are assumed to be dynamic (i.e. lifelong
learning), software agents capabilities are assumed to be static and only the behaviour model
may change with agents' interactions.
In CS the majority of approaches assume that the joint capabilities of agents in a team are
enough to solve a given task. However, the researchers in OP recognize also other factors as
important when composing and forming a team, such as the motivation of individuals and the
task context. They also show that the motivation characteristics predict more accurately the
performance of a team than the other factors. Regarding OP research gaps, it lacks a mapping
between cognitive ability of individuals and task types (which is an input in CS models) which
complicates team composition.
The CS literature has focused on team co-operation with various objectives that can be
categorized as at least one of the following: minimizing overall cost, maximizing social utility,
or maximizing the quality of the outcome (understood as maximizing team performance). In OP,
the main objective for team composition and formation is just to maximize team performance.
Moreover, from an OP perspective team performance cannot be assessed by the time spent to
perform a task, by comparing costs or by counting the number of right answers as it would ignore
some important subjective reasons. Instead, OP analyzes possible causes of failure, such as an
excessive amount of work needed to execute the task given the size of the team or the lack of
motivation of team members. This is why the performance is assessed from two perspectives:
objective and subjective, while, CS only considers objective measures. In CS there are only early
attempts to include a subjective perspective while analyzing team performance. It is shown that
the motivation increases by introducing competition mechanisms (like in crowdsourcing teams)
or by giving agents freedom while selecting their collaborators (like in ad-hoc teams).
Since in CS agents can be modeled depending on the needs, researchers can study different
settings depending on the dynamics of task arrival (one task or many, one time or many). Many
MAS models are simplistic since they consider only one task arriving at a time. Unlike CS,
the reviewed OP literature does not study simple scenarios, since humans have memory and
improve their capabilities with every task. Hence, typically OP analyzes only complex and realistic
scenarios. The CS literature uses these complex scenarios to let agents build their beliefs based
on past experiences and compose new teams according to these learned beliefs. OP, on top of
including the social network and memory about the outcomes of past experiences, deals with
28
the dynamism of individuals' capabilities (as humans learn new capabilities and forget not used
ones).
5.3 Cross fertilization opportunities
Although some of the individual properties studied in OP (e.g. age or gender) may not make
sense in a CS context, some do. For instance, the dynamics of competences through learning and
experience and the cultural values could be used to program more sophisticated agents, specially
when interacting in mixed teams involving humans.
The majority of MAS literature on team composition and teamwork assumes that the agents
always behave according to their capabilities and knowledge. OP highlights the importance of
the motivation of individuals, when estimating performance. There is an opportunity to extend
current MAS models by adding agent motivation properties.
Additionally, although in both CS and OP the modeling of the individuals' properties has been
broadly studied, there is still a need in both fields of modeling the properties of agent teams,
other than a sum of agents' individual capabilities or a boolean representation of whether the
team can perform a task.
In both CS and OP literature, there are some preliminary attempts to include planning,
though they are very simplistic. The majority of methods do not consider time constraints, action
dependencies, action failure, plan robustness, task requirement dynamic changes and hence, the
vast literature on planning has not yet been integrated into team formation methods in both
fields.
According to OP having a good team climate seems key to achieve good performance. However,
only few CS works recognize team climate (expressed as a synergy or a compatibility graph) as
an important factor when composing teams. Further work is needed to investigate the relation
between good team climate and team performance in CS research.
In OP, context is considered one of the most important characteristics related to team
performance. To our best knowledge, there are only few works in CS that would recognize context
as an important factor besides the social and geographical context considered in a few papers.
There is a need to perform further research on context to build better performing agent teams.
According to OP there is a strong relationship between task type and team type (structure).
However, the majority of CS literature does not correlate team type with a task type apart from
the relationship between the number of agents in a team and the set of capacities defined by a
task. There is a need to further explore OP task types and their influence on teams' performance.
Finally, despite of a vast body of OP research over decades on team composition, the researchers
are not yet at the point of creating the algorithms that lead to the dream team. This survey
provides some guidelines on team composition and formation from the CS literature that can
help on this lack of formal models and algorithms in OP.
Acknowledgements
Work supported by projects Collectiveware TIN2015-66863-C2-1-R (MINECO/FEDER), SMA
(201550E040), and Gencat 2014 SGR 118. The first author is supported by an Industrial PhD
scholarship from the Generalitat de Catalunya.
References
N. Agmon, S. Barrett, and P. Stone. Modeling uncertainty in leading ad hoc teams.
In
Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent
Systems (AAMAS), May 2014.
A. Anagnostopoulos, L. Becchetti, C. Castillo, A. Gionis, and S. Leonardi. Online team formation
in social networks. In Proceedings of the 21st World Wide Web Conference 2012, WWW 2012,
Lyon, France, April 16-20, 2012, pages 839–848, 2012.
29
E. Andrejczuk, J.A. Rodr´ıguez-Aguilar, and Sierra C. Optimising congenial teams. 10/05/2016
2016.
S. Barrett, P. Stone, S. Kraus, and A. Rosenfeld. Teamwork with limited knowledge of teammates.
In Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, July 2013.
K.M. Bartol. Building synergistic edp teams. Proceedings of the fifteenth annual SIGCPR
conference, 1977.
D. Bartram and R.A. Roe. Definition and assessment of competences in the context of the
european diploma in psychology. European Psychologist, 10(2):93, 2005.
R.M. Belbin. Team Roles at Work: A Strategy for Human Resource Management. Butterworth-
Heinemann, Oxford, 1993.
S.T. Bell. Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: A meta-analysis.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3):595–615.
F.C. Brodbeck. Team climate for learning in higher education. Aston Network (Summer), pages
4–5, 2003.
M.A. Campion, G.J. Medsker, and A.C. Higgs. Relations between work group characteristics
and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, (46):
823–850, 1993.
G. Chalkiadakis and C Boutilier. Sequentially optimal repeated coalition formation under
uncertainty. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 24(3):441–484, 2012.
B. Chen, X. Chen, A. Timsina, and L. Soh. Considering agent and task openness in ad hoc team
formation. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and
Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2015, Istanbul, Turkey, May 4-8, 2015, pages 1861–1862, 2015.
N. Chmiel. An introduction to work and organizational psychology: a European perspective. John
Wiley and Sons, 2008. Chapter Fourteen.
C. Crawford, Z. Rahaman, and Sen S. Evaluating the efficiency of robust team formation
algorithms. International Workshop on Optimisation in Multi-Agent Systems, 2016.
M.I. Delgado Pina, M.A. Romero Mart´ınez, and L. G´omez Mart´ınez. Teams in organizations: a
review on team effectiveness. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 14
(1/2):7–21, 2008.
D.J. Devine. A review and integration of classification systems relevant to teams in organizations.
Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6(4):291, 2002.
D.J. Devine and J.L. Philips. Do smarter teams do better a meta-analysis of cognitive ability
and team performance. Small Group Research, 32(5):507–532, 2001.
A. Edmondson. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 44:350–383, 1999.
M. Farhangian, M.K. Purvis, M. Purvis, and B.T.R. Savarimuthu. Agent-based modeling of
resource allocation in software projects based on personality and skill. In Communications in
Computer and Information Science, pages 130–146, 2015a.
M. Farhangian, M.K. Purvis, M. Purvis, and B.T.R. Savarimuthu. Modeling the effects of
personality on team formation in self-assembly teams. In PRIMA 2015: Principles and Practice
of Multi-Agent Systems - 18th International Conference, Bertinoro, Italy, October 26-30, 2015,
Proceedings, pages 538–546, 2015b.
30
T.N. Garavan and A. McCarthy. Collective learning processes and human resource development.
Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10:451–471, 2008.
C.B. Gibson and B.L. Kirkman. Our past, present, and future in teams: The role of human
resource professionals in managing team performance, 1999.
G. F. Goodwin, C. S. Burke, J. L. Wildman, and E. Salas. Team effectiveness in complex orga-
nizations: An overview. In Team Effectiveness in Complex Organizations: Cross-Disciplinary
Perspectives and Approaches, chapter 1, pages 3–16. Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group,
New York,USA, 2009.
R.A. Guzzo and M.W. Dickson. Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and
effectiveness. Annual review of psychology, 47(1):307–338, 1996.
J.R. Hackman. Harvard Business School Press.
J.R. Hackman. Groups that work (and those that don't): Creating conditions for effective
teamwork. Number 10–H123. Jossey-Bass, 1990.
J.R. Hackman and E.E. Lawler. Employee reactions to job characteristics. Journal of applied
psychology, 55(3):259–286, 1971.
J.R. Hackman and G.R. Oldham. Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied
psychology, 60(2):159–170, 1975.
N. Hanna and D. Richards. Do birds of a feather work better together? the impact of virtual agent
personality on a shared mental model with humans during collaboration. In Proceedings of the
3rd International Workshop on Collaborative Online Organizations, COOS 2016, co-located
with the 14th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems,
AAMAS 2015, Istanbul, Turkey, May 4, 2015., pages 28–37, 2015.
M Haque, M Egerstedt, and A Rahmani. Multilevel coalition formation strategy for suppression
of enemy air defenses missions. Journal of Aerospace Information Systems, 10(6):287–296,
2013.
G. Hoffman and C. Breazeal. Collaboration in human-robot teams. In Proceedings of the 1st
AIAA04 Intelligent Systems Conference, 2004.
S.K. Horwitz and I.B. Horwitz. The effect of team diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analyitic
review of team demography. Journal of Management, 33(6):987–1015, 2007.
L.R. James, C. Choi, C.H.E. Ko, P. McNeil, M. Minton, and M.A. Wright. Collective learning
processes and human resource development. European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 17:5–32, 2008.
N.R. Jennings, L. Moreau, D. Nicholson, S. Ramchurn, S. Roberts, T. Rodden, and A. Rogers.
Human-agent collectives. Communications of the ACM, 57(12):80–88, 2014.
M. Kargar, A. An, and M. Zihayat. Efficient bi-objective team formation in social networks. In
Proceedings of the 2012 European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery
in Databases - Volume Part II, pages 483–498, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012. Springer-Verlag.
R. Knapp. Collective (team) learning process models: A conceptual review. Human Resource
Development Review, 9:286–299, 2010.
L. Komaki. LEA.
S.W. Kozlowski and D.R. Ilgen.
31
S.W.J. Kozlowski and B.S Bell. Work groups and teams in organizations: Review update. 2013.
Marjan Laal and Peyman Salamati. Lifelong learning; why do we need it? Procedia-Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 31:399–403, 2012.
T. Lappas, K. Liu, and E. Terzi. Finding a team of experts in social networks. In Proceedings of
the 15th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining,
pages 467–476, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM. ISBN 978-1-60558-495-9.
S. Liemhetcharat and M. Veloso. Team formation with learning agents that improve coordination.
In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent
Systems, AAMAS '14, pages 1531–1532, Richland, SC, 2014. International Foundation for
Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems.
S. Liemhetcharat and M.M. Veloso. Modeling and learning synergy for team formation with
In International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent
heterogeneous agents.
Systems, AAMAS 2012, Valencia, Spain, June 4-8, 2012 (3 Volumes), pages 365–374, 2012.
L.S. Marcolino, A.X. Jiang, and A Tambe. Multi-agent team formation: Diversity beats
strength? In IJCAI 2013, Proceedings of the 23rd International Joint Conference on Artificial
Intelligence, Beijing, China, August 3-9, 2013, 2013.
L.S. Marcolino, H. Xu, D. Gerber, B. Kolev, S. Price, E. Pantazis, and M. Tambe. Multi-agent
team formation for design problems. In Coordination, Organizations, Institutions and Norms
in Agent Systems XI. Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in AI, 2016.
M.A. Marks, J.E. Mathieu, and S.J. Zaccaro. A temporally based framework and taxonomy of
team processes. Academy of management review, 26(3):356–376, 2001.
Jr. Martz, W.B., R.R. Vogel, and Jr. Nunamaker, J.F. Electronic meeting systems: Results from
the field. Decision Support Systems, (8):141–158, 1992.
J. Mathieu, M .T. Maynard, T. Rapp, and L. Gilson. Team effectiveness 1997-2007: A review of
recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. Journal of Management, 34(3):410–476,
2008.
J.E. Mathieu, M.T. Maynard, S.R. Taylor, L.L. Gilson, and T.M. Rudy. An examination of
the effects of organizational district and team contexts on team processes and performance.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28:891–910, 2007.
J.E. McGrath. Groups: Interaction and performance, volume 14. Prentice-Hall Englewood Cliffs,
NJ, 1984.
R. Meneses and J. Navarro. How to improve team effectiveness through group processes: an
example in the automotive industry. Papeles del Psic´ologo, 36(3):224–229, 2015.
M.K. Mount, M.R. Barrick, and G.L. Stewart. Five-factor model of personality and performance
in jobs involving interpersonal interactions. (11):145–65, 1998.
I. Myers Briggs, M.H. McCaulley, N.L. Quenk, and A.L. Hammer. Consulting Psychologists
Press.
V. Nagarajan, L.S. Marcolino, and M. Tambe. Every team deserves a second chance: Identifying
when things go wrong (student abstract version). In Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth AAAI
Conference on Artificial Intelligence, January 25-30, 2015, Austin, Texas, USA., pages 4184–
4185, 2015.
32
J. Navarro, S. Quijano, R. Berger, and R. Meneses. Work-groups in organizations: A basic tool
to manage increasing complexity and ambiguity. Papeles del Psicologo, 32:17–28, 2011.
T. Okimoto, N. Schwind, M. Clement, T. Ribeiro, K. Inoue, and P. Marquis. How to form a task-
oriented robust team.
In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Autonomous
Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS '15, pages 395–403. International Foundation for
Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 2015.
F. Olivera and L. Argote. Organizational learning and new product development: Core processes.
Shared cognition in organizations: The management of knowledge, pages 297–326, 1999.
C.K. Oyster. Groups: A Users Guide. McGraw-Hill, Boston, 1999.
A. Peleteiro, J.C. Burguillo-Rial, M. Luck, J.L. Arcos, and J.A. Rodr´ıguez-Aguilar. Using
reputation and adaptive coalitions to support collaboration in competitive environments.
Engineering applications of artificial intelligence, 45:325–338, 2015.
Philip M Podsakoff, Scott B MacKenzie, and Michael Ahearne. Moderating effects of goal
acceptance on the relationship between group cohesiveness and productivity. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 82(6):974, 1997.
S Quijano, J Navarro, M Yepes, R Berger, and M Romeo. Human system audit (hsa) for the
analysis of human behaviour in organizations. Papeles del Psic´ologo, 29(1):92–106, 2008.
T. Rahwan, T.P. Michalak, E. Elkind, P. Faliszewski, J. Sroka, M. Wooldridge, and N.R. Jennings.
Constrained coalition formation. In Wolfram Burgard and Dan Roth, editors, AAAI. AAAI
Press, 2011.
S. D. Ramchurn, A. Farinelli, K. S. Macarthur, and N. R. Jennings. Decentralized coordination
in robocup rescue. Comput. J., 53(9):1447–1461, November 2010. ISSN 0010-4620. doi: 10.
1093/comjnl/bxq022. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/bxq022.
S.D. Ramchurn, F. Wu, J.E. Fischer, S. Reece, J. W, S.J. Roberts, T. Rodden, and N.R. Jennings.
Human-agent collaboration for disaster response. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-
Agent Systems, pages 1–30, 2016.
M. Ramezan. Intellectual capital and organizational organic structure in knowledge society: How
are these concepts related? International Journal of Information Management, 31:88–95, 2011.
B. Ramirez-Heller, R. Berger, and F.C. Brodbeck. Does an adequate team climate for learning
predict team effectiveness and innovation potential? a psychometric validation of the team
climate questionnaire for learning in an organizational context. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 114:543–550, 2014.
S.S. Rangapuram, T. Buhler, and M. Hein. Towards realistic team formation in social networks
based on densest subgraphs. CoRR, abs/1505.06661, 2015.
R. Rico, C.M. Alcover, and C.D. Tabernero. Efectividad de los equipos de trabajo, una revision
de la ultima decada de investigacion (1999- 2009). Revista de Psicologia del Trabajo y de las
Organizaciones, 26:47–71, 2010.
I. Rochlin, Y. Aumann, D. Sarne, and L. Golosman. Efficiency and fairness in team search with
self-interested agents. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 30(3):526–552, 2016.
R.A. Roe. What makes a competent psychologist? European Psychologist, 7(3):192, 2002.
M. Rokicki, S. Zerr, and S. Siersdorfer. Groupsourcing: Team competition designs for crowd-
sourcing. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW
2015, Florence, Italy, May 18-22, 2015, pages 906–915, 2015.
33
E. Salas, D.E. Sims, and C.S. Burke. Is there a big five in teamwork? Small group research, 36
(5):555–599, 2005.
W.C. Schutz. Firo: A three dimensional theory of interpersonal behavior. 1958.
M. Spradling, J. Goldsmith, X. Liu, C. Dadi, and Z. Li. Roles and teams hedonic game. In ADT,
volume 8176 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 351–362. Springer, 2013.
Kerrie Unsworth and Michael West. Teams: The challenges of cooperative work. Introduction to
Work and Organizational Psychology. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK, pages 327–346, 2000.
M.A. West. Effective Teamwork: Practical Lessons Learned from Organizational Research. Wiley-
Blackwell, West Sussex, 2012a.
M.A. West. Effective teamwork: Practical lessons from organizational research. John Wiley and
Sons, 2012b.
K.B. White. Mis project teams: An investigation of cognitive style implications. (8(2)):95–101,
1984.
D.J. Wilde. Teamology: The Construction and Organization of Effective Teams. Springer-Verlag,
London, 2009.
D.J. Wilde.
Jungs Personality Theory Quantified.
Springer-Verlag London, 2011.
ISBN
0857290991,9780857290991.
D.J. Wilde. Post-Jungian Personality Theory for Individuals and Teams. SYDROSE LP, 2013.
ISBN 9780615944548. URL https://books.google.es/books?id=-hAjngEACAAJ.
J.L. Wildman, A.L. Thayer, M.A. Rosen, E. Salas, J.E. Mathieu, and S.R. Rayne. Task types and
team-level attributes: Synthesis of team classification literature. Human Resource Development
Review, 11:97–129, March 2012.
C. Zellmer-Bruhn, M.and Gibson. Multinational organization context: Implications for team
learning and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 494:501–518, 2006.
34
|
1706.04315 | 1 | 1706 | 2017-06-14T04:53:42 | RoboCup 2D Soccer Simulation League: Evaluation Challenges | [
"cs.MA"
] | We summarise the results of RoboCup 2D Soccer Simulation League in 2016 (Leipzig), including the main competition and the evaluation round. The evaluation round held in Leipzig confirmed the strength of RoboCup-2015 champion (WrightEagle, i.e. WE2015) in the League, with only eventual finalists of 2016 competition capable of defeating WE2015. An extended, post-Leipzig, round-robin tournament which included the top 8 teams of 2016, as well as WE2015, with over 1000 games played for each pair, placed WE2015 third behind the champion team (Gliders2016) and the runner-up (HELIOS2016). This establishes WE2015 as a stable benchmark for the 2D Simulation League. We then contrast two ranking methods and suggest two options for future evaluation challenges. The first one, "The Champions Simulation League", is proposed to include 6 previous champions, directly competing against each other in a round-robin tournament, with the view to systematically trace the advancements in the League. The second proposal, "The Global Challenge", is aimed to increase the realism of the environmental conditions during the simulated games, by simulating specific features of different participating countries. | cs.MA | cs |
RoboCup 2D Soccer Simulation League: Evaluation
Challenges
Mikhail Prokopenko1, Peter Wang2, Sebastian Marian3, Aijun Bai4, Xiao Li5 and
Xiaoping Chen5
1 Complex Systems Research Group, Faculty of Engineering and IT
The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
[email protected]
2 Data Mining, CSIRO Data61, PO Box 76, Epping, NSW 1710, Australia
3 Compa-IT, Romania
4 Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences
University of California Berkeley
5 Multi-Agent Systems Lab, School of Computer Science and Technology,
University of Science and Technology of China
Abstract. We summarise the results of RoboCup 2D Soccer Simulation League
in 2016 (Leipzig), including the main competition and the evaluation round.
The evaluation round held in Leipzig confirmed the strength of RoboCup-2015
champion (WrightEagle, i.e. WE2015) in the League, with only eventual finalists
of 2016 competition capable of defeating WE2015. An extended, post-Leipzig,
round-robin tournament which included the top 8 teams of 2016, as well as
WE2015, with over 1000 games played for each pair, placed WE2015 third be-
hind the champion team (Gliders2016) and the runner-up (HELIOS2016). This
establishes WE2015 as a stable benchmark for the 2D Simulation League. We
then contrast two ranking methods and suggest two options for future evaluation
challenges. The first one, "The Champions Simulation League", is proposed to
include 6 previous champions, directly competing against each other in a round-
robin tournament, with the view to systematically trace the advancements in the
League. The second proposal, "The Global Challenge", is aimed to increase the
realism of the environmental conditions during the simulated games, by simulat-
ing specific features of different participating countries.
1 Introduction
The International RoboCup Federation's Millennium challenge sets an inspirational tar-
get that by mid-21st century, a team of fully autonomous humanoid soccer players shall
win the soccer game, complying with the official rule of the FIFA, against the winner
of the most recent World Cup [1]. In pursuit of this goal, the RoboCup Federation has
introduced multiple leagues, with both physical robots and simulation agents, which
have developed different measures of their progress over the years. The main mode, of
course, is running competitions at the national, regional and world cup levels. In addi-
tion, however, various leagues have included specific evaluation challenges which not
only complement the competitions, but also advance the scientific and technological
2
Prokopenko et al.
base of RoboCup and Artificial Intelligence in general. Typically, a challenge intro-
duces some new features into the standard competition environment, and then evaluates
how the teams perform under the new circumstances.
For example, during an evaluation round of RoboCup 2001 the rules of the soccer
simulator were modified in such a way that "dashing on the upper half of the field
resulted in only half of normal speed for all the players" [2]. This modification was
not announced in advance, and while the changed conditions were obvious to human
spectators, none of the simulation agents could diagnose the problem [2].
A specific technical challenge was presented by the so-called Keepaway problem
[3], when one team (the "keepers") attempt to keep the ball away from the other team
(the "takers") for as long as possible.
Later on, the focus of evaluation in RoboCup 2D Soccer Simulation League shifted
from changing the physics of the simulation or the tactics of the game, to studying
the diverse "eco-system" of the League itself, which has grown to include multiple
teams. The Simulated Soccer Internet League (SSIL) was designed to allow a continual
evaluation of the participating teams during the time between annual RoboCup events:
pre-registered teams could upload their binaries to a server on which games were played
automatically [4]. The SSIL was used at some stage as a qualification pathway to the
annual RoboCup, but this practice was discontinued due to verification problems.
Several other challenges and technical innovations introduced in Soccer Simulation
Leagues (both 2D and 3D), including heterogeneous players, stamina capacity model,
and tackles, are described in [5]. This study further pointed out the importance of the
online game analysis and online adaptation.
More recently, a series of "drop-in player challenges" was introduced by [6] in or-
der to investigate how real or simulated robots from teams from around the world can
cooperate with a variety of unknown teammates. In each evaluation game, robots/agents
are drawn from the participating teams and combined to form a new team, in the hope
that the agents would be able to quickly adapt to meaningfully play together without
pre-coordination. The "drop-in" challenge was adopted by RoboCup Standard Platform
League (SPL) and both RoboCup Soccer Simulation Leagues, 2D and 3D. In all the con-
sidered leagues, the study observed "a trend for agents that perform better at standard
team soccer to also perform better at the drop-in player challenge" [6].
At RoboCup-2016 in Leipzig, several soccer and rescue leagues increased realism
of the competition by holding their competitions outdoors. In the SPL, a separate com-
petition was successfully held not on the customary green carpet but rather on an ar-
tificial turf, under diverse natural lighting conditions. Similarly, Middle Size Soccer
League also successfully implemented a Technical Challenge under these difficult con-
ditions, while the Humanoid League used artificial turf and real soccer balls6.
In this paper, we describe the latest evaluation challenge, introduced by RoboCup
2D Soccer Simulation League [7,8] in 2016, in order to trace the progress of the overall
League. Furthermore, we describe two possibilities for future challenges: one intended
to systematically trace the advancements in the League ("The Champions Simulation
League"), and the other aimed to increase the realism of the environmental conditions
during the simulated games ("The Global Challenge").
6 http://robocup2016.org/press-releases/leipzig-best-place-for-robots-and-friends/452749
RoboCup 2D Soccer Simulation League: Evaluation Challenges
3
2 Methodology and Results
2.1 Actual competition
The RoboCup-2016 Soccer Simulation 2D League included 18 teams from 9 countries:
Australia, Brazil, China, Egypt, Germany, Iran, Japan, Portugal and Romania. The last
group stage was a round-robin tournament for top 8 teams. It was followed by the
two-game semi-final round, a single-game final, and 3 more playoffs between third and
fourth, fifth and sixth, and seventh and eighth places.
In the two-game semi-final round, HELIOS2016 (Japan) [9] defeated team Ri-
one (Japan) [10], 3:0 and 4:0, while Gliders2016 (Australia) [11,12] defeated team
CSU Yunlu (China) [13], winning both games with the same score 2:1.
The single-game final between HELIOS2016 and Gliders2016 went into the extra
time, and ended with Gliders2016 winning 2:1.
The third place was taken by team Ri-one which won against CSU Yunlu 3:0.
Oxsy (Romania) [14] took the fifth place, winning 4:0 against Shiraz (Iran) [15]; and
MT2016 (China) [16] became seventh, winning against FURY (Iran) [17] on penalties
4:2. The final ranking of RoboCup-2016 (Leipzig, Germany) is shown in the left column
of Table 1.
2.2 Ranking Estimation
Using the ranking estimation methodology established by [18,19], we conducted an
8-team round-robin tournament for top 8 teams from RoboCup-2016. The estimation
process used the released binaries of top RoboCup-2016 teams7, where all 28 pairs
of teams play approximately 4000 games against one another. The following discrete
scheme was used for discrete point calculation:
-- Firstly, the average score between each pair of teams (across all 4000 games) is
rounded to the nearest integer (e.g. "1.2 : 0.5" is rounded to "1 : 1").
-- Next, points are allocated for each pairing based on these rounded results: 3 for a
win, 1 for a draw and 0 for a loss.
-- Teams are then ranked by the sum of the points received against each opponent.
The total goal difference of the rounded scores is used as a tie-breaker.
The final ranking r
d under this scheme is presented in Table 1.
In order to capture the overall difference between any two rankings r
a and r
b, the
L1 distance is utilised [18]:
d1(r
a, r
b) = kr
a − r
bk1 =
n
X
i=1
ra
i − rb
i ,
(1)
where i is the index of the i-th team in each ranking, 1 ≤ i ≤ 8.
The distance between the actual ranking r
a and the estimated ranking r
d is
d1(r
a, r
d) = 1 − 1+ 2 − 2+ 3 − 6+ 4 − 4+ 5 − 3+ 6 − 5+ 7 − 8+ 8 − 7 = 8.
7 https://chaosscripting.net/files/competitions/RoboCup/WorldCup/2016/2DSim/binaries/
4
Prokopenko et al.
Gliders HELIOS Ri-one CSU Yunlu Oxsy
Shiraz MT2016 FURY Goals Points rd
Gliders
0.3 : 0.4 2.8 : 0.3
1.9 : 0.3
0.7 : 0.8 3.8 : 0.4 5.0 : 0.0 2.5 : 0.2 18 : 1
HELIOS 0.4 : 0.3
1.8 : 0.1
3.0 : 0.2
1.2 : 0.5 4.3 : 0.3 3.6 : 0.0 2.5 : 0.0 17 : 1
Ri-one
0.3 : 2.8 0.1 : 1.8
1.1 : 1.1
0.2 : 1.8 0.6 : 0.5 0.4 : 0.0 0.6 : 0.5 3 : 10
CSU Yunlu 0.3 : 1.9 0.2 : 3.0 1.1 : 1.1
0.5 : 1.2 2.0 : 0.7 1.4 : 0.0 1.2 : 0.4 6 : 8
Oxsy
0.8 : 0.7 0.5 : 1.2 1.8 : 0.2
1.2 : 0.5
3.5 : 0.5 4.4 : 0.0 3.0 : 0.1 16 : 4
Shiraz
0.4 : 3.8 0.3 : 4.3 0.5 : 0.6
0.7 : 2.0
0.5 : 3.5
0.5 : 0.1 0.8 : 1.0 5 : 16
MT2016
0.0 : 5.0 0.0 : 3.6 0.0 : 0.4
0.0 : 1.4
0.0 : 4.4 0.1 : 0.5
0.0 : 0.0 0 : 15
FURY
0.2 : 2.5 0.0 : 2.5 0.5 : 0.6
0.4 : 1.2
0.1 : 3.0 1.0 : 0.8 0.0 : 0.0
2 : 12
17
17
4
11
15
5
2
3
1
2
6
4
3
5
8
7
Table 1. Round-robin results (average goals scored and points allocated with the discrete scheme)
for the top 8 teams from RoboCup 2016, ordered according to their final actual competition
a. The scores are determined by calculating the average number of goals scored over
rank, r
approximately 4000 games rounded to the nearest integer, then awarding 3 points for a win, 1
point for a draw and 0 points for a loss. The resultant ranking is marked with r
d.
The top two teams were fairly close in their performance (confirmed by the fi-
nal game, which needed extra time). Similarly the 7th and 8th teams were similar in
strength too (not surprisingly their playoff ended up with penalties). The main discrep-
ancy between the actual and estimated results is due to performances of two teams:
Oxsy (whose rank is estimated as third, while the actual rank was only fifth) and Ri-one
(which finished the competition as third, while its average rank is estimated to be sixth).
2.3 A critique of the continuous ranking scheme
There exists another ranking method: continuous scheme [18,19]:
-- Teams are ranked by the sum of average points obtained against each opponent
across all 4000 games.
-- The total goal difference of the non-rounded scores is used as a tie-breaker.
Both schemes, discrete and continuous, were introduced in order to evaluate dif-
ferent competition formats, using the top 8 teams of 2012 and 2013 [18,19]. However,
over the years it has become apparent that the continuous scheme suffers from two ma-
jor drawbacks, violating the balance of points (3 for a win, 1 for a draw and 0 for a loss)
and overestimating the points for draws and losses. Specifically, under the continuous
scheme:
1. there is a bias to attribute more points to draws with higher scores.
2. there is a bias to reduce the advantage of the three-points-for-a-win standard.
1. Let us consider two opposite scenarios: (i) two teams A and B of equal strengths,
denoted A ⇔ B, but with a stronger defensive capability, play N games resulting in
the average 0 : 0 score; and (ii) two teams X and Y of equal strengths X ⇔ Y , but
with a stronger attacking capability, play N games resulting in the average q : q score,
where q > 0 is sufficiently large, e.g., q = 3. In the first pair, the scores of individual
games, which may or may not be draws, do not diverge much from 0 : 0, as the teams
are defensive. And so the actual drawn scores 0 : 0 dominate among the results, with
RoboCup 2D Soccer Simulation League: Evaluation Challenges
5
large outliers k : 0 or 0 : k, for k > 0 being relatively rare. Thus, the continuous points
p attained by teams A and B stay close to 1.0, for example, pA ≈ pB ≈ 1.2.
In the second pair, the scores of individual games, which again may or may not be
draws, diverge more from the average q : q, due to a higher variability of possible high
scores. Consequently, the proportion of actual draws among N games is much smaller
in comparison to the first pair, and the large outliers k : 0 or 0 : k, even for k > q, are
more numerous. As a result, the teams X and Y exchange wins and losses more often
than teams A and B, acquiring more points for their respective wins. This yields the
continuous points pX and pY significantly higher than 1.0, for example, pX ≈ pY ≈
1.4, creating a general bias to attribute more points to the drawn contests with higher
scores: pA ≈ pB < pX ≈ pY . A typical sample of 10,000 scores q1 : q2, where
both q1 and q2 are normally distributed around the same mean q, with the standard
deviation σ = 1.0, results in the following continuous points p⇔(q) for different draws
around q: p⇔(0) = 1.23 for draws 0.38 : 0.38, p⇔(1) = 1.33 for draws 1.07 : 1.08,
p⇔(2) = 1.36 for draws 1.99 : 2.00, and p⇔(3) = 1.38 for draws 3.02 : 3.00.
While the higher scoring teams may be expected to get an advantage at a tie-breaker
stage, getting more continuous points for the same outcome is obviously an unfair bias.
The discrete scheme does not suffer from this drawback as the average scores are con-
verted into the identical discrete points immediately, i.e., pA = pB = pX = pY = 1.0.
It is easy to see that the lower bound for the continuous points shared by any two
teams of equal strength is inf ⇔ = 1.0 (attainable only if all N games are drawn),
while the upper bound is sup⇔ = 1.5 (attained in the extreme case when all N games
are non-draws, with wins and losses split equally). Consequently, under the continuous
scheme, the points attributed to equal teams drawing on average, are overestimated,
being somewhere between the lower and upper bounds: inf ⇔ < p < sup⇔, while the
expected result (one point) sits only at exactly the lower bound.
2. The "three-points-for-a-win" standard which was widely adopted since FIFA
1994 World Cup finals "places additional value on wins with respect to draws such
that teams with a higher number of wins may rank higher in tables than teams with a
lower number of wins but more draws"8. To illustrate the second drawback of the con-
tinuous scheme we will contrast two scenarios, comparing the combined points of two
drawn contests against the combination of one-won and one-lost contests.
Firstly, we consider a case when team Q is paired with teams U and Z, such that
Q ⇔ U and Q ⇔ Z. We do not expect transitivity, and so U ⇔ Z is not assumed. The
continuous points for team Q resulting from these two iterated match-ups, both drawn,
could vary between these lower bound (inf ⇔,⇔) and upper bound (sup⇔,⇔):
inf
⇔,⇔
= inf
⇔
+ inf
⇔
= 2.0
sup
⇔,⇔
= sup
+ sup
= 3.0
⇔
⇔
Typically the combined points vary around the level of pQ ≈ 2.6, which is an overesti-
mation of the ideal outcome by more than half-a-point.
Secondly, we consider a scenario with team R matched-up against teams V and W ,
with team V being weaker than R, denoted R ⇒ V , while the team W is stronger
8 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three points for a win
6
Prokopenko et al.
than R, denoted R ⇐ W . The relative strength of V and W is not important for our
comparison. The continuous points that team R attains from the first pair, against the
weaker opponent V , are bounded by inf ⇒ = 1.5 (just a slight over-performance) and
sup⇒ = 3.0 (the total dominance with all N games won):
1.5 = inf
⇒
< pR < sup
= 3.0 .
⇒
In practice, the stronger team rarely drops below pR ≈ 2.0 points. In the second pair,
team R is weaker, and its continuous points are bounded by inf ⇐ = 0.0 (the total
inferiority with all N games lost) and sup⇐ = 1.5 (getting almost to an equal standing):
0.0 = inf
⇐
< pR < sup
= 1.5 .
⇐
In practice, the weaker team rarely reaches beyond pR ≈ 1.0 points. A typical sample
of 10,000 scores q1 : q2, where q1 and q2 are normally distributed around the means
q and 0.0 respectively, with the standard deviation σ = 1.0, results in the following
continuous points p⇒(q) for different won contests around q: p⇒(1) = 2.31 for wins
1.07 : 0.38, p⇒(2) = 2.75 for wins 2.00 : 0.38, and p⇒(3) = 2.94 for wins 2.97 : 0.38.
Correspondingly, the continuous points p(q) for the respective lost contests sampled
under the same distribution are overestimated above 0.0 as follows: p⇐(1) = 0.32,
p⇐(2) = 0.13, and p⇐(3) = 0.04.
The combined continuous points for team R after these match-ups, one won and
one lost, could vary between the lower bound of and the upper bound of
inf
⇒,⇐
= inf
⇒
+ inf
⇐
= 1.5
sup
⇒,⇐
= sup
+ sup
= 4.5
⇒
⇐
In practice, 2.0 < pR < 4.0. That is, the combined continuous points of a win and a
loss typically vary around pR ≈ 3.0, which is an appropriate outcome.
Contrasting the possible bounded intervals and typical outcomes of two contests
(two draws versus one win and one loss) immediately highlights that the continuous
points do not differentiate these scenarios sufficiently well. The intention of the three-
points-for-a-win standard was precisely to preference the one-win-and-one-loss sce-
nario over the two-draws scenario, p⇒,⇐ = 3 > p⇔,⇔ = 2. In other words, team Q
with two drawn contests should achieve a lower rank than team R with a won and a
lost contest, with the difference being the cost of a single drawn game. The continuous
scheme fails in this regard, by producing, on average, less than half-a-point difference,
p⇒,⇐ ≈ 3.0 > p⇔,⇔ ≈ 2.6. In fact, it is quite conceivable that p⇒,⇐ could happen to
be less than p⇔,⇔ under the continuous scheme in some cases, as inf ⇒,⇐ < sup⇔,⇔.
In other words, one hard-won contest, e.g. p⇒(1) = 2.31, coupled with a serious loss,
e.g., p⇐(3) = 0.04 could earn less points (e.g., p⇒,⇐ ≈ 2.35) than two high-scoring
draws, e.g. p⇔(3) = 1.38 (resulting in p⇔,⇔ ≈ 2.76) -- definitely, something not
intended by the three-points-for-a-win standard.
Again, the discrete scheme easily overcomes this drawback as the average scores
are converted into the appropriate discrete points for each contest (3 for a win, 1 for a
draw and 0 for a loss), and combined only afterwards.
RoboCup 2D Soccer Simulation League: Evaluation Challenges
7
The two problems identified for the continuous scheme may amplify over many
match-ups in a 8-teams round-robin, especially when there are many teams of similar
strength (which is the case in the Simulation League in recent years). The biases become
even more pronounced in the absence of transitivity in teams' relative strengths. In
light of these concerns, we suggest that some recent works employing the continuous
scheme, e.g. [20], would benefit from re-evaluation.
2.4 Evaluation round
The 2016 competition also included an evaluation round, where all 18 participating
teams played one game each against the champion of RoboCup-2015, team WrightEa-
gle (China), i.e., WE2015 [21]. Only two teams, the eventual finalists Gliders2016 and
HELIOS2016, managed to win against the previous year champion, with Gliders de-
feating WrightEagle 1:0, and HELIOS2016 producing the top score 2:1.
We extended this evaluation over 1000 games, again playing WE2015 against the
top 8 teams from RoboCup-2016. Table 2 summarises the evaluation for RoboCup-
2016: both actual scores obtained in Leipzig and the averages over 1000 games.
Gliders2016 HELIOS2016 Ri-one CSU Yunlu Oxsy
Shiraz2016 MT2016 FURY
WE2015
0 : 1
1 : 2
7 : 1
2 : 0
4 : 1
3 : 2
4 : 0
11 : 2
WE2015
1.4 : 1.8
1.3 : 1.7
5.0 : 0.5
2.7 : 0.5
3.5 : 1.3
4.0 : 0.8
5.9 : 0.0 4.8 : 0.4
Table 2. Evaluation round results for the top 8 teams playing against WE2015. Top row: actual
scores obtained at RoboCup-2016 in Leipzig; bottom row: average scores over 1000 games.
The evaluation round confirmed the strength of RoboCup-2015 champion in the
League. It is evident that WE2015, if entered in 2016, would likely have achieved third
rank. To confirm this conjecture we combined the estimation results presented in Table
1 with the estimates of WE2015 scores from Table 2, summarised in Table 3.
Gliders HELIOS WE2015 Ri-one CSU Yunlu Oxsy
Shiraz MT2016 FURY Goals Points re
Gliders
0.3 : 0.4 1.8 : 1.4 2.8 : 0.3
1.9 : 0.3
0.7 : 0.8 3.8 : 0.4 5.0 : 0.0 2.5 : 0.2 20 : 2
HELIOS 0.4 : 0.3
1.7 : 1.3 1.8 : 0.1
3.0 : 0.2
1.2 : 0.5 4.3 : 0.3 3.6 : 0.0 2.5 : 0.0 19 : 2
WE2015
1.4 : 1.8 1.3 : 1.7
5.0 : 0.5
2.7 : 0.5
3.5 : 1.3 4.0 : 0.8 5.9 : 0.0 4.8 : 0.4 29 : 8
Ri-one
0.3 : 2.8 0.1 : 1.8 0.5 : 5.0
1.1 : 1.1
0.2 : 1.8 0.6 : 0.5 0.4 : 0.0 0.6 : 0.5 4 : 15
CSU Yunlu 0.3 : 1.9 0.2 : 3.0 0.5 : 2.7 1.1 : 1.1
0.5 : 1.2 2.0 : 0.7 1.4 : 0.0 1.2 : 0.4 7 : 11
Oxsy
0.8 : 0.7 0.5 : 1.2 1.3 : 3.5 1.8 : 0.2
1.2 : 0.5
3.5 : 0.5 4.4 : 0.0 3.0 : 0.1 17 : 8
Shiraz
0.4 : 3.8 0.3 : 4.3 0.8 : 4.0 0.5 : 0.6
0.7 : 2.0
0.5 : 3.5
0.5 : 0.1 0.8 : 1.0 6 : 20
MT2016
0.0 : 5.0 0.0 : 3.6 0.0 : 5.9 0.0 : 0.4
0.0 : 1.4
0.0 : 4.4 0.1 : 0.5
0.0 : 0.0 0 : 21
FURY
0.2 : 2.5 0.0 : 2.5 0.4 : 4.8 0.5 : 0.6
0.4 : 1.2
0.1 : 3.0 1.0 : 0.8 0.0 : 0.0
2 : 17
20
20
18
4
11
15
5
2
3
1
2
3
7
5
4
6
9
8
Table 3. Evaluation round-robin results (average goals scored and points allocated with discrete
scheme), combined for the top 8 teams from RoboCup 2016 and the RoboCup-2015 champion
(WE2015). The resultant evaluation ranking is marked with r
e.
8
Prokopenko et al.
Gliders2016 WE2015 WE2014 WE2013 HELIOS2012 WE2011 Goals Points rl
Gliders2016
1.8 : 1.4
1.8 : 1.3
1.7 : 0.9
1.2 : 0.1
2.0 : 1.0
9 : 4
15
WE2015
1.4 : 1.8
2.5 : 2.5
3.0 : 2.5
2.2 : 0.9
4.0 : 2.9
13 : 12
WE2014
1.3 : 1.8
2.5 : 2.5
2.8 : 2.6
2.3 : 0.8
3.9 : 3.0
13 : 12
WE2013
0.9 : 1.7
2.5 : 3.0
2.6 : 2.8
1.9 : 0.9
2.9 : 3.2
12 : 12
HELIOS2012
0.1 : 1.2
0.9 : 2.2
0.8 : 2.3
0.9 : 1.9
2.6 : 1.8
6 : 9
WE2011
1.0 : 2.0
2.9 : 4.0
3.0 : 3.9
3.2 : 2.9
1.8 : 2.6
12 : 16
8
8
6
3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
Table 4. Champions Simulation League round-robin results (average goals scored and points
allocated with discrete scheme), for six champions of RoboCup 2011 to 2016. To distinguish
WE2015 and WE2014 results, non-rounded scores were used as a tie-breaker. The resultant
league ranking with discrete point allocation scheme is marked with r
l.
3 Proposed challenges
3.1 Champions Simulation League
In order to trace the progress of the League over time it is interesting to compare per-
formance of several previous champions, directly competing against each other in a
round-robin tournament. For example, we evaluated relative performance of six cham-
pions of RoboCup-2011 to RoboCup-2016: WrightEagle (WE2011 [22,23], WE2013
[24,25], WE2014 [26], WE2015 [21]), HELIOS2012 [27] and Gliders2016 [11,12].
The round-robin results over 1000 games, presented in Table 4, confirmed the progress
of the League over the last six years, with the resultant ranking r
with the chronological ranking r
t, i.e., d1(r
l completely concurring
l, r
t) = 0.
3.2 Global Challenge
Another proposal suggests to pit together the best teams from each of the top 6 or
8 participating countries (for example, in 2016 it would have been Australia, Brazil,
China, Egypt, Germany, Iran, Japan, Romania), with two "home-and-away" games be-
tween opponents. There can be 14 games for a home-and-away single-elimination round
with 8 teams; or 30 games for a home-and-away double round-robin with 6 teams.
The "Global Challenge" will be distinguished from the main competition by playing
the games with different parameters, for example, higher noise, or even with random
player(s) disconnecting. In other words, the Global Challenge will focus on resilience
of the teams in the face of unexpected conditions.
In each game, the home side would choose a hidden parameter to vary, in order to
represent some features of their country (like high altitude in Bolivia or long-distance
travel to Australia). These parameters will not be known to the opposition, but would
be the same for both teams in that game.
The full list of possible hidden server parameters may include a significant num-
ber (currently, the number of server parameters is 27) and the set of changeable pa-
rameters will be agreed in advance. The global challenge mode will be selected via
a new parameter, for example, server::global challenge mode, introduced in the sim-
ulation server (server.conf). When the global challenge mode parameter is set to true,
the server will permit the left side coach (the home side) to send a command like this:
(change player param (param 1 value) (param 2 value). . . (param N value)).
RoboCup 2D Soccer Simulation League: Evaluation Challenges
9
For example, if the home side chooses to simulate some bad weather conditions
or a soggy pitch, these server parameters can be changed: ball accel max, ball decay,
ball rand, ball speed max, catch probability, inertia moment, kick rand, player rand.
Exploiting their own strong points, and possibly trying to exploit some weak points
of the opponent, the home side could change some of the available parameters in a way
that creates an advantage. While the adjusted environment will be applied equally to
the both teams, the task of the left side coach (the home team) will be to optimise the
choice of the adjusted parameters to maximise the home side advantage.
4 Conclusion
We summarised the results of RoboCup-2016 competition in the 2D Soccer Simula-
tion League, including the main competition and the evaluation round. The evaluation
round confirmed the strength of RoboCup-2015 champion (WrightEagle, i.e. WE2015)
in the League, with only eventual finalists of 2016 (Gliders2016 and HELIOS2016)
capable of winning against WE2015. After the RoboCup-2016, we extended this eval-
uation, over 1000 games for each pair, in a multi-game round-robin tournament which
included the top 8 teams of 2016, as well as WE2015. The round-robin results con-
firmed that WE2015 would take third place, behind the champion team (Gliders2016)
and the runner-up (HELIOS2016). This establishes WE2015 as a stable benchmark for
the 2D Simulation League. In doing so we offered a critique of a particular ranking
method (the continuous scheme), arguing that the discrete scheme is more appropriate.
We then followed with proposing two options to develop the evaluation challenge
further. The first such possibility introduces "The Champions Simulation League",
comprising several previous champions, directly competing against each other in a
round-robin tournament. "The Champions Simulation League" can systematically trace
the advancements in the League, measuring the progress of each new champion over
its predecessors. We evaluated The Champions Simulation League with the champions
from 2011 to 2016, producing a ranking which completely concurs with the chronologi-
cal order, and confirming a steady progress in the League. Arguably, simulation leagues
are the only ones in RoboCup where such an evaluation is possible, given the obvious
constraints and difficulties with running such a tournament in robotic leagues.
Tracing such advances is especially important because different champion teams
usually employ different approaches, often achieving a high degree of specialisation in
a sub-field of AI, for example, automated hierarchical planning developed by WrightEa-
gle [23,24,26,21,28], opponent modelling studied by HELIOS [27], and human-based
evolutionary computation adopted by Gliders [11,12]. Many more research areas are
likely to contribute towards improving the League, and several general research direc-
tions are recognised as particularly promising: nature-inspired collective intelligence
[29,30,31], embodied intelligence [32,33,34,35], information theory of distributed cog-
nitive systems [36,37,38,39,40,41], guided self-organisation [42,43,44], and deep learn-
ing [45,46,47].
The other proposed evaluation challenge ("The Global Challenge") aims to model
environmental conditions during the games by simulating specific features of differ-
ent participating countries, such as climate, infrastructure, travel distance, etc. This,
10
Prokopenko et al.
arguably, may increase the realism of the simulated competition, making another small
step toward the ultimate Millennium challenge.
5 Acknowledgments
A majority of RoboCup 2D Soccer Simulation teams, including the 2016 champion
team, Gliders2016, are based on the well-developed code base agent2d [48], release
of which has greatly benefited the RoboCup 2D Simulation community. Several teams,
including WrightEagle and Oxsy, are independent of agent2d.
References
1. Burkhard, H.D., Duhaut, D., Fujita, M., Lima, P., Murphy, R., Rojas, R.: The road to
RoboCup 2050. IEEE Robotics Automation Magazine 9(2) (Jun 2002) 31 -- 38
2. Obst, O.: Using model-based diagnosis to build hypotheses about spatial environments: A
response to a technical challenge. In Polani, D., Bonarini, A., Browning, B., Yoshida, K.,
eds.: RoboCup 2003: Robot Soccer World Cup VII. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence.
Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York (2004) 518 -- 525
3. Stone, P., Kuhlmann, G., Taylor, M.E., Liu, Y.: Keepaway soccer: From machine learning
testbed to benchmark. In Noda, I., Jacoff, A., Bredenfeld, A., Takahashi, Y., eds.: RoboCup-
2005: Robot Soccer World Cup IX. Volume 4020. Springer Verlag, Berlin (2006) 93 -- 105
4. Obst, O.: Simulation league - league summary. In Kaminka, G.A., Lima, P.U., Rojas, R., eds.:
RoboCup 2002: Robot Soccer World Cup VI. Volume 2752 of Lecture Notes in Computer
Science., Springer (2002) 443 -- 452
5. Akiyama, H., Dorer, K., Lau, N.: On the progress of soccer simulation leagues. In Bianchi,
R.A.C., Akin, H.L., Ramamoorthy, S., Sugiura, K., eds.: RoboCup 2014: Robot World Cup
XVIII. Volume 8992 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science., Springer (2014) 599 -- 610
6. MacAlpine, P., Genter, K., Barrett, S., Stone, P.: The robocup 2013 drop-in player challenges:
A testbed for ad hoc teamwork. In: Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on
Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems. AAMAS'14, International Foundation for
Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (2014) 1461 -- 1462
7. Kitano, H., Tambe, M., Stone, P., Veloso, M.M., Coradeschi, S., Osawa, E., Matsubara, H.,
Noda, I., Asada, M.: The RoboCup Synthetic Agent Challenge 97. In: RoboCup-97: Robot
Soccer World Cup I, London, UK, Springer (1998) 62 -- 73
8. Noda, I., Stone, P.: The RoboCup Soccer Server and CMUnited Clients: Implemented Infras-
tructure for MAS Research. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 7(1 -- 2) (July --
September 2003) 101 -- 120
9. Akiyama, H., Nakashima, T., Henrio, J., Henn, T., Tanaka, S., Nakade, T., Fukushima, T.:
HELIOS2016: Team Description Paper. In: RoboCup 2016 Symposium and Competitions:
Team Description Papers, Leipzig, Germany, July 2016. (2016)
10. Asai, K., Katsumata, Y., Shibayama, T., Nomura, H., Kondo, R., Tanaka, H., Uchinishi, K.,
Mizumoto, M., Fuzimitsu, T., Sei, M., Tani, Y., Kubo, S., Matsushita, Y.: RoboCup 2016 - 2D
Soccer Simulation League Team Description Ri-one (Japan). In: RoboCup 2016 Symposium
and Competitions: Team Description Papers, Leipzig, Germany, July 2016. (2016)
11. Prokopenko, M., Wang, P.and Obst, O., Jaurgeui, V.: Gliders2016: Integrating multi-agent
In: RoboCup 2016 Symposium and Competitions: Team
approaches to tactical diversity.
Description Papers, Leipzig, Germany, July 2016. (2016)
RoboCup 2D Soccer Simulation League: Evaluation Challenges
11
12. Prokopenko, M., Wang, P.: Disruptive innovations in RoboCup 2D Soccer Simulation
League: from Cyberoos'98 to Gliders2016. In Behnke, S., Lee, D.D., Sariel, S., Sheh, R.,
eds.: RoboCup 2016: Robot Soccer World Cup XX. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence.
Springer, Berlin (2016)
13. Li, P., Ma, X., Jiang, F., Zhang, X., Peng, J.: CSU Yunlu 2D Soccer Simulation Team De-
scription Paper 2016. In: RoboCup 2016 Symposium and Competitions: Team Description
Papers, Leipzig, Germany, July 2016. (2016)
14. Marian, S., Luca, D., Sarac, B., Cotarlea, O.: OXSY 2016 Team Description. In: RoboCup
2016 Symposium and Competitions: Team Description Papers, Leipzig, Germany, July 2016.
(2016)
15. Asali, E., Valipour, M., Afshar, A., Asali, O., Katebzadeh, M., Tafazol, S., Moravej, A.,
Salehi, S., Karami, H., Mohammadi, M.: Shiraz Soccer 2D Simulation Team Description
Paper 2016. In: RoboCup 2016 Symposium and Competitions: Team Description Papers,
Leipzig, Germany, July 2016. (2016)
16. Zhang, L., Yao, B., Chen, S., Lv, G.: MT2016 Robocup Simulation 2D Team Description. In:
RoboCup 2016 Symposium and Competitions: Team Description Papers, Leipzig, Germany,
July 2016. (2016)
17. Darijani, A., Mostaejeran, A., Jamali, M.R., Sayareh, A., Salehi, M.J., Barahimi, B.: FURY
2D Simulation Team Description Paper 2016. In: RoboCup 2016 Symposium and Competi-
tions: Team Description Papers, Leipzig, Germany, July 2016. (2016)
18. Budden, D., Wang, P., Obst, O., Prokopenko, M.: Simulation leagues: Analysis of competi-
tion formats. In: RoboCup 2014: Robot Soccer World Cup XVIII, Springer (2014)
19. Budden, D.M., Wang, P., Obst, O., Prokopenko, M.: Robocup simulation leagues: Enabling
replicable and robust investigation of complex robotic systems. IEEE Robotics and Automa-
tion Magazine 22(3) (2015) 140 -- 146
20. Gabel, T., Falkenberg, E., Godehardt, E.: Progress in RoboCup Revisited: The State of
Soccer Simulation 2D. In Behnke, S., Lee, D.D., Sariel, S., Sheh, R., eds.: RoboCup 2016:
Robot Soccer World Cup XX. LNAI. Springer, Berlin (2016)
21. Li, X., Chen, R., Chen, X.: WrightEagle 2D Soccer Simulation Team Description 2015. In:
RoboCup 2015 Symposium and Competitions: Team Description Papers, Hefei, China, July
2015. (2015)
22. Bai, A., Lu, G., Zhang, H., Chen, X.: WrightEagle 2D Soccer Simulation Team Description
2011. In: RoboCup 2011 Symposium and Competitions: Team Description Papers, Istanbul,
Turkey, July 2011. (2011)
23. Bai, A., Chen, X., MacAlpine, P., Urieli, D., Barrett, S., Stone, P.: WrightEagle and UT
In: RoboCup 2011: Robot
Austin Villa: RoboCup 2011 Simulation League Champions.
Soccer World Cup XV. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer (2012)
24. Zhang, H., Jiang, M., Dai, H., Bai, A., Chen, X.: WrightEagle 2D Soccer Simulation Team
Description 2013. In: RoboCup 2013 Symposium and Competitions: Team Description Pa-
pers, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, June 2013. (2013)
25. Zhang, H., Chen, X.: The decision-making framework of WrightEagle, the RoboCup 2013
soccer simulation 2D league champion team. In: Robot Soccer World Cup, Springer (2013)
114 -- 124
26. Zhang, H., Lu, G., Chen, R., Li, X., Chen, X.: WrightEagle 2D Soccer Simulation Team De-
scription 2014. In: RoboCup 2014 Symposium and Competitions: Team Description Papers,
Joao Pessoa, Brazil, July 2014. (2014)
27. Akiyama, H., Shimora, H., Nakashima, T., Narimoto, Y., Yamashita, K.: HELIOS2012:
Team Description Paper. In: RoboCup 2012 Symposium and Competitions: Team Descrip-
tion Papers, Mexico City, Mexico, June 2012. (2012)
12
Prokopenko et al.
28. Bai, A., Wu, F., Chen, X.: Online planning for large Markov decision processes with hierar-
chical decomposition. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology 6(4) (July
2015) 45:1 -- 45:28
29. Sayama, H.: Guiding designs of self-organizing swarms: Interactive and automated ap-
proaches. In Prokopenko, M., ed.: Guided Self-Organization: Inception. Volume 9 of Emer-
gence, Complexity and Computation. Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2014) 365 -- 387
30. Nallaperuma, S., Wagner, M., Neumann, F.: Analyzing the effects of instance features and al-
gorithm parameters for maxmin ant system and the traveling salesperson problem. Frontiers
in Robotics and AI 2 (2015) 18
31. Hamann, H., Khaluf, Y., Botev, J., Divband Soorati, M., Ferrante, E., Kosak, O., Montanier,
J.M., Mostaghim, S., Redpath, R., Timmis, J., Veenstra, F., Wahby, M., Zamuda, A.: Hybrid
societies: Challenges and perspectives in the design of collective behavior in self-organizing
systems. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 3 (2016) 14
32. Pfeifer, R., Bongard, J.C.: How the body shapes the way we think: A new view of intelli-
gence. The MIT Press (November 2006)
33. Polani, D., Sporns, O., Lungarella, M.: How information and embodiment shape intelligent
information processing. In Lungarella, M., Iida, F., Bongard, J., Pfeifer, R., eds.: Proceed-
ings of the 50th Anniversary Summit of Artificial Intelligence, New York. Volume 4850 of
Lecture Notes in Computer Science., Berlin / Heidelberg, Springer (2007) 99 -- 111
34. Der, R.: On the role of embodiment for Self-Organizing robots: Behavior as broken symme-
try. In Prokopenko, M., ed.: Guided Self-Organization: Inception. Volume 9 of Emergence,
Complexity and Computation. Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2014) 193 -- 221
35. Ghazi-Zahedi, K., Haeufle, D.F.B., Montfar, G., Schmitt, S., Ay, N.: Evaluating morpholog-
ical computation in muscle and dc-motor driven models of hopping movements. Frontiers in
Robotics and AI 3 (2016) 42
36. Ay, N., Bertschinger, N., Der, R., Guttler, F., Olbrich, E.: Predictive information and explo-
rative behavior of autonomous robots. The European Physical Journal B - Condensed Matter
63 (2008) 329 -- 339(11)
37. Tishby, N., Polani, D.: Information theory of decisions and actions. In Cutsuridis, V., Hus-
sain, A., Taylor, J.G., eds.: Perception-Action Cycle: Models, Architectures, and Hardware.
Springer New York, New York, NY (2011) 601 -- 636
38. Cliff, O.M., Lizier, J., Wang, R., Wang, P., Obst, O., Prokopenko, M.: Towards quantifying
interaction networks in a football match. In Behnke, S., Veloso, M., Visser, A., Xiong, R.,
eds.: RoboCup 2013: Robot Soccer World Cup XVII, Springer (2013) 1 -- 12
39. Lizier, J.T., Prokopenko, M., Zomaya, A.Y.: A framework for the local information dynam-
ics of distributed computation in complex systems. In Prokopenko, M., ed.: Guided Self-
Organization: Inception. Volume 9 of Emergence, Complexity and Computation. Springer
Berlin Heidelberg (2014) 115 -- 158
40. Cliff, O.M., Prokopenko, M., Fitch, R.: An information criterion for inferring coupling of
distributed dynamical systems. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 3 (2016) 71
41. Cliff, O.M., Lizier, J.T., Wang, P., Wang, X.R., Obst, O., Prokopenko, M.: Quantifying
long-range interactions and coherent structure in multi-agent dynamics. Artificial Life 23(1)
(2017) 34 -- 57
42. Prokopenko, M.: Guided self-organization. HFSP Journal 3(5) (2009) 287 -- 289
43. Der, R., Martius, G.: The Playful Machine -- Theoretical Foundation and Practical Realiza-
tion of Self-Organizing Robots. Springer (2012)
44. Prokopenko, M.: Guided Self-Organization: Inception. Springer, Berlin (2014)
45. Bengio, Y., Courville, A., Vincent, P.: Representation learning: A review and new perspec-
tives. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 35(8) (August 2013) 1798 -- 1828
46. Schmidhuber, J.: Deep learning in neural networks: An overview. Neural Networks 61
(2015) 85 -- 117
RoboCup 2D Soccer Simulation League: Evaluation Challenges
13
47. Greenwald, H.S., Oertel, C.K.: Future directions in machine learning. Frontiers in Robotics
and AI 3 (2017) 79
48. Akiyama, H.: Agent2D Base Code. http://www.rctools.sourceforge.jp
(2010)
|
1207.6475 | 2 | 1207 | 2012-12-09T06:50:23 | Distributed team formation in multi-agent systems: stability and approximation | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.SI"
] | We consider a scenario in which leaders are required to recruit teams of followers. Each leader cannot recruit all followers, but interaction is constrained according to a bipartite network. The objective for each leader is to reach a state of local stability in which it controls a team whose size is equal to a given constraint. We focus on distributed strategies, in which agents have only local information of the network topology and propose a distributed algorithm in which leaders and followers act according to simple local rules. The performance of the algorithm is analyzed with respect to the convergence to a stable solution.
Our results are as follows. For any network, the proposed algorithm is shown to converge to an approximate stable solution in polynomial time, namely the leaders quickly form teams in which the total number of additional followers required to satisfy all team size constraints is an arbitrarily small fraction of the entire population. In contrast, for general graphs there can be an exponential time gap between convergence to an approximate solution and to a stable solution. | cs.MA | cs |
Distributed team formation in multi-agent systems:
1
stability and approximation
Lorenzo Coviello and Massimo Franceschetti
Abstract
We consider a scenario in which leaders are required to recruit teams of followers. Each leader
cannot recruit all followers, but interaction is constrained according to a bipartite network. The objective
for each leader is to reach a state of local stability in which it controls a team whose size is equal to a
given constraint. We focus on distributed strategies, in which agents have only local information of the
network topology and propose a distributed algorithm in which leaders and followers act according to
simple local rules. The performance of the algorithm is analyzed with respect to the convergence to a
stable solution.
Our results are as follows. For any network, the proposed algorithm is shown to converge to an
approximate stable solution in polynomial time, namely the leaders quickly form teams in which the
total number of additional followers required to satisfy all team size constraints is an arbitrarily small
fraction of the entire population. In contrast, for general graphs there can be an exponential time gap
between convergence to an approximate solution and to a stable solution.
I. Introduction
A multi-agent system (MAS) is composed of many interacting intelligent agents. Agents can
be software, robots, or humans, and the system is highly distributed, as agents do not have
a global view of the state and act autonomously of each other. These systems can be used
to collectively solve problems that are difficult to solve by a single entity. Their application
ranges from robotics, to disaster response, social structures, crowd-sourcing etc. A main feature
of MAS is that they can manifest self-organization as well as other complex control paradigms
This work was partially supported by the Army Research Office grant number W911NF-11-1-0363.
The authors are with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of California San Diego, 9500
Gilman Dr., La Jolla CA, 92093. Emails: [email protected], [email protected]
DRAFT
2
even when the individual strategies of the agents are very simple. In short, simple local interaction
can conspire to determine complex global behaviors. Examples of such emerging behaviors are
in economics and game theory, where local preferences translate into global equilbria [35], in
social sciences, where local exposure governs the spread of innovation [41], and in control,
where local decision rules determine whether and how rapidly consensus is reached [4], [28],
[29], [30], [36], [37].
From a practical perspective, the performance of a MAS often depends on how quickly
convergence to a global, possibly approximate, solution is reached and it is in general influenced
by the network structure. For example, in the context of information diffusion in social networks,
the rate of convergence of the system's dynamics is affected by the underlaying network and the
local interaction rules [21], [26].
One of the critical issues in multi-agent systems is coordination. Due to the autonomous
behavior of the agents and to the absence of a central controller, coordination must be distributed.
In the case of human agents, it is also important that the distributed control algorithm is simple
enough to be suitable to model basic principles of human behavior [8]. Two prominent problems
related to consensus and coordination in multi-agent systems are leader election and group
formation. In the former case, multiple agents elect a leader that can then assign tasks [24],
while in the latter they divide themselves into teams in such a way that each agent knows to
what team it belongs [11]. In both cases agents are all equal and coordination occurs among
agents of a single class.
We consider a scenario in which there are agents of two classes, leaders and followers. Each
leader must recruit a team of followers whose size is equal to a given constraint, by sending
requests to the followers. Followers can only accept or reject incoming leaders' requests. While
multiple followers can be part of a leader's team, each follower can be part of a single team at any
time, but is allowed to change team over time. Moreover, a leader cannot recruit all followers, but
can only recruit the followers it is in direct communication with. The communication structure
between leaders and followers is captured by an arbitrary bipartite network, and we assume
that each agent has knowledge of and can interact with its neighbors only. That is, agents only
have local knowledge of the underlying network. In general, the communication constraints of
the population (and therefore the structure of the bipartite network) can be dictated by physical
constraints (as for example antenna visibility range or signal to noise ratio threshold), social
DRAFT
3
Leader
Follower
A
1
G
C
3
H
J
4
D
2
E
I
B
F
5
K
1
2
3
4
5
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
PSfrag replacements
Fig. 1.
Example of a bipartite network between leaders and followers determined by physical constraints. Left: each leader
can only recruit the followers in its visibility range (dotted circle), arrows represent team membership, and the set of arrows
defines a partition of the followers into teams.
Right: the resulting bipartite network. An edge between leader ℓ and follower f exists if and only if f is in ℓ's visibility range.
Matching edges define team membership and are highlighted.
context, and so on. A pictorial representation of a bipartite network arising from physical
constraints is given in Figure 1.
We consider a notion of stability in which each agent controls a team of adequate size. Each
leader has an incentive to reach local stability (that is, to build a team of followers of the
right size) by dynamically interacting with its neighbors. The question we aim to answer is:
can simple local rules lead to stable, or close to stable, team formation in reasonable time? By
"close to stable" we mean that the total number of additional followers required to satisfy all
team size constraints is an arbitrary small fraction of the entire population. We propose a simple,
distributed, memoryless algorithm in which leaders do not communicate between each other, and
we show that, in any network of size n, any constant approximation of a stable outcome (or of
a suitably defined best outcome if a stable one does not exist) is reached in time polynomial
in n with high probability. In contrast, for general graphs we show through a counterexample
that there can be an exponential gap between the time needed to reach stability and that needed
to reach approximate stability, that is, to find the best solution compared to a good solution.
We remark that, in its simplicity, the proposed algorithm is suitable to model human agents, it
can be programmed on simple robots with limited computation abilities, and it is amenable to
DRAFT
4
analysis.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. After discussing how our work relates to the
existing literature, in Section II we formally define the problem and the notions of stability
and approximate stability, in Section III we present the distributed algorithm for leaders and
followers, in Sections IV and V we present our technical results on the algorithm's performance,
and in Section VI we further discuss the algorithm's performance by showing some simulations'
results. To prove our result on the convergence to approximate stability, we derive a technical
lemma (Lemma 1) that relates the quality of a matching to the existence of particular paths (that
we call deficit-decreasing paths) of given length. The lemma extends a known combinatorial
result by Hopcroft and Karp [15] to the setup of many-to-one matching, and can be considered
to be of independent interest.
A. Related work
The problem of team formation that we consider is an example of distributed many-to-
one matching in bipartite networks [2], [14], [34]. The one-to-one case has been previously
studied in the context of theoretical computer science [23] [32]. In the control literature, our
work is related to the distributed assignment problem and to group formation in MAS. In this
framework, Moore and Passino [27] proposed a variant of the distributed auction algorithm for
the assignment of mobile agents to tasks. Cenedese et al. [6] proposed a variant of the Stable
Marriage algorithm [12] to solve the distributed task assignment problem. Abdallah and Lesser [1]
proposed an "almost" distributed algorithm for coalition formation, allowing for a special agent
with the role of "manager". Gatson and den Jardins [13] studied a scenario of group formation
where agents can adapt to the network structure. Tosic and Agha [39] proposed an algorithm
for group formation based on the distributed computation of maximal cliques in the underlying
network. Further work studied team formation in multi-robot systems [40], in the case where
communication between agents is not allowed [3]. Other authors considered MAS composed by
leaders and followers. To cite a few, Tanner [38] derived a necessary and sufficient condition for
a group of interconnected agents to be controllable by one of them acting as a leader; Rahmani
et al. [33] studied the controlled agreement problem in networks in which certain agents have
leader roles, translating graph-theoretic properties into control-theoretic properties; Pasqualetti
et al. [31] analyzed the problem of driving a group of mobile agents, represented by a network
DRAFT
5
of leaders and followers, in which follower act according to a simple consensus rule.
We distinguish ourselves from all mentioned papers, as we propose a fully distributed algorithm
for group formation on arbitrary networks in which agents act according to simple local rules
and perform very limited computation, and we derive performance guarantees in the form of
theorems. For an exhaustive overview on distributed algorithms in multi-agent systems, the
interested reader is referred to the books by Lynch [24] and by Bullo et al. [5] and the references
therein, while the survey by Horling and Lesser [16] offers an overview on three decades of
research on organizational paradigms as team and coalition formation.
A more recent line of research aims to study how humans connected over a network solve tasks
in a distributed fashion [8], [10], [17], [19], [20], [25]. In the work of Kearns et al. [20], human
subjects positioned at the vertices of a virtual network were shown to be able to collectively
reach a coloring of the network, given only local information about their neighbors. Similar
papers further investigated human coordination in the case of coloring [10], [17], [25] and
consensus [17], [19], with the main goal of characterizing how performance is affected by the
network's structure. Using experimental data of maximum matching games performed by human
subjects in a laboratory setting, Coviello et al. [8] proposed a simple algorithmic model of human
coordination that allows complexity analysis and prediction.
Finally, related to our work is also the research on social exchange networks [7], [22], that
considers a networked scenario in which each edge is associated to an economic value, nodes
have to come to an agreement on how to share these values, and each agent can only finalize
a single mutual exchange with a single neighbor. Recently, Kanoria et al. [18] proposed a
distributed algorithm that reaches approximate stability in linear time. However, we consider a
different setup since we allow leaders to build teams of multiple followers.
II. Problem formulation
We consider a population composed of agents of two different classes: leaders and followers.
Each leader is required to recruit a team of followers whose size is equal to a given constraint,
by sending requests to the followers. Followers can only accept or reject leaders' requests. While
multiple followers can be in a leader's team, each follower can be part of a single team at a time,
but is allowed to change team over time. A leader is not allowed to recruit all followers, but can
only recruit the followers it is in direct communication with. The communication constraints of
DRAFT
6
the population are captured by a bipartite network G = (L ∪ F, E) whose nodes' partition is given
by the set L of leaders and the set F of followers, and where there exists an edge ( f , ℓ) ∈ E
between follower f and leader ℓ if and only if f and ℓ can communicate between each other
(see Figure 1). Let Nℓ = { f ∈ F : ( f , ℓ) ∈ E} be the neighborhood of ℓ ∈ L. For each ℓ ∈ L,
leader ℓ is required to recruit a team of cℓ followers, where cℓ ≥ 1.
Definition 1 (Matching): A subset M ⊆ E is a matching of G if for each f ∈ F there exists
at most a single ℓ ∈ L such that (ℓ, f ) ∈ M.
The definition of matching is consistent with the fact that multiple followers can be part of a
leader's team. There is a one-to-one correspondence between matchings M of G and tuples of
teams {Tℓ(M) : ℓ ∈ L}, where Tℓ(M) denotes the team of leader ℓ under the matching M. We
have that Tℓ(M) = { f ∈ F : (ℓ, f ) ∈ M} ⊆ Nℓ for every matching M. We consider the following
notion of stability.
Definition 2 (Stable matching): Given constraints cℓ for each ℓ ∈ L, a matching M of G is
stable if and only if Tℓ(M) = cℓ for all ℓ ∈ L.
Depending on the constraints cℓ, a network G might not admit a stable matching. Nonetheless,
given a matching of G, we are interested in assessing its quality. Our main result builds on the
following definitions of deficit of a leader and deficit of a matching.
Definition 3 (Deficit of a leader): Let ℓ be a leader with constraint cℓ ≥ 1, and M be a
matching of G. The deficit of ℓ under the matching M is
dℓ(M) = cℓ − Tℓ(M).
Definition 4 (Deficit of a matching): Given constraints cℓ ≥ 1 for each ℓ ∈ L, the deficit of a
matching M of G is
d(M) = Xℓ∈L
dℓ(M) = Xℓ∈L
(cℓ − Tℓ(M)) .
In words, dℓ(M) is the number of additional followers leader ℓ needs to satisfy its size
constraint. Similarly, d(M) sums the numbers of additional followers each leader needs to satisfy
its size constraint. Given a matching M, we say that a leader ℓ is poor if dℓ(M) > 0 (that is,
Tℓ(M) < cℓ) and stable if Tℓ(M) = cℓ. In this work, we do not consider the case of Tℓ(M) > cℓ
since we assume that each leader ℓ never recruits more than cℓ followers simultaneously. This
can be justified by the fact that recruiting additional followers might be costly.
DRAFT
7
Observe that only poor leaders contribute to d(M), and that M is stable if and only if d(M) = 0.
Given G, two matchings of G can be compared with respect to their deficit, and the best matching
of G can be defined as one minimizing the deficit.
Definition 5 (Best matching): A matching M of G is a best matching of G if d(M) ≤ d(M′)
for every matching M′ of G.
Observe that a stable matching is also a best matching. Moreover, if G admits a stable
matching, d(M) quantifies how much M differs from a stable matching of G. In general, if
M∗ is a best matching of G with d(M∗) = d∗, then, d(M) − d∗ tells how much M differs from a
best matching of G. Given a matching M of G, the following definition provides a measure of
how well M approximates a best matching of G.
Definition 6 (Approximate best matching): Fix ε ∈ [0, 1], and let m be the number of followers
in G. Let M∗ be a best matching of G. Then, a matching M is a (1−ε)-approximate best matching
of G if d(M) − d(M∗) < εm.
When G admits a stable matching, we are interested in the notion of approximate stable
matching.
Definition 7 (Approximate stable matching): Let G admit a stable matching. Fix ε ∈ [0, 1],
and let m be the number of followers in G. Then, a matching M is a (1 − ε)-approximate stable
matching of G if d(M) < εm.
III. The algorithm
We now present a distributed algorithm for team formation. Time is divided into rounds, and
each round is composed by two stages. In the first stage, each leader acts according to the
algorithm in Table 1, and in the second stage each follower acts according to the algorithm in
Table 2.
First consider a leader ℓ, and let M be the matching at the beginning of a given round. If ℓ is
poor (that is, Tℓ(M) < cℓ) and Tℓ(M) < Nℓ (that is, ℓ is not already matched with all followers
in Nℓ) then, with probability p (where p ∈ (0, 1] is a fixed constant), ℓ attempts to recruit an
additional follower, chosen as explained below, by sending a matching request. An unmatched
follower in Nℓ, if any, is chosen uniformly at random; otherwise, a follower in Nℓ\Tℓ(M) is
chosen uniformly at random. In other words, leaders always prefer to recruit followers that are
DRAFT
8
currently unmatched over matched ones. Note that a leader tries to recruit an additional follower
after checking if local stability holds (that is, after checking if its team size is equal to cℓ).
Consider now a follower f . During each round, if f has incoming requests then each request is
rejected independently of the others with probability 1 − q (where q ∈ (0, 1] is a fixed constant).
If all incoming requests are rejected, then f does not change team (if currently matched) or
it remains unmatched (if currently unmatched). Otherwise, one among the active requests is
chosen uniformly at random,
f
joins the corresponding leader, and all the other requests are
discarded. For ease of presentation, we assume that a follower is equally likely to join a team
when unmatched and to change team when currently matched, but all our results hold if we
consider different values of q for matched and unmatched followers (and even if we consider a
different value of q for each follower, as long as each value is a constant).
Table 1 Algorithm for leader ℓ ∈ L
if Tℓ(M) < min{cℓ, Nℓ} then
with probability p do the following
if ∃ unmatched f ∈ Nℓ then
choose an unmatched follower f ′ ∈ Nℓ u.a.r.
else
choose a follower f ′ ∈ Nℓ\Tℓ(M) u.a.r.
end if
send a matching request to f ′
end if
The proposed algorithm enjoys several properties. It is memoryless, the actions of each agent
only depend on local information, and the leaders do not communicate between each other. Also,
it is self-stabilizing, that is, once a stable matching is reached, leaders stop recruiting followers.
Moreover, it is a single-stage algorithm, that is, agents never change their behavior until stability
is reached. Finally, observe that the exchanged messages can be represented by a single bit.
IV. Convergence to approximate stable matchings
In this section, we only consider networks admitting stable matchings, and we show that, given
any network and any constant ε ∈ (0, 1), a (1 − ε)-approximate stable matching is reached in a
DRAFT
9
Table 2 Algorithm for follower f ∈ F
if f has incoming requests then
for each leader ℓ requesting f do
with probability 1 − q reject ℓ's request
end for
if there are active requests then
select one u.a.r. and join the corresponding team
reject all other requests
end if
end if
number of rounds that is polynomial in the network size with high probability. The assumption
that a stable matching exists is for ease of presentation, and all our results also hold for reaching
approximate best matchings, by replacing d(M) with d(M) −d(M∗), where M∗ is a best matching
of G.
Given a network G, for every t ≥ 0, let M(t) be the matching of G at the beginning of round
t, with deficit d(M(t)). The next property follows from the fact that leaders do not voluntarily
disengage from the followers in their teams (and therefore the deficit of a leader increases of a
unit only if the deficit of another leader decreases by one unit).
Property 1: For t ≥ 0, d(M(t)) is non-increasing in t.
The next property follows from the assumption cℓ ≥ 1, ∀ℓ.
Property 2: If G admits a stable matching, then d(M(t)) ≤ m for every t ≥ 0.
We are now ready to state our main result.
Theorem 1: Let G be a network with m followers and which admits a stable matching. Let
∆ = maxℓ∈L Nℓ be the maximum degree of the leaders. Fix 0 < ε < 1, and let c ≥ 1 + 1
m(1−ε).
Then, a (1 − ε)-approximate stable matching of G is reached within c⌊1/ε⌋(∆/pq)⌊1/ε⌋m rounds
of the algorithm with probability at least 1 − e−cmε2/2.
Example 1: If ∆ is constant in the network size, then one can choose ε = 1/ log m, and
Theorem 1 implies that a (1 − 1/ log m)-approximate stable matching is reached in at most
O(m2 log m) rounds with probability that goes to one as m → ∞.
To prove Theorem 1, we introduce the notion of deficit-decreasing path, that in our setup
DRAFT
10
PSfrag replacements
Fig. 2. A deficit-decreasing path of length 5 is represented at the top of the figure: ℓ0 is a poor leader, f3 is an unmatched
follower, and matching edges are highlighted. The path is "solved" by turning each matched edge into an unmatched edge and
vice versa, as show at the bottom of the figure: ℓ0 obtains an additional follower (and therefore its deficit decreases by a unit)
and both ℓ1 and ℓ2 do not change their numbers of followers.
plays the same role as the augmenting path in the context of one-to-one matching [9]. Since we
consider bipartite networks, a path alternates leaders and followers.
Definition 8 (Deficit-decreasing path): Given a matching M of G, a cycle-free path P =
ℓ0, f1, ℓ1, . . . , fk (of odd length 2k-1) is a deficit-decreasing path relative to M if (ℓi, fi) ∈ M
for all 1 ≤ i ≤ k − 1, ℓ0 is a poor leader, and fk is an unmatched follower.
In words, a deficit-decreasing path starts at a poor leader with an edge not in M, ends at
a follower that is not matched, and alternates edges in M and edges not in M. To justify the
nomenclature, observe that, if d(M) > 0 and P is a deficit-decreasing path relative to M, a new
matching M′ such that d(M′) = d(M) − 1 can be obtained by flipping each unmatched edge of
P into a matched edge, and vice versa. This is depicted in Fig. 2.
The proof of Theorem 1 builds on a technical lemma that, given a matching M with d(M) ≥ εm,
guarantees the existence of a deficit-decreasing path of length at most 2⌊1/ε⌋. The existence of
such a path allows us to bound the number of rounds needed for a one-unit reduction of the
deficit. Our technical lemma extends a known result by Hopcroft and Karp [15, Theorem 1]
given in the context of one-to-one matching, but our proof is more subtle because leaders can be
matched to multiple followers and can have different size constraints cℓ. The symmetric difference
of two sets A and B is defined as A ⊕ B = (A\B) ∪ (B\A). Two paths are follower-disjoint if they
do not share any follower (even though they might share some leader).
Lemma 1: Let G admit a stable matching N. Let M be a matching of G with deficit d(M) > 0.
Then, in M ⊕ N there are at least d(M) follower-disjoint deficit-decreasing paths relative to M.
DRAFT
11
Proof: See Appendix A.
We make use of Lemma 1 through the following corollary.
Corollary 1: Let G be a network with m followers, admitting a stable matching N. Let M
be a matching of G with deficit d(M) ≥ εm, for some ε > 0. Then, in M ⊕ N there exists a
deficit-decreasing path relative to M of length at most 2⌊1/ε⌋ − 1.
Proof: By Lemma 1, if d(M) ≥ εm and N is a stable matching of G, then in M ⊕ N we can
choose εm follower-disjoint deficit-decreasing paths relative to M, whose cumulative length is
at most 2m (since they do not share followers and G is bipartite). Necessarily, one of them has
length at most 2⌊1/ε⌋ − 1 (note that a deficit-decreasing path has odd length).
We are now ready to present the proof of Theorem 1.
A. Proof of Theorem 1
Let G be a network with m followers and which admits a stable matching. Fix 0 < ε < 1. For
t ≥ 0, M(t) denotes the matching at the beginning of round t. For every 0 < x ≤ 1, let
τ(x) = minnt ≥ 0 : d(M(t)) < xmo
be the first round at whose beginning the deficit is strictly smaller than xm. We are interested
in bounding τ(ε).
Consider any round t ≥ 0. By Property 2, d(M(t)) ≤ m, and therefore there exists 0 < ε′ ≤ 1
such that d(M(t)) = ε′m (we assume ε′ > 0, since the case of ε′ = 0 is trivial). The following
lemma bounds the number of rounds τ(ε′) − t needed for a one-unit reduction of the deficit. Let
∆ = maxℓ∈L Nℓ be the maximum degree of the leaders in G.
Lemma 2: Let d(M(t)) = ε′m for some 0 < ε′ ≤ 1. Then
Pr(cid:16)τ(ε′) − t ≤ ⌊1/ε′⌋(cid:17) ≥ (cid:18) pq
∆ (cid:19)⌊1/ε′⌋
.
Proof: Let h(t) ≥ 1 be the odd length of the shortest deficit-decreasing path relative to M(t).
By Corollary 1, h(t) ≤ 2⌊1/ε′⌋ − 1. We distinguish the cases of h(t) = 1 and h(t) ≥ 3.
First consider h(t) = 1. With probability at least pq/∆ the deficit decreases by at least one
unit during the next round of the algorithm. Too see this, consider a deficit-decreasing path ℓ, f .
With probability at least p/∆, ℓ attempts to recruit f and, conditional on this event, f considers
ℓ's proposal with probability q, resulting in the lower bound pq/∆.
DRAFT
12
Now consider h(t) ≥ 3, and let P be a shortest deficit-decreasing path of length h(t) ending
at an unmatched follower f . By the same argument as above, the length of P decreases by one
during the next round with probability at least pq/∆ (observe that, as long as h(t) > 1, f remains
unmatched during round t since P is a deficit decreasing path of shortest length).
By independence of successive rounds of the algorithm and the bound h(t) ≤ 2⌊1/ε′⌋ − 1, with
probability at least (pq/∆)⌊1/ε′⌋, a sequence of ⌊1/ε′⌋ − 1 rounds reduces the length of P to 1 and
then in one additional round P gets "solved" and the deficit decreases by one unit.
Consider consecutive phases of ⌊1/ε⌋ rounds each. For phases i = 0, 1, 2, . . ., let Xi be iid
Bernoulli random variables with Pr(Xi = 1) = (pq/∆)⌊1/ε⌋. By Lemma 2, after T phases (i.e., at
the beginning of round t∗ = T ⌊1/ε⌋), the deficit of the matching is upper bounded by
d(M(t∗)) < max
εm, m + 1 −
T
Xi=1
,
Xi
since by Property 2 the matching at the beginning of round 0 has deficit d(M(0)) ≤ m. By
independence of the phases, a Chernoff bound implies that for any 0 < δ ≤ 1
T
Pr(cid:16)
Xi=1
Xi < (1 − δ)T (pq/∆)⌊1/ε⌋(cid:17) < e−T (pq/∆)⌊1/ε⌋δ2/2.
Setting δ = ε and T = cm(∆/pq)⌊1/ε⌋ (where c is a constant to be specified later), the deficit
of the matching at the beginning of round t∗ = ⌊1/ε⌋cm(∆/pq)⌊1/ε⌋ is upper bounded by
d(M(t∗)) < max {εm, m + 1 − (1 − ε)cm}
with probability at least 1 − e−cmε2/2. To conclude the proof of the theorem we need that εm ≥
m + 1 − (1 − ε)cm, which is true for any c ≥ 1 + 1
m(1−ε).
V. Exponential convergence
Theorem 1 gives a polynomial bound for reaching a (1 − ε)-approximate stable matching for
any constant 0 < ǫ < 1 and any network. However, a similar guarantee cannot be derived for the
case of a stable matching, as shown in this section through a counterexample. In particular, we
define a sequence of networks of increasing size and maximum degree that diverges with the
network size, and show that the number of rounds required to converge from an approximate
matching M with d(M) = 1 to the stable matching (that is, to reduce the deficit of a single unit)
DRAFT
13
is exponentially large in the network's size with high probability from an overwhelming fraction
of the approximate matchings M such that d(M) = 1.
For n ≥ 1, let Gn = (Ln ∪ Fn, En) be the network with n leaders and n followers (i.e.,
Ln = {ℓ1, . . . , ℓn} and Fn = { f1, . . . , fn}), with edges En = {(ℓi, f j) : 1 ≤ i ≤ n, j ≤ i}, and team size
constraints cℓ = 1 for all ℓ ∈ Ln, see Figure 3. Gn has maximum degree n and a unique stable
matching given by M∗
n = {(ℓi, fi) : 1 ≤ i ≤ n}.
Fig. 3. The network Gn for n = 6. The matching M′
n is highlighted.
Theorem 2: For any matching M of Gn, let τ∗(M) denote the number of rounds to converge
to the perfect matching when starting from M. Then, for any fixed constant 0 < γ < 1, τ∗(M) is
exponentially large in γn with high probability for a 1 −O(n2−(1−γ)n) fraction of all the matchings
M such that d(M) = 1.
Here we only provide a sketch of the proof, whose details are presented in Appendix B. To
get an understanding of the algorithm's dynamics, consider the matching
M′
n = {(ℓi, fi−1) : 2 ≤ i ≤ n},
n) = 1 and, under M′
highlighted in Figure 3 for the case of n = 6. Observe that d(M′
n, ℓ1 is
poor, and the remaining leaders are stable. According to the algorithm, ℓ1 attempts to recruit
f1 (currently in ℓ2's team). If f1 accepts, then ℓ1 becomes stable and ℓ2 becomes poor (and can
in turn attempt to recruit either f1 or f2). After each round, there exists a unique poor leader
until the stable matching is reached. The stable matching is reached when ℓn−1 (ℓ5 in Figure 3)
becomes poor and then successfully recruits fn−1 ( f5 in Figure 3), and finally ℓn successfully
recruits fn (recall that leaders prefer unmatched followers).
DRAFT
14
In general, fix any matching M of Gn such that d(M) = 1. In M, there is a single poor
leader ℓi0 and a single unmatched follower fiK . M is associated to a unique deficit-decreasing
path ℓi0, fi0, . . . , ℓiK−1, fiK−1, ℓiK , fiK. We define the height h(M) of M as follows. If K ≥ 1 then
h(M) = iK−1, if K = 0 then h(M) = 0.
Starting from M, for every t < τ(M), the matching M(t) at the beginning of round t has deficit
d(M(t)) = 1 (by Property 1), a single poor leader denoted by ℓi(t), the single unmatched follower
fiK and height h(M(t)) = h(M) = iK−1. The stochastic process {i(t)} tracking the position of the
poor leader ℓi(t) is not a classical random walk on {ℓ1, . . . , ℓiK } and its transition probabilities at
each round depend on the current matching. The time to reach stability is upper bounded by
min{t : i(t) = h(M)}, that is, the first round in which ℓh(M) becomes poor (since ℓh(M) can then
match with fh(M) leaving ℓiK poor, who would in turn match with the unmatched follower fiK ,
thus reaching the stable matching).
We prove a one-to-one correspondence between the matchings M(t) reachable from M in
which i(t) ≤ h(M) (note that d(M(t)) = 1 for each of them) and the nodes of a tree whose
size is exponentially large in the height h(M). In particular, we can show that the process
{M(t) : t ≥ 0, M(0) = M} is equivalent to a classical random walk on the nodes of the tree,
and that reaching the matching with i(t) = h(M) corresponds to reaching the root of the tree.
A random walk starting at any node of the tree visits the root after a number of steps that is
exponentially large in the height h(M) with high probability. Finally, the proof of Theorem 2 is
completed by arguing that, for any constant 0 < γ < 1, a 1−O(n2−(1−γ)n) fraction of all matchings
M of Gn such that d(M) = 1 have height h(M) ≥ γn.
VI. Simulations
In this section, the performance of our algorithm is further evaluated through simulation. In
Figure 4, the algorithm's average convergence time on the sequence of networks Gn defined in
Section V is shown (in logarithmic scale). On the one hand, the thick solid line suggests that
the average number of rounds to reach a 0.9-approximate stable matching is upper bounded by
a polynomial of small degree, consistently with Theorem 1. On the other hand, convergence to
the stable matching requires an average number of rounds that grows exponentially in n (thin
solid line), as predicted by Theorem 2. Moreover, the dotted line represents the average time
after which all followers become matched, that grows slowly with n.
DRAFT
15
PSfrag replacements
n
Rounds (log-scale)
0.9-approximation
Stable matching
Followers matched
Fig. 4. Algorithm's convergence time on the sequence of networks Gn.
Figure 5 shows the algorithm's performance in reaching successively finer approximations of
the best matching on random networks G(n, m, ρ). Here, G(n, m, ρ) refers to a random bipartite
network with n leaders and m followers, in which each edge exists independently of the others
with probability ρ (we fixed ρ = 0.04), and with constraint cℓ = min{m/n, Nℓ} for each leader
ℓ . For each of the (n, m) pairs that we considered, 20 random G(n, m, ρ) were generated, and
the algorithm was run 20 times on each. We observe that, consistently with Theorem 1, τ(ε)
increases both when ε decreases (i.e., when a finer approximation is desired) and when the
number m of followers increases. The plot visually suggests that a good solution is reached
quickly, while most of the time is spent in the attempt of improving it to the best solution.
VII. Discussion
The distributed algorithm we proposed, in which leaders and followers act according to simple
local rules, is computationally tractable and allows us to derive performance guarantees in the
form of theorems. Despite its simplicity, the algorithm is shown to reach an arbitrarily close
approximation of a stable matching (or of a best matching) in polynomial time in any network.
However, in general there can be an exponential gap between reaching an approximate solution
and a stable solution.
In the proposed algorithm, leaders do not communicate between each other, and only act in
response to their own status and the status of their neighborhoods. The only collaboration between
DRAFT
16
PSfrag replacements
1 − ε
Rounds
n = 100, m = 200
n = 100, m = 300
n = 150, m = 450
n = 200, m = 600
Fig. 5. Algorithm's average time to reach a (1 − ε)-approximate best matching on random bipartite networks G(n, m, ρ), for
ρ = 0.04.
them consists in the fact that the leaders whose size constraints are satisfied do not attempt to
recruit additional matched followers, and this is justified since recruiting more followers might
be costly. How communication between leaders affects performance is an open question, as well
as determining what amounts of communication and complexity are necessary to remove the
exponential gap in the case of unbounded degree networks.
Finally, in Section V, we defined a sequence of networks in which the maximum degree of
the leaders scales linearly with the network size. It would be interesting to understand whether
a counterexample in which the maximum degree scales more slowly (e.g., logarithmically in the
network size) could be derived.
Appendix
A. Proof of Lemma 1
Given the matching M and the stable matching N, for brevity we write deficit-decreasing path
instead of deficit-decreasing path in M ⊕ N relative to M. Similarly, by telling that leader ℓ and
follower f are matched we mean that (ℓ, f ) ∈ M, unless otherwise specified.
We prove a stronger claim than the one stated in the lemma, proceeding as follows. First, we
show that for each leader ℓ with deficit dℓ(M) > 0 there are at least dℓ(M) follower-disjoint deficit-
DRAFT
17
PSfrag replacements
Fig. 6. A leader ℓ with constraint cℓ, degree Nℓ ≥ cℓ and deficit dℓ(M). Matched edges are highlighted. ℓ is matched to exactly
cℓ − dℓ(M) followers (depicted on the right). Among the other k ≥ dℓ(M) followers in Nℓ, h < k of them are the first followers
on h follower-disjoint deficit-decreasing paths starting at ℓ (these paths are denoted by P1, . . . , Ph), and none of the remaining
k − h (denoted by f1, . . . , fk−h ) is the first follower of a deficit-decreasing paths starting at ℓ.
decreasing paths starting at ℓ. Then, we argue that d(M) follower-disjoint deficit-decreasing paths
can be chosen, dℓ(M) of which start at each leader ℓ with deficit dℓ(M) > 0.
Consider a leader ℓ with dℓ(M) > 0. Assume by contradiction that there are strictly less then
dℓ(M) follower-disjoint deficit-decreasing paths starting at ℓ, and refer to Fig. 6 for a schematic
representation.
Since ℓ has a team size constraint cℓ > 0, there are exactly cℓ−dℓ(M) followers that are matched
to ℓ. Observe that no follower matched to ℓ can be the first follower of a deficit-decreasing path
starting at ℓ, since a deficit-decreasing path starts with an edge in N\M.
Since G admits a stable matching, the neighborhood Nℓ of ℓ has size Nℓ ≥ cℓ. Therefore,
there are are k ≥ dℓ(M) followers in Nℓ that are not matched to ℓ. Assume that h < dℓ(M) of the
followers in Nℓ are the first followers of h follower-disjoint deficit-decreasing paths starting at
ℓ (these paths are denoted by P1, . . . , Ph in Figure 6). Denote the remaining k − h > 0 followers
by f1, . . . , fk−h, and assume by contradiction that none among them is the first follower of a
deficit-decreasing path starting at ℓ (this is equivalent to assuming that there are strictly less
than dℓ(M) follower-disjoint deficit-decreasing paths starting at ℓ).
Observe that, in order to become stable, ℓ needs to match with at least one additional follower
among { f1, . . . , fk−h}. We show that, under the assumption above, a one-unit reduction in the deficit
of ℓ would eventually result in a one-unit increase of the deficit of another leader, implying that
DRAFT
18
PSfrag replacements
Fig. 7.
If f ′′ is not matched then ℓ, f ′, ℓ′, f ′′ would be a deficit-decreasing path (shown at the top of the figure, in which
matching edges are highlighted), contradicting the assumption that no follower in { f1, . . . , fk−h} can be the first follower of a
deficit-decreasing path starting at ℓ. Therefore, f ′′ is matched to a leader ℓ′′ (the bottom of the figure represents the case of
ℓ , ℓ′′).
G does not admit a stable matching, generating a contradiction.
Consider any follower f ′ ∈ { f1, . . . , fk−h}, and observe that f ′ is matched in M since otherwise
ℓ f ′ would be a deficit-decreasing path starting at ℓ. Let ℓ′ be the leader such that (ℓ′, f ′) ∈ M,
and observe that if ℓ′ is matched to all followers in Nℓ′ then ℓ cannot match to f ′ without causing
a one-unit increase of the deficit of ℓ′. Therefore assume that in Nℓ′ there is a follower f ′′ such
that (ℓ′′, f ′′) ∈ M for some leader ℓ′′ , ℓ′ ( f ′′ is matched in M since otherwise ℓ, f ′, ℓ′, f ′′ would
be a deficit-decreasing path starting at ℓ, see Fig. 7). In the following two cases ℓ cannot match
to f ′ without eventually increasing the deficit of another leader.
(i) ℓ′′ = ℓ. In this case ℓ, f ′, ℓ′, f ′′, ℓ is a cycle, and if ℓ matches to f ′ then the deficit of a
leader in the cycle must increase of one unit.
(ii) ℓ′′ , ℓ and ℓ′′ is matched to all followers in Nℓ′′ other than f ′. In this case if ℓ matches to
f ′ then the deficit of a leader on the path ℓ, f ′, ℓ′, f ′′, ℓ′′ must eventually increase by a unit.
Therefore assume that in Nℓ′′ there is a follower f ′′′ such that (ℓ′′′, f ′′′) ∈ M for some leader
f ′′′ is matched in M since otherwise ℓ, f ′, ℓ′, f ′′, ℓ′′, f ′′′ would be a deficit-
ℓ′′′ , ℓ′′ (again,
decreasing path). Again, ℓ cannot match to f ′ without eventually increasing the deficit of another
leader if either ℓ′′′ = ℓ or ℓ′′′ = ℓ′ (each similar to the case (i) above), or if ℓ′′′ is matched to all
followers in Nℓ′′ other than f ′, f ′′ (similar to the case (ii) above).
By iteration, it follows that ℓ cannot match to any follower f ′ ∈ { f1, . . . , fk−h} without eventually
increasing the deficit of another leader, in contradiction with the existence of the stable matching
N. Hence, there are at least dℓ(M) follower-disjoint deficit-decreasing paths starting at ℓ.
DRAFT
19
PSfrag replacements
Fig. 8. Given the matching at the top of the figure (matching edges are highlighted), assume that both ℓ0 and ℓ1 are poor, and
that f3 is unmatched. The deficit-decreasing paths P = ℓ0, f1, ℓ1, f2, ℓ2, f3 and P′ = ℓ0, f1, ℓ1, f2 are not follower-disjoint. If P′ is
solved (shown at the bottom of the figure), then P is not solved, and vice versa.
To complete the proof of the lemma, we show that we can choose d(M) follower-disjoint
deficit-decreasing paths, dℓ(M) of which start at each leader ℓ with dℓ(M) > 0.
We proceed by contradiction, and make the following assumption. Let P be any set of d(M)
deficit-decreasing paths, dℓ(M) of which start at each leader ℓ with dℓ(M) > 0 (denote by Pℓ
the elements of P starting at ℓ); then, there are two leaders ℓ, ℓ′ such that two paths P ∈ Pℓ,
P′ ∈ Pℓ′ are not follower-disjoint. In order to reach the stable matching N starting from M, a set
of d(M) deficit-decreasing paths must be solved. However, if P is solved (by "flipping" matched
edges into unmatched edges, and vice versa) then P′ is not solved, and if P′ is solved then P
is not solved (see Figures 8 and 9 for a schematic representation). If follows that N cannot be
reached from M by solving the d(M) deficit-decreasing paths in P.
The last argument holds for any choice of P, and this generates a contradiction on the
reachability of N starting from M (observe that N can be reached from M in finite time, e.g. by
a cat-and-mouse argument on the space of all the matchings of G). Hence, we can choose d(M)
follower-disjoint deficit-decreasing paths, dℓ(M) of which start at each leader ℓ with dℓ(M) > 0,
and the lemma is proven.
B. Proof of Theorem 2
Let Mn be the set of all the matchings of Gn such that d(M) = 1. We proceed as follows. First,
we show that each M ∈ Mn is uniquely identified by the set of the leaders that are not matched
with "horizontal" edges (that is, leaders ℓi such that (ℓi, fi) < M). Second, we define trees T ∗
m,
m starting at any node different than the root hits the root
m ≥ 1 such that a random walk on T ∗
DRAFT
20
PSfrag replacements
Fig. 9.
If, under the matching highlighted in the figure, both ℓ and ℓ′ are poor and f1 is unmatched then there are two
deficit-decreasing paths that are not follower-disjoint (one starting at ℓ ad ending at f1, the other starting at ℓ′ ad ending at f1).
If one of them is solved then the other is not solved, and vice versa.
after a number of steps that is exponentially large in m with high probability. Third, for each
matching M ∈ Mn we define a quantity h(M) that we call the height of M and we argue that,
when initialized at M, the algorithm's dynamics is equivalent to a random walk on the tree T ∗
h(M)
and reaching the stable matching of Gn corresponds to reaching the root of T ∗
h(M) (and therefore
it requires a number of rounds that is exponentially large in h(M) with high probability). Finally,
by a counting argument, we show that for any constant 0 < γ < 1 a 1 − O(n2−(1−γ)n) fraction of
all the matchings in Mn have height at least γn, completing the proof of the theorem.
A. Properties of the matchings in Mn.
Matchings in Mn enjoy the following structural properties.
Lemma 3: Let M ∈ Mn. The following properties hold.
(1) There are a single poor leader ℓi∗(M) and a single unmatched follower ℓ j∗(M) in M.
(2) 1 ≤ i∗(M) ≤ j∗(M) ≤ n.
(3) (ℓk, fk) ∈ M for all k < i∗(M) and all k > j∗(M).
(4) Let I(M) = { j0, j1, . . . , jK} be the sorted set of indexes j such that (ℓ j, f j) < M. Then
(a)
j1 = i∗(M) and jK = j∗(M).
(b) (ℓ jk+1, f jk) ∈ M for all k ∈ {0, . . . , K − 1}.
Proof: Property (1). Since d(M) = Pℓ∈L dℓ(M) = 1, there is a single poor leader ℓi∗(M) in M.
Since cℓ = 1 for all ℓ ∈ L, each leader ℓ , ℓi∗(M) is matched to a single follower. It follows that
there is a unique unmatched follower f j∗(M).
DRAFT
21
Property (2). Suppose by contradiction that i∗(M) > j∗(M). Since Nℓ j∗(M) = { f1, . . . , f j∗(M)} and
f j∗(M) is unmatched, leader ℓ j∗(M) is matched to one of the followers in { f1, . . . , f j∗(M)−1}. Hence,
the j∗(M)−1 leaders ℓ1, . . . , ℓ j∗(M)−1 are matched to at most j∗(M)−2 out of the j∗(M)−1 followers
f1, . . . , f j∗(M)−1, and one of them is necessarily poor, contradicting Property (1). Therefore, i∗(M) ≤
j∗(M).
Property (3). We proceed by induction. If i∗(M) > 1, then (ℓ1, f1) ∈ M since Nℓ1 = { f1} and ℓ1 is
matched with a follower. Assume that if i∗(M) > j then (ℓk, fk) ∈ M for all k ≤ j. If i∗(M) > j +1,
then, by the inductive assumption, ℓ j+1 can only be matched to f j+1 since Nℓ j+1 = { f1, . . . , f j+1}.
This shows that (ℓk, fk) ∈ M for all k < i∗(M). If j∗(M) < n then (ℓn, fn) ∈ M since fn is matched
and ℓn is the only leader connected to fn. Assume by induction that if j∗(M) < j then (ℓk, fk) ∈ M
for all k ≥ j. If j∗(M) < j − 1, then, by the inductive assumption, f j−1 can only be matched to
ℓ j−1 since f j−1 is adjacent to ℓ j−1, . . . , ℓn. This shows that (ℓk, fk) ∈ M for all k > j∗(M).
Property (4). If K = 0 then M = {(ℓi, fi) : i , i∗(M)}, j∗(M) = i∗(M), and properties (4a) and
(4b) trivially hold. Now consider K ≥ 1. Let I(M) = { j0, j1, . . . , jK} be the sorted set of indexes
j such that (ℓ j, f j) < M. By property (3), we have that j0 = i∗(M) and jK = j∗(M), therefore
property (4a) follows. Hence, (ℓ j2, f j1) ∈ M since (ℓk, fk) ∈ M for all k ∈ { j1 + 1, . . . , j2 − 1} by
definition of I(M), and Nℓ j2
= { f1, . . . , f j2}. Property (4b) follows by induction.
Lemma 3 states that non-horizontal matching edges do not intersect. In particular, given a
matching M ∈ Mn, the set I(M) represents the set of (the sorted indexes of) the leaders that are
not matched with horizontal edges (see Figure 10 for an example), ℓi∗(M) for i∗(M) = min I(M) is
the unique unmatched leader, and ℓ j∗(M) for j∗(M) = max I(M) is the unique unmatched follower.
Recall that M∗
n) = ∅.
Lemma 3 implies that every matching M ∈ Mn ∪ {M∗n} is uniquely identified by the set I(M).
In particular, the following result holds.
n = {(ℓk, fk) : 1 ≤ k ≤ n} is the unique stable matching of Gn, and let I(M∗
Lemma 4: Consider the mapping I(·) from Mn ∪ {M∗
M 7→ I(M). Then I(·) is a bijection.
n} to S = (cid:8)A : A ⊆ {1, . . . , n}(cid:9) defined by
Proof: The stable matching M∗
n) = ∅. The mapping I(·) is injective
since if M, M′ ∈ Mn and M , M′ then I(M) , I(M′). To see that I(·) is surjective, fix K ≤ n−1
and A = {i0, i1, . . . , iK} ∈ S such that 1 ≤ i0 < i1 < . . . < iK ≤ n. The matching M ∈ Mn such that
n is associated to I(M∗
DRAFT
22
Fig. 10. An example of a matching M of G6 with d(M) = 1. M is uniquely determined by the set I(M) = {2, 4, 6}, that
encodes the following: ℓ2 is not matched, ℓ4 is matched with f2, ℓ6 is matched with f4,
f6 is not matched. Also note that
P(M) = ℓ2, f2, ℓ4, f4, ℓ6, f6 is the unique deficit-decreasing path relative to M.
I(M) = A is given by
M = (cid:8)(ℓik+1, fik) : 0 ≤ k ≤ K − 1(cid:9) ∪(cid:8)(ℓk, fk) : k < A(cid:9) ∈ Mn.
Remark 1: Lemma 3 and Lemma 4 imply that every matching M ∈ Mn, I(M) = {i0, . . . , iK},
is associated to a unique deficit-decreasing path in M ⊕ M∗
n relative to M, given by
P(M) = ℓi0 , fi0, ℓi1, fi1, . . . , ℓiK , fiK .
Too see this, observe that M\M∗
n is given by the non-horizontal edges in M, while M∗
n\M is
given by the horizontal edges that are not in M. Therefore, by Lemma 3,
M\M∗
n = (cid:8)(ℓi1 , fi0), (ℓi2, fi1), . . . , (ℓiK , fiK−1)(cid:9),
n\M = (cid:8)(ℓi0 , fi0), (ℓi1, fi1), . . . , (ℓiK , fiK)(cid:9),
M∗
and the set of edges in P(M) is equal to M ⊕ M∗
n. The uniqueness of P(M) follows since
I(M) is unique by Lemma 4 and there is no other way to connect the poor leader ℓi0 and the
unmatched follower fiK with a path. This suggests that, given a matching M ∈ Mn, the unique
deficit-decreasing path P(M) must be "solved" in order to reach the stable matching of Gn.
B. The tree T ∗
m
Definition 9: Let T1 be a labeled rooted tree with a singleton node with label 1. Inductively,
for i ≤ 2, let Ti be the labeled rooted tree whose root is labeled with i and its i − 1 children
DRAFT
are the roots of copies of T1, . . . , Ti−1. We define T ∗
m to be the tree with a root with label m + 1
whose only child is the root of a copy of Tm (see Figure 11 for a visual representation). Let r∗
denote the root of T ∗
m.
23
Fig. 11. The three T ∗
m for m = 5.
We show that the hitting time of r∗ for a random walk on T ∗
m starting at any node u , r∗
is exponential in m with high probability. For a node u , r∗, we call the edge that connects u
to its parent u's exit edge. For any subtree Ti ⊂ T ∗
m, let Zi be the random variable denoting the
number of steps that it takes for a walk starting at the root of Ti to exit Ti (that is, to hit the
parent of the root of Ti). The following lemma provides an exponential lower bound on Zi.
Lemma 5: There exist positive constants α, γ > 0 such that, for all i ≥ 2,
Pr[Zi ≥ γ · 2i/(α log2 i)] ≥ 1 −
1
log i
.
Proof: We proceed by induction on i. For convenience, define g(i) = α log2 i and f (i) =
γ · 2i/g(i) for some α, γ > 0. For any α > 0 and i ≥ 2, we can choose γ > 0 such that f (i) ≤ 1;
therefore, as Zi ≥ 1 with probability 1, the claim holds trivially for any i ≤ i∗, where i∗ is a
suitably large constant.
Now consider any i ≥ i∗ and suppose the claim holds up to i − 1. Every time the walk is on
the root of Ti, it exits Ti with probability 1/i (since the root of Ti has i neighbors: one parent
and i − 1 children). Therefore, letting Et be the event that the first t times the walk is on the
root of Ti it does not exit Ti, we have Pr[Et] ≥ 1 − t/i. Let t = i/(2 log i), and let D j, 1 ≤ j ≤ t,
DRAFT
be the event that, when it is on the root of Ti for the j-th time, the walk moves to the root of
one of the subtrees Ti−g(i), . . . , Ti−1 and takes at least f (i − g(i)) steps to exit that subtree. For
1 ≤ j ≤ t, we have
24
Pr[D j Et] ≥
≥
g(i)
i
g(i)
i
· Pr[Zi−g(i) ≥ f (i − g(i))]
· 1 −
1
log(i − g(i))! ,
by the induction hypothesis on Zi−g(i). Letting χ j be the indicator function of the event D j for
1 ≤ j ≤ t, the probability that at least two of the events D j happen, given Et, is lower bounded
by:
χ j ≥ 1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
Et
.
t
2
χ j ≥ 1,
Xj=t/2+1
Et
χ j ≥ 1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
t
Pr
Xj=1
χ j ≥ 2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
By union bound, we can write
Et
t/2
t/2
≥ Pr
Xj=1
= Pr
Xj=1
Et
χ j ≥ 1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
Yi=1 (cid:16)1 − Pr[D jEt](cid:17)
t/2
t/2
Pr
Xj=1
≥ 1 −
where the last step holds for i sufficiently large so that log(i − g(i)) ≥ 2. This implies that
log(i − g(i))!# ≥ 1 −
1
iα/8 ,
Therefore, we conclude that
t
1
1
1
4
g(i)
1 −
i
α log i
log(i − g(i))!!t/2
≥ 1 − 1 −
1 −
≥ 1 − exp"−
iα/8!2
Et
Pr
χ j ≥ 2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
≥ 1 −
Xj=1
Pr[Zi ≥ 2 · f (i − g(i))] ≥ Pr
χ j ≥ 2
Xj=1
≥ Pr
χ j ≥ 2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
Xj=1
iα/8!(cid:18)1 −
≥ 1 −
2
t
t
≥ 1 −
2
iα/8 .
Pr[Et]
Et
i(cid:19) ≥ 1 −
t
1
log i
,
DRAFT
25
where the last step holds by choosing α sufficiently large. The claim follows since 2 · f (i −g(i)) ≥
f (i).
Note that a random walk starting at any node u , r∗ has to exit Tm before hitting r∗. Therefore,
an application of Lemma 5 to Tm yields a lower bound to the hitting time of r∗ when starting
at any node u , r∗.
Corollary 2: The hitting time of r∗ of a random walk starting at any node u , r∗ is 2Ω(n/ log2 n)
with high probability.
C. The dynamics of the algorithm starting from M ∈ Mn
For ease of presentation, we set the probability parameters of the algorithms to p = q = 1.
Setting p = 1 means that a poor leader always proposes to a follower. Setting q = 1 means that
a follower always accepts an incoming request. Our result holds for any choice of p and q.
By Lemma 4, every matching M ∈ Mn ∪ {M∗
n} is uniquely identified by the set I(M) = {k :
(ℓk, fk) < M}.
Definition 10 (The height of a matching): Let M ∈ Mn, I(M) = {i0, . . . , iK}. The height h(M)
of M is defined as follows. If K = 0 then h(M) = 0. If K ≥ 1 then h(M) = iK−1 ∈ {1 . . . , n − 1}.
For a matching M ∈ Mn such that h(M) > 0 we can write I(M) = {i0, . . . , h(M), iK}. For each
t ≥ 0, let M(t) be the matching at the beginning of round t of the algorithm, and for ease of
notation let I(t) = I(M(t)). For a matching M ∈ Mn let
be the number of steps that the algorithm needs to reach the stable matching starting from M.
τ∗(M) = min(cid:8)t : M(t) = M∗
nM(0) = M(cid:9)
Note that, with p = q = 1, t∗(M) = 1 for every M ∈ Mn such that h(M) = 0 (that is, I(M) =
1), since according to the algorithm leaders prefer unmatched followers. We are interested in
relating τ∗(m) and h(M) for every matching M ∈ Mn such that h(M) > 0 (that is, I(M) > 1).
We study how the matching evolves over time through the Markov process {I(t) : 0 ≤ t ≤
n) = ∅, τ∗(M) = min{t : I(t) = ∅}. The state space of the Markov process
is given by the set S defined in Lemma 4. The transition probabilities are characterized by the
τ∗(M)}. Since I(M∗
following lemma.
DRAFT
Lemma 6: Conditional on I(t) = I ∈ S, I > 1, the transition probabilities at time t are given
by
26
Pr(cid:16)I(t + 1) = I′(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
I(t) = I(cid:17) =
1
min I
if
I′ ∈ nI ∪ {k} : k < min Io ∪nI\{min I}o,
and 0 otherwise. Moreover Pr(I(t + 1) = ∅I(t) = ∅) = 1, and Pr(I(t + 1) = ∅I(t) = I) = 1 for
every I sich that I = 1.
Proof: The case of I(t) = ∅ corresponds to the stable matching M∗
n, which is an absorbing
state for the Markov process. In the case of I(t) = 1, we have that h(M) = 0, and p = q = 1
implies that that I(t + 1) = ∅.
Consider now I > 1. Conditional on I(t) = I, the poor leader is ℓmin I and has degree min I
and neighborhood Nmin I = { f1, . . . , fmin I}, and chooses one of the followers in Nmin I uniformly at
random. If ℓmin I chooses follower fk for some k < min I then the leader ℓk becomes poor, since
by property (3) of Lemma 3 ℓk was matched to fk in M(t), and we have that I(t + 1) = I ∪ {k}. If
instead ℓmin I chooses follower fmin I (matched to ℓmin(I\ min I) in M(t) by property (4) of Lemma 3),
then I(t + 1) = I\{min I}.
For every matching M ∈ Mn such that h(M) > 0 and I(M) = {i0, . . . , iK}, define the matching
L(M) = {(ℓ j, f j) : j , iK} and τ(M) = min{t : M(t) = L(M)}, and observe that h(L(M)) = 0 and
τ∗(M) > τ(M) (in particular, τ∗(M) = 1 + τ(M) for p = q = 1).
For every matching M such that I(M) > 1, let R(M) be the set of the matchings in Mn that
can be reached from M (after one or multiple steps). According to the transition probabilities
defined by Lemma 6, it is easy to see that
R(M) = nL(M)o ∪nM′ ∈ Mn : I(M′) = A ∪ {h(M), iK}, A ⊆ {1, . . . , h(M) − 1}o.
Observe that every M′ ∈ R(M)\{L(M)} has height h(M′) = h(M). The following lemma charac-
h(M).
terizes the one-to-one correspondence between matchings in R(M) and nodes of the tree T ∗
r, where r is the root of T ∗
Lemma 7: Consider the mapping ω(·) from R(M) to T ∗
h(M) defined as follows. Let ω(L(M)) =
h(M). For M′ ∈ R(M)\{L(M)} and I(M′) = I, let ω(M′) be the node
h(M) with label min I and connected to the root with a path of nodes labeled by the sorted
of T ∗
indexes in I\{min I}. Then ω(·) is a bijection.
The proof is omitted since it directly follows from the construction of the tree T ∗
h(M) and the
mapping I(·).
DRAFT
27
Lemma 8: The stochastic process {I(t) : 0 ≤ t ≤ τ(M)M(0) = M} is equivalent to a random
walk on T ∗
h(M) starting at ω(M).
Proof: It suffices to show that the transition probabilities between two matchings M1, M2 ∈
R(M) are nonzero if and only if the nodes ω(M1) and ω(M2) are adjacent in T ∗
h(M). To prove
the "only if" direction, assume that M1, M2 ∈ R(M) are such that there is a nonzero transition
probability from M1 to M2 (and therefore from M2 to M1). Let I(M1) = I1 and I(M2) = I2.
According to the transition probabilities given above, there are two possible cases. In the first
case, I2 = I1 ∪ {k} for some k < min I1, and ω(M1) is a child of ω(M1). In the second case
I2 = I1\{min I1} and ω(M2) is the parent of ω(M1). The proof of the other direction is similar.
To summarize, the number of steps that the algorithm needs to reach the stable matching of Gn
starting from M ∈ Mn with h(M) > 0 is upper bounded by the time τ(M) to reach the matching
L(M), and reaching L(M) is equivalent to reaching the root of T ∗
h(M) starting from the node
ω(M). By Corollary 2, τ(M) is exponentially large in h(M) with high probability. To complete
the proof of the theorem, we show that, for any constant 0 < γ < 1, a 1 − O(n2−(1−γ)n) fraction
of the matchings M ∈ Mn have h(M) ≥ γn. This is done through a counting argument.
D. The fraction of the matchings M ∈ Mn such that h(M) ≥ γn
Let N be the number of matchings in Mn. Fixed a constant 0 < γ < 1, let Mγ = {M ∈ Mn :
h(M) < γn} and let Nγ = Mγ. For j = 0, . . . , n−1, let N( j) be the number of matchings M ∈ Mn
such that h(M) = j. It follows that
N =
n−1
Xj=0
N( j),
Nγ ≤
⌈γn⌉−1
Xj=0
N( j).
Lemma 9: N(0) = n and N( j) = (n − j)2 j−1 for all j = 1, . . . , n − 1.
Proof: N(0) = n since there are n matchings M with h(M) = 0, that is, the matchings
{(ℓ j, f j) : j , k} for 1 ≤ k ≤ n.
Fix j ∈ {1, . . . , n − 1}. By Lemma 4, a matching M ∈ Mn with h(M) = j is uniquely identified
by a set I(M) = {i0, . . . , iK−1, iK} for some 1 ≤ K ≤ n − 1 and iK−1 = j. Since I(·) is a bijection,
to determine N( j) we need to count all subsets of {1 . . . , n} of the form {i0, . . . , j, iK}. There are
2 j−1 subsets of {1, . . . , j − 1} and n − j ways to choose iK ∈ { j + 1, . . . , n}, thus N( j) = (n − j)2 j−1.
DRAFT
28
We now show that for any constant 0 < γ < 1, the fraction of matchings M ∈ Mn such that
h(M) < γn goes to zero exponentially fast in n
Lemma 10: Fix 0 < γ < 1. Then, Nγ/N = O(n2−(1−γ)n).
Proof: We first compute N.
N =
n−1
Xi=0
N(i) = n +
n−1
Xi=1
(n − i)2i−1 = n + n
n−2
Xi=0
2i −
n−1
Xi=1
i2i−1.
The second sum can be shown (e.g. by induction) to be equal to (n − 1) + (n − 2)(2n−1 − 1).
Therefore,
N = n + n(2n−1 − 1) − (n − 1) − (n − 2)(2n−1 − 1) = 2n − 1 = Ω(2n).
Similarly, letting k = ⌈γn⌉ we have that,
k−1
k−2
k−1
Nγ ≤
N(i) = n + n
Xi=0
= n + n(2k−1 − 1) − (k − 1) − (k − 2)(2k−1 − 1)
Xi=1
2i −
i2i−1
Xi=0
= 2k−1(n − k − 2) − 1 = O(n2⌈γn⌉).
Therefore, the fraction of matchings in Mn with height h(M) < γn is Nγ/N = O(n2−(1−γ)n).
References
[1] S. Abdallah and V. Lesser. Organization-based cooperative coalition formation. In IEEE Conference on Intelligent Agent
Technology, pages 162 -- 168, 2004.
[2]
I. Ashlagi, M. Braverman, and A. Hassidim. Matching with couples revisited. In ACM EC, pages 335 -- 336, 2011.
[3] S. Berman, A. Halasz, M.A. Hsieh, and V. Kumar. Optimized stochastic policies for task allocation in swarms of robots.
IEEE Trans. on Robotics, 25(4):927 -- 937, 2009.
[4] V.D. Blondel, J.M. Hendrickx, A. Olshevsky, and J.N. Tsitsiklis. Convergence in multiagent coordination, consensus, and
flocking. In IEEE CDC, pages 2996 -- 3000, 2005.
[5] F. Bullo, J. Cort´es, and S. Martinez. Distributed control of robotic networks: a mathematical approach to motion
coordination algorithms. Princeton Univ Pr, 2009.
[6] A. Cenedese, F. Cerruti, M. Fabbro, C. Masiero, and L. Schenato. Decentralized task assignment in camera networks. In
IEEE CDC, pages 126 -- 131, 2010.
[7] K.S. Cook, R.M. Emerson, M.R. Gillmore, and T. Yamagishi. The distribution of power in exchange networks: Theory
and experimental results. American Journal of Sociology, pages 275 -- 305, 1983.
[8] L. Coviello, M. Franceschetti, M.D. McCubbins, R. Paturi, and A. Vattani. Human matching behavior in social networks:
an algorithmic perspective. PLoS One, 2012.
DRAFT
29
[9] R. Diestel. Graph theory. Graduate texts in mathematics, pages 24 -- 26, 2005.
[10] D. Enemark, M. McCubbins, R. Paturi, and N. Weller. Does more connectivity help groups to solve social problems? In
ACM EC, 2011.
[11] M. Franceschetti and J. Bruck. A group membership algorithm with a practical specification. IEEE Trans. Parallel and
Distributed Systems, 12(11):1190 -- 1200, 2001.
[12] D. Gale and L.S. Shapley. College admissions and the stability of marriage. The American Mathematical Monthly,
69(1):9 -- 15, 1962.
[13] M.E. Gaston and M. desJardins. Agent-organized networks for dynamic team formation. In ACM AAMAS, pages 230 -- 237,
2005.
[14] J.W. Hatfield and S.D. Kominers. Multilateral matching. In ACM E-Commerce, pages 337 -- 338, 2011.
[15] J.E. Hopcroft and R.M. Karp. A n5/2 algorithm for maximum matchings in bipartite. In IEEE SSAT, pages 122 -- 125, 1971.
[16] B. Horling and V. Lesser. A survey of multi-agent organizational paradigms. The Knowledge Engineering Rev., 19(04):281 --
316, 2004.
[17] S. Judd, M. Kearns, and Y. Vorobeychik. Behavioral dynamics and influence in networked coloring and consensus. PNAS,
107(34):14978 -- 14982, 2010.
[18] Y. Kanoria, M. Bayati, C. Borgs, J. Chayes, and A. Montanari. Fast convergence of natural bargaining dynamics in
exchange networks. In ACM STOC, pages 1518 -- 1537, 2011.
[19] M. Kearns, S. Judd, J. Tan, and J. Wortman. Behavioral experiments on biased voting in networks. PNAS, 106(5):1347,
2009.
[20] M. Kearns, S. Suri, and N. Montfort. An experimental study of the coloring problem on human subject networks. Science,
313(5788):824, 2006.
[21] J. Kleinberg. Cascading behavior in networks: Algorithmic and economic issues. Algorithmic game theory, pages 613 -- 632,
2007.
[22] J. Kleinberg and ´E. Tardos. Balanced outcomes in social exchange networks. In ACM STOC, pages 295 -- 304, 2008.
[23] Z. Lotker, B. Patt-Shamir, and S. Pettie.
Improved distributed approximate matching.
In ACM SPAA, pages 129 -- 136,
2008.
[24] N.A. Lynch. Distributed algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann, 1996.
[25] M.D. McCubbins, R. Paturi, and N. Weller. Connected coordination: Network structure and group coordination. American
Politics Research, 37:899, 2009.
[26] A. Montanari and A. Saberi. The spread of innovations in social networks. PNAS, 107(47):20196, 2010.
[27] B.J. Moore and K.M. Passino. Distributed task assignment for mobile agents. IEEE Trans. on Aut. Control, 52(4):749 -- 753,
2007.
[28] A. Nedi´c and A. Ozdaglar. Convergence rate for consensus with delays. Journal of Global Optimization, 47(3):437 -- 456,
2010.
[29] A. Nedi´c, A. Ozdaglar, and P.A. Parrilo. Constrained consensus and optimization in multi-agent networks. IEEE Trans.
on Aut. Control, 55(4):922 -- 938, 2010.
[30] A. Olshevsky and J.N. Tsitsiklis. Convergence rates in distributed consensus and averaging. In IEEE CDC, pages 3387 --
3392, 2006.
[31] F. Pasqualetti, S. Martini, and A. Bicchi. Steering a leader-follower team via linear consensus. Hybrid Systems: Computation
and Control, pages 642 -- 645, 2008.
DRAFT
30
[32] S. Pettie and P. Sanders. A simpler linear time 2/3-approximation for maximum weight matching. Information Processing
Letters, 91(6):271 -- 276, 2004.
[33] A.R. Rahmani, M. Ji, M. Mesbahi, and M.B. Egerstedt. Controllability of multi-agent systems from a graph-theoretic
perspective. SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, 48(1):162 -- 186, 2010.
[34] A.E. Roth. The evolution of the labor market for medical interns and residents: a case study in game theory. The Journal
of Political Economy, pages 991 -- 1016, 1984.
[35] A.E. Roth and M.A.O. Sotomayor. Two-sided matching: A study in game-theoretic modeling and analysis. Cambridge
Univ Pr, 1992.
[36] A. Tahbaz-Salehi and A. Jadbabaie. A necessary and sufficient condition for consensus over random networks.
IEEE
Trans. on Aut. Control, 53(3):791 -- 795, 2008.
[37] A. Tahbaz-Salehi and A. Jadbabaie. Consensus over ergodic stationary graph processes.
IEEE Trans. on Aut. Control,
55(1):225 -- 230, 2010.
[38] H.G. Tanner. On the controllability of nearest neighbor interconnections. In IEEE CDC, pages 2467 -- 2472, 2004.
[39] P. Tosic and G. Agha. Maximal clique based distributed group formation for autonomous agent coalitions. In Coalitions
and Teams Workshop, AAMAS, 2004.
[40] L. Vig and J.A. Adams. Multi-robot coalition formation. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 22(4):637 -- 649, 2006.
[41] H.P. Young. The diffusion of innovations in social networks. The Economy As an Evolving Complex System III, page 267,
2006.
DRAFT
|
cs/0012004 | 1 | 0012 | 2000-12-11T10:17:36 | Improving Performance of heavily loaded agents | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI"
] | With the increase in agent-based applications, there are now agent systems that support \emph{concurrent} client accesses. The ability to process large volumes of simultaneous requests is critical in many such applications. In such a setting, the traditional approach of serving these requests one at a time via queues (e.g. \textsf{FIFO} queues, priority queues) is insufficient. Alternative models are essential to improve the performance of such \emph{heavily loaded} agents. In this paper, we propose a set of \emph{cost-based algorithms} to \emph{optimize} and \emph{merge} multiple requests submitted to an agent. In order to merge a set of requests, one first needs to identify commonalities among such requests. First, we provide an \emph{application independent framework} within which an agent developer may specify relationships (called \emph{invariants}) between requests. Second, we provide two algorithms (and various accompanying heuristics) which allow an agent to automatically rewrite requests so as to avoid redundant work---these algorithms take invariants associated with the agent into account. Our algorithms are independent of any specific agent framework. For an implementation, we implemented both these algorithms on top of the \impact agent development platform, and on top of a (non-\impact) geographic database agent. Based on these implementations, we conducted experiments and show that our algorithms are considerably more efficient than methods that use the $A^*$ algorithm. | cs.MA | cs |
Improving Performance of Heterogeneous Agents
Fatma Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian
University of Maryland, Dept. of CS
College Park, MD 20752, USA
{fatma,vs}@cs.umd.edu
and
Jurgen Dix
The University of Manchester, Dept. of CS
Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
[email protected]
With the increase in agent-based applications, there are now agent systems that support concur-
rent client accesses. The ability to process large volumes of simultaneous requests is critical in
many such applications. In such a setting, the traditional approach of serving these requests one
at a time via queues (e.g. FIFO queues, priority queues) is insufficient. Alternative models are
essential to improve the performance of such heavily loaded agents. In this paper, we propose a set
of cost-based algorithms to optimize and merge multiple requests submitted to an agent. In order
to merge a set of requests, one first needs to identify commonalities among such requests. First,
we provide an application independent framework within which an agent developer may specify
relationships (called invariants) between requests. Second, we provide two algorithms (and var-
ious accompanying heuristics) which allow an agent to automatically rewrite requests so as to
avoid redundant work -- these algorithms take invariants associated with the agent into account.
Our algorithms are independent of any specific agent framework. For an implementation, we im-
plemented both these algorithms on top of the IMPACT agent development platform, and on top
of a (non-IMPACT) geographic database agent. Based on these implementations, we conducted
experiments and show that our algorithms are considerably more efficient than methods that use
the A∗ algorithm.
Categories and Subject Descriptors: I.2.12 [Artificial Intelligence]: Distributed AI -- Intelli-
gent Agents; I.2.3 [Artificial Intelligence]: Deduction and Theorem Proving; D.2.12 [Software
Engineering]: Interoperability; H.2.4 [Database Management]: Heterogenous Databases
General Terms: Multi-Agency, Logical Foundations, Programming
Additional Key Words and Phrases: Heterogenous Data Sources, Multi-Agent Reasoning
1. MOTIVATION AND INTRODUCTION
A heavily loaded agent is one that experiences a large volume of service requests
and/or has a large number of conditions to track on behalf of various users. The
traditional model for servicing requests is via one kind of queue or the other (e.g.
FIFO, LIFO, priority queue, etc.). For instance, a company may deploy a PowerPoint
agent ppt that automatically creates PowerPoint presentations for different users
The first and third authors gratefully acknowledge support from the Army Research Labora-
tory under contract number DAAL01-97-K0135, and by DARPA/AFRL under grant number
F306029910552.
2
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
based on criteria they have registered earlier. The finance director may get the latest
budget data presented to him, a shop worker may get information on the latest work
schedules for him, and the CEO may get information on stock upheavals.
If the ppt agent has thousands of such presentations to create for different users,
it may well choose to exploit "redundancies" among the various requests to enhance
its own performance. Hence, rather than sequentially creating a presentation for
the CEO, then one for the finance director, then one for the marketing manager,
then one for the shop manager, etc., it may notice that the finance director and
CEO both want some relevant financial data -- this data can be accessed and a
PowerPoint page created for it once, instead of twice. Likewise, a heterogeneous
database agent hdb tracking inventory information for thousands of users may well
wish to exploit the commonality between queries such as
Find all suppliers who can provide 1000 automobile engines by June
25, 2003 and Find all suppliers who can provide 1500 VX2 automobile
engines by June 21, 2003.
In this case, the latter query can be executed by using the answer returned by the
first query, rather than by executing the second query from scratch. This may be
particularly valuable when the hdb agent has to access multiple remote supplier
databases -- by leveraging the common aspects of such requests, the hdb agent can
greatly reduce load on the network and the time taken to jointly process these two
requests.
The same problem occurs in yet another context.
[Subrahmanian et al. 2000]
have described a framework called IMPACT within which software agents may be
built on top of arbitrary data structures and software packages. In their framework,
an agent manipulates a set of data structures (including a message box) via a set
of well defined functions. The state of the agent at a given point in time consists
of a set of objects in the agent's data structures. The agent also has a set of
integrity constraints. When the agent state changes (this may happen if a message
is received from another agent, a shared workspace is written by another agent or
entity, a clock tick occurs, etc.), the agent must take some actions that cause the
state to again be consistent with the integrity constraints. Hence, each agent has an
associated set of actions (with the usual preconditions and effects), and an agent
program which specifies under what conditions an agent is permitted to take an
action, under what conditions it is obliged to take an action, under what conditions
it is forbidden from taking an action, and under what conditions an action is in fact
taken. [Eiter et al. 2000] have shown how (under some restrictions) such an agent
program may be compiled into a set of conditions to be evaluated at run-time over
the agent's state. When the agent state changes, then for each action α, one such
condition needs to be evaluated over the state in order to determine which instances
of that action (if any) need to be performed. Hence, numerous such conditions need
to be simultaneously evaluated so that the agent can decide what actions to take
so as to restore consistency of the state with the integrity constraints.
Therefore, in this paper, we consider the following technical problem. Suppose
an agent is built on top of heterogeneous data structures (e.g. using methods
such as those described in various agent frameworks such as [Eiter et al. 1999;
Subrahmanian et al. 2000; Dix et al. 2000; Dix et al. 2001; Dix et al. 2000]).
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
3
Suppose the agent is confronted with a set S of requests. How should the
agent process these requests so as to reduce the overall load on itself ?
In the case of the ppt agent for example, this capability will allow the agent to
recognize the fact that many presentations requested by different clients require
common financial data to be computed and/or analyzed, and hence, performing
this once instead of many times will most certainly enhance performance. Likewise,
in the case of the hdb agent, merging the two queries about automobile engines
presented earlier allows the agent to reduce load on itself, thus allowing it to respond
to other queries faster than by queuing.
The paper is organized as follows: First, we provide the basic definitions and
some preliminary results that will be employed throughout the paper in Section 2.
Then, we present our architecture in Section 3. In Sections 4 and 5, we discuss
the development phase and the deployment phase components, respectively. The
experiments are discussed in Section 6. Finally, Section 7 presents related work and
Section 8 concludes the paper.
2. PRELIMINARIES
All agents manipulate some set T of data types and manipulate these types via
some set of functions (application program interface functions). The input/output
types of functions are known.
If d is the name of a data structure (or even a
software package), and f is an n-ary function defined in that package, then
is a code call. This code call says
d : f (a1, . . . , an)
Execute function f as defined in data structure/package d on the stated
list of arguments.
We assume this code call returns as output, a set of objects -- if an atomic ob-
ject is returned, it can be coerced into a set. For instance, if we consider a com-
monly used data structure called a quad-tree [Samet 1989] for geographic reasoning,
quadtree : range(h20, 30i, T, 40)) may be a code call that says find all objects in the
quadtree the root of which is pointed to by T which are within 40 units of location
h20, 30i -- this query returns a set of points.
An atomic code call condition is an expression of the form
in(t, d : f (a1, . . . , an))
which succeeds if t is in the set of answers returned by the code call in question.
For example, in(t, excel : chart (excelFile, rec, date)) is an atomic code call condition
that succeeds if t is a chart plotting rec with respect to date in the excelFile.
We assume that for each type τ manipulated by the agent, there is a set root (τ ) of
"root" variable symbols ranging over τ . In addition, suppose τ is a complex record
type having fields f1, . . . , fn. Then, for every variable X of type τ , we require that
X.fi be a variable of type τi where τi is the type of field fi. In the same vein, if
fi itself has a sub-field g of type γ, then X.fi.g is a variable of type γ, and so on.
The variables, X.fi, X.fi.g, etc. are called path variables. For any path variable Y of
the form X.path, where X is a root variable, we refer to X as the root of Y, denoted
4
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
by root (Y); for technical convenience, root (X), where X is a root variable, refers to
itself. If S is a set of variables, then root (S) = {root (X) X ∈ S}.
Convention 2.1. From now on, we use lower case letters (a, b, c, c1, . . . ) to denote
constants and upper case letters (X, Y, Z, X1, . . . ) to denote variables. When it is clear
from context, we will also use lower case letters like s, t as metavariables ranging
over constants, variables or terms.
A code call condition (ccc) may now be defined as follows:
(1) Every atomic code call condition is a code call condition.
(2) If s and t are either variables or objects, then s = t is an (equality) code call
condition.
(3) If s and t are either integers/real valued objects, or are variables over the
integers/reals, then s < t, s > t, s ≤ t, and s ≥ t are (inequality) code call
conditions.
(4) If χ1 and χ2 are code call conditions, then χ1 & χ2 is a code call condition.
Code call conditions provide a simple, but powerful language syntax to access het-
erogeneous data structures and legacy software code.
Example 2.1. [Sample ccc] The code call condition
in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financeRel, date, "=", "11/15/99")) &
FinanceRec.sales ≥ 10K &
in(C, excel : chart (excelFile, FinanceRec, day)) &
in(Slide, ppt : include(C, "presentation.ppt"))
is a complex condition that accesses and merges data across a relational database,
an Excel file, and a PowerPoint file. It first selects all financial records associated
with "11/15/99": this is done with the variable FinanceRec in the first line. It
then filters out those records having sales more than 10K (second line). Using the
remaining records, an Excel chart is created with day of sale on the x-axis and the
resulting chart is included in the PowerPoint file "presentation.ppt" (fourth line).
In the above example, it is very important that the first code call be evaluable. If,
for example the constant f inanceRel were a variable, then
rel : select (FinanceRel, date, "=", "11/15/99")
would not be evaluable, unless there were another condition instantiating this vari-
able.
In order to come up with a notion of evaluability, we need the following
notion.
Definition 2.2 (Dependent ccc's). For an atomic code call condition of the form
in(Xi, cci) we define root (cci) = {root (Y) Y occurs in cci} and root (Xi) = {root (Y))
Y occurs in Xi}. For an (in-)equality code call condition cccin/eq we define var(cccin/eq) =
{root (Y)) Y occurs in cccin/eq}.
A code call condition χj is said to be dependent on χi
iff the following holds:
(1) Case 1: χi is of the form in(Xi, cci).
(a) If χj is an atomic code call condition of the form in(Xj, ccj) then
root (Xi) ⊆ root (ccj).
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
5
(b) If χj is an equality or inequality code call condition of the form s1 op s2,
then either s1 is a variable and root (s1) ∈ root (Xi) or s2 is a variable and
root (s2) ∈ root (Xi) or both.
(2) Case 2: χi is an (in-)equality code call condition.
(a) If χj is an atomic code call condition of the form in(Xj, ccj) then
var(χi) ⊆ root (ccj).
(b) If χj is an equality or inequality code call condition of the form s1 op s2,
then either s1 is a variable and root (s1) ∈ var(χi) or s2 is a variable and
root (s2) ∈ var(χi) or both.
Example 2.3. [Dependency among ccc's] The ccc χ1 : FinanceRec.sales ≥ 10K
is dependent on the atomic code call condition
χ2 : in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financeRel, date, "=", "11/15/99")),
because root (FinanceRec.sales) ∈ root (FinanceRec). Similarly, the atomic code
call condition χ3 : in(C, excel : chart (excelFile, FinanceRec, day)) is dependent on
the atomic code call condition χ2, as the root variable FinanceRec which appears
as an argument in the code call of χ3 is instantiated in χ2.
Definition 2.4 (Code Call Evaluation Graph (cceg) of a ccc). A code call evalu-
ation graph for a code call condition χ = χ1&...&χn, n ≥ 1 where each χi is
either an atomic, equality or inequality code call condition, is a directed graph
cceg(χ) = (V, E) where:
(1) V =def {χi 1 ≤ i ≤ n},
(2) E =def {hχi, χji χj is dependent on χi and 1 ≤ i 6= j ≤ n}.
Example 2.5. Figure 1 shows an example code call evaluation graph for the code
call condition of Example 2.1.
If f inRel were a variable FinRel, then the ccc would depend on the equality ccc
FinRel = f inRel.
Using the dependency relation on the constituents of a code call condition, we
are now able to give a precise description of an evaluable ccc.
Definition 2.6 (Evaluability of a ccc, varbase(ccc)). A code call evaluation graph
is evaluable iff
(1) It is acyclic.
(2) For all nodes χi, with in-degree 0 the following holds:
(a) If χi is an atomic code call condition of the form in(Xi, d : f (d1, . . . , dn)),
then each di, 1 ≤ i ≤ n, is ground.
(b) If χi is an equality or inequality code call condition of the form s1 op s2,
then either s1 or s2 or both are constants.
A code call condition ccc is evaluable iff it has an evaluable code call evaluation
graph.
For an evaluable ccc, we denote by varbase(ccc) the set of all variables ocurring
in nodes having in-degree 0. The set var(ccc) of all variables ocurring in ccc may
be a superset of varbase(ccc).
6
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
in(FinanceRec, rel : select(finRel, date, "=", "11/15/99"))
FinancRec.sales ≥ 10K
in(C, excel : chart (excFile, FinanceRec, day))
in(Slide, ppt : include(C, "presnt.ppt"))
Fig. 1. The code call evaluation graph of Example 2.1
Example 2.7. The code call evaluation graph in Figure 1 is evaluable because the
atomic code call condition of the only node with in-degree 0 has ground arguments
in its code call and it contains no cycles.
In [Eiter et al. 2000] the notion of a safe code call was defined to provide the
necessary means to check if a given code call is evaluable. It defines a linear ordering
of atomic, equality and inequality code calls within a given code call condition
in such a way that when executed from left to right the code call condition is
executable. Before tying our new notion of graph-evaluability to the notion of
safety, we recapitulate the definition of safety from [Eiter et al. 2000].
Definition 2.8 (Safe Code Call (Condition)).
A code call d : f (arg1, . . . , argn) is safe iff each argi is ground. A code call con-
dition χ1 & . . . & χn, n ≥ 1, is safe iff there exists a permutation π of χ1, . . . , χn
such that for every i = 1, . . . , n the following holds:
(1) If χπ(i) is an equality/inequality s1 op s2, then
-- at least one of s1,s2 is a constant or a variable X such that root (X) belongs
to RVπ(i) = {root(Y) ∃j < i s.t. Y occurs in χπ(j)};
-- if si is neither a constant nor a variable X such that root (X) ∈ RVπ(i), then
si is a root variable.
(2) If χπ(i) is an atomic code call condition of the form in(Xπ(i), ccπ(i)), then
the root of each variable Y occurring in ccπ(i) belongs to RVπ(i), and either Xπ(i)
is a root variable, or root (Xπ(i)) is from RVπ(i).
We call the permutation π with the above properties a witness to the safety.
Intuitively, a code call is safe, if we can reorder the atomic code call conditions
occurring in it in a way such that we can evaluate these atoms left to right, assuming
that root variables are incrementally bound to objects.
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
7
Example 2.9. Consider the code call condition
in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financeRel, data, "=", "11/15/99")) &
in(C, excel : chart (excelFile, FinanceRec, day)).
This code call condition is safe as it meets both of the safety requirements. However,
the following code call condition is not safe:
in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financeRel, data, "=", "11/15/99")) &
in(C, excel : chart (ExcelFile, FinanceRec, day)).
This is because, there is no permutation of these two atomic code call conditions
which allows safety requirement 1 to be met for the variable ExcelFile.
As a cceg is acyclic for any evaluable graph, ccegs determine a partial ordering
(cid:22) on the χi's:
χi (cid:22) χj if and only if hχi, χji ∈ E.
Hence, we may abuse notation and talk about topological sorts [Knuth 1997] of
a graph to mean the topological sort of the associated partial ordering. Recall
that given a partially ordered set (S, ≤), a topological sorting of that set yields a
linearly ordered set (S, (cid:22)) such that (∀x, y ∈ S)x ≤ y → x (cid:22) y. In the same vein,
a topological sort of a directed acyclic graph (dag) is a linear ordering of nodes in
the graph, such that if there exists an edge hv1, v2i in the graph, then v1 precedes
v2 in the topological sort.
Theorem 2.10. π is a witness to the safety of χ if and only if π is a valid topo-
logical sort of the cceg of χ.
The algorithm Create-cceg (Figure 2) takes a code call condition χ and creates
an evaluable code call evaluation graph if χ is evaluable -- otherwise it returns NIL.
The following example demonstrates the working of this algorithm for the code
call condition of Example 2.1.
Example 2.11. Let
χ1 : in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financialRel, date, "=", "11/15/99")),
χ2 : FinanceRec.sales ≥ 10K,
χ3 : in(C, excel : chart (excelFile, FinanceRec, day)), and
χ4 : in(Slide, ppt : include(C, "presentation.ppt")).
First, L = {χ1, χ2, χ3, χ4}, L′ = V ar = E = ∅. We first create a node for each of
the four code call conditions. Ok = {χ1, χ2}, as all arguments in the code call of χ1
are ground, and 10K is a constant in χ2. Next, we create the edge (χ1, χ2). Because
χ2 depends on χ1. Then, L = {χ3, χ4}, L′ = {χ1, χ2} and V ar = {FinanceRec}.
In the first iteration of the while loop Ψ = {χ3} as χ3 depends on χ1, and all
variables in χ3 (FinanceRec) are in V ar. V ar becomes {FinanceRec, C} and we
create the edge (χ1, χ3). Now, L = {χ4}, L′ = {χ1, χ2, χ3}. In the second iteration
of the while loop Ψ = {χ4}, since χ4 depends on χ3 and all variables in χ4 (namely
{C}) are in V ar. This time, V ar becomes {FinanceRec, C, Slide}, and we add
the edge hχ3, χ4i to the graph. Now L becomes the empty set and the algorithm
returns the code call evaluation graph given in Figure 1.
8
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
Create-cceg(χ)
/* Input: χ : χ1 & χ2 & ... & χn
/* Output:NIL, if χ is not evaluable
/*
*/
*/
a cceg CCEG = (V, E), if χ is evaluable*/
:= {χ1, χ2, .., χn};
L
:= ∅;
L′
V ar := ∅;
E := ∅;
V
Ok := {χi χi is either of the form in(X, d: f (args)) where args is ground or
1 ≤ i ≤ n};
:= {χi
of the form s1 op s2, where either s1 or s2 or both are constants };
for all pairs hχi, χj i, χi, χj ∈ Ok such that χj is dependent on χi
create an edge hχi, χji and add it to E;
V ar := V ar ∪ {root(Xi) in(Xi, d : f (args)) ∈ Ok};
L
L′
while (L is not empty) do
:= L − Ok;
:= L′ ∪ Ok;
Ψ := {χi χi ∈ L and all variables in χi are in V ar and
∃χj ∈ L' such that χi depends on χj};
if card (Ψ) = 0 then Return NIL;
else
V ar := V ar ∪ {root(Xi) in(Xi, d: f (args)) ∈ Ψ};
for all pairs hχi, χji, χj ∈ Ψ, such that χj is dependent on χi ∈ L′
create an edge hχi, χji and add it to E;
L := L − Ψ;
L′ := L′ ∪ Ψ;
Return (V, E);
End-Algorithm
Fig. 2. Create-cceg Algorithm
Convention 2.2. Throughout the rest of this paper, we assume that all code call
conditions considered are evaluable and that the graph associated with each code
call condition has been generated.
The Create-cceg algorithm runs in O(n3) time, where n is the number of con-
stituents χi of χ. The number of iterations of the while loop is bounded by n, and
the body of the while loop can be executed in quadratic time.
We have conducted experiments to evaluate the execution time of the Create-
cceg algorithm. Those experiments are described in detail in Section 6.1.
Definition 2.12 (State of an agent). The state of an agent is a set of ground code
call conditions.
When an agent developer builds an agent, she specifies several parameters. One of
these parameters must include some domain-specific information, explicitly laying
out what inclusion and equality relations are known to hold of code calls. Such
information is specified via invariants.
Definition 2.13 (Invariant Expression).
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
9
-- Every evaluable code call condition is an invariant expression. We call such
expressions atomic.
-- If ie1 and ie2 are invariant expressions, then (ie1 ∪ie2) and (ie1 ∩ie2) are invariant
expressions. (We will often omit the parentheses.)
Example 2.14. Two examples of invariant expressions are:
in(StudentRec, rel : select (courseRel, exam, "=", midterm1)) &
in(C, excel : chart (excelFile, StudentRec, grade))
in(X, spatial : horizontal (T, B, U)) ∪ (in(Y, spatial : horizontal (T′, B′, U′)) ∪
in(Z, spatial : horizontal (T′, B′, U))).
What is the meaning, i.e. the denotation of such expressions? The first invariant
represents the set of all objects c such that
in(StudentRec, rel : select (courseRel, exam, "=", midterm1)) &
in(c, excel : chart (excelFile, StudentRec, grade))
holds: we are looking for instantiations of C. Note that under this viewpoint,
the intermediate variable StudentRec which is needed in order to instantiate C to
an object c does not matter. There might just as well be situations where we are
interested in pairs hc, studentreci instead of just c. Therefore a notion of denotation
must be flexible enough to allow this.
Let us now consider the invariant
in(StudentRec, rel : select(courseRel, exam, "=", TypeofExam)) &
in(C, excel : chart (excelFile, StudentRec, grade))
where the object midterm1 has been replaced by the variable TypeofExam which
is now a base variable. Then we might be interested in all c's that result if an
instantiation of TypeofExam is given, i.e. for different instantiations of TypeofExam
we get different c's. Thus we have to distinguish carefully between various sorts
of variables: base variables (defined in Definition 2.17), auxiliary variables and the
main variables defining the set of objects of interest.
Definition 2.15 (Denotation of an Invariant Expression). Let ie be an invariant
expression with var(ie) = varbase(ie) ∪ {V1, . . . , Vn}. The denotation of ie with
respect to a state S, an assignment θ of the variables in varbase(ie) and a sequence
hVi1 , . . . , Vik i (where Vi1 , . . . , Vik } ⊆ {V1, . . . , Vn}) is defined as follows:
-- Let
[ie]S,θ := { hoπ(1), . . . , oπ(nk)i (ie θ)τ is ground and is true in state S,
π is a permutation on {1, . . . , n}, nk ≤ n,
τ is a grounding substitution,
τ is of the form [V1/o1, . . . , Vn/on] }
-- [ie1 ∩ ie2]S,θ := [ie1]S,θ ∩ [ie2]S,θ,
-- [ie1 ∪ ie2]S,θ := [ie1]S,θ ∪ [ie2]S,θ.
10
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
The variables in {Vπ(1), . . . , Vπ(nk)} are called main variables while all remain-
ing variables {Vπ(nk+1), . . . , Vπ(n)} are called auxiliary. The substitution τ is de-
fined on the set of main variables (in our example above it is the set {C}). The
set of auxiliary variables consists of {StudentRec} and the only base variable is
TypeofExam. Taking the first viewpoint in our example above, τ would be defined
on {C, StudentRec}.
As usual, we abuse notation and say that ie1 ⊆ ie2 if [ie1]S,θ ⊆ [ie2]S,θ for all S
and all assignments θ. Similarly, we say that ie1 = ie2 if [ie1]S,θ = [ie2]S,θ for all S
and all assignments θ. Now we are ready to define an invariant.
Definition 2.16 (Invariant Condition (ic)). An invariant condition atom is a state-
ment of the form t1 Op t2 where Op ∈ {≤, ≥, <, >, =} and each of t1, t2 is either a
variable or a constant. An invariant condition (IC) is defined inductively as follows:
(1) Every invariant condition atom is an ic.
(2) If C1 and C2 are ic's, then C1 ∧ C2 and C1 ∨ C2 are ic's.
Definition 2.17 (Invariant inv, varbase(inv), INVsimple, INVordinary, INV). An in-
variant, denoted by inv, is a statement of the form
ic =⇒ ie1 ℜ ie2
(1)
where
(1) ic is an invariant condition, all variables occuring in ic are among varbase(ie1)∪
varbase(ie2).
(2) ℜ ∈ {=, ⊆}, and
(3) ie1, ie2 are invariant expressions.
If ie1 and ie2 both contain solely atomic code call conditions, then we say that inv
is a simple invariant.
If ic is a conjunction of invariant condition atoms, then we say that inv is an
ordinary invariant.
We denote by varbase(inv) the set of all variables of inv that need to be instan-
tiated in order to evaluate inv in the current state: varbase(inv) := varbase(ie1) ∪
varbase(ie2).
The set of all invariants is denoted by INV. The set of all simple invariants is
denoted by INVsimple and the set of all ordinary invariants is denoted by INVordinary.
An invariant expresses semantic knowledge about a domain. Invariants used by
each of our two example agents -- ppt and hdb are given below.
Example 2.18. The following are valid invariant conditions: val1 ≤ val2, Rel1 =
Rel2. Note that such expressions can be evaluated over a given state S. Only the
two relations ≤ and ≥ require that the constants occurring on the right or left hand
sides must be of the appropriate type: these relations must be defined over each
state S.
The invariant
File = File′ ∧ Rec = Rec′ ∧ Col = Col′
=⇒
in(C, excel : chart one(File, Rec, Col)) = in(C′, excel : chart two(File′, Rec′, Col′))
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
11
says that these two code call conditions are equivalent if their arguments unify.
Note that the code calls involved are different. The invariant,
Rel = Rel′ ∧ Attr = Attr′ ∧ Op = Op′ = "≤" ∧ Val < Val′
=⇒
in(X, rel : select (Rel, Attr, Op, Val)) ⊆ in(Y, rel : select(Rel′, Attr′, Op′, Val′))
says that the code call condition in(X, rel : select (Rel, Attr, Op, Val)) can be evalu-
ated by using the results of the code call condition
in(Y, rel : select (Rel′, Attr′, Op′, Val′))
if the above conditions are satisfied. Note that this expresses semantic information
that is not available on the syntactic level: the operator "≤" is related to the
relation symbol "<".
Convention 2.3. Throughout the rest of this paper, we assume that we have the
code calls ag : addition (X, Y) and ag : subtraction(X, Y) available for all agents ag.
These code calls return the sum, (resp. the difference) of X and Y, where X and Y
range over the reals or the integers. We also assume we have code calls ag : ge0 (X)
(resp. ag : geq 0 (X)) available which returns 1 if X is strictly greater (resp. greater
or equal) than 0 and 0 otherwise.
By stating invariants, we focus interest on states where the invariants hold. This
is like in classical predicate logic, where we write down axioms and thereby constrain
the set of models -- we are only interested in the class of models satisfying the
axioms. We therefore have to define formally what it means for a state S to satisfy
an invariant inv.
Definition 2.19 (Satisfaction, S = inv, I = inv, Taut).
A state S satisfies the invariant inv having the form shown in Formula (1) above
with respect to an assignment θ iff for every ground instance (inv θ) τ of inv θ, it is
the case that either (ic θ) τ evaluates to false, or (ie1 θ) τ ℜ (ie2 θ) τ is true in S.
We say that a set of invariants I entails an invariant inv iff all states S and
assignments θ satisfying I also satisfy inv. We write I = inv. We call an invariant
inv a tautology, if inv is true in all states S for all assignments θ:
Taut =def {inv = inv}.
From now on we do not mention explicitly the assignment θ and we write simply
S = inv.
It is worth noting that there are indeed trivial invariants that are satisfied in all
states: such invariants are like tautologies in classical logic (therefore their name
in the last definition). For example the following invariant is true in all states
whatsoever (note the difference from the similar invariant above):
File =File′ ∧ Rec =Rec′ ∧ Col =Col′ =⇒
in(C, excel : chart (File, Rec, Col)) = in(C′, excel : chart (File′, Rec′, Col′))
12
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
The reason that this last invariant is a tautology, is that for the same set of instances
of Y for a code call d : f (Y), we always get the same set representing the atomic code
call condition in(X, d : f (Y)).
Theorem 2.20.
There is a translation Trans which associates with each conjunction ic of invariant
condition atoms, and invariant expression ie another invariant expression Trans(ic, ie1)
such that the following holds for all states S, assignments θ and invariants ic =⇒ ie1 ℜ ie2
(S, θ) = (ic =⇒ ie1 ℜ ie2)
if and only if
(S, θ) = true =⇒ Trans(ic, ie1) ℜ Trans(ic, ie2).
Corollary 2.21 (Eliminating Invariant Conditions, Trans). Let inv : ic =⇒ ie1 ℜ ie2
be an arbitrary invariant. Then, the following holds for all states S and assignments
θ
(S, θ) = (ic =⇒ ie1 ℜ ie2)
if and only if
(∀Ci, 1 ≤ i ≤ m) (S, θ) = true =⇒ Trans(Ci, ie1) ℜ Trans(Ci, ie2).
where the Ci, 1 ≤ i ≤ m, are the disjuncts in the DNF of ic.
3. ARCHITECTURE
Let us suppose now that we have a set I of invariants, and a set S of data struc-
tures that are manipulated by the agent. How exactly should a set C of code call
conditions be merged together? And what needs to be done to support this? Our
architecture contains two parts:
(i) a development time phase stating what the agent developer must specify when
building her agent, and what algorithms are used to operate on that specifica-
tion, and
(ii) a deployment time phase which specifies how the above development-time spec-
ifications are used when the agent is in fact running autonomously.
We describe each of these pieces below.
3.1 Development Time Phase
When the agent developer builds her agent, the following things need to be done.
(1) First, the agent developer specifies a set I of invariants.
(2) Suppose C is a set of CCCs to be evaluated by the agent. Each code call
condition χ ∈ C is represented via an evaluable cceg. Let INS(C) represent the
set of all nodes in ccegs of χs in C. That is,
INS(C) = {vi ∃χ ∈ C s.t. vi is in χ′s cceg}.
This can be done by a topological sort of the cceg for each χ ∈ C.
(3) Additional invariants can be derived from the initial set I of invariants. This
requires the ability to check whether a set I of invariants implies an inclusion
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
13
relationship between two invariant expressions. We will provide a generic test
called Chk Imp for implication checking between invariants. Although the set
of invariants entailed by I is defined by Definition 2.19, the set of invariants
actually derived by the Chk Imp test will depend on the set of axioms used
in the test. Hence, some Chk Imp tests will be sound, but not complete. On
the other hand, some tests will be "more complete" than others, because the
set of invariants derived by them will be a superset of the set of invariants
derived by others. "More complete" tests may use a larger set of axioms, hence
will be more expensive to compute. The agent developer can select a test
that is appropriate for her agent. Given an arbitrary (but fixed) Chk Imp
test, we will provide an algorithm called Compute-Derived-Invariants that
calculates the set of derivable invariants from the initial set I of invariants and
needs to be executed just once.
3.2 Deployment Time Phase
Once the agent has been "developed" and deployed and is running, it will need to
continuously determine how to merge a set C of code call conditions. This will be
done as follows:
(1) The system must identify three types of relationships between nodes in INS(C).
Identical ccc's: First, we'd like to identify nodes χ1, χ2 ∈ INS(C) which are
"equivalent" to one another, i.e. χ1 = χ2 is a logical consequence of the
set of invariants I. This requires a definition of equivalence of two code
call conditions w.r.t. a set of invariants. This strategy is useful because we
can replace the two nodes χ1, χ2 by a single node. This avoids redundant
computation of both χ1 and χ2.
Implied ccc's: Second, we'd like to identify nodes χ1, χ2 ∈ INS(C) which are
not equivalent in the above sense, but such that either χ1 ⊆ χ2 or χ2 ⊆ χ1
hold, but not both. Suppose χ1 ⊆ χ2. Then we can compute χ2 first, and
then compute χ1 from the answer returned by computing χ2. This way of
computing χ1, χ2 may be faster than computing them separately.
Overlapping ccc's: Third, we'd like to identify nodes χ1, χ2 ∈ INS(C) for
which the preceding two conditions do not hold, but χ1 & χ2 is consistent
with INS(C).
In this case, we might be able to compute the answer to
χ1 ∨ χ2. From the answer to this, we may compute the answer to χ1
and the answer to χ2. This way of computing χ1, χ2 may be faster than
computing them separately.
We will provide an algorithm, namely Improved-CSI, which will use the set of
derived invariants returned by the Compute-Derived-Invariants algorithm
above, to detect commonalities (equivalent, implied and overlapping code call
conditions) among members of C.
Example 3.1. The two code call conditions in(X, spatial : vertical (T, L, R))
and in(Y, spatial : vertical (T′, L′, R′)) are equivalent to one another if their ar-
guments are unifiable. The results of evaluating the code call condition
in(Z, spatial : range(T, 40, 50, 25))
14
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
is a subset of the results of evaluating the code call condition
in(W, spatial : range(T′, 40, 50, 50))
if T = T′. Note that spatial : range(T, X, Y, Z) returns all points in T that are Z
units away from the point hX, Yi. In this case, we can compute the results of the
former code call condition by executing a selection on the results of the latter
rather than executing the former from scratch. Finally, consider the following
two code call conditions:
in(X, spatial : horizontal (map, 100, 200)),
in(Y, spatial : horizontal (map, 150, 250)).
Here spatial : horizontal (map, a, b) returns all points (X, Y) in map such that
a ≤ Y ≤ b. Obviously, the results of neither of these two code call conditions
are subset of the results of the other. However, the results of these two code call
conditions overlap with one another. In this case, we can execute the code call
condition in(Z, spatial : horizontal (map, 100, 250)). Then, we can compute the
results of the two code call conditions by executing selections on the results of
this code call condition.
(2) We will then provide two procedures to merge sets of code call conditions,
BFMerge and DFMerge, that take as input, (i) the set C and (ii) the out-
put of the Improved-CSI algorithm above, and (iii) a cost model for agent
code call condition evaluations. Both these algorithms are parameterized by
heuristics and we propose three alternative heuristics. Then we evaluate our
six implementations (3 heuristics times 2 algorithms) and also compare it with
an A∗ based approach.
4. DEVELOPMENT PHASE
Prior to deployment of the agent, once the agent developer has defined a set of
invariants, we compute a set of derived invariants from it. These derived invariants
are stored. Once deployed, when the agent is confronted with a set of requests from
other agents, it can examine these stored derived invariants for a "pattern match"
which then enables it to classify invariants into one of the three categories listed
(equivalent, implied or overlapping invariants).
Consider the case when I contains the two invariants:
V1 ≤ V2 =⇒ in(X, d1 : f1 (V1)) = in(Y, d2 : f2 (V2)).
V3 ≤ V4 =⇒ in(Z, d2 : f2 (V3)) ⊆ in(W, d3 : f3 (V4)).
Clearly from these two invariants, we can infer the invariant
V1 ≤ V2 ∧ V2 ≤ V4 =⇒ in(X, d1 : f1 (V1)) ⊆ in(W, d3 : f3 (V4))
(2)
(3)
(4)
Algorithm Combine 1 (Figure 3) combines two invariants. The algorithm uses
a simplify routine which simplifies a conjunction of invariant conditions and checks
if the resulting invariant condition is inconsistent or not. If so, it returns NIL. The
Combine 1 algorithm makes use of two important algorithms: Chk Imp and
Chk Ent, which we will discuss in detail later. The Chk Imp algorithm checks
if one invariant expression implies another, while the Chk Ent algorithm checks
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
15
if some member of a set of invariants entails an other invariant. Let us first define
the table which is implemented by the Combine 1 algorithm.
Definition 4.1 (Combine1). Let inv1 : ic1 =⇒ ie1 ℜ1 ie′
1 and inv2 : ic2 =⇒ ie2 ℜ2 ie′
2.
Then, the following table provides the resulting derived relation of the form
simplify(ic1 ∧ ic2) =⇒ ie1 ℜ1 ie′
2
when inv1 and inv2 are combined. The "*" denotes a "don't care" condition in this
table. The simplify routine checks whether ic1 ∧ic2 is inconsistent. If so, it returns
ℜ1 ℜ2 Chk Imp(ie′
1, ie2) Chk Imp(ie2, ie′
1)
*
=
=
⊆
⊆
*
=
⊆
=
⊆
False
True
True
True
True
*
True
*
*
*
derived rel
NIL
=
⊆
⊆
⊆
Table 1. Summary of Combining Two Invariants
false, if not it returns an equivalent (perhaps simplified) formula for ic1 ∧ ic2 (the
precise realization of simplify is not important here and leaves enough freedom for
the actual implementation):
simplify(ic) =
if for all (S, θ) = ic,
true,
false, if for all (S, θ) = ¬ic,
φ1,
otherwise.
Figure 3 implements a slightly generalized version of the last definition. Namely,
we assume that there is given a set I of invariants and we are considering states
satisfying these invariants. This is an additional parameter. For simplicity, assume
that ℜ1 = ℜ2 = "⊆". The idea is that although the subset relation ie′
1 ⊆ ie2 might
not hold in general (i.e. in all states) it could be implied by the invariants in I
(i.e. holds in all states satisfying I). That is, if there is ic∗ =⇒ ie∗
2 ∈ I
2 ⊆ ie2 ∈ I, and (ic1 ∧
s.t.
ic2) → (ic∗ ∧ ic∗∗ ∧ ic∗∗∗)). Under these conditions, we can derive the invariant
simplify(ic1 ∧ ic2) =⇒ ie1 ⊆ ie′
2.
1 ∈ I, ic∗∗∗ =⇒ ie∗
(ic∗∗ =⇒ ie′
1 ⊆ ie∗
1 ⊆ ie∗
We introduce three notions, Chk Imp, Chk Taut and Chk Ent of increasing
complexity. The first notion, Chk Imp, is a relation between invariant expressions.
Definition 4.2 (Implication: Chk Imp, ie1 → ie2).
An invariant expression ie1 is said to imply another invariant expression ie2, de-
noted by ie1 → ie2,
iff it is the case that [ie1]S,θ ⊆ [ie2]S,θ for all S and all
assignments θ.
1where φ is any formula equivalent to ic, i.e. for all states (S, θ): (S, θ) = φ ↔ ic.
16
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
Combine 1(inv1, inv2, I)
/* inv1 : ic1 =⇒ ie1 ℜ1 ie′
/* inv2 : ic2 =⇒ ie2 ℜ2 ie′
1 */
2 */
if
if
1 ⊆ ie∗
1, ie2) = false) and
(Chk Imp (ie′
(there is no ic∗ =⇒ ie∗
(ic∗∗ =⇒ ie′
(ic1 ∧ ic2) → (ic∗ ∧ ic∗∗ ∧ ic∗∗∗)), then
Return NIL;
(ℜ1 = ℜ2 = "=")
2 ∈ I s.t.
ic∗∗∗ =⇒ ie∗
1 ⊆ ie∗
1 ∈ I,
then
1) = true) or
2 ∈ I s.t.
(Chk Imp (ie2, ie′
if
(there is ic∗ =⇒ ie∗
(ic∗∗ =⇒ ie2 ⊆ ie∗
(ic1 ∧ ic2) → (ic∗ ∧ ic∗∗ ∧ ic∗∗∗))), then
relation := (ie1 = ie′
1 ⊆ ie∗
1 ∈ I,
ic∗∗∗ =⇒ ie∗
2);
2 ⊆ ie2 ∈ I,
2 ⊆ ie′
1 ∈ I,
else relation := (ie1 ⊆ ie′
2);
2);
else relation := (ie1 ⊆ ie′
derivedic := simplify(ic1 ∧ ic2);
if
derived inv := (derivedic =⇒ relation);
if (there is inv ∈ I with (Chk Ent (inv, derived inv) = true)
then Return NIL;
(derivedic = false)
then
Return NIL;
else Return derived inv;
End-Algorithm
Fig. 3. Combine 1 Algorithm
Chk Imp is said to be an implication check algorithm if it takes two invariant
expressions ie1, ie2 and returns a boolean output. We say that Chk Imp is sound
iff whenever Chk Imp(ie1, ie2)=true, then ie1 implies ie2. We say Chk Imp is
complete iff Chk Imp(ie1, ie2) = true if and only if ie1 implies ie2.
If Chk Imp1, Chk Imp2 are both sound, and for all ie1, ie2, Chk Imp1(ie1, ie2) =
true implies that Chk Imp2(ie1, ie2) = true, then we say that Chk Imp2 is more
complete than Chk Imp1.
Definition 4.3 (Chk Taut, Chk Ent as Relations between Invariants). Chk Taut
is said to be a tautology check algorithm if it takes a single invariant inv and re-
turns a boolean output. Chk Taut is sound iff whenever Chk Taut(inv)=true,
then inv ∈ Taut (see Definition 2.19). Chk Taut is complete iff Chk Taut(inv)
= true if and only if inv ∈ Taut.
Chk Ent is said to be an entailment check algorithm if it takes two invariants
inv1, inv2 and returns a boolean output. We say that Chk Ent is sound iff whenever
Chk Ent(inv1, inv2)=true, then inv1 entails inv2 (inv1 = inv2). We say Chk Ent
is complete iff Chk Ent(inv1, inv2) = true if and only if inv1 entails inv2.
Similarly to Definition 4.2, we use the notion of being more complete for tau-
tology as well as for entailment check algorithms.
Lemma 4.4 (Relation between Chk Imp, Chk Taut and Chk Ent).
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
17
(1) Chk Imp can be reduced to Chk Taut:
Chk Imp(ie1, ie2) if and only if Chk Taut(true =⇒ ie1 ⊆ ie2).
(2) Chk Taut can be reduced to Chk Imp:
Chk Taut((C1 ∨ C2 ∨ . . . ∨ Cm) =⇒ ie1 ⊆ ie2)
if and only if
∀Ci, 1 ≤ i ≤ m, Chk Imp(Trans(Ci, ie1), Trans(Ci, ie2)).
(3) Chk Taut is an instance of Chk Ent.
Thus in general, implication checking between invariant expressions is a special case
of tautology checking of invariants. Conversely, checking tautologies is an instance
of implication checking. Note that checking simple invariants is reduced to checking
implications of non-simple invariant expressions.
It is also obvious that checking for tautologies is a special case of the entailment
problem.
The following results tell us that the implementation of the Chk Imp routine
used in the Combine 1 algorithm is undecidable in general. Even if we restrict to
finite domains, it is still intractable.
Proposition 4.5 (Undecidability of Chk Imp, Chk Taut, Chk Ent).
Suppose we consider arbitrary datatypes. Then the problem of checking whether
an arbitrary invariant expression ie1 implies another invariant expression ie2 is
undecidable. The same holds for checking tautologies of invariants or entailment
between invariants.
Proposition 4.6 (co-NP Completeness of Checking Implication).
Suppose all datatypes have a finite domain (i.e. each datatype has only finitely
many values of that datatype). Then the problem of checking whether an arbitrary
invariant expression ie1 implies another invariant expression ie2 is co-NP complete.
The same holds for the problem of checking whether an invariant is a tautology.
As the problem of checking implication (and hence equivalence) between invariant
expressions is co-NP complete, in this paper, we decided to study the tradeoffs
involved in using sound, but perhaps incomplete implementations of implication
checking.
There are clearly many ways of implementing the algorithm Chk Imp that are
sound, but not complete. In this paper, we propose a generic algorithm to imple-
ment Chk Imp, where the complexity can be controlled by two input parameters --
an axiomatic inference system and a threshold.
-- The axiomatic inference system used by Chk Imp includes some axioms and
inference rules. By selecting the axioms and inference rules, the agent developer
is controlling the branching factor of the search space.
-- The second parameter called the threshold is either an integer or ∞, and de-
If it is ∞, then the generic
termines the maximum depth of the search tree.
algorithm does not have an upper bound on the number of rule applications,
and terminates either when it proves the implication or there is no further rule
that is applicable(i.e. failure). When it is an integer value, the algorithm reports
18
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
failure if it cannot prove the implication by using the threshold number of rule
applications.
We have conducted experiments with different instances of these two parameters.
Those experiments are discussed in detail in Section 6.2.
It is important to note that the set of all derived invariants obtained from I may
be very large because they contain "redundant" constraints. For instance, using
our example I above, every invariant of the form
V1 ≤ V2 ∧ V2 ≤ V4
=⇒
in(X, d1 : f1 (V1)) ⊆ in(W, d3 : f3 (V4)) ∪ in(T, d4 : f4 (V5)) . . .
would be entailed from I -- however, these invariants are redundant as they are
entailed by the single invariant (4).
As we have seen above (Propositions 4.5, 4.6), such an entailment test between
invariants is either undecidable or intractable. It would be much better if we had
a purely syntactical test (which must be necessarily incomplete) of checking such
implications.
The following lemma shows that entailment between two invariants can, under
certain assumptions, be reduced to a syntactical test.
Lemma 4.7. Let inv1 :
ic1 =⇒ ie1 ⊆ ie′
1 and inv2 :
ic2 =⇒ ie2 ⊆ ie′
two simple invariants, i.e. ie1 has the form in(X, d1 : f1 (. . . )), ie′
in(X, d′
2 has the form in(Y, d′
If inv1 = inv2 and inv2 is not a tautology (6= inv2), then the following holds:
1 (. . . )), ie2 has the form in(Y, d2 : f2 (. . . )) and ie′
1 : f ′
2 be
1 has the form
2 : f ′
2 (. . . )).
(1) d1=d2 and f1 = f2 ,
1 = f ′
(2) d′
2 ,
2 and f ′
1=d′
(3) In all states that do not satisfy inv2, it holds "ic2 → ic1". I.e. each coun-
terexample for inv2 is also a counterexample for inv1.
Corollary 4.8 (Sufficient Condition for Chk Ent).
There is a sufficient condition for Chk Ent(inv1, inv2) based on Chk Imp and
Chk Taut: First check whether inv2 ∈ Taut. If yes, Chk Ent(inv1, inv2) holds. If
not, check whether ic2 → ic1 holds in all states (i.e. Chk Imp(ic2, ic1)). If yes,
Chk Ent(inv1, inv2) holds.
In this paper, we use the following sound but incomplete Chk Ent algorithm.
Let inv1 : ic1 =⇒ ie1 ℜ1 ie′
true iff
1 and inv2 : ic2 =⇒ ie2 ℜ2 ie′
2. Then, Chk Ent(inv1, inv2) =
(1) For all states S: S = ic2 → ic1,
(2) (ℜ1 = "⊆" and ℜ2 = "⊆") or (ℜ1 = "=" and ℜ2 = "⊆"),
(3) ie2 → ie1,
1 → ie′
(4) ie′
2.
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
19
4.1 Computing All Derived Invariants
In this section, we define how given a set I, the set of all invariants that are entailed
by I may be computed using the selected Chk Imp and Chk Ent algorithms.
The Compute-Derived-Invariants algorithm presented in Figure 4 takes as
input a set of invariants I, and returns a set of invariants I ∗, such that every
invariant in I ∗ is entailed by I. Although the Compute-Derived-Invariants
algorithm has exponential running time, it is executed only once at registration-
time, and hence the worst case complexity of the algorithm is acceptable.
Compute-Derived-Invariants(I)
X := I;
change := true;
Done := ∅;
while change do
change := f alse
forall invi ∈ X do
forall invj ∈ X − {invi} s.t. (invi, invj ) /∈ Done do
derived inv1 := combine 1(invi, invj, X);
if derived inv1 != NIL then
X := X ∪ {derived inv1}; change := true;
derived inv2 := combine 1(invj , invi, X);
if derived inv2 != NIL then
X := X ∪ {derived inv2}; change := true;
derived inv3 := combine 2(invj , invi);
if derived inv3 != NIL then
X := X ∪ {derived inv3}; change := true;
derived inv4 := combine 3(invj , invi);
if derived inv4 != NIL then
X := X ∪ {derived inv4}; change := true;
Done := Done ∪ {(invi, invj), (invj , invi)};
Return X.
End-Algorithm
Fig. 4. Compute-Derived-Invariants Algorithm
Lemma 4.9. For all I: {inv1, inv2} ∪ I = Combine 1(inv1, inv2, I).
Combine 1 does not derive all invariants that are logically entailed by I. For
example from "true ⇒ ie1 ⊆ ie2" and "true ⇒ ie2 ⊆ ie1" we can infer "true ⇒ ie1 =
ie2". We call this procedure, slightly generalized, Combine 2. It is illustrated in
Figure 5. The unify routine takes two invariant expressions and returns the most
general unifier if the two are unifiable, and returns NIL if they are not unifiable.
Another set we need is the set of all invariant tautologies
Taut =def {true ⇒ ie1 ⊆ ie2 : Chk Imp(ie1, ie2)}.
Obviously, all tautologies are satisfied in all states and the invariant computed in
the Combine 2 Algorithm (if it exists) is entailed by the invariants it is computed
from.
Lemma 4.10. {inv1, inv2} = Combine 2(inv1, inv2).
20
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
Combine 2(inv1, inv2)
/* inv1 : ic1 =⇒ ie1 ℜ1 ie′
/* inv2 : ic2 =⇒ ie2 ℜ2 ie′
1 */
2 */
if
then
(ℜ1 = ℜ2 = "⊆")
1);
2, ie1);
θ := unif y(ie2, ie′
γ := unif y(ie′
if (θ != NIL) and (γ != NIL) then
(derivedic = false)
derivedic := simplify((ic1 ∧ ic2)θγ);
if
derived inv := (derivedic =⇒ (ie1)θγ = (ie′
Return derived inv;
then Return NIL;
1)θγ);
else Return NIL.
else Return NIL.
End-Algorithm
Fig. 5. Combine 2 Algorithm
However, the above sets are still not sufficient. Consider the situation inv1 : x <
0 =⇒ ie1 ℜ1 ie′
1. Then, we can conclude
true =⇒ ie1 ℜ1 ie′
1. However, neither Combine 1 nor Combine 2 is able to
compute this invariant. As a result, we define the final routine, Combine 3, given
in Figure 6, to capture these cases.
1, and inv2 : x ≥ 0 =⇒ ie1 ℜ1 ie′
Combine 3(inv1, inv2)
/* inv1 : ic1 =⇒ ie1 ℜ1 ie′
/* inv2 : ic2 =⇒ ie2 ℜ2 ie′
1 */
2 */
if
(ℜ1 = ℜ2)
then
θ := unify(ie1, ie2);
γ := unify(ie′
2);
if (θ != NIL) and (γ != NIL) then
1, ie′
derivedic := simplify((ic1 ∨ ic2)θγ);
derived inv := derivedic =⇒ ((ie1)θγ ℜ1 (ie′
Return derived inv;
1)θγ);
Return NIL
End-Algorithm
Fig. 6. Combine 3 Algorithm
We emphasize in the Combine 3 Algorithm our use of the simplify routine
introduced just after Definition 4.1. Our example is captured because x < 0 ∨ x ≥ 0
is simplified to true. By recursively applying Combine 3, one can also handle more
complicated intervals like x < 0 ∨ (x ≥ 0 ∧ x < 1) ∨ x ≥ 1.
Lemma 4.11. {inv1, inv2} = Combine 3(inv1, inv2).
Definition 4.12 (Operator CI ). We associate with any set I of invariants, a
mapping CI : INV → INV which maps sets of invariants to sets of invariants,
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
21
as follows:
CI (X) =def {Combine 1(inv1, inv2, X ∪ I) inv1, inv2 ∈ X ∪ I} ∪
inv1, inv2 ∈ X ∪ I} ∪
inv1, inv2 ∈ X ∪ I} ∪
.
{Combine 2(inv1, inv2)
{Combine 3(inv1, inv2)
I ∪ X
Definition 4.13 (Powers of CI ). The powers of CI (X) are defined as follows:
:= Taut
CI ↑0
CI ↑(i+1) := CI (CI ↑i)
:= Si≥0(CI ↑i)
CI ↑ω
Proposition 4.14 (Monotonicity of CI). If X1 ⊆ X2, then CI (X1) ⊆ CI (X2).
Lemma 4.15. CI(CI ↑ω) ⊆ CI ↑ω.
Lemma 4.16. CI ↑ω⊆ {inv I = inv}.
What we are really interested in is a converse of the last lemma, namely that all
invariants that follow from I can be derived. Strictly speaking, this is not the case:
we already noticed that there are many redundant invariants that follow from I but
are subsumed by others. Such "redundant" invariants contribute little. We show
below that whenever an invariant is entailed from I as a whole, it is already entailed
by another variant in CI ↑ω. This is the statement of our main Corollary 4.18.
Theorem 4.17 (All Entailed "⊆"-Invariants are Subsumed in CI ↑ω).
Suppose I = inv. We assume further that all the invariants are simple and that
ℜ = "⊆" in all invariants. Then, there is inv′ ∈ CI ↑ω such that inv′ entails inv.
Corollary 4.18 (All Entailed Invariants are Subsumed in CI ↑ω). We are now con-
sidering arbitrary simple invariants, i.e. ℜ = {⊆, =}. If I = inv, then there exists
inv′ ∈ CI ↑ω such that inv′ entails inv.
The following corollary tells us that if the implementation of Chk Imp and
Chk Ent algorithms used are complete, then the Compute-Derived-Invariants
algorithm correctly computes all derived invariants.
Corollary 4.19 (Development-Time Check). Suppose Chk Imp is a complete im-
plication check, and Chk Ent is a complete subsumption check algorithm. Then,
the set of invariants returned by the Compute-Derived-Invariants has the fol-
lowing properties:
(1) Every invariant returned by it is implied by I and
(2) If an invariant is implied by I, then there is an invariant inv′ returned by
the Compute-Derived-Invariants algorithm that entails inv.
Our results above apply to simple invariants only. The reason is that in Table 1
only a subset of all possible derivable invariants are listed. For example even if the
Chk Imp tests do not hold, then there are still the following nontrivial invariants
entailed:
22
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
(1) derived-inv1 : ic1 ∧ ic2 =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie2) ℜ (ie′
(2) derived-inv2 : ic1 ∧ ic2 =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie2) ℜ (ie′
1 ∩ ie′
2)
1 ∪ ie′
2)
In fact, our framework can be easily extended as follows. Let iv1 : ic1 =⇒
ie1 ℜ1 ie′
2. In addition to the derived invariant returned
by the Combine 1 algorithm, the new extended XCombine 1 also returns the
derived invariants determined by Tables 2 and 4.1.
1 and iv2 : ic2 =⇒ ie2 ℜ2 ie′
ℜ1
ℜ2
simplify(ic1, ic2)
derived inv
*
⊆
*
⊆
NIL
ic′
⊆
=
=
⊆
=
=
ic′
ic′
ic′
NIL
1 ∩ ie′
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie2) ⊆ (ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie2) ⊆ (ie1 ∩ ie′
2)
1 ∩ ie′
ic′ =⇒ (ie′
1 ∩ ie2) ⊆ (ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie2) ⊆ (ie′
1 ∩ ie2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie′
2) ⊆ (ie′
1 ∩ ie′
2)
1 ∩ ie′
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie2) ⊆ (ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie2) = (ie1 ∩ ie′
2)
1 ∩ ie′
ic′ =⇒ (ie′
1 ∩ ie2) = (ie′
2)
1 ∩ ie2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie2) ⊆ (ie′
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie′
2) ⊆ (ie′
1 ∩ ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie2) ⊆ (ie′
1 ∩ ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie2) ⊆ (ie1 ∩ ie′
2)
1 ∩ ie′
ic′ =⇒ (ie′
1 ∩ ie2) ⊆ (ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie2) = (ie′
1 ∩ ie2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie′
2) = (ie′
1 ∩ ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie2) = (ie′
1 ∩ ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie2) = (ie1 ∩ ie′
2)
1 ∩ ie′
ic′ =⇒ (ie′
1 ∩ ie2) = (ie′
2)
1 ∩ ie2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie2) = (ie′
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∩ ie′
1 ∩ ie′
2) = (ie′
2)
Table 2. XCombine for Arbitrary Invariants
5. DEPLOYMENT PHASE
Once an agent is up and running, it is continuously confronted with requests for its
services. One crucial observation is that there might be enormous overlap among
these requests. These overlaps can be exploited if a given set C of code call con-
ditions are merged in a way that executes common portions only once. However,
in order to exploit commonalities, we must first determine the type of those com-
monalities, that is we must first identify code call conditions (1) that are equivalent
to other code call conditions, (2) that are implied by other code call conditions
and (3) that overlap with other code call conditions. Moreover, given two code
call conditions ccc1 and ccc2, it might be the case that they are neither equivalent,
nor implied, nor overlapped. On the other hand, parts of ccc1 and ccc2 maybe
equivalent, implied or overlapped. We also want to exploit such cases. This gives
rise to the following definition:
Definition 5.1 (Sub-Code Call Condition). Let ccc = χ1&χ2& . . . &χn be a code
call condition. cccj := χi1 &χi2 & . . . &χij , for 1 ≤ i1, . . . ij ≤ n and il 6= ik ∀1 ≤
l, k ≤ j is called a sub-code call condition of ccc.
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
23
ℜ1
ℜ2
simplify(ic1, ic2)
derived inv
*
⊆
*
⊆
NIL
ic′
⊆
=
=
⊆
=
=
ic′
ic′
ic′
NIL
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie2) ⊆ (ie′
1 ∪ ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie2) ⊆ (ie1 ∪ ie′
2)
1 ∪ ie′
ic′ =⇒ (ie′
1 ∪ ie2) ⊆ (ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie2) ⊆ (ie′
1 ∪ ie2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie′
2) ⊆ (ie′
1 ∪ ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie2) ⊆ (ie′
1 ∪ ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie2) = (ie1 ∪ ie′
2)
1 ∪ ie′
ic′ =⇒ (ie′
1 ∪ ie2) = (ie′
2)
1 ∪ ie2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie2) ⊆ (ie′
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie′
2) ⊆ (ie′
1 ∪ ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie2) ⊆ (ie′
1 ∪ ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie2) ⊆ (ie1 ∪ ie′
2)
1 ∪ ie′
ic′ =⇒ (ie′
1 ∪ ie2) ⊆ (ie′
2)
1 ∪ ie2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie2) = (ie′
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie′
1 ∪ ie′
2) = (ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie2) = (ie′
1 ∪ ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie2) = (ie1 ∪ ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie′
1 ∪ ie2) = (ie′
1 ∪ ie′
2)
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie2) = (ie′
1 ∪ ie2)
1 ∪ ie′
2) = (ie′
ic′ =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie′
2)
Table 3. XCombine for Arbitrary Invariants
Example 5.2. Let ccc1 = χ1&χ2&χ3&χ4&χ5. Then, χ1&χ2&χ3, χ1&χ3&χ5 and
χ2&χ5 are some sub-code call conditions of ccc1.
Note that a code call condition with k atomic/(in)equality code call conditions
has 2k different sub-code call conditions. We are now ready to define equivalent,
implied and overlapping sub-code call conditions χ, χ
. To do so, we need to fix
the variable(s) in each ccc to which we want to project (see Definition 2.15: the
ik i
sequence hvi1 , . . . , vik i of variables occurring in χ1, and the sequence hv
of variables occurring in χ2 are important). Often the sequences consist just of one
single variable: this is the case when there is only one non-base variable occurring
in the ccc's. In that case we do not explicitly mention the sequences.
i1 , . . . , v
′
′
′
Definition 5.3 (Equivalent (Sub-) CCC). Two (sub-) code call conditions χ1 and
i,
χ2 are said to be equivalent w.r.t. the sequences hvi1 , . . . , vik i and hv
denoted by χ1 ≡ χ2, if and only if for all states S of the agent and all assignments
θ, it is the case that
i1 , . . . , v
ik
′
′
[χ1]S,θ,hvi1 ,... ,vik i = [χ2]S,θ,hv
′
i1
,... ,v
′
ik
i.
In the case of equivalent ccc's, we only need to execute one of the sub-code call
conditions. We can use the cached solutions for the other sub-code call condition.
Example 5.4. The ccc in(C, excel : chart (excelFile, FinanceRec, day)) is equiva-
i to the ccc in(C′, excel : chart (excelFile, Rec, day)),
lent wrt. the sequences hCi, hC
since the two code call conditions unify with the mgU γ = [FinanceRec/Rec].
′
Definition 5.5 (Implied (Sub-) CCC). A (sub-) code call condition χ1 is said to
imply another (sub-) code call condition χ2 wrt. the sequences hvi1 , . . . , vik i and
24
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
′
′
i1 , . . . , v
hv
all assignments θ, it is the case that
ik
i, denoted by χ1 → χ2, if and only if for all states S of the agent and
[χ1]S,θ,hvi1 ,... ,vik i ⊆ [χ2]S,θ,hv
′
i1
,... ,v
′
ik
i,
and it is not the case that χ1 ≡ χ2.
In the case of implied ccc's, we execute and cache the solutions of χ2. In order
to evaluate χ1, all we need to do is to use the cached results to restrict the solution
set of χ2.
Example 5.6. The code call condition in(T1, spatial : range(map1, 5, 5, 30)) im-
plies the code call condition in(T2, spatial : range(map1, 5, 5, 50)), because all the
points that are within 30 units of the point (5, 5) are also within 50 units of (5, 5).
As mentioned above, in this case, we suppress the sequences hT1i and hT2i.
Definition 5.7 (Overlapping (Sub-) CCC). Two (sub-) code call conditions χ1
i,
and χ2 are said to be overlapping wrt. the sequences hvi1 , . . . , vik i and hv
denoted by χ1 ⊥ χ2, if and only if for some states S of the agent and for some as-
signments θ, it is the case that
i1 , . . . , v
ik
′
′
[χ1]S,θ,hvi1 ,... ,vik i ∩ [χ2]S,θ,hv
′
i1
,... ,v
′
ik
i 6= ∅,
and neither χ1 → χ2 nor χ2 → χ1.
In the case of overlapping ccc's, we execute and cache the solutions of χ3, where
χ3 is a code call condition the solution of which is set equal to the union of the
solution sets of χ1 and χ2. In order to evaluate both χ1 and χ2, we need to access
the cache and restrict the solution set of χ3 to those of χ1's and χ2's solution sets.
Note that the definition of overlapping ccc's requires that the intersection of the
solution sets of χ1 and χ2 be non-empty for some state of the agent. This implies
there might be states of the agent, where the intersection is empty. However, the
solution set of χ3 in such a case still contains the solutions to χ1 and χ2.
Example 5.8. The code call condition in(T1, rel : rngselect (emp, age, 25, 35)) over-
laps with the code call condition in(T2, rel : rngselect (emp, age, 30, 40)), because all
employees between the ages 30 and 35 satisfy both code call conditions.
In order to identify various relationships between code call conditions, we use
the derived invariants that are computed at development phase. We are now faced
with the following problem:
Definition 5.9 (Common sub-ccc identification problem). Given a set of code call
conditions C={ccc1, ccc2, . . . , C = cccn}, and a set of derived invariants, I ∗, find
all sub-code call conditions of Vn
-- equivalent with respect to I ∗,
-- imply one another with respect to I ∗,
-- overlap with each other with respect to I ∗.
i=1 ccci that are
The brute-force solution to the above problem is to choose two code call con-
ditions, ccci and cccj from C, then traverse the list of invariants, I ∗, and apply
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
25
Brute-Force-CSI(C,I ∗)
/* Input:
/*
/* Output: Eq = {(χi, χj ) χi ≡ χj }
/*
/*
C = {ccc1, ccc2, . . . , cccn}
*/
I ∗ = {inv1, inv2, . . . , invm} */
*/
*/
I = {(χi, χj) χi → χj }
O = {(χi, χj, χk) χi ⊥ χj and χi → χk and χj → χk} /¿*/
i=1 Ci
SC := Vn
SC p := all sub-code call conditions of SC
for all χi ∈ SC p do
for all χj 6= χi ∈ SC p do
for all inv ∈ I ∗ do
ApplyInvariant(inv, χi, χj, Eq, I, O)
ApplyInvariant(inv, χj , χi, Eq, I, O)
Return (Eq, I, O)
End-Algorithm
Fig. 7. Brute-Force CSI Algorithm
each invariant to various sub-code call conditions of ccci and cccj. The algorithm
Brute-Force-CSI, given in Figure 7, implements this approach.
The Brute-Force-CSI algorithm makes use of an ApplyInvariant routine
which takes as input an invariant and two sub-code call conditions, as well as
the equivalent, implied and overlapped sub-code call conditions sets. It applies the
invariant to the sub-code call conditions, and inserts the relationship entailed by
the invariant into the respective set. This routine is given in Figure 8. Note that
we need to call ApplyInvariant twice with different relative orders for χi and χj.
ApplyInvariant(inv, χi, χj, Eq, I, O)
if (iv is of the form ic =⇒ ie1 = ie2) and
(∃θ, such that χi = (ie1)θ and χj = (ie2)θ and (ic)θ = true) then
Eq = Eq ∪{(χi, χj)} // χi ≡ χj
else if (inv is of the form ic =⇒ ie1 ⊆ ie2) and
(∃θ, such that χi = (ie1)θ and χj = (ie2)θ and (ic)θ = true) then
I = I ∪{(χi, χj)} // χi → χj
else if (inv is of the form ic =⇒ (ie1 ∪ ie2) = ie3) and
(∃θ, such that χi = (ie1)θ and χj = (ie2)θ and (ic)θ = true) then
χk = (ie3)θ
O = O ∪{(χi, χj, χk)} // χi ⊥ χj
Return
End-Algorithm
Fig. 8. ApplyInvariant Routine
Assuming ApplyInvariant takes constant time to execute, the complexity of the
Brute-Force-CSI algorithm is O(m ∗ 22k), where m is the number of invariants in
I ∗ and k is the number of atomic/(in)equality code call conditions in SC. However,
one important observation is that we do not have to apply each invariant to all
possible sub-code call conditions. An invariant expression can only unify with a
26
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
(sub-) code call condition if both contain "similar" (sub-) code call conditions. The
performance of the Brute-Force-CSI algorithm can be significantly improved by
making use of this observation. But, before describing this improved CSI algorithm,
let us first define similar (sub-) code call conditions.
Definition 5.10 (Similar (sub-) code call conditions). Two (sub-) code all condi-
tions χ1 and χ2 are said to be similar if one of the following holds:
-- Both χ1 and χ2 are atomic code call conditions of the form in(·, d : f (·)).
-- Both χ1 and χ2 are equality/inequality code call conditions.
-- χ1 is of the form χ11&χ12 and χ2 is of the form χ21&χ22, and χ11 is similar to
χ21 and χ12 is similar to χ22.
Improved-CSI(C,I ∗)
/* Input:
/*
/* Output: Eq = {(χi, χj ) χi ≡ χj}
/*
/*
C = {ccc1, ccc2, . . . , cccn}
I ∗ = {inv1, inv2, . . . , invm} */
*/
*/
I = {(χi, χj) χi → χj }
O = {(χi, χj , χk) χi ⊥ χjand χi → χk and χj → χk} */
{G1, G2, . . . , Gl} := Classify(C);
for all Gi for i = 1, . . . l do
I = {inv inv contains similar sub − code call conditions with Gi}
for all χj ∈ Gi do
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9) Return (Eq, I, O)
(10) End-Algorithm
for all χk 6= χj ∈ Gi do
for all inv ∈ I do
ApplyInvariant(inv, χj, χk, Eq, I, O)
ApplyInvariant(inv, χk, χj , Eq, I, O)
Fig. 9.
Improved CSI Algorithm
The Improved-CSI algorithm is given in Figure 9. Lines (1) and (3) of the
algorithm need further explanation. In order to facilitate fast unification of sub-
code call conditions with invariant expressions, the Classify(C) routine in the
Improved-CSI algorithm organizes sub-code call conditions into groups such that
each group contains similar sub-code call conditions. Example 5.11 demonstrates
how Classify(C) works.
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
27
χ
11
χ
12
χ
13
χ
21
χ
22
χ
23
χ
31
χ
32
χ
33
&χ
11
χ
12
χ
21
&
χ
22
χ
31
χ
32
&
χ
12
&
χ
13
χ
22
&
χ
23
χ
32
&
χ
33
χ
11
&
χ
13
χ
21
χ
23
&
χ
31
χ
33
&
χ
11
χ
12
&
χ
13
&
χ
21
χ
22
& χ
23
&
χ
31
& χ
32
χ
33
&
group-0:
rel : select ()
group-1:
eq/ineq
group-2:
excel : chart ()
group-3:
rel : select () &
eq/ineq
group-4:
eq/ineq &
excel : chart ()
group-5:
rel : select () &
excel : chart ()
group-6:
rel : select () &
eq/ineq &
excel : chart ()
Fig. 10. Organization of Sub-code Call Conditions of Example 5.11
Example 5.11. Consider the following code call conditions:
χ11 = in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financeRel, sales, "≥", 10K))
χ12 = FinanceRec.date ≥ "6/6/2000"
χ13 = in(C, excel : chart (excelFile, FinanceRec, day))
χ21 = in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financeRel, sales, "≥", 20K))
χ22 = FinanceRec.date = "7/7/2000"
χ23 = in(C, excel : chart (excelFile, FinanceRec, day))
χ31 = in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financeRel, sales, "≥", 30K))
χ32 = FinanceRec.date = "7/7/2000"
χ33 = in(C, excel : chart (excelFile, FinanceRec, month)).
Let ccc1 = χ11&χ12&χ13, ccc2 = χ21&χ22&χ23 and ccc3 = χ31&χ32&χ33. Figure
10 shows how sub-code call conditions of ccc1, ccc2 and ccc3 are grouped.
Line (3) of the algorithm identifies a subset I ⊆ I ∗ of invariants that are applica-
ble to a given group of sub-code call conditions. In order to speed up this task, the
invariants are stored in a hash table based on the in(·, d : f (·))'s they contain. Given
a group of sub-code call conditions, we apply only those invariants which contain
similar sub-code call conditions (lines (7) and (8)). The Improved-CSI algorithm
also uses ApplyInvariant to compute various relationships. However, the number
of times it is invoked is much smaller than the number of times it is invoked in
Brute-Force-CSI algorithm. Example 5.12 demonstrates how Improved-CSI
algorithm works.
28
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
Example 5.12. The algorithm first processes group-0 (Figure 10). It identifies all
invariants containing in(·, rel : select (·)) code calls. Then, it tries to apply each of
those invariants to various combinations of this group. For example, the following
invariant will unify with pairs of code call conditions in this group:
Rel = Rel′ ∧ Attr = Attr′ ∧ Op = Op′ = "≥" ∧ Val > Val′
=⇒
in(X, rel : select (Rel, Attr, Op, V)) ⊆ in(Y, rel : select (Rel′, Attr′, Op′, V′)).
As a result of the application of this invariant the following relationships are found:
in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financeRel, sales, "≥"20K)) →
in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financeRel, sales, "≥", 10K))
in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financeRel, sales, "≥", 30K)) →
in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financeRel, sales, "≥", 10K))
in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financeRel, sales, "≥", 30K)) →
in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financeRel, sales, "≥"20K))
The same procedure is applied to group-1 resulting in the discovery of the fol-
lowing relationships:
FinanceRec.date = "7/7/2000" → FinanceRec.date ≥ "6/6/2000"
FinanceRec.date = "7/7/2000" ≡ FinanceRec.date = "7/7/2000"
As a result of processing group-2, the following relationship is found:
in(C, excel : chart (excelFile, FinanceRec, day))
≡
in(C, excel : chart (excelFile, FinanceRec, day)).
We process the other groups similarly. When processing group-5, we only apply
invariants containing both in(·, rel : select (·)) and in(·, excel : chart (·)) code calls.
Finally, the following relationships are found:
χ21 → χ11
χ22 ≡ χ32
χ13 ≡ χ23
χ21&χ22 → χ11&χ12
χ22&χ23 → χ12&χ13
χ21&χ23 → χ11&χ13
χ21&χ22&χ23 → χ11&χ12&χ13
χ31 → χ11
χ22 → χ12
χ31 → χ21
χ32 → χ12
χ31&χ32 → χ11&χ12 χ31&χ32 → χ21&χ22
.
It is important to note that in the above algorithms the derived invariants computed
during the development phase are used to match the sub-code call conditions. This
assumes that the derived invariants are complete, that is they contain all possible
relationships derivable from I. However, this may be too costly to compute. More-
over, we may end up storing a lot of invariants which never match with any of the
sub-code call conditions. One solution to this problem is to restrict the length of
invariant expressions in the derived invariants. However, in that case we need to
perform some inferencing at deployment to make sure that we compute all sub-code
call condition relationships.
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
29
Hence, in the case of incomplete derived invariants, we also need to perform a
second phase where we use the inference rules in Table 4 to deduce further rela-
tionships.
if χi ≡ χj and χk ≡ χl then (χi& χk) ≡ (χj & χl)
if χi ≡ χj and χk → χl then (χi& χk) → (χj & χl)
if χi → χj and χk → χl then (χi& χk) → (χj & χl)
Table 4.
Inference Rules Used in Improved-CSI Algorithm
Once the agent identifies equivalent, implied and overlapping sub-code call con-
ditions in C, it merges those sub-code call conditions to decrease execution costs.
In the next section we will describe how to merge a set of sub-code call conditions.
5.1 Merging Code Call Conditions
In this section, we first describe a technique for evaluating costs of code call con-
ditions. We then describe two algorithms -- the DFMerge and the BFMerge
algorithms -- which are used to process the set C = {ccc1, ccc2, ..., cccn} of code call
conditions. Both of these algorithms are parameterized by a selection strategy.
Later, in our experiments, we will try multiple alternative selection strategies in
order to determine which ones work the best. We will also compare the perfor-
mance of the DFMerge and BFMerge algorithms so as to assess the efficiency of
computation of these algorithms.
5.1.1 Cost Estimation for Code Call Conditions. In this section, we describe how
to estimate the cost of merged code call conditions for a set C = {ccc1, ccc2, ..., cccn}
of code call conditions. We assume that there is a cost model that can assess costs
of individual code call conditions. Such costing mechanisms have been already
developed for heterogeneous sources by [Du et al. 1992; Adali et al. 1996; Naacke
et al. 1998; Roth et al. 1999]. Using this, we may state the cost of a single code
call condition.
Definition 5.13 (Single Code Call Condition Cost). The cost of a code call con-
dition ccc is defined as: cost(ccc) = Pχi∈ccc cost(χi) where cost(χi) is the cost of
executing the atomic or equality/inequality code call condition χi. Note that the cost
of χi may include a variety of parameters such as disk/buffer read time, network
retrieval time, network delays, etc.
We may now extend this definition to describe the coalesced cost of executing
two code call conditions ccck and ccck+1.
Definition 5.14 (Coalesced cost). The coalesced cost of executing code call condi-
tions ccck and ccck+1 by exploiting equivalent, implied and overlapped sub-code call
conditions of ccck and ccck+1 is defined as:
coalesced cost(ccck, ccck+1) = cost(ccck) + cost(ccck+1) − gain(ccck, ccck+1)
where gain(ccck, ccck+1) is the cost of the savings obtained by sharing sub-code call
conditions between ccck and ccck+1.
We are now left with the problem of defining the concept of gain used above.
30
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
Definition 5.15 (Gain of two sub-ccc's). Suppose χi and χj are sub-code call con-
ditions in ccck and ccck+1, respectively, and I is a set of invariants. Then, the gain
of executing χi, χj is defined as:
gain(χi, χj) =
if I = χi ≡ χj
cost(χi)
cost(χi) − cost(eval(χi, χj )) if I = χi → χj
expk
if I = χi ⊥ χj and I = χi → χk and
0
I = χj → χk
otherwise
where expk = cost(χi)+cost(χj)−cost(χk)−cost(eval(χi, χk))−cost(eval(χj, χk))
and eval(χi, χj) is the task of executing code call condition χi by using the results
of code call condition χj.
An explanation of the above definition is important.
If code call conditions
χi and χj are equivalent, then we only need to execute one of them, leading to
If χi → χj (i.e. χj's answers include those of χi) then
a saving of cost(χi).
we can first evaluate χj, and then select the answers of χi from the answers to
χj. A third possibility is that χi and χj overlap, and there exists a code call
condition χk such that χk is implied by both χi, χj. In this case, we can compute
χk first, and then use the result to select the answers of χi, χj. The cost of this is
cost(χk) + cost(eval(χi, χk)) + cost(eval(χj, χk)). As the cost of executing χi, χj
sequentially is cost(χi) + cost(χj ), the gain is computed by taking the difference,
leading to the third expression. We now define the gain for two code call conditions
in terms of the gains of their sub-code call conditions involved.
Definition 5.16 (Gain of two code call conditions). The gain for ccck and ccck+1
is defined as:
gain(ccck, ccck+1) =
X
χi∈ccck,χj ∈ccck+1
gain(χi, χj).
Example 5.17. Consider the following code call conditions:
χ1 : in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financeRel, sales, "≥", 20K)),
χ2 : in(C, excel : chart (C, FinanceRec, day)),
χ3 : in(FinanceRec, rel : select (financeRel, sales, "≥", 10K))
Let ccc1 = χ1 & χ2 and ccc2 = χ3. It is evident that ANS(χ1) ⊆ ANS(χ3). Suppose
further that the costs of these code call conditions are given as: cost (χ1) = 25,
cost (χ2) = 10, cost (χ3) = 15 and cost (eval (χ1, χ3))=10. Then, gain (ccc1, ccc2)
= Pχi∈ccc1,χj ∈ccc2
gain(χi, χj) = gain (χ1, χ3) because gain (χ2, χ3)=0, as there
is no relation between code call conditions χ2 and χ3. As χ1 → χ3, gain (χ1, χ3)
= cost (χ1)- cost (eval (χ1, χ3))= 25 - 10 =15. Then, the coalesced cost of
ccc1 and ccc2 is given by, coalesced cost(ccc1, ccc2) = cost(ccc1) + cost(ccc2) −
gain(ccc1, ccc2) = (25 + 10) + 15 - 15 = 35.
5.1.2 Merging Code Call Conditions. We now develop two algorithms that pro-
duce a global merged code call evaluation graph for a set, C = {ccc1, ccc2, ..., cccn}
of code call conditions. These algorithms use the cceg representation of each code
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
31
call condition ccci, and merge two graphs at a time until all graphs are merged into
a final global code call evaluation graph. They make use of a merge routine which
merges code call evaluation graphs by using the Eq, I and O sets generated by the
Improved-CSI algorithm.
While merging two code call evaluation graphs, the merge routine may need
to delete some nodes from the ccegs. Recall that in a cceg, a node represents
an atomic/(in)equality code call condition. The following procedure is applied
recursively to delete a node χi from a code call evaluation graph:
(1) First the node χi is removed.
(2) Then all incoming edges (χj, χi) and all outgoing edges (χi, χl) are deleted.
(3) If any of the nodes χj, encountered in the previous step, has no outgoing edges,
then node χj is also deleted recursively.
The merge routine uses a set of three transformations which we define now.
The first transformation takes a set of graphs of equivalent code call conditions and
creates a single graph.
Definition 5.18 (Equivalence Transformation, T1). Let C = {C1, C2, . . . , Cm} be
of code call conditions. Let CCEG = {cceg(C1), cceg(C2), . . . , cceg(Cm)} be their
code call evaluation graphs. Given a set Eq of equivalent code call conditions, which
are sub-cccs of the Ci's, the equivalence transformation T1 is defined as follows:
T1:cceg(C) = (S1≤i≤m Vi, S1≤i≤m Ei)
Eq′ := {(χi, χj) (χi, χj) ∈ Eq and ∄(χ′
j) ∈ Eq such that χi is a sub-ccc
i, χ′
of χ′
i and χj is a sub- ccc of χ′
j }
for all (χi, χj) ∈ Eq′ do
if gain(χi, χj) > 0 then
delete all the nodes corresponding to atomic cccs in χi
from cceg(C) recursively
delete all outgoing edges hχi, χki ∈ cceg(C)
create the edges hχj, χki ∈ cceg (C)
The second transformation (T2) below takes a set of graphs of code call condi-
tions, together with a set of known implications between sub-code call conditions of
these code call conditions. Using these known implications, it merges these graphs
into one.
Definition 5.19 (Implication Transformation, T2). Let C = {C1, C2, . . . , Cm} be
of code call conditions. Let CCEG = {cceg(C1), cceg(C2), . . . , cceg(Cm)} be their
code call evaluation graphs. Given a set I of implied code call conditions, which are
sub-cccs of the Ci's, the implication transformation T2 is defined as follows:
T2:cceg(C) = (S1≤i≤m Vi, S1≤i≤m Ei)
I ′ := {(χi, χj) (χi, χj) ∈ I and ∄(χ′
j) ∈ I such that χi is a sub-ccc
i, χ′
of χ′
i and χj is a sub- ccc of χ′
j }
for all (χi, χj) ∈ I ′ do
if gain(χi, χj) > 0 then
32
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
delete all incoming edges hχl, χii ∈ cceg(C) to χi recursively
create the edge hχj, χii ∈ cceg(C)
set cost (χi) to cost (eval (χi, χj))
The third transformation (T3) below takes a set of graphs of code call conditions,
together with a set of known overlaps between sub-code call conditions of these code
call conditions. Using these known overlaps, it merges these graphs into one.
Definition 5.20 (Overlap Transformation, T3). We consider the set C = {C1, C2, . . . , Cm}
of code call conditions. Let CCEG = {cceg(C1), cceg(C2), . . . , cceg(Cm)} be their
code call evaluation graphs. Given a set O of overlapping code call conditions, which
are sub-cccs of Ci's, the overlap transformation T3 is defined as follows:
T3:cceg(C) = (S1≤i≤m Vi, S1≤i≤m Ei)
O′ := {(χi, χj, χk) (χi, χj) ∈ O and ∄(χ′
k) ∈ O such that χi is a sub-ccc
i, χ′
j, χ′
of χ′
i and χj is a sub- ccc of χ′
j }
for all (χi, χj) ∈ O′ do
if gain(χi, χj) > 0 then
create a node χk ∈ cceg(C)
create edges hχk, χii ∈ cceg(C) and hχk, χji ∈ cceg(C)
delete all incoming edges hχl, χii ∈ cceg(C) to χi recursively
delete all incoming edges hχm, χji ∈ cceg(C) to χj recursively
create edges hχl, χki ∈ cceg(C) and hχm, χki ∈ cceg(C)
set cost (χi) to cost (eval (χi, χk))
set cost (χj) to cost (eval (χj, χk))
The merge routine merely applies the above three transformations sequentially
in the order T1),(T2),(T3).
Definition 5.21 (The Merge Routine). The merge routine takes as input a set
of code call evaluation graphs, and the sets of equivalent, implied and overlapped
sub-code call conditions, and uses T1, T2 and T3 to produce a single code call
evaluation graph. It is given by the following:
merge(CCEG, Eq, I, O) = T3(T2(T1(CCEG, Eq), I), O).
The merge routine works as follows: First, it gets the sets of equivalent, im-
plied and overlapped sub-code call conditions from the Improved-CSI algorithm.
Then, it applies the merge-transformations in the order: T1, T2, T3. The intu-
ition behind this order is the fact that the maximum gain is obtained by merging
equivalent code call conditions.
The merge routine can be utilized with any search paradigm (e.g. depth-first
search, dynamic programming, etc.) to obtain an algorithm which creates a "global"
code call evaluation graph. In Figures 11 and 12, we provide two algorithms that
use the merge routine to create a global code call evaluation graph. Both algo-
rithms merge two graphs at a time until a single graph is obtained. The DFMerge
algorithm starts with the empty graph, and chooses the next "best" code call eval-
uation graph to merge with the current global code call evaluation graph. This
process is iteratively executed. On the other hand, the BFMerge algorithm picks
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
33
the "best" pair of code call evaluation graphs to merge from the ToDo list, which
initially contains all code call evaluation graphs. Upon merging, the merged code
call evaluation graph replaces the two code call evaluation graphs being merged.
This process is executed iteratively till only one code call evaluation graph remains
in the ToDo list.
DFMerge(CCEG, Eq, I, O)
/* Input: CCEG = {cceg1, ..., ccegn} */
/* Output: a global cceg
*/
T oDo := CCEG;
currentGraph := selectNext(T oDo, NIL);
delete currentGraph from T oDo;
while (T oDo is not empty) do
nextGraph := selectNext(T oDo, currentGraph);
delete nextGraph from T oDo;
currentGraph := merge({currentGraph, nextGraph}, Eq, I, O);
Return currentGraph;
End-Algorithm
Fig. 11. DFMerge Algorithm
BFMerge(CCEG, Eq, I, O)
/* Input: CCEG = {cceg1, ..., ccegn} */
/* Output: a global cceg
*/
T oDo := CCEG;
while (card(T oDo) > 1 ) do
(ccegi, ccegj) := selectNextPair(T oDo);
delete ccegi, ccegj from T oDo;
newGraph := merge({ccegi, ccegj}, Eq, I, O);
insert newGraph into T oDo;
Return ccegi ∈ T oDo;
End-Algorithm
Fig. 12. BFMerge Algorithms
The success of both the DFMerge and BFMerge algorithms depends very
much on how the next "best" merge candidates) are selected. Below, we present
three alternative strategies for doing this which we have used in our experiments.
Strategy 1:
DFMerge: Choose the graph which has the largest number of equivalent code
call conditions with the currentGraph.
BFMerge: Choose a pair of graphs which have the largest number of equiva-
lent code call conditions.
Strategy 2:
34
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
DFMerge: Choose the graph which has the largest number of equivalent, im-
plied or overlapped code call conditions in common with the currentGraph.
BFMerge: Choose a pair of graphs which have the largest number of equiva-
lent, implied or overlapped code call conditions between the two of them.
Strategy 3:
DFMerge: Choose the graph which leads to the greatest gain with the the
currentGraph.
BFMerge: Choose the pair of graphs the associated gain of which is maximal.
5.1.3 Executing The Global CCEG. The final problem that needs to be addressed
is to find an execution order for the global code call evaluation graph. Any topo-
logical sort of the global cceg is a valid execution order. However, there might
be several topological sorts that can be obtained from the global cceg, and some
of them might be preferable to others. For example, a topological sort that gives
preferences to certain nodes, i.e. outputs them earlier in the sequence, might be de-
sirable. In order to find such an execution order, we compute weights for topological
sorts.
Definition 5.22 (Weight of a topological sort). Let π be a topological sort, and
weightπ(i) be the weight of the ith node in the topological sort. If we have n total
nodes, the weight of π, denoted by weight(π), is given by
weight(π) =
n
X
i=1
i ∗ weightπ(i)
Any topological sort that minimizes weight(π) gives a desirable execution order.
Besides, we can implement various strategies with this function simply by assigning
weights accordingly. For example, if we want to favor nodes that output results,
we can assign larger weights to such nodes. In order to find the topological sort
with the minimum weight(π), we use a modified topological sort algorithm which
is given in Figure 13.
FindExecutionOrder(cceg)
/* Input: global cceg
*/
/* Output: a topological sort π that minimizes weight(π) */
D := {v v has indegree 0}
while D is not empty do
v′ := node with the heighest weight in D,
output v′,
remove v′ from D,
delete all outgoing edges of v′,
D := D ∪ {v v has in-degree 0, v /∈ D}
End-Algorithm
Fig. 13. Modified Topological Sort Algorithm That Finds the Minimal weight(π)
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
35
6. EXPERIMENTS
We ran various sets of experiments on a Sun Ultra1 machine with 320 MB memory
running Solaris 2.6. In the first set of these experiments, we study the execution
time of the Create-cceg algorithm. Specifically, we evaluate the performance of
this algorithm with varying number of dependencies and conjunctions in the code
call conditions. In the second set of the experiments, we study the execution time of
the development phase component. In particular, we study the trade-offs involved
in the generic Chk Imp Algorithm. In the last set of experiments, we demonstrate
the efficiency of the Improved-CSI Algorithm, as well as the merging algorithms.
We compare the performance of the merging algorithms (with different strategies)
with the A∗ algorithm of [Sellis 1988]. Our implementation of the development
phase and deployment phase components involved over 9, 500 lines of C++ code.
6.1 Performance Evaluation of the Create-cceg Algorithm
To evaluate the performance of the Create-cceg algorithm, we generated several
code call conditions, with varying number of conjuncts and number of dependencies.
In the first set of experiments, we kept the number of dependencies constant and
varied the number of conjuncts from 5 to 40. We repeated the same experiments
when 10, 15, 20 and 25 dependencies are present. For each combination of number
of dependencies and conjuncts, we created 500 code call conditions and recorded
the average running time. Figure 14 shows the results. As seen from the figure, the
execution time increases linearly with the number of conjuncts. The Create-cceg
algorithm is extremely fast, taking only 14 milliseconds for code call conditions
involving 40 conjunctions and 25 dependencies.
Execution Time of Create-CCEG Algorithm (fixed no of dependencies)
no of dependencies = 10
no of dependencies = 15
no of dependencies = 20
no of dependencies = 25
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
)
s
c
e
s
i
l
l
i
m
(
e
m
i
t
0
5
10
15
20
25
number of conjuncts
30
35
40
Fig. 14. Execution Time of Create-cceg (constant number of dependencies)
In the second, set of experiments, we kept the number of conjuncts constant,
and varied the number of dependencies from 10 to 50. We ran four experiments
with 10, 20, 30 and 40 number of conjuncts. Again, we generated 500 code call
conditions for each combination and used the average running time. The results are
given in Figure 15. Again, the execution time increases linearly with the number
of dependencies.
36
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
)
s
c
e
s
i
l
l
i
m
(
e
m
i
t
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
10
Execution Time of Create-CCEG Algorithm (fixed no of conjuncts)
conjuncts = 10
conjuncts = 20
conjuncts = 30
conjuncts = 40
15
20
25
35
number of dependencies
30
40
45
50
Fig. 15. Execution Time of Create-cceg (constant number of conjuncts)
6.2 Performance Evaluation of the Development Phase Component
In order to evaluate the performance of the development phase component, we con-
ducted a set of experiments which use the Chk Ent algorithm described in Sec-
tion 4 and different instances of the Chk Imp Algorithm. We varied the threshold
and the Axiomatic Inference System used by Chk Imp. The instances we
used are described in Table 5. As the instance number increases, the complexity of
the Chk Imp Algorithm also increases.
Instance Threshold Axiomatic Inference System
Instance 0
∞
⊆ χ
χ
χ ∩ χ′ ⊆ χ
χ
⊆ χ ∪ χ′
Instance i
Instance ω
i
∞
All rules in Appendix B.
All rules in Appendix B.
Table 5.
Instances of the Chk Imp Algorithm
We ran a set of experiments with two different data sets, namely spatial domain
invariants and the relational domain invariants, which are given in Appendix C. For
each instance of the algorithm we ran the development phase component several
times until we get an accuracy of 3%, with 3% confidence interval. Figure 16 shows
the execution time of the Compute-Derived-Invariants algorithm for these two
data sets. As the only difference is the Chk Imp Algorithm instance employed,
the x-axis is labeled with those instances.
Note that the x-axis used a logarithmic-scale and hence, we may conclude that
execution time increases linearly with the instance number, until instance 4096, and
increases exponentially after that. However, we have observed that all instances
starting from instance 4, produced the same final set of Derived Invariants,
18 invariants for the spatial domain, and 15 invariants for the relational domain.
For the relational domain invariants, the execution-time increases more rapidly
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
37
than the spatial case. The observed time increase is due to the time spent in
detecting failure. Memory overflows prevented us from running experiments with
larger threshold values.
)
s
c
e
s
(
e
m
i
t
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1
Execution Time of Development Phase
spatial
relational
4
16
64
256
CHK_IMP Instance
1024
4096
16384
65536
Fig. 16. Execution Time of Compute-Derived-Invariants
6.3 Performance Evaluation of the Deployment Phase Component
For the performance evaluation of the deployment phase component, we ran exper-
iments to evaluate both the execution times of the merging algorithms and the net
savings obtained by the algorithms. We will describe the experimental setting in
detail in the following:
In the experiments we assume a hdb agent that accesses relational and spatial
(PR-quadtree) data sources. We have built cost estimation modules for these two
sources where the cost calculations are similar to those of [Salzberg 1988]. We
also built an agent cost module which coordinates with the above two modules to
estimate the cost of a code call condition. The individual cost estimation modules
report the cost and the cardinality of their code call conditions to the agent cost
module. The agent cost model also includes network costs. For the experiments,
it is assumed that the data sources and the agent are on a fast Ethernet LAN. We
created a synthetic database schema given below, and used the cost estimates in
the experiments.
supplier(sname, pno, quantity)
product(pno, price, color)
map(name, x-location, y-location)
purchases(customer name, pno)
We used the ccc templates given in Table 6 in the experiments.
In Table 6,
Op = {≤, =, ≥}. Note that the last entry in Table 6 involves only relational data
sources.
By changing constants in these template code call conditions, we have created
various commonality relationships. We have constructed the following three types
of code call condition sets by using the above templates.
38
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
=(T1.sname, P.name)
Code Call Condition Template
in(T1, rdb1 : select2 (supplier, pno, "=", Val1, qty, Op1, Val2))
in(P, quadtree: range(map, X, Y, Rad))
in(T2, rdb2 : select(product, price, Op2, Val3)) & =(T1.pno, T2.pno)
in(T1, rdb1 : select2 (supplier, pno, "=", Val1, qty, Op1, Val2))
in(P, quadtree: range(map, X, Y, Rad))
=(T1.sname, P.name)
in(T2, rdb2 : rngselect(product, price, Val3, Val4)) & =(T1.pno, T2.pno)
in(T1, rdb1 : rngselect(supplier, qty, Val1, Val2))
&
&
in(T2, rdb2 : select(product, price, Op2, Val3)) & =(T1.pno, T2.pno)
in(T1, rdb1 : rngselect(supplier, qty, Val1, Val2))
in(T2, rdb2 : select(product, price, Op2, Val4))
in(T3, rdb3 : rngselect(purchases, pno, Val5, Val6)) & =(T1.pno, T3.pno)
in(P, quadtree: range(map, X, Y, Rad))
=(T1.pno, Val3)
=(T1.pno, T2.pno)
&
&
&
&
&
=(T1.sname, P.name)
=(T1.pno, Val3)
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
Table 6. Query Templates Used in the Experiments
Type 1: Such sets of code call conditions only contain equivalent code call con-
ditions.
Type 2: Such sets of code call conditions only contain both equivalent and implied
code call conditions.
Type 3: Such sets of code call conditions contain equivalent,implied and overlap-
ping code call conditions.
Before describing the experiments, let us first define the metrics we use in these
sets of experiments.
Definition 6.1 (Savings Percentage). Let C cost be the initial total cost of the set
of code call conditions, i. e., the sum of the individual code call condition costs,
fin cost be the cost of the global merged code call condition produced by the merg-
ing algorithm, IdCom cost be the execution time of the Improved-CSI algorithm
and Merge cost be the execution time of the merge algorithm employed. Then, the
savings percentage achieved by the merge algorithm is given by:
savings percentage =
C cost − fin cost − IdCom cost − Merge cost
C cost
We try to capture the net benefit of merging the code call conditions with the
savings percentage metric. Moreover, in order to remedy the difference between
high-cost code call conditions and low-cost code call conditions, we normalize the
savings percentage metric.
Definition 6.2 (Sharing factor). Let C = {C1, .., CN } be the set of given code call
conditions. Let [χ1], ..., [χm] be equivalence relations, where each [χi] contains a set
of equivalent code call conditions and card([χi]) ≥ 2, i = 1, .., m. Let I = {χi
such that χi /∈ [χj], j=1,..,m, and there exists at least one χk, such that χi → χk}.
And finally let 0 = {(χi, χj, χk) such that χi, χj /∈ [χk], k = 1, .., m, and χi, χj /∈
I, and χi ←→ χj, χk → χiand χk → χj}.
Then, the sharing factor of this set of code call conditions is given by:
Pm
i=1 card([χi]) ∗ card(χi) + Pχi∈I card(χi) + P(χi,χj ,χk)∈O card(χk)
PN
i=1 Pχj ∈Ci
card(χj )
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
39
The sharing factor basically gives the percentage of data objects shared among
code call conditions. The intuition behind this metric is that we expect to see
an increasing benefit from merging as the sharing among the code call conditions
increases. In this metric, we try to avoid counting the cardinality of any code call
condition more than once, so that the sharing factor is between 0% and 100%.
In order to compare our algorithms with a well known algorithm [Shim et al.
1994] for merging multiple relational database only queries using the A∗ algorithm,
we implemented an adapted version of the A∗ of [Shim et al. 1994]. We used
an improved version of their heuristic function. We adapted our Improved-CSI
algorithm to work with the A∗ algorithm. We enumerated the most promising 8
execution plans for each individual ccc and input those plans to the A∗ algorithm.
[Sellis and Ghosh 1990] also uses similar measures. In their case, they only have
equivalent relationships, hence the sharing factor metric is trivially calculated. In
their version of the savings percentage metric, they only measure the difference
between initial cost and the final cost obtained by merging, and fail to take into
account the cost of achieving that savings. Our experiments show that although
the A∗ algorithm finds better global results, the cost of obtaining those results is
so prohibitively high that the A∗ algorithm is often infeasible to use in practice.
In all of the experiments, the algorithms are run several times to obtain results
that are accurate within plus or minus 3%, with a 3% confidence interval.
)
s
c
e
s
i
l
l
i
m
(
e
m
i
t
n
o
i
t
u
c
e
x
e
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
2
Execution Time of IdentifyCommonCCCs Algorithm
Type 1 CCC sets
Type 2 CCC sets
Type 3 CCC sets
4
6
8
10
12
no of CCCs
14
16
18
20
Fig. 17. Execution Time of of Improved-CSI
6.3.1 The Execution Time of the Improved-CSI Algorithm. The Improved-
CSI algorithm has been ran with the three types of ccc sets. Figure 17 shows the
execution times of the algorithm as the number of ccc's in the set increases. As seen
from the figure, although the execution time is exponential with a small slope, it is
in the order of seconds. It takes only 6 seconds for the Improved-CSI algorithm
to find all relationships in a set containing 20 queries. Moreover, the execution
time increases as more types of relationships exist in the ccc sets. It has the highest
execution time for Type 3 ccc sets, and the lowest execution time for Type 1 ccc
sets.
40
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
6.3.2 Savings Achieved by the Merge Algorithms. In these experiments, we inves-
tigate the net savings the merge algorithms achieve for our three different types of
ccc sets, as well as for ccc sets involving only relational sources. We have 10 ccc's
in each set. The reason for this is that the A∗ algorithm exhausts memory for ccc
sets having more than 11-12 ccc's.
Figures 18, 19 and 20 show the savings percentage achieved for Type 1, 2 and
3 ccc sets, respectively. As seen from Figure 18, the A∗ algorithm performs as
well as our merge algorithms once the sharing factor exceeds approximately 30%.
We have not been able to run the A∗ algorithm for low sharing factors because
of the memory problem. The A∗ algorithm has an effective heuristic function for
equivalent ccc's, hence it is able to obtain high quality plans in a very short time.
However, as seen from the figure, our merge algorithms are also able to achieve the
same level of savings.
e
g
a
t
n
e
c
r
e
p
s
g
n
v
a
s
i
100
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
-500
0
Savings Percentage Achieved
DFMerge1
DFMerge2
DFMerge3
BFMerge1
BFMerge2
BFMerge3
ASTAR
20
40
sharing factor
60
80
100
Fig. 18. Net savings achieved with Type 1 ccc Sets
e
g
a
t
n
e
c
r
e
p
s
g
n
v
a
s
i
100
50
0
-50
-100
-150
-200
-250
0
Savings Percentage Achieved
DFMerge1
DFMerge2
DFMerge3
BFMerge1
BFMerge2
BFMerge3
ASTAR
20
40
sharing factor
60
80
100
Fig. 19. Net savings achieved with Type 2 ccc Sets
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
41
Figure 19 shows the results when there are both equivalent and implied ccc
relationships. This time the heuristic function of the A∗ algorithm is not as effective
as with Type 1 ccc sets, and the net savings it achieves are negative until very high
sharing factors. Although the A∗ algorithm finds low cost global execution plans,
the execution time of the algorithm is so high that the net savings are negative.
Our merge algorithms achieve very good net savings percentages. All the selection
strategies perform almost equally well, with BFMerge3 performing slightly better.
Figure 20 shows the net savings obtained when all three types of relationships
exist in the ccc sets. Note that the A∗ algorithm only considers equivalent and
implied relationships. The results are very similar to the previous experiment.
Again, our merge algorithms perform much better than the A∗ algorithm. Our
different select strategies have similar performances, with BFMerge3 performing
the best.
As the A∗ algorithm was devised only for relational data sources, we designed
another experiment involving only relational data sources. In this type of ccc sets,
we only allowed equivalent relationships, as the A∗ algorithm performed best with
equivalent ccc's. Figure 21 shows the net savings achieved in this case. As seen
from the figure, our algorithms perform as well as the A∗ algorithm for sharing
factor greater than 30%, and better for the rest.
e
g
a
t
n
e
c
r
e
p
s
g
n
v
a
s
i
100
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
-500
-600
0
Savings Percentage Achieved
DFMerge1
DFMerge2
DFMerge3
BFMerge1
BFMerge2
BFMerge3
ASTAR
20
40
sharing factor
60
80
100
Fig. 20. Net savings achieved with Type 3 ccc Sets
These results suggest that although our algorithms explore a smaller search space
with respect to the A∗ algorithm, the savings we obtain in practice are as good
as that of the A∗ algorithm, and the high execution cost of the A∗ algorithm is
prohibitive.
6.3.3 Execution Times of Merge Algorithms. In these experiments, we studied
the execution times of our Merge algorithms and the A∗ algorithm. Figures 22, 23
and 24 show the execution times for Type 1, Type 2 and Type 3 ccc sets as the
number of ccc's in the sets increases. Note that the y-axes in the figures
have logarithmic scale. As seen from the figures, the A∗ algorithm has double-
exponential execution time, and it cannot handle ccc sets having more than 10-11
ccc's, as it exhausts memory. The results show that our algorithms run (1) 1300
42
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
e
g
a
t
n
e
c
r
e
p
s
g
n
v
a
s
i
100
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
-500
-600
-700
-800
-900
0
Savings Percentage Achieved
DFMerge1
DFMerge2
DFMerge3
BFMerge1
BFMerge2
BFMerge3
ASTAR
20
40
sharing factor
60
80
100
Fig. 21. Net savings achieved with relational sources
)
s
c
e
s
i
l
l
i
m
(
e
m
i
t
n
o
i
t
u
c
e
x
e
1e+06
100000
10000
1000
100
10
1
0.1
2
Execution Time of the Algortihms with Type 1 CCC Sets
DFMerge1
DFMerge2
DFMerge3
BFMerge1
BFMerge2
BFMerge3
ASTAR
4
6
8
10
12
no of CCCs
14
16
18
20
Fig. 22. Execution Time of Merge Algorithms with Type 1 ccc Sets
to 5290 times faster than the A∗ algorithm for Type 1 ccc sets, (2) 1360 to 6280
times faster than the A∗ algorithm for Type 2 ccc sets, and (3) 100 to 350 times
faster than the A∗ algorithm for Type 3 ccc sets.
The execution times of our Merge algorithms are exponential, but in the order
of milliseconds, taking less than a second for even 20 ccc's. Among our algorithms,
BFMerge3 has the highest execution time, as it uses an expensive heuristic and ex-
plores a relatively larger search space than the DFMerge algorithms. DFMerge3
has the next highest execution time, and DFMerge1 has the lowest. One impor-
tant observation is that although BFMerge3 and DFMerge3 use a relatively
expensive and more informed heuristic, and therefore have higher execution times,
and find better global execution plans, they achieve the same level of net savings
with the other strategies. Hence, the increased cost induced by these two strategies
are not offset by the net savings they achieve.
6.3.4 Final Cost of Plans Generated by the Merge Algorithms. As the A∗ algo-
rithm examines an exhaustive search space, we studied the quality of plans gener-
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
43
Execution Time the Algortihms with Type 2 CCC Sets
DFMerge1
DFMerge2
DFMerge3
BFMerge1
BFMerge2
BFMerge3
ASTAR
4
6
8
10
12
no of CCCs
14
16
18
20
)
s
c
e
s
i
l
l
i
m
(
e
m
i
t
n
o
i
t
u
c
e
x
e
1e+06
100000
10000
1000
100
10
1
2
Fig. 23. Execution Time of Merge Algorithms with Type 2 ccc Sets
)
s
c
e
s
i
l
l
i
m
(
e
m
i
t
n
o
i
t
u
c
e
x
e
100000
10000
1000
100
10
1
0.1
2
Execution Time of the Algortihms with Type 3 CCC Sets
DFMerge1
DFMerge2
DFMerge3
BFMerge1
BFMerge2
BFMerge3
ASTAR
4
6
8
10
12
no of CCCs
14
16
18
20
Fig. 24. Execution Time of Merge Algorithms with Type 3 ccc Sets
ated by our Merge algorithms and the A∗ algorithm to determine how suboptimal
our final plans are. For this purpose, we examined the final costs of the plans for
our Type 3 ccc sets. Figure 25 shows the estimated execution costs of the final plans
generated by the Merge algorithms. As seen from the figure, the A∗ algorithm
almost always finds better plans than our algorithms. However, the time it spends
in finding those quality plans is not offset by the net savings it achieves. Although
our algorithms explore only a restricted search space, the results show that they are
able to compute plans whose costs are at most 10 % more than the plans produced
by the A∗ algorithm. From these results, we can conclude that our algorithms are
both feasible and practical.
7. RELATED WORK
Our work has been influenced by and is related to various areas of research. Over the
last decade, there has been increasing interest in building information agents that
can access a set of diverse data sources. These systems include HERMES [Adali
et al. 1996], SchemaSQL [Lakshmanan et al. 1996; Lakshmanan et al. 1999], TSIM-
44
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
)
s
c
e
s
(
s
t
s
o
c
l
a
n
i
f
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
20
Final Costs Obtained
DFMerge1
DFMerge2
DFMerge3
BFMerge1
BFMerge2
BFMerge3
ASTAR
30
40
50
60
sharing factor
70
80
90
100
Fig. 25. Final Plan Costs Generated for Type 3 ccc Sets
MIS [Chawathe et al. 1994; Garcia-Molina et al. 1997], SIMS [Arens et al. 1993],
Information Manifold [Levy et al. 1996b; Levy et al. 1996a], The Internet Softbot
[Etzioni and Weld 1994], InfoSleuth [Bayardo et al. 1997], Infomaster [Genesereth
et al. 1997], and ARIADNE [Ambite et al. 1998]. Although all these systems pro-
vide mechanisms to optimize individual requests, the only one which addresses the
problem of optimizing overall agent performance is ARIADNE.
In [Ashish 1998; Ashish et al. 1999], the authors propose techniques to selectively
materialize data to improve the performance of subsequent requests. They use the
LOOM [MacGregor 1990] knowledge representation language for modeling data and
maintain an ontology of classes of information sources in LOOM. They determine
what to materialize by examining previous user requests as follows. They first look
at the constraints imposed by user queries and create subclasses in the ontology
corresponding to these restrictions. They then try to merge subclasses whenever
possible. After all user queries have been examined, they sort these subclasses
according to the frequency of requests and materialize subclasses from this list
until the space reserved for materialization is exhausted. They repeat this process
in fixed intervals. Their idea is similar to previous semantic caching ideas [Adali
and Subrahmanian 1195; Adali et al. 1996; Dar et al. 1996]. In semantic caching,
the cache is organized into semantic regions instead of pages. When a new query
arrives, the contents of the cache is examined to determine what portion of the
data requested in the query is present in the cache. A query is then created to
retrieve the rest of the data from disk. The problem with semantic caching is that
containment checking is hard and having a large number of semantic regions creates
performance problems.
Both [Ashish et al. 1999] and [Dar et al. 1996] process one query at a time,
and try to reduce the execution time by using caches, whereas we examine a set of
requests (in our framework, agents can be built on top of legacy software code bases
such as PowerPoint, Excel, route planners, etc. which may not support a database
style query language) and try to optimize the overall execution time of this set of
requests by exploiting the commonalities between them. Since we process a set
of requests simultaneously, we cache the results of a code call condition evaluation
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
45
only if another code call condition in this set can make use of the cached results. On
the other hand, in [Ashish et al. 1999] caching decisions are based on user request
histories. The advantage of their approach is that they can make use of the cache
for a longer period of time, while in our case the cache contents are valid during
the execution of a particular set of code call conditions. When we process the next
batch of code call conditions, we discard the contents of the cache. On the other
hand, the disadvantage of history based caching is that it cannot rapidly adapt to
changes in interests. Nevertheless, we believe that incorporating more global level
caching techniques, like the ones in [Ashish et al. 1999], into our framework is a
promising research area that is worth pursuing. Another important difference is
that our results also include soundness and completeness theorems.
The problem of simultaneously optimizing and merging a set of queries has
been studied within the context of relational and deductive databases [Grant and
Minker 1980; Sellis 1988; Shim et al. 1994; Sellis and Ghosh 1990; Finkelstein 1982;
Chakravarthy and Minker 1985].
[Grant and Minker 1980; Sellis 1988; Sellis and
Ghosh 1990; Shim et al. 1994] address the problem of creating a globally opti-
mal access plan for a set of queries, provided that the common expressions among
the queries are given as input.
[Grant and Minker 1980] describe a branch-and-
bound algorithm which searches a state space in a depth-first manner to optimize
a set of relational expressions. Their algorithms are not cost-based, and hence they
may increase the total execution cost of the queries. Moreover, they only consider
equivalence relationships, but not containment relationships and they only deal
with relational sources. Furthermore, they do not deal with non database sources.
[Sellis 1988; Shim et al. 1994; Sellis and Ghosh 1990] propose exhaustive algo-
rithms to create a globally optimal execution plan for a set of relational database
queries. [Sellis and Ghosh 1990] show that the multiple-query optimization (MQO)
problem in relational databases is NP-hard even when only equivalence relationships
are considered. Hence, exact algorithms for MQO are not practical and therefore,
approximations or heuristic algorithms are worth pursuing.
[Sellis 1988] formulates the MQO problem as a state search problem and uses the
A∗ algorithm. In their approach, a state is defined as an n-tuple h P1j1 ,P2j2,..Pnjni,
where P1j1 ∈ {N U LL} ∪ Pi and Pi is the set of possible access plans for query
Qi. The initial state is the vector h NULL, . . . , NULL i, that is no access plan
is chosen for any query. A state transition chooses an access plan for the next
query whose corresponding access plan is NULL in the state vector. The heuristic
function proposed by [Sellis 1988] takes only equivalence relationships into account.
[Shim et al. 1994] improves and extends this heuristic function by incorporating
implication relationships and by modifying the estimated costs. This improved
heuristic function provides a tighter bound than the one proposed in [Sellis 1988].
However, their approach requires enumeration of all possible plans for each query,
leading to a (theoretically) very large search space. As a result, these algorithms
have an exponential worst case running time. Moreover, in a heterogeneous envi-
ronment, it may not be possible to assume that all query plans can be enumerated
since queries might have infinitely many access plans. Furthermore, application
program interfaces of individual data sources and/or software packages may not
enumerate all such plans for requests shipped to them. This may be because (i)
their internal code does not support it, or (ii) they are not willing to do so.
46
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
While [Sellis 1988; Shim et al. 1994; Sellis and Ghosh 1990] focus on only rela-
tional data sources, we address the problem of optimizing a set of code call condi-
tions in agents which are built on top of arbitrary data sources. For this purpose,
we provide a framework to define and identify common subexpressions for arbitrary
data sources. Moreover, we do not need to enumerate all possible plans of a single
query. We have implemented an adapted version of the A∗ algorithm of [Shim et al.
1994] and compared it with our merging algorithms. As the results in Section 6
show, our merging algorithms are much faster than the A∗-based algorithm. As the
A∗-based algorithm examines a larger search space, it may find low-cost plans that
our merging algorithms may miss. However, the time it takes to find such good
plans is usually not offset by the savings it achieves.
[Finkelstein 1982; Chakravarthy and Minker 1985], on the other hand, focus on
detecting common expressions among a set of queries in relational and deductive
databases. Since the notion of "common subexpression" varies for different data
sources, the common expression identification problem for agents is very different
from those of relational and deductive databases. Furthermore, they only consider
equivalence and containment relationships among queries when detecting common
subexpressions, whereas we also consider overlapping cases.
The only work that addresses heterogeneity and hence is most closely related
to ours is that of [Subramanian and Venkataraman 1998]. The authors propose
an architecture to process complex decision support queries that access to a set of
heterogeneous data sources. They introduce transient views, which are materialized
views that exist during the execution of a query. [Subramanian and Venkataraman
1998] describe algorithms which analyze the query plan generated by an optimizer
to identify similar sub-plans, combine them into transient views and insert filters
for compensation. Moreover, [Subramanian and Venkataraman 1998] presenst the
implementation of their algorithms within the context of DataJoiner's [Gupta and
Lin 1994; Venkataraman and Zhang 1998] query optimizer. They try to optimize
a complex decision support query by exploiting common subexpressions within
this single query, whereas we try to simultaneously optimize a given set of requests.
While they examine relational-style operators in detecting common subexpressions,
we process any code call condition defined over arbitrary data sources not just re-
lational sources. Moreover, they do not have a language to describe equivalence
and containment relationships for heterogeneous data sources and hence these re-
lationships are fixed apriori in the optimizer code. On the other hand, we provide
invariants to describe relationships for heterogeneous data sources. Our algorithms
for merging multiple code call conditions take such invariants and cost information
into account when performing the merge.
Another area of research that is related to ours is partial evaluation in logic
programs [Leuschel et al. 1998; Lloyd and Shepherdson 1991; De Schreye et al.
1999]. Partial evaluation takes a program and a goal and rewrites the program by
using a set of transformations to optimize its performance. The rewritten program
usually runs faster for the particular goal when SLD or SLD-NF resolution is used
for query processing. On the other hand, our framework takes an agent program
and a set of derived invariants, and tries to optimize the agent program apriori,
that is at development time, prior to occurence of state changes. An interesting
research problem in our framework may be the following: If a state change can be
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
47
encoded as a goal, then we can use partial evaluation techniques to further optimize
the rewritten agent program, as shown in Figure 26. We believe this problem needs
further attention and research.
Agent
Program P
common expression
detection and
merging
P ′
Partial
Evaluation
P ′′
derived
invariants
state
change
Fig. 26. Application of Partial Evaluation Techniques to Agent Programs
Another area of research that is very closely related to ours is query optimization
in relational and deductive databases [Graefe 1995; Haas et al. 1989; Ioannidis and
Kang 1990; Graefe 1993; Ibaraki and Kameda 1984; Kim 1982; Mumick et al. 1996],
and in mediators [Adali et al. 1996; Levy et al. 1996a; Haas et al. 1997; Ambite
and Knoblock 2000; Duschka et al. 2000]. It is worth noting that this list is not ex-
haustive since over the last decades, enormous effort has been devoted to the query
optimization problem. Our work is orthogonal to techniques for optimizing indi-
vidual queries, as they can be incorporated into our framework in numerous ways.
For example, individual requests might be first optimized by using the techniques
in [Levy et al. 1996a] or [Ambite and Knoblock 2000], then our techniques might
be applied to the results. However, our focus in this paper is on the simultaneous
optimization of a set of requests.
Finally, the problem of choosing appropriate materialized views to answer queries
is also related to our work and there exist several papers in this area [Qian 1996;
Levy et al. 1995; Chaudhuri et al. 1995].
[Levy et al. 1995] describes algorithms
to determine the portions of a query that can be expressed using the definitions of
materialized views. [Chaudhuri et al. 1995] identifies portions of a query that can
be answered using materialized views, and determine if it is efficient to answer the
query using the view. The focus of such techniques is to efficiently compute the
answers to a single query, whereas our focus is to optimize the overall cost of a set
of requests submitted to a heavily loaded agent.
8. CONCLUSION
There is now an incredible increase in the amount of research being conducted
on software agents. Software agents now provide a host of web based services,
ranging from creating personalized newspapers for people, to building multimedia
presentations. In addition, agents for corporate web sites often try to personalize
the web site for a given user by tracking histories of that user's interest. Agents
are also being increasingly used in the aerospace and defense industries.
When an agent gets lots of requests within a short time frame, the standard
mechanism that most agent frameworks use is to queue the requests in accordance
with some queueing policy (e.g. LIFO, FIFO, priority queue) and then service the
48
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
requests one after the other. This often leads to long wait times for requests that
occur later on in the queue.
In this paper, we have shown how to improve the
performance of an agent by merging a set of requests and servicing the requests
simultaneously. We proposed a generic and customizable framework for this pur-
pose. Our solution applies to agents that are built on top of legacy code, which is
certainly a practical assumption, as the success of the agent endeavor rests on the
ability to build on top of existing data and software sources. Our solution consists
of two parts:
(1) identifying "commonalities" among a set of code call conditions and
(2) computing a single global execution plan that simultaneously optimizes the
total expected cost of this set of code call conditions.
We first provided a formal framework within which an agent developer can specify
what constitutes a "common subexpression" for a data source via a set of structures,
called invariants. Invariants describe (1) code call conditions that are "equivalent"
to other code call conditions, (2) code call conditions that are "contained" in other
code call conditions, and (3) code call conditions that overlap with other code call
conditions. Moreover, such invariants may imply other invariants. We developed
provably sound and complete algorithms to take the initial set of invariants input
by the developer and compute all implied invariants.
Second, we provided an architecture to merge multiple requests in agents. We
provided algorithms to identify equivalent, implied and overlapped code call con-
ditions in any set C. We then proposed two heuristic based algorithms, BFMerge
and DFMerge, that take as input, the set of code call conditions, and produce as
output, a single execution plan. The merging decisions are based on costs, hence
the resulting global plan is guaranteed to have a reduced cost.
We have experimentally shown that our algorithms achieve significant savings.
We have compared our merging algorithms with Sellis' A∗-based algorithm (which
applied to merging multiple requests in the relational database case only) and
demonstrated that our algorithms almost always outperform theirs. We have shown
that our merging algorithms (1) can handle more than twice as many simultaneous
code call conditions as the A∗ algorithm and (2) run 100 to 6300 times faster than
the A∗ algorithm and (3) produce execution plans the cost of which is at most 10%
more than the plans generated by the A∗ algorithm.
We conclude with a brief remark on an important piece of future work. Eiter
et. al. [Eiter et al. 2000] have developed a class of agents called regular agents. In
their framework, the semantics of an agent is given by computing certain kinds of
semantic constructs called "status sets." When an agent experiences a state (which
may occur, for example, when it receives a message), the agent computes a new
"status set" having some properties decribed in [Eiter et al. 1999]. This "status
set" specifies what the agent is supposed to do in order to respond to the state
change. [Subrahmanian et al. 2000] shows that this framework is rich enough not
only to deal with reactive agent behavior [Kowalski and Sadri 1999], but also the so-
called autonomous agent behavior of the type described by Shoham [Shoham 1993;
Shoham 1999]. Eiter et. al. [Eiter et al. 2000]'s regular agent framework reduce the
problem of computing "status sets" of regular agents to that of evaluating a set of
code call conditions. The beauty of their result is that the syntactic restrictions on
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
49
regular agents makes it possible, to associate with each agent, prior to deployment
of the agent, a set of code call conditions. Whenever the agent needs to find a
new status set in response to a state change, it recomputes a new status set by
evaluating this set of code call conditions. Hence, all the techniques described in
this paper may be used to optimize, once and for all, this set of code call conditions,
so that once the agent is deployed, this optimized set of code call conditions is used
by the agent for "status set" computations. We are pursuing this research avenue.
REFERENCES
Adali, S., Candan, K., Papakonstantinou, Y., and Subrahmanian, V. S. 1996. Query
caching and optimization in distributed mediator systems. In Proc. of the ACM SIGMOD
Conf. on Management of Data (Montreal, Canada, June 1996), pp. 137 -- 148.
Adali, S. and Subrahmanian, V.
Intelligent caching in hybrid knowledge bases.
In N. Mars Ed., Proc. 1995 Intl. Conf. on Very Large Knowledge Bases (Twente, The
Netherlands, May 1195), pp. 247 -- 256. IOS Press.
1195.
Ambite, J. L. et al.
1998. Ariadne: A system for constructing mediators for internet
sources. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD Conference on Management of Data (Seattle,
Washington, USA, June 1998), pp. 561 -- 563.
Ambite, J. L. and Knoblock, C. A. 2000. Flexible and scalable cost-based query planning
in mediators: A transformational approach. Artificial Intelligence 118, 1-2, 115 -- 161.
Arens, Y., Chee, C. Y., Hsu, C.-N., and Knoblock, C.
1993. Retrieving and integrating
data from multiple information sources. International Journal of Intelligent Cooperative
Information Systems 2, 2, 127 -- 158.
Ashish, N.
1998. Optimizing information agents by selectively materializing data. In Pro-
ceedings of the 15th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and 10th Innovative
Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference (Madison, Wisconsin, USA, July 1998),
pp. 1168. Doctoral Consortium Abstract.
Ashish, N., Knoblock, C. A., and Shahabi, C.
Selectively materializing data in
mediators by analyzing user queries. In Proceedings of the 4th IFCIS International Con-
ference on Cooperative Information Systems, (CoopIS) (Edinburgh, Scotland, September
1999), pp. 256 -- 266.
1999.
Bayardo, R. et al.
Infosleuth: Agent-based semantic integration of information
in open and dynamic environments. In J. Peckham Ed., Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD
Conference on Management of Data (Tucson, Arizona, 1997), pp. 195 -- 206.
1997.
Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., and Lenzerini, M. 1998. On the decidability of query
containment under constraints. In Proc. of the 17th ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART
Symp. on Principles of Database Systems (PODS) (Seattle, Washington, USA, June 1998),
pp. 214 -- 223.
Chakravarthy, U. S. and Minker, J. 1985. Multiple query processing in deductive
databases using query graphs. In Proc. of the Conf. on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB)
(Kyoto, Japan, 1985), pp. 384 -- 391.
Chaudhuri, S., Krishnamurthy, R., Potamianos, S., and Shim, K.
1995. Optimizing
queries with materialized views. In Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Data Engineering
(Taipei, Taiwan, March 1995), pp. 190 -- 200.
Chawathe, S. et al. 1994. The tsimmis project: Integration of heterogeneous information
sources. In Proceedings of the 10th Meeting of the Information Processing Society of Japan
(Tokyo, Japan, October 1994).
Dar, S., Franklin, M. J., Jonsson, B., Srivastava, D., and Tan, M.
Semantic
data caching and replacement. In Proc. of the Conf. on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB)
(Bombay, India, September 1996), pp. 330 -- 341.
1996.
De Schreye, D. et al. 1999. Conjunctive partial deduction:
foundations, control, algo-
rithms and experiments. Journal of Logic Programming 41, 2-3, 231 -- 277.
50
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
Dix, J., Kraus, S., and Subrahmanian, V.
2001.
Temporal agent reasoning. Artificial
Intelligence to appear.
Dix, J., Nanni, M., and Subrahmanian, V. S. 2000. Probabilistic agent reasoning. Trans-
actions of Computational Logic 1, 2, 201 -- 245.
Dix, J., Subrahmanian, V. S., and Pick, G.
2000. Meta Agent Programs. Journal of
Logic Programming 46, 1-2, 1 -- 60.
Du, W., Krishnamurthy, R., and Shan, M.-C.
1992. Query optimization in heterogeneous
DBMS. In Proc. of the Conf. on Very Large Data Bases (VLDB) (Vancouver, Canada,
August 1992), pp. 277 -- 291.
Duschka, O. M., Genesereth, M. R., and Levy, A. Y.
2000. Recursive query plans for
data integration. Journal of Logic Programming 43, 1 (April), 49 -- 73.
Eiter, T., Subrahmanian, V., and Pick, G. 1999. Heterogeneous Active Agents, I: Se-
mantics. Artificial Intelligence 108, 1-2, 179 -- 255.
Eiter, T., Subrahmanian, V., and Rogers, T. J.
2000. Heterogeneous Active Agents,
III: Polynomially Implementable Agents. Artificial Intelligence 117, 1, 107 -- 167.
Etzioni, O. and Weld, D.
1994. A softbot-based interface to the internet. Communications
of the ACM 37, 7, 72 -- 76.
Finkelstein, S. 1982. Common expression analysis in database applications. In Proc. of
the ACM SIGMOD Conf. on Management of Data (Orlando, Florida, USA, 1982).
Garcia-Molina, H. et al.
1997. The tsimmis approach to mediation: Data models and
languages. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems 8, 2, 117 -- 132.
Genesereth, M. R., Keller, A. M., and Duschka, O. M.
Infomaster: An infor-
mation integration system. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD Conference on Management
of Data (Tucson, Arizona, USA, May 1997), pp. 539 -- 542.
1997.
Graefe, G. 1993. Query evaluation techniques for large databases. ACM Computing Sur-
veys 25, 2, 73 -- 170.
Graefe, G.
1995. The cascades framework for query optimization. Bulletin of the TC on
Data Engineering 18, 3 (September), 19 -- 29.
Grant, J. and Minker, J.
1980. On optimizing the evaluations of a set of expressions.
Technical Report TR-916 (July), Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Maryland, College
Park, MD, USA.
Gupta, P. and Lin, E. T.
1994. Datajoiner: A practical approach to multi-database ac-
cess. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Parallel and Distributed
Information Systems (Austin, Texas, September 1994). IEEE-CS Press.
Haas, L. M., Freytag, J. C., Lohman, G. M., and Pirahesh, H. 1989. Extensible query
processing in starburst. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD Conference on Management of
Data (Portland, OR, USA, 1989), pp. 377 -- 388.
Haas, L. M., Kossmann, D., Wimmers, E. L., and Yang, J.
1997. Optimizing queries
across diverse data sources. In Proceedings of the 23rd Int. Conference on Very Large
Databases (VLDB) (Athens, Greece, August 1997), pp. 276 -- 285.
Ibaraki, T. and Kameda, T.
1984. On the optimal nesting order of computing n-relational
joins. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 9, 3 (September), 482 -- 502.
Ioannidis, Y. E. and Kang, Y. C.
1990. Randomized algorithms for optimizing large join
queries. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD Conference on Management of Data (Atlantic
City, NJ, USA, May 1990), pp. 312 -- 321.
Kim, W.
1982. On optimizing an sql-like nested query. ACM Transactions on Database
Systems 7, 3 (September), 443 -- 469.
Knuth, D. E.
1997. The Art of Computer Programming, Volume I: Fundamental Algo-
rithms (3rd ed.). Addison-Wesley.
Kowalski, R. and Sadri, F.
1999. From logic programming to multi-agent systems. Annals
of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, Special issue edited by Jurgen Dix and Jorge
Lobo, 25, 3-4, 391 -- 419.
Lakshmanan, L. V. S., Sadri, F., and Subramanian, I. N.
Schemasql - a language
for interoperability in relational multi-database systems. In Proceedings of the 22nd Int.
1996.
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
51
Conference on Very Large Databases, (VLDB) (Bombay, India, September 1996), pp. 239 --
250.
Lakshmanan, L. V. S., Sadri, F., and Subramanian, S. N.
1999. On efficiently imple-
menting schemasql on a sql database system. In Proceedings of the 25th Int. Conference
on Very Large Databases, (VLDB) (Edinburgh, Scotland, September 1999), pp. 471 -- 482.
Some achievements and prospects
Leuschel, M., Martens, D., and De Schreye, D.
1998.
in partial deduction. ACM Computing Surveys 30, 3es (September).
Levy, A., Rajaraman, A., and Ordille, J. 1996a. Querying heterogeneous information
sources using source descriptions. In Proceeding of the 22nd Int. Conference on Very Large
Databases (VLDB) (Bombay, India, September 1996), pp. 251 -- 262.
Levy, A. Y., Mendelzon, A. O., Sagiv, Y., and Srivastava, D.
1995. Answering queries
using views. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symp. on Prin-
ciples of Database Systems (PODS) (San Jose, CA, USA, May 1995), pp. 95 -- 104.
Levy, A. Y., Rajaraman, A., and Ordille, J. J. 1996b. The world wide web as a collec-
tion of views: Query processing in the information manifold. In Workshop on Materialized
Views: Techniques and Applications (VIEW 1996) (Montreal, Canada, 1996), pp. 43 -- 55.
Partial evaluation in logic programming.
Lloyd, J. W. and Shepherdson, J. C.
1991.
Journal of Logic Programming 11, 3-4, 217 -- 242.
MacGregor, R.
1990. The evolving technology of classification-based knowledge represen-
tation systems. In J. Sowa Ed., Principles of Semantic Networks: Explorations in the
Representation of Knowledge. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
Mumick, I. S., Finkelstein, S. J., Pirahesh, H., and Ramakrishnan, R.
1996. Magic
conditions. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 21, 1 (March), 107 -- 155.
Naacke, H., Gardarin, G., and Tomasic, A.
Leveraging mediator cost models with
heterogeneous data sources. In Proc. IEEE Conf. on Data Engineering (Orlando, Florida,
USA, 1998), pp. 351 -- 360.
1998.
Qian, X. 1996. Query folding. In Proc. IEEE Conf. on Data Engineering (New Orleans,
LA, USA, 1996), pp. 48 -- 55.
Roth, M. T., Ozcan, F., and Haas, L.
Cost models do matter: Providing cost
information for diverse data sources in a federated system. In Proc. of the Conf. on Very
Large Data Bases (VLDB) (Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, September 1999).
1999.
Salzberg, B.
1988.
File Structures: An Analytical Approach. Prentice Hall.
Samet, H.
1989.
Reading, MA.
The Design and Analysis of Spatial Data Structures. Addison-Wesley,
Sellis, T. K.
1988. Multiple query optimization. ACM Transactions on Database Sys-
tems 13, 1 (March), 23 -- 52.
Sellis, T. K. and Ghosh, S.
1990. On the multiple-query optimization problem. IEEE
Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 2, 2 (June), 262 -- 266.
Shim, K., Sellis, T. K., and Nau, D.
1994.
Improvements on a heuristic algorithm for
multiple-query optimization. Data and Knowledge Engineering 12, 2, 197 -- 222.
Shoham, Y. 1993. Agent Oriented Programming. Artificial Intelligence 60, 51 -- 92.
Shoham, Y.
1999. What we talk about when we talk about software agents. IEEE Intelli-
gent Systems 14, 28 -- 31.
Subrahmanian, V., Bonatti, P., Dix, J., Eiter, T., Kraus, S., Ozcan, F., and Ross, R.
2000. Heterogeneous Agent Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Subramanian, S. N. and Venkataraman, S. 1998.
Cost-based optimization of decision
support queries using transient views. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMOD Conference on
Management of Data (Seattle, WA, USA, June 1998), pp. 319 -- 330.
Ullman, J. D.
1989.
Principles of Database and Knowledge Base Systems, Volume 2.
Computer Science Press, New York, NY.
1998.
Venkataraman, S. and Zhang, T.
Heterogeneous database query optimization
in db2 universal datajoiner. In Proceedings of the 24th Int. Conference on Very Large
Databases, (VLDB) (New York City, USA, August 1998), pp. 685 -- 689.
52
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
APPENDIX
A. PROOFS OF THEOREMS
Proof of Theorem 2.10.
(⇒): Suppose π is a witness to the safety of χ. There are two cases:
Case 1: Let χπ(i) be an atomic code call condition of the form in(Xπ(i), ccπ(i)),
then by the definition of safety, root (ccπ(i)) ⊆ RVπ(i), where RVπ(i) =
{root (Y) ∃j < i s.t. Y occurs in χπ(j)}, and either Xπ(i) is a root variable
or root (Xπ(i)) ∈ RVπ(i). Then, there exist χπ(j1), χπ(j2), . . . , χπ(jk), jk <
i , such that root (Xπ(jk)) ⊆ RVπ(i), and root (Xπ(jk)) ⊆ root (ccπ(i)). But,
then χπ(i) is dependent on each of the χπ(j1), χπ(j2), . . . , χπ(jk), jk < i by
definition. Hence, there exist edges
(χπ(j1), χπ(i)), (χπ(j2), χπ(i)), . . . (χπ(jk), χπ(i)).
Therefore, χπ(j1), χπ(j2), . . . , χπ(jk), jk < i precede χπ(i), hence π is also a
topological sort of the cceg of χ.
Case 2: If χπ(i) is an equality/inequality of the form s1 op s2, then at least one
of s1, s2 is a constant or a variable S such that root (S) ∈ RVπ(i). Suppose
at least one of s1, s2 is a variable. Then, there exists a χπ(j), j < i, such
that root (S) ∈ root (Xπ(j)), as root(Xπ(j)) ⊆ RVπ(i). But, then χπ(i) is
dependent on χπ(j) by definition, and there exists an edge (χπ(j), χπ(i)) in
the cceg of χ. Hence, χπ(j) precedes χπ(i) in the topological sort of the cceg.
If both s1 and s2 are constants, then their nodes have in-degree 0 in the
cceg, and no code call condition needs to precede χπ(i) in the topological
sort order, i.e., they are unrestricted. Therefore, π is also a topological sort
of the cceg of χ.
(⇐): Suppose π is a topological sort of the cceg of χ. Let
χπ(i), χπ(j1), χπ(j2), . . . , χπ(jk), jk < i
be code call conditions such that there exist edges
(χπ(j1), χπ(i)), (χπ(j2), χπ(i)), . . . , (χπ(jk), χπ(i))
in the cceg of χ. Then, by definition each χπ(jm), m = 1, . . . , k, depends on
χπ(i).
If χπ(i) is an atomic code call condition of the form in(Xπ(i), ccπ(i)),
then root (Xπ(jm)) ⊆ root (ccπ(i)), m = 1, . . . , k. As ∀jm, m = 1, . . . , k, jm < i,
root (Xπ(jm)) ⊆ RVπ(i), by definition of RVπ(i), hence root (ccπ(i)) ⊆ RVπ(i). On
the other hand, if χπ(i) is an equality/inequality of the form s1 op s2, then either
s1 is a variable and root (s1) ∈ root (Xπ(jm)), where jm ∈ {j1, . . . , jk}, or s2 is
a variable and root (s1) ∈ root (Xπ(j′
m ∈ {j1, . . . , jk}, or both. But,
root (Xπ(jm)) ⊆ RVπ(i) ∀jm, m = 1, . . . , k, jm < i. Hence, root (s1), root (s2) ∈
root (Xπ(jm)). If both s1 and s2 are constants, then they are unrestricted in the
topological sort. Therefore, π is also a witness to the safety of χ.
m)), where j′
Proof of Theorem 2.20. The proof is by induction on the structure of con-
dition lists.
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
53
Base Cases: Base cases are when the condition list consists of t1 Op t2 where
Op ∈ {<, >, ≤, ≥, =} and each of t1, t2 is either a variable or a constant. We
suppress the cases when both t1, t2 are constants: the relation either holds (in
that case we an eliminate t1 Op t2) or it does not (in that case we can eliminate
the whole invariant).
Op = "≤, ≥": We have to consider terms of the form t1 ≤ t2 (resp. t1 ≥ t2) and
1, ie′
2
distinguish the following cases. For each case we define expressions ie′
such that true =⇒ ie′
2 is equivalent to t1 ≤ t2 =⇒ ie1 ℜ ie2.
(1) t2 is a constant a: Then t1 is a variable. We modify ie1, ie2 by intro-
ducing a new variable Xnew and adding the following ccc to all subex-
pressions of ie1, ie2 containing t1
1 ℜ ie′
in(t1, ag : subtraction(a, Xnew)) & in(1, ag : geq 0 (Xnew)).
We note that t1 now becomes an auxiliary variable and Xnew is a base
variable.
Trans(ic, iei) is defined to be the modified iei just described.
(2) t1 is a constant a: Then t2 is a variable. We modify ie1, ie2 by intro-
ducing a new variable Xnew and adding the following ccc to all subex-
pressions of ie1, ie2 containing t2
in(t2, ag : addition (a, Xnew)) & in(1, ag : geq 0 (Xnew)).
Again, t2 becomes an auxiliary variable and Xnew is a base variable.
Trans(ic, iei) is defined to be the modified iei just described.
(3) Both t1, t2 are variables: We modify ie1, ie2 by introducing a new vari-
able Xnew and adding the following ccc to all subexpressions of ie1, ie2
containing t2
in(t2, ag : addition (t1, Xnew)) & in(1, ag : geq 0 (Xnew)).
Again, t2 becomes an auxiliary variable and Xnew is a base variable.
Trans(ic, iei) is defined to be the modified iei just described.
The case ≥ is completely analogous: just switch t1 with t2. Note that the
above covers all possible cases, as any variable in the condition list must
be a base variable (see Definition 2.17).
Op = "¡,¿": Analogous to the previous case, just replace "ag : geq 0 (Xnew)" by
"ag : ge 0 (Xnew)"
Op = "=": If in t1 = t2 the term t1 is a variable, then we replace each occur-
rence of t1 in ie1, ie2 by t2. If t1 is a constant and t2 is a variable, replace
each occurrence of t2 in ie1, ie2 by t1.
Inductive Step: As the condition list is just a conjunction of the cases mentioned
above, we can apply our modifications of ie1, ie2 one after another. Once all
modifications have been performed, we arrive at an equivalent formula of the
form
true =⇒ Trans(ic, ie1) ℜ Trans(ic, ie2)
Proof of Corollary 2.21.
(⇒) : Let inv : ic =⇒ ie1 ℜ ie2 be an invariant. We can assume that ic is in
54
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
DNF: C1 ∨ C2 ∨ . . . ∨ Cm. Thus we can write inv as follows:
{Ci =⇒ ie1 ℜ ie2 1 ≤ i ≤ m}
Let invθ be any ground instance of inv. If (S, θ) = inv, then either (C1 ∨ C2 ∨ . . . ∨
Cm)θ evaluates to false in state S, or (ie1)θ ℜ (ie2)θ is true in S. Assume that
(C1 ∨ C2 ∨ . . . ∨ Cm)θ evaluates to false, then each (Ci)θ has to be false in S. Hence,
(S, θ) = (Ci =⇒ ie1 ℜ ie2)f or1 ≤ i ≤ m
Assume (C1 ∨ C2 ∨ . . . ∨ Cm)θ evaluates to true in S. Then there exists at least
one (Ci)θ that evaluates to true in state S. Let T = {(Cj)θ 1 ≤ j ≤ m} be the
set of conjunctions that are true in S. As all other (Ci)θ /∈ T evaluates to false,
(S, θ) = (Ci =⇒ ie1 ℜ ie2) f or 1 ≤ i ≤ m, and (Ci)θ /∈ T . But (S, θ) = inv, hence
(ie1)θ ℜ (ie2)θ is true in S. As a result, (S, θ) = (Cj =⇒ ie1 ℜ ie2) f or 1 ≤ j ≤
m and(Cj)θ ∈ T .
Since, each Ci =⇒ ie1 ℜ ie2 is an ordinary invariant the result follows from
Theorem 2.20.
(⇐) : Assume that (∀Ci, 1 ≤ i ≤ m) (S, θ) = true =⇒ Trans(Ci, ie1) ℜ Trans(Ci, ie2)
and suppose (S, θ) = (C1 ∨C2 ∨. . .∨Cm). Then by Theorem 2.20, (∀Ci, 1 ≤ i ≤ m)
(S, θ) = (Ci =⇒ ie1 ℜ ie2). There exists at least one (Cj)θ which evaluates to true
in S. But then, (ie1)θ ℜ (ie2)θ is true in state S. Hence, (S, θ) = inv.
Proof of Lemma 4.4.
Chk Imp(ie1, ie2)
if and only if
for all states S and all assignments θ: [ie1]S,θ ⊆ [ie2]S,θ
if and only if
for all states S and all assignments θ: true =⇒ ie1θ ⊆ ie2θ
if and only if
Chk Taut(true =⇒ ie1 ⊆ ie2).
(2) follows from Theorem 2.20 and Corollary 2.21. Note that it also holds for
invariants of the form ic ⇒ ie1 = ie2 because they can be written as two separate
invariants: "ic ⇒ ie1 ⊆ ie2" and "ic ⇒ ie1 ⊇ ie2". (3) is immediate by the very
definition.
Proof of Proposition 4.5. We show that the containment problem [Ullman
1989] in the relational model of data is an instance of the problem of checking
implication between invariant expressions. The results follow then from Lemma 4.4
and the fact, that the containment problem in relational databases is well known
to be undecidable.
To be more precise, we use the results in [Calvanese et al. 1998], where it has been
shown that in the relational model of data, the containment of conjunctive queries
containing inequalities is undecidable.
It remains to show that our implication
check problem between invariant expressions can be reduced to this problem.
Let relational : query(Q) be a code call that takes as input an arbitrary set of
subgoals corresponding to the conjunctive query Q and returns as output the result
of executing Q.
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
55
Let Q1 and Q2 be arbitrary conjunctive queries which may contain inequalities.
we define
ie1 = relational : query(Q1),
ie2 = relational : query(Q2).
Then, clearly
Chk Imp(ie1, ie2) = true if and only if Q1 ⊆ Q2.
Hence the implication check problem is also undecidable.
Proof of Proposition 4.6. Clearly, by Lemma 4.4, it suffices to prove the
proposition for Chk Imp.
For an invariant expression ie, the set of all substitutions θ such that ieθ is
ground, is finite (because of our assumption about finiteness of the domains of
all datatypes). Thus, our atomic code call conditions in(obj, ag : f (args)) can all
be seen as propositional variables. Therefore, using this restriction, we can view
our formulae as propositional formulae and a state corresponds to a propositional
valuation.
With this restriction, our problem is certainly in co-NP, because computing [ie]S,θ
is nothing but evaluating a propositional formula (the valuation corresponds to the
state S). Thus "[ie1]S,θ ⊆ [ie2]S,θ for all S and all assignments θ" translates to
checking whether a propositional formula is a tautology: a problem known to be in
co-NP.
To show completeness, we use the fact that checking whether C is a logical
consequence of {C2, . . . , Cn} (where C is an arbitrary clause and {C2, . . . , Cn} an
arbitrary consistent set of clauses) is well-known to be co-NP-complete.
We prove our proposition by a polynomial reduction of implication between
atomic invariant expressions to this problem.
Let ie be an atomic invariant expression, i.e. an atomic code call condition:
it
takes as input, a set of clauses, and returns as output, all valuations that satisfy
that set of clauses. Let ANS(ie({C})) denote the set of results of evaluating ie on
C with respect to a state S. Then
ANS(ie({C})) ⊆ ANS(ie({C2, . . . , Cn})) if and only if {C2, . . . , Cn} = C.
Hence, checking whether an arbitrary atomic invariant expression ie1 implies an-
other atomic invariant expression ie2 is co-NP hard.
Lemma A.1 (Translation into predicate logic). There is a translation Trans from
simple invariants INVsimple into predicate logic with equality such that the following
holds
I = inv if and only if Trans(I) ∪ Tord = Trans(inv),
where Tord is the theory of strict total orders < and a ≤ b, (resp. a ≥ b), is an
abbreviation for "a < b ∨ a = b", (resp. "a > b ∨ a = b").
Moreover, a simple invariant "ic1 =⇒ ie1 ⊆ ie′
1" is translated into a formula of
the form
∀ (ic1 → ∀x(predhd1,f1i(. . . , x) → (predhd2,f2i(. . . , x)))
56
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
where ∀ denotes the universal closure with respect to all remaining variables. This
is a universally quantified formula.
Proof. We translate each simple invariant to a predicate logic formula by in-
duction on the structure of the invariant.
Code Calls: For each n-ary code call d : f (. . . ) we introduce a (n+1)-ary predicate
predhd,f i(. . . , ·). Note that we interpret d : f (. . . ) as a set of elements. The
additional argument is used for containment in this set.
Atomic ccc's: We then replace each simple invariant expression
in(X, d1 : f1 (. . . )) ⊆ in(Y, d2 : f2 (. . . ))
by the universal closure (with respect to all base variables) of the formula
∀x(predhd1,f1i(. . . , x) → predhd2,f2i(. . . , x))
Simple Ordinary Invariants: A simple ordinary invariant of the form
is translated into
ic1 =⇒ ie1 ⊆ ie′
1
∀ (ic1 → ∀x(predhd1,f1i(. . . , x) → (predhd2,f2i(. . . , x)))
where ∀ denotes the universal closure with respect to all remaining variables.
Simple Invariants: A simple invariant of the form
(C1 ∨ C2 ∨ . . . Cm) =⇒ ie1 ⊆ ie′
1
is translated into the following m statements (1 ≤ i ≤ m)
∀ (Ci → ∀x(predhd1,f1i(. . . , x) → (predhd2,f2i(. . . , x)))
where ∀ denotes the universal closure with respect to all remaining variables.
Note that according to the definition of a simple ordinary invariant and according
to the definition of a code call condition (in front of Example 2.1), ic1 and the Ci
are conjunctions of equalities s = t and inequalities s ≤ t, s ≥ t, s < t, s > t where
s, t are real numbers or variables.
The statement
I = inv if and only if Trans(I) ∪ Tord = Trans(inv)
is easily proved by structural induction on simple invariants and condition lists.
Proof of Lemma 4.7. We use the translation of Lemma A.1.
The assumption 6= inv2 expresses that there is a state S0 and a substitution θ of
the base variables in inv2 such that S0 = ic2θ and there is an object a such that
S0 = predhd2,f2i(. . . , a)θ and S0 6= predhd′
2i(. . . , a)θ.
2,f ′
As inv1 entails inv2,
inv1 is not satisfied by S0. Thus there is θ′ such that
S0 = ic1θ′ and there is an object a′ with S0 = predhd1,f1i(. . . , a′)θ and S0 6=
predhd′
1i(. . . , a′)θ.
Now suppose hd′
is just a collection of ground code call conditions) so that S0 = predhd′
We do this for all θ′ that are counterexamples to the truth of inv1. Because hd′
2i. Then we simply modify the state S0 (note a state
1i(. . . , a′)θ.
1i 6=
1i 6= hd′
1, f ′
1,f ′
1,f ′
1, f ′
2, f ′
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
57
2, f ′
2i, this modification does not affect the truth of S0 = predhd2,f2i(. . . , a)θ and
2i(. . . , a)θ. But this is a contradiction to our assumption that inv1
hd′
S0 6= predhd′
entails inv2. Thus we have proved: hd′
2,f ′
1i = hd′
Similarly, we can also modify S0 by changing the extension of predhd1,f1i(. . . , a′)θ
and guarantuee that inv1 holds in S0. So we also get a contradiction as long as
hd1, f1i 6= hd2, f2i. Therefore we have proved that hd1, f1i = hd2, f2i.
1, f ′
2, f ′
2i.
Our second claim follows trivially from hd′
1, f ′
1i = hd′
2, f ′
2i, and hd1, f1i = hd2, f2i.
Proof of Lemma 4.9. Let inv1 : ic1 =⇒ ie1 ℜ1 ie′
1 and inv2 : ic2 =⇒ ie2 ℜ2 ie′
2.
Then by the computation performed by the Combine 1 algorithm, the derived
invariant has the following form
inv : simplify(ic1 ∧ ic2) =⇒ ie1 ℜ ie′
2,
where ℜ is determined by Table 1. If simplify(ic1 ∧ ic2) = false we are done. In
this case, there is no state S satisfying a ground instance of ic1 ∧ ic2.
We assume that we are given a state S of the agent that satisfies inv1, inv2 and I.
Let inv1Θ and inv2Θ be any ground instances of inv1 and inv2. Then, either ic1(Θ)
evaluates to false, or ie1(Θ) ℜ1 ie′
1(Θ) is true in S. Similarly, either ic2(Θ) is false
or ie2(Θ) ℜ2 ie′
2(Θ) is true in S.
If either ic1(Θ) or ic2(Θ) evaluates to false, then (ic1 ∧ ic2)(Θ) also evaluates to
false, and inv is also satisfied. Let's assume both ic1(Θ) and ic2(Θ) evaluate to true.
Then so does (ic1 ∧ ic2)(Θ), and both ie1(Θ) ℜ1 ie′
2(Θ) are
true in S, as S satisfies both inv1 and inv2. If ℜ = "=", then both ℜ1 = "=" and
ℜ2 = "=", ie′
1 (in all states satisfying I and inv1, inv2). Then,
we have ie1 = ie′
2, hence ie1(Θ) = ie2(Θ) is true in S, and Θ satisfies
inv. If ℜ = "⊆", then ie′
1 → ie2 (in all states satisfying I and inv1, inv2), and we
have ie1 ℜ1 ie′
2, and ie1(Θ) ⊆ ie2(Θ). As inv is satisfied by
any S that also satisfies both inv1, inv2 and I, we have {inv1, inv2} ∪ I = inv.
1(Θ) and ie2(Θ) ℜ2 ie′
1 → ie2 and ie2 → ie′
1 ⊆ ie2, ie2 ℜ2 ie′
1 = ie2 = ie′
1, ie′
Proof of Lemma 4.11. Let inv1 : ic1 =⇒ ie1 ℜ1 ie′
1 and inv2 : ic2 =⇒ ie2 ℜ2 ie′
2.
Then, either Combine 3 returns NIL or the derived invariant has the following
form
inv : simplify(ic1 ∨ ic2) =⇒ ie1 ℜ1 ie′
1.
In the latter case, ie1 = ie2, ℜ1 = ℜ2 and ie′
algorithm.
1 = ie′
2 as implied by the Combine 3
We assume that we are given a state S of the agent that satisfies both inv1 and
inv2. Let inv1Θ and inv2Θ be any ground instances of inv1 and inv2. Then, either
ic1(Θ) evaluates to false, or ie1(Θ) ℜ1 ie′
1(Θ) is true in S. Similarly, either ic2(Θ)
is false or ie1(Θ) ℜ1 ie′
1(Θ) is true in S. We have four possible cases.
Case 1: Both ic1(Θ) and ic2(Θ) evaluate to false. Then (ic1 ∨ ic2) also evaluates
to false, and inv is also satisfied.
Case 2: ic1(Θ) evaluates to false and ic2(Θ) evaluates to true. Since S = inv2,
ie1(Θ) ℜ1 ie′
Case 3:
ie1(Θ) ℜ1 ie′
ic1(Θ) evaluates to true and ic2(Θ) evaluates to false. In this case,
1(Θ) is true in S, since S satisfies inv1. Hence S also satisfies inv.
1(Θ) is true in S. Then S also satisfies inv.
58
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
Case 4: Both ic1(Θ) and ic2(Θ) evaluate to true. Again, since S satisfies both
inv1 and inv2, ie1(Θ) ℜ1 ie′
1(Θ) is true in S and inv is also satisfied.
Proof of Proposition 4.14. Suppose X1 ⊆ X2 and inv ∈ CI (X1). We need
to show that inv ∈ CI(X2). By definition of CI , there are five possible cases:
inv = Combine 1(inv1, inv2, I) where inv1, inv2 ∈ I ∪ X1. But then
Case 1: inv ∈ I, hence inv ∈ CI(X2) by definition of CI.
Case 2: inv ∈ X1. As X1 ⊆ X2, inv ∈ X2. Hence, inv ∈ CI(X2) by definition
of CI .
Case 3:
inv1, inv2 ∈ I ∪ X2 as X1 ⊆ X2. Hence, inv ∈ CI (X2).
Case 4:
inv1, inv2 ∈ I ∪ X2 as X1 ⊆ X2. Hence, inv ∈ CI (X2).
Case 5:
inv1, inv2 ∈ I ∪ X2 as X1 ⊆ X2. Hence, inv ∈ CI (X2).
inv = Combine 2(inv1, inv2) where inv1, inv2 ∈ I ∪ X1. But then
inv = Combine 3(inv1, inv2) where inv1, inv2 ∈ I ∪ X1. But then
Proof of Lemma 4.15. Let inv ∈ CI (CI ↑ω). We need to show inv ∈ CI ↑ω.
By the definition of CI , there are three possible cases:
Case 1: inv ∈ I, then inv ∈ CI ↑ω by the definition of CI .
Case 2: inv ∈ CI ↑ω, which is trivial.
inv = Combine 1(inv1, inv2, I) (or inv = Combine 2(inv1, inv2) or
Case 3:
inv = Combine 3(inv1, inv2)) such that inv1, inv2 ∈ I ∪ (CI ↑ω). There exists a
smallest integer ki (i=1,2) such that invi ∈ I ∪ (CI ↑ki). Let k := max(k1, k2).
Then, inv1, inv2 ∈ I ∪ (CI ↑k). By definition of CI and as I ⊆ CI ↑k, inv ∈
CI ↑(k+1). Hence, inv ∈ CI ↑ω.
Proof of Lemma 4.16. Suppose inv ∈ CI ↑ω. Then, there exists a smallest
integer k, such that inv ∈ CI ↑k. The proof is by induction on k. Let the inductive
hypothesis be defined as ∀k′ : 1 ≤ k′ ≤ k, if inv ∈ CI ↑k, then I = inv.
Base Step: k = 1, inv ∈ CI ↑1, then there are four possible cases: (1) inv ∈
I, hence I = inv, (2) inv = Combine 1(inv1, inv2, I) where inv1, inv2 ∈ I.
As inv1, inv2 ∈ I, I = inv1, inv2. Then, by Lemma 4.9, {inv1, inv2} = inv.
Therefore, I = inv. (3) inv = Combine 2 (iv1, inv2) where inv1, inv2 ∈ I.
Since inv1, inv2 ∈ I, I = inv1, inv2. Then, by Lemma 4.10, {inv1, inv2} = inv.
Therefore, I = inv. (4) inv = Combine 3 (iv1, inv2) where inv1, inv2 ∈ I.
As inv1, inv2 ∈ I, I = inv1, inv2. Then, by Lemma 4.11, {inv1, inv2} = inv.
Therefore, I = inv.
Inductive Step: k > 1. Let inv ∈ CI ↑k. Then, there exist inv1, inv2 ∈ CI ↑(
k − 1), such that inv is derived by one of Combine 1, Combine 2 or Com-
bine 3 operators. That is, either inv = Combine 1(inv1, inv2, I), or inv =
Combine 2(inv1, inv2), or inv = Combine 3(inv1, inv2). Because this is the
only possibility, as inv /∈ CI ↑j, j < k, by definition of k. By the inductive
hypothesis I = inv1 and I = inv2. By Lemma 4.9, {inv1, inv2} = inv. Hence,
I = inv.
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
59
Lemma A.2. We consider predicate logic with equality and a binary predicate
symbol <. The language also contains arbitrary constants and parameters from the
reals.
We consider a special class of formulae, namely universally quantified formulae of
the form ic → Pi(t) → Pj(t′), where t, t′ are tuples consisting of variables, constants
and parameters, Pi are predicate symbols and ic is an invariant condition involving
equality, <, variables, constants and parameters. We call this class inv-formulae.
Let T be a set of inv-formulae.
The proof system consisting of (R0):
φ(x)
φ(x)θ , where θ is any substitution for
the variables in the tupel x and φ is an inv-formula, and the two inference rules
(R1) and (R2) below is complete for the class of inv-formulae: For each formula
ic → Pi(t) → Pj(t′) which follows from T , there is an instance of a derived formula
which is identical to it. And each derived formula also follows from T .
(R1)
→ P1(t1) → P ′
→ P2(t2) → P ′
simplify((ic1 ∧ ic2)θ) → P1(t1)θ → P ′
ic1
ic2
1(t′
1)
2(t′
2)
2(t′
2)θ
where θ is such that
P ′
1(t′
1)θ = P2(t2)θ
(R2)
→ P1(t1) → P ′
→ P2(t2) → P ′
simplify((ic1 ∨ ic2)θγ) → P1(t1)θγ → P ′
ic1
ic2
1(t′
1)
2(t′
2)
1(t′
1)θγ
where P1(t1)θ = P2(t2)θ,
1(t′
P ′
1)γ = P ′
2(t′
2)γ
The simplify routine simplifies invariant conditions (containing the binary symbol
<) wrt. the theory of real numbers in the signature <, =, and arbitrary constants
and parameters in the reals.
Proof. The correctness of the system is obvious, as all rules have this property.
The completeness follows by adapting the classical completeness proof of first-
order logic and taking into account the special form of the inv-formulae. Let
ϕ :
ic∗ → P ∗(t∗) → P ′∗(t′∗)
be a formula that follows from T . Then the set
T ∪ {∃ (ic∗ ∧ P ∗(t∗) ∧ ¬P ∗′(t∗′))}
is unsatisfiable (because T = ϕ). Therefore it suffices to show the following claim:
Given a set T ∪ {ϕ} of inv-formulae, whenever T 6⊢ ϕ, then T ∪ {¬ϕ}
is satisfiable.
Because then the assumption T 6⊢ ϕ′ leads to a contradiction. Therefore, taking
into account (R0), we can conclude that at least an inv-formula of the form
ϕ′ :
ic → P (t) → P ′(t′),
with ϕ = ϕ′θ must be derivable.
The claim can be shown by establishing that each consistent set T ∪{¬ϕ} contain-
ing inv-formulae and their negations, can be extended to a maximally consistent set
60
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
ΦT which contains witnesses.2 For such sets, the following holds: (1) φT ∪{¬ϕ} ⊢ γ
implies γϕ ∈ φT ∪{¬ϕ}, (2) for all γ: γ ∈ φT ∪{¬ϕ} or ¬γ 6∈ φT ∪{¬ϕ}, and (3)
∃xγ ∈ φT ∪{¬ϕ} implies that there is a term t with γ[ t
x ] ∈ φT ∪{¬ϕ}. These proper-
ties induce in a natural way an interpretation which is a model of φT ∪{¬ϕ}.
Proof of Theorem 4.17. The proof is by reducing the statement into pred-
icate logic using Lemma A.1. We are then in a situation to apply Lemma A.2.
Note that the inference rules of Lemma A.2 act on inv-formulae exactly as Com-
bine1 and Combine3 on invariants. Therefore there is a bijection between proofs
in the proof system described in Lemma A.2 and derivations of invariants using
Combine1 and Combine3.
Proof of Corollary 4.18. We are reducing the statement to Theorem 4.17.
We transform each invariant with ℜ = "=", into two separate invariants with
ℜ = "⊆".
If inv is of the form ic ⇒ ie1 ⊆ ie2, we are done, because
(1) the set of transformed invariants is equivalent to the original ones, and
(2) although deriving invariants with ℜ = "=" is possible (such invariants are
contained in the set Taut and new ones will be generated by Combine 13 and
by Combine 3), for all such invariants we have also both their ⊆ counterparts
(this can be easily shown by induction).
Let's suppose therefore that inv has the form ic ⇒ ie1 = ie2. We know that both
ic ⇒ ie1 ⊆ ie2 and ic ⇒ ie1 ⊇ ie2 are entailed by I and we apply Theorem 4.17 to
these cases. We can assume wlog that none of these two invariants is a tautology
(otherwise we are done).
Thus there are inv′ (for ⊆) and inv′′ (for ⊇). We apply Lemma 4.7 and get that
inv′ (resp. inv′′) has the form ic′ ⇒ ie1 ⊆ ie2 (resp. ic′′ ⇒ ie1 ⊇ ie2). By symmetry
ic′ is equivalent (in fact, by using a deterministic strategy it can be made identical)
to ic′′. Thus by our Combine 2, there is also a derived invariant of the form
ic′ ⇒ ie1 = ie2,
and this derived invariant clearly entails ic ⇒ ie1 = ie2 (because inv′ entails ic ⇒
ie1 ⊆ ie2 and inv′′ entails ic ⇒ ie1 ⊇ ie2).
Proof of Corollary 4.19.
(1): The proof is by induction on the iteration of the while loop in the Compute-
Derived-Invariants algorithm. Let the inductive hypothesis be ∀i ≥ 0 if inv
is inserted into X in iteration i, then I = inv.
Base Step: For i = 0, inv ∈ I, inv → inv, hence I = inv.
Inductive Step: Let inv be inserted into X in iteration i > 0, and inv =
Combine 1(inv1, inv2, I), where inv1 and inv2 are inserted into X at step
2This is analogous to the classical Henkin proof of the completeness of first-order logic. In our case
the theory T in question contains only finitely many free variables which simplifies the original
proof.
3see the first line in Table 1
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
61
(i−1) or earlier. Then, by the inductive hypothesis, I = inv1 and I = inv2.
By Lemma 4.9, {inv1, inv2} = inv, hence I = inv.
(2): First note that the Compute-Derived-Invariants algorithm computes and
returns CI ↑ω. The result follows from Theorem 4.17 and Corollary 4.18.
B. AXIOMATIC INFERENCE SYSTEM
Equivalence Rules
A ∪ A = A ∩ A = A
A ∪ ∅ = A and A ∩ ∅ = ∅
(A ∪ B) ∪ C = A ∪ (B ∪ C) and (A ∩ B) ∩ C = A ∩ (B ∩ C)
A ∪ B = B ∪ A and A ∩ B = B ∩ A
A ∪ (B ∩ C) = (A ∪ B) ∩ (A ∪ C)
A ∩ (B ∪ C) = (A ∩ B) ∪ (A ∩ C)
¬(¬(A)) = A
¬(A ∪ B) = ¬A ∩ ¬B and ¬(A ∩ B) = ¬A ∪ ¬B
A ∪ (A ∩ B) = A and A ∩ (A ∪ B) = A
Inference Rules
A ⊆ A
(A ∩ B) ⊆ A
A ⊆ (A ∪ B)
((A ∪ B) ∩ ¬B) ⊆ A
A ⊆ ((A ∩ B) ∪ ¬B)
if A ⊆ B and B ⊆ C
then A ⊆ C
if A ⊆ B and C ⊆ D
then (A ∩ C) ⊆ (B ∩ D)
if A ⊆ B and C ⊆ D
then (A ∩ C) ⊆ (B ∪ D)
C. INVARIANTS FOR THE SPATIAL AND RELATIONAL DOMAINS
T =T′ ∧ L =L′ ∧ R =R′ =⇒
in(Y, spatial : vertical (R, L, R)) = in(Y, spatial : vertical (T′, L′, R′))
in(Y, spatial : vertical (R, L, R)) ⊆ in(Y, spatial : vertical (T′, L′, R′))
T =T′ ∧ L =L′ ∧ R <R′ =⇒
T =T′ ∧ R =R′ ∧ L>L' =⇒
in(Y, spatial : vertical (R, L, R)) ⊆ in(Y, spatial : vertical (T′, L′, R′))
in(Y, spatial : vertical (T, L, R)) ⊆ in(Y, spatial : vertical (T′, L′, R′))
T =T′ ∧ R<R' ∧ L>L' =⇒
in(Y, spatial : vertical (T, B, U)) = in(Y, spatial : vertical (T′, B′, U′))
T =T′ ∧ B =B′ ∧ U =U′ =⇒
T =T′ ∧ B =B′ ∧ U <U′ =⇒
in(Y, spatial : vertical (T′, B′, U′)) ⊆ in(Y, spatial : vertical (T′, B′, U′))
in(Y, spatial : vertical (T, B, U)) ⊆ in(Y, spatial : vertical (T′, B′, U′))
T =T′ ∧ U =U′ ∧ B >B′ =⇒
T =T′ ∧ U <U′ ∧ B >B′ =⇒
in(Y, spatial : vertical (T, B, U)) ⊆ in(Y, spatial : vertical (T′, B′, U′))
T =T′ ∧ X =X′ ∧ Y =Y′ ∧ Rad =Rad′ =⇒
in(Z, spatial : range(T, X, Y, Rad)) = in(W, spatial : range(T′, X′, Y′, Rad′))
T =T′ ∧ X =X′ ∧ Y =Y′ ∧ Rad < Rad′ =⇒
in(Z, spatial : range(T, X, Y, Rad)) ⊆ in(W, spatial : range(T′, X′, Y′, Rad′))
Table 7.
Invariants for the spatial domain (1)
62
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
T =T′ ∧ R ≤R′ ∧ L ≤L′ ∧ L′ ≤R =⇒
in(Y, spatial : vertical (T, L, R)) ∪ in(Y, spatial : vertical (T′, L′, R′))
=
in(Y, spatial : vertical (T, L, R′))
T =T′ ∧ R ≥R′ ∧ L ≥L′ ∧ L ≤R′ =⇒
in(Y, spatial : vertical (R, L, R)) ∪ in(Y, spatial : vertical (T′, L′, R′))
=
in(Y, spatial : vertical (T, L′, R))
T =T′ ∧ U≤U' ∧ B≤B' ∧ B'≤U =⇒
in(Y, spatial : horizontal (T, B, U)) ∪ in(Y, spatial : horizontal (T′, B′, U′))
=
in(Y, spatial : horizontal (T′, B, U′))
T =T′ ∧ U ≥U′ ∧ B ≥B′ ∧ B ≤U′ =⇒
in(Y, spatial : horizontal (T, B, U)) ∪ in(Y, spatial : horizontal (T′, B′, U′))
=
in(Y, spatial : horizontal (T′, B′, U))
Table 8.
Invariants for the spatial domain (2)
Improving Performance of Heavily-Loaded Agents
·
63
Rel =Rel′ ∧ Attr =Attr′ ∧ Op =Op′ ∧ V =V′ =⇒
in(X, rel : select (Rel, Attr, Op, V)) = in(Y, rel : select (Rel′, Attr′, Op′, V′))
Rel =Rel′ ∧ Attr =Attr′ ∧ Op =Op′ ="≤" ∧ V<V' =⇒
in(X, rel : select (Rel, Attr, Op, V)) ⊆ in(Y, rel : select (Rel′, Attr′, Op′, V′))
Rel =Rel′ ∧ Attr =Attr′ ∧ Op =Op′ ="≥" ∧ V>V' =⇒
in(X, rel : select (Rel, Attr, Op, V)) ⊆ in(Y, rel : select (Rel′, Attr′, Op′, V′))
Rel =Rel′ ∧ Attr =Attr′ ∧ V1 =V1′ ∧ V2 =V2′ =⇒
in(X, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr, V1, V2)) = in(Y, rel : rngselect (Rel′, Attr′, V1′, V2′))
Rel =Rel′ ∧ Attr =Attr′ ∧ V1≥V1′ ∧ V2 ≤V2′ =⇒
in(X, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr, V1, V2)) ⊆ in(Y, rel : rngselect (Rel′, Attr′, V1′, V2′))
Rel =Rel′ ∧ Attr =Attr′ ∧ V1≤V1′ ∧ V2 ≤V2′ ∧ V1′ ≤ V2 =⇒
in(X, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr, V1, V2)) ∪ in(Y, rel : rngselect (Rel′, Attr′, V1′, V2′))
in(Z, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr, V1, V2′))
=
Rel =Rel′ ∧ Attr =Attr′ ∧ V1≥V1′ ∧ V2 ≥V2′ ∧ V1≤V2′ =⇒
in(X, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr, V1, V2)) ∪ in(Y, rel : rngselect (Rel′, Attr′, V1′, V2′))
in(Z, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr, V1′, V2))
=
Table 9.
Invariants for the relational domain (1)
64
·
F. Ozcan, V.S. Subrahmanian and J. Dix
Rel =Rel′ ∧ Attr1 =Attr1′ ∧ Attr2 =Attr2′ ∧ V1′ =V1 ∧
V2 =V2′ ∧ V3′ =V3 ∧ V4 =V4′ =⇒
in(X, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr1, V1, V2)) ∩ in(Y, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3, V4))
=
in(Z, rel : rngselect (Rel′, Attr1′, V1′, V2′)) ∩ in(W, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3′, V4′))
Rel =Rel′ ∧ Attr1 =Attr1′ ∧ Attr2 =Attr2′ ∧ V1′ ≤V1
∧ V2 ≤V2′ ∧ V3′ ≤V3 ∧ V4 ≤V4′ =⇒
in(X, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr1, V1, V2)) ∩ in(Y, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3, V4))
⊆
in(Z, rel : rngselect (Rel′, Attr1′, V1′, V2′)) ∩ in(W, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3′, V4′))
Rel =Rel′ ∧ Attr1 =Attr1′ ∧ Attr2 =Attr2′ ∧ V1′ ≤V1 ∧
V2′ ≤V2 ∧ V3 ≤V3′ ∧ V4 ≤V4′ ∧ V1 ≤V2′ ∧ V3′ ≤V4 =⇒
(in(X, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr1, V1, V2)) ∩ in(X, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3, V4))) ∪
(in(X, rel : rngselect (Rel′, Attr1′, V1′, V2′)) ∩ in(X, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3′, V4′)))
⊆
in(X, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr1, V1′, V2)) ∩ in(X, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3, V4′))
Rel =Rel′ ∧ Attr1 =Attr1′ ∧ Attr2 =Attr2′ ∧ V1 ≤V1′
∧ V2 ≤V2′ ∧ V3 ≤V3′ ∧ V4 ≤V4′ ∧ V1′ ≤V2 ∧ V3′ ≤V4 =⇒
(in(X, rel : rngselect (Attr1, V1, V2)) ∩ in(Y, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3, V4))) ∪
(in(Z, rel : rngselect (Rel′, Attr1′, V1′, V2′)) ∩ in(W, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3′, V4′)))
⊆
in(X′, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr1, V1, V2′)) ∩ in(Y′, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3, V4′))
Rel =Rel′ ∧ Attr1 =Attr1′ ∧ Attr2 =Attr2′ ∧ V1≤V1′ ∧
V2 ≤V2′ ∧ V3′ ≤V3 ∧ V4′ ≤V4 ∧ V1′ ≤V2 ∧ V3 ≤V4′ =⇒
(in(X, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr1, V1, V2)) ∩ in(Y, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3, V4))) ∪
(in(Z, rel : rngselect (Rel′, Attr1′, V1′, V2′)) ∩ in(W, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3′, V4′)))
⊆
in(X′, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr1, V1, V2′)) ∩ in(Y′, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3′, V4))
Rel =Rel′ ∧ Attr1 =Attr1′ ∧ Attr2 =Attr2′ ∧ V1′ ≤V1 ∧
V2′ ≤V2 ∧ V3′ ≤V3 ∧ V4′ ≤V4 ∧ V1 ≤V2′ ∧ V3 ≤V4′ =⇒
(in(X, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr1, V1, V2)) ∩ in(Y, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3, V4))) ∪
(in(Z, rel : rngselect (Rel′, Attr1′, V1′, V2′)) ∩ in(W, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3′, V4′)))
in(X′, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr1, V1′, V2)) ∩ in(Y′, rel : rngselect (Rel, Attr2, V3′, V4))
⊆
Table 10.
Invariants for the relational domain (2)
|
1509.08088 | 1 | 1509 | 2015-09-27T11:56:00 | Approximation and Heuristic Algorithms for Probabilistic Physical Search on General Graphs | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI"
] | We consider an agent seeking to obtain an item, potentially available at different locations in a physical environment. The traveling costs between locations are known in advance, but there is only probabilistic knowledge regarding the possible prices of the item at any given location. Given such a setting, the problem is to find a plan that maximizes the probability of acquiring the good while minimizing both travel and purchase costs. Sample applications include agents in search-and-rescue or exploration missions, e.g., a rover on Mars seeking to mine a specific mineral. These probabilistic physical search problems have been previously studied, but we present the first approximation and heuristic algorithms for solving such problems on general graphs. We establish an interesting connection between these problems and classical graph-search problems, which led us to provide the approximation algorithms and hardness of approximation results for our settings. We further suggest several heuristics for practical use, and demonstrate their effectiveness with simulation on real graph structure and synthetic graphs. | cs.MA | cs |
Approximation and Heuristic Algorithms for
Probabilistic Physical Search on General Graphs
Noam Hazon
[email protected]
Mira Gonen
[email protected]
Max Kleb
[email protected]
Department of Computer Science and Mathematics
Ariel University, Israel
July 2, 2021
Abstract
We consider an agent seeking to obtain an item, potentially available at differ-
ent locations in a physical environment. The traveling costs between locations are
known in advance, but there is only probabilistic knowledge regarding the possible
prices of the item at any given location. Given such a setting, the problem is to find
a plan that maximizes the probability of acquiring the good while minimizing both
travel and purchase costs. Sample applications include agents in search-and-rescue
or exploration missions, e.g., a rover on Mars seeking to mine a specific mineral.
These probabilistic physical search problems have been previously studied, but we
present the first approximation and heuristic algorithms for solving such problems
on general graphs. We establish an interesting connection between these problems
and classical graph-search problems, which led us to provide the approximation
algorithms and hardness of approximation results for our settings. We further sug-
gest several heuristics for practical use, and demonstrate their effectiveness with
simulation on real graph structure and synthetic graphs.
Introduction
An autonomous intelligent agent often needs to explore its environment and choose
among different available alternatives. In many physical environments the exploration
is costly, and the agent also faces uncertainty regarding the price of the possible al-
ternatives. For example, consider a traveling purchaser seeking to obtain an item [12].
While there may be prior knowledge regarding candidate stores (e.g., based on search
history), the actual price at any given site may only be determined upon reaching the
site. In another domain, consider a Rover robot seeking to mine a certain mineral on
the face of Mars. While there may be prior knowledge regarding candidate mining sites
1
(e.g., based on satellite images), the actual cost associated with the mining at any given
location, e.g., in terms of battery consumption, may depend on the exact conditions at
each site (e.g., soil type, terrain, etc.), and hence are fully known only upon reaching
the site.
These scenarios are referred to as probabilistic physical search problems, since
there is a prior probabilistic knowledge regarding the price of the possible alternatives
at each site, and traveling for the purpose of observing a price typically entails a cost.
Furthermore, exploration and obtaining the item results in the expenditure of the same
type of resource. The purchaser's money is used not only to obtain the item but also
for traveling from one potential store to another; the robot's battery is used not only for
mining the mineral but also for traveling from one potential location to another. Thus,
the agent needs to carefully plan its exploration and balance its use of the available
budget between the exploration cost and the purchasing cost.
This paper focuses on the development of efficient exploration strategies for prob-
abilistic physical search problems on graphs. The analysis of such problems was ini-
tiated by [1, 10], who showed that it is (computationally) hard to find the optimal
solution on general graphs. Accordingly, they provide a thorough analysis of physi-
cal search problems on one-dimensional path graphs, both for single and multi-agent
settings However, many real-world physical environments may only be represented by
two-dimensional graphs. For example, the Mars rover can freely move directly from
any possible mining location to another (with an associated travel cost), while in path
graphs the robot is restricted to move only to the two adjacent neighbors of its cur-
rent location. Our work thus handles probabilistic physical search problems on general
graphs. To the best of our knowledge, our is the first to do this.
We consider two variants of the problem. The first variant, coined Max-Probability,
considers an agent that is given an initial budget for the task (which it cannot exceed)
and needs to act in a way that maximizes the probability it will complete its task (e.g.,
reach at least one opportunity with a budget large enough to successfully buy the prod-
uct). In the second variant, coined Min-Budget, we are required to guarantee some pre-
determined success probability, and the goal is to minimize the initial budget necessary
in order to achieve the said success probability.
Since previous work showed that probabilistic physical search problems are hard
on general graphs, we either need to consider approximations with guaranteed bounds
or heuristics with practical running time. We do both. We first establish an interesting
connection between Max-Probability and the Deadline-TSP problems [4], and as a
result we are able to provide an Oplog nq approximation for the former, based on an
Oplog nq approximation for the latter, with the only requirement that the probabilities
are not too small. We then show a 5 ` approximation, for every ą 0, for the
special case of Min-Budget with equal purchasing costs, equal single probabilities, and
a hardness of approximation within a ratio of 1.003553 for the general Min-Budget
problem. We then consider heuristics for practical use. We suggest two families of
heuristics, linear-time and exponential-time heuristics. We evaluate the performance
of our heuristics through simulations on graphs extracted from a real network and on
synthetic graphs. We found that our no-backtrack branch-and-bound algorithm is able
to efficiently solve very large instances while producing solutions that are very close
to optimal, even though it has a theoretical exponential worst-case running time. Our
2
ant-colony based heuristic, which has a linear worst-case running time, does not lag
much behind.
Related Work
Models of search processes with prior probabilistic knowledge have been studied ex-
tensively in the economic literature [16, 11]. However, these economic-based search
models assume that the cost associated with observing a given opportunity is station-
ary, i.e., does not change along the search process. In our settings the agent is operated
in a physical environment. That is, the distances to other sites depends on the agent's
position, and thus when the agent travels to explore other sites the cost of traveling to
other sites changes.
Changing search costs has been considered in the computer science domain tradi-
tionally in the contexts of the Prize-Collecting Traveling Salesman problem [3] and its
variants. These problems, while related, fundamentally differ from our model in that
the traveling budget and the prizes in these models are distinct, with different curren-
cies. Thus, expending the travel budget does not, and cannot affect the prize collected
at a node. In our work, in contrast, traveling and buying use the same resource (e.g.
battery power). The Deadline-TSP [4] problem, which is a generalization of the Orien-
teering problem [15], is much more relevant to our settings, and in the next section we
establish a connection between the Max-Probability and the Deadline-TSP problems.
The work most related to ours is the work of [10], who introduced the probabilis-
tic physical search problems and provided a comprehensive analysis of the problems
on one-dimensional path graphs, both for single [1] and multi-agent settings [9]. Re-
cently, [6] presented an MILP formulation and a branch-and-bound optimal algorithm
for general graphs, which work only if the graph is complete. In a different paper, [7]
investigate the minimal number of agents required to solve Max-Probability and Min-
Budget problems on a path and in a 2-dimensional Euclidean space.
From a broader perspective, our search problems relate to planning, scheduling
and path planning with uncertainty. We refer the reader to [10] for a comprehensive
overview of relevant works and how they relate to probabilistic physical search.
Preliminaries
We are given a graph G " pV, Eq, whose vertices represent the sites where an item
is available (i.e. stores) and the edges represent the connections between the sites. We
are also given a weight function w on the edges w : E Ñ R`, which determines the
travel costs between any two sites. W.l.o.g. (without loss of generality) we assume that
the agent's initial location is at one of the sites, denoted by v1, and the item cannot
be obtained at this site. The cost of obtaining the item at each site v P V is a random
variable Cv with an associated probability mass function pvpciq for 1 ď i ď k, which
gives the probability that obtaining the item will cost ci at site v. For ease of notation,
we assume that all sites have k cost values (if a site v has fewer cost values then we
can add arbitrary cost values ci with pvpciq " 0). Hence, with a probability of 1 ´
3
ř
k
i"1 pvpciq the item cannot be obtained at a given site v. Note that the actual cost at
any site is only revealed once the agent reaches the site.
The total cost for the agent includes both the traveling cost and the cost of obtaining
the item. The agent travels along a path P " xv1, . . . , v(cid:96)y where pvi, vi`1q P E, which
is an ordered multiset of vertices. That is, vi P P represents the i-th vertex of the path,
and thus it is possible that for i ‰ j, vi " vj. Notice that we allow the agent to visit a
site v multiple times if needed. However, the probability pvpciq of obtaining the item
ř
at cost ci will be counted only once - specifically, the first time the agent reaches v
with a remaining budget of at least ci. The cost of traveling a path P " xv1, . . . , v(cid:96)y is
(cid:96)´1
i"1 wpvi, vi`1q, hereafter denoted wP. Given these inputs, the goal is to find a path
that maximizes the probability of obtaining the item, while minimizing the necessary
budget. The standard approach in such multi-criterion optimization problems is to op-
timize one of the objectives while bounding the other. In our case, we get two concrete
problem formulations (following [10]):
1. Max-Probability: given a total initial budget B, maximize the probability of ob-
taining the item.
2. Min-Budget: given a success probability psucc, minimize the budget needed to
guarantee the item will be obtained with a probability of at least psucc.
Max-Probability
In this section we provide an Oplog nq approximation algorithm for the Max-probability
problem, when the probabilities are not too small. We first consider a restricted case of
the Max-Probability problem, and then we show how to extend our analysis to the gen-
eral case. Our algorithm is built on the approximation algorithm of [4] for the Deadline-
TSP problem that they defined as follows:
Definition 1 Given a weighted graph G " pV, Eq on n nodes, with a start node r, a
prize function π : V Ñ Z`, deadlines D : V Ñ Z`, and a length function (cid:96) : E Ñ
Z`, find a path starting at r that maximizes the total prize, where a path starting at r
collects the prize πpvq at node v if it reaches v before Dpvq.
If P is a path found by an algorithm for the Deadline-TSP,let V pPq denote the set of
nodes visited by P before their deadline.
The case of single probabilities
We begin by providing an approximation algorithm for the case where k " 1. That is,
in each site either the item can be obtained at a given cost with a given probability, or
not available at all. We abuse the notation and use cv to denote the (single) cost of the
item at site v, and pv to denote the probability of obtaining the item there.
Our goal is to maximize the probability of success using a given budget. That is, the
probability that the agent will be able to succeed in at least one site, and that the total
cost is at most the given budget B. We may also phrase our objective as minimizing the
4
failure probability. Formally, we would like to find a path P " xv1, . . . , v(cid:96)y with a set
of vertices V pPq Ď P such that:
ř
• wP ď B.
• For all vj P Pztv1u, if vj P V pPq then B ´
j´1
vj R V pPq then B ´
i"1 wpvi, vi`1q ă cv.
ś
• For all vi " vj P P, if i ă j and vi P V pPq, it holds that vj R V pPq.
vPV pPqp1 ´ pvq is minimal.
•
ř
j´1
i"1 wpvi, vi`1q ě cv and if
However,
ź
arg minP t
vPV pPq
arg minP tlogp
ÿ
arg maxP t´ logp
arg maxP t
ź
p1 ´ pvqu "
ź
p1 ´ pvqqu "
vPV pPq
p1 ´ pvqqu "
(1)
vPV pPq
vPV pPq
´ logp1 ´ pvqu
ř
vPV pPq ´ logp1 ´ pvq is maximal. Since
Therefore it is suffice to find a path such that
we represent our objective as an optimization over summation we can convert every
instance of our problem into an instance of the Deadline-TSP problem and run the
approximation algorithm of [4]. This is not straightforward, since the Deadline-TSP is
defined over prizes from Z` but due to our conversion the prizes will not be necessarily
integers 1. Lemma 1 shows that we can overcome this challenge, if we bound the size
of the prizes by any small constant.
Lemma 1 If there is an r-approximation algorithm for the Deadline-TSP problem
where the prizes are integers, then there is an Oprq-approximation algorithm for the
Deadline-TSP problem where the prizes are not necessarily integers, but there is a
lower bound of 1{c on these prizes, for any constant c larger than 0.
Proof. Given an instance with prizes πpvq for every vertex v, that are not necessarily
integers, let π1pvq " tπpvqu if πpvq ě 1, and 1 otherwise. Let OP T be the value of
the optimal solution with the original prizes and POPT an optimal path. OP T 1 and
POPT 1 are similarly defined with the scaled prizes π1pvq. Then,
ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
vPV pPOPT 1q
vPV pPOPT q
OP T 1 "
ě
π1pvq ě
πpvq
2
vPV pPOPT q
" 1
2
OP T.
π1pvq
(2)
1Although the lengths of edges in the Deadline-TSP problem are integers, and in the Max-Probability
problem they are not necessarily so, we note that they do not play any role in the optimization process.
5
The last inequality is true since π1pvq ě 1, thus by rounding we lose at most a factor of
2. Now, suppose we have an r-approximation algorithm for the Deadline-TSP problem
that uses rounded integer prizes. Let Alg1 be the total prize collected by this algorithm
r OP T 1. If we use the
and PAlg1 the path returned by this algorithm. Clearly, Alg1 ě 1
path PAlg1 with the non-rounded prizes we will collect a different total prize, denoted
Alg. If c ď 1 then no prize has been rounded up, and according to Equation 2,
Alg ě Alg1 ě 1
r
OP T 1 ě 1
2r
(3)
If c ą 1 then in the rounding process each prize of a node in V pPAlg1q is increased by
at most 1 ´ 1{c, so it holds that
OP T.
Alg ě Alg1 ´ V pPAlg1q p1 ´ 1{cq
ě Alg1 ´ Alg1 p1 ´ 1{cq " Alg1 1{c
ě 1
r
OP T 1 ě 1
2r c
OP T.
1
c
Therefore, the lemma immediately follows.
(4)
l
We are now ready to present the details of our conversion and show how it guaran-
tees an approximation ratio of Oplog nq. The idea is that the probabilities correspond
to prizes and the costs correspond to deadlines, but the challenge here is to keep the
same approximation ratio.
Theorem 1 The Max-Probability problem for the case of single probabilities can be
approximated within a ratio of Oplog nq, for any instance of the problem for which it
holds that pv ě 1{c for each probability pv, where c is any constant larger than 1.
Proof. Given an instance of the Max-Probability in which p ě 1{c for every proba-
bility p, we construct an instance of Deadline-TSP as follows. Each site of the Max-
Probability is a node of Deadline-TSP, r " v1, and the weight function w becomes the
length function (cid:96). For each site v, we set the prize at the corresponding node, πpvq, to
´ logp1´ pvq and the deadline Dpvq to B´ cv. Note that in the Deadline-TSP problem
when starting at r the time is 0, and it increases when traveling the path. However, in
the Max-Probability problem the budget, B, is maximal when starting at v1, and it de-
creases when traveling the path. Therefore, by setting Dpvq to B ´ cv we can consider
the budget already spent instead of the remaining budget. The budget already spent is
0 when starting at v1, and increases when traveling the path. When reaching a node v
in which Dpvq " B ´ cv, if the budget already spent is at most Dpvq the item can be
bought at v since the remaining budget is at least cv.
Now, we apply the approximation algorithm of [4] to the Deadline-TSP problem
with the instance described above, and we use the path returned as a solution for Max-
Probability. Obviously, p ě 1{c implies that ´ logp1´ pq ě ´ logp1´ 1{cq. For every
constant c ą 1 a constant c1 ‰ 0 exists such that ´ logp1 ´ 1{cq ě 1{c1. (For instance
take c1 " ´
logp1´1{cq). Therefore, by Lemma 1 we can use the approximation algo-
rithm of [4] even for non-integer prizes and lose only a factor of c1 in the approximation
ratio.
1
6
It remains to show that the approximation ratio is Oplog nq. Let p be the opti-
mal probability of the instance of Max-Probability problem. Let T be the optimal
total prize of the Deadline-TSP problem on the converted instance, and let P be a
path returned by an optimal algorithm for the problem. Similarly, let T apx be the to-
tal prize collected by the approximate algorithm for the Deadline-TSP problem on
the converted instance, and let P apx be the path returned by the approximation al-
ś
ř
gorithm. Finally, let papx be the probability achieved by using P apx for solving Max-
ś
Probability. According to our conversion, T "
vPV pPq ´ logp1´ pvq, and T apx "
vPV pPqp1´ pvq,
vPV pP apxq ´ logp1´ pvq. By Equation (1) we find that p " 1´
and by our construction papx " 1´
vPV pP apxqp1´ pvq. According to [4], a constant
d exists such that T {pd log nq ď T apx. To simplify notations, let r " 1{pd log nq.
Therefore,
ř
ÿ
ÿ
ź
´ logp1 ´ pvq r ď
ź
p1 ´ pvqq r ě logp
vPV pPq
ź
logp
vPV pPq
p1 ´ pvqqr ě
p
vPV pPq
vPV pP apxq
vPV pP apxq
ź
´ logp1 ´ pvq ñ
p1 ´ pvqq ñ
vPV pP apxq
p1 ´ pvq
ź
Therefore we get:
papx " 1 ´
vPV pP apxq
p1 ´ pvq ě
1 ´ p
`
r
j
We use the generalization of Newton's binom, namely p1 ` xqr "
" 1. Thus,
real r, where
" rpr´1q...pr´j`1q
1 ´ p1 ´ pqr " 1 ´
for j ą 0, and
ppqj p´1qj
8ÿ
j"0
r
j
r
0
j!
ź
`
vPV pPq
8ÿ
j"1
"
r
j
p1 ´ pvqqr " 1 ´ p1 ´ pqr.
ř8
j"0
`
r
j
xj for any
ppqj p´1qj`1 ě r p.
The last inequality is valid since the sum of two consecutive terms the p2iqth term and
7
the p2i ` 1qth term is positive:
ppq2i`1 p´1q2i`1`1
r
2i
r
ppq2i p´1q2i`1 `
" ´ 1
p2iq!
r pr ´ 1q . . . pr ´ p2i ` 1q ` 1q ppq2i`1
1
2i ` 1
r pr ´ 1q . . . pr ´ 2i ` 1q ppq2i
looooooooooooooomooooooooooooooon
r pr ´ 1q . . . pr ´ 2i ` 1q
" ppq2i
p2i ` 1q!
`
1
p2iq!
Overall, we find that, papx ě r p, as required.
ă0
„
looooooooooooooooomooooooooooooooooon
´1 ` 1
pr ´ 2iq p
2i ` 1
ă0
ą 0
l
i
k
ř
General Case
We now show how to extend our results from the previous section to provide an ap-
proximation algorithm for the general case, i.e., where the number of probabilities in
each site is not bounded. W.l.o.g. assume that in each site c1 ď c2 ď . . . ď ck. Thus,
ř
an agent that reaches a site v with a reaming budget of b will acquire the item with a
j"1 pvpcjq for i for which ci ď b ă ci`1 if i ă k, and probability of
probability of
j"1 pvpcjq if b ě ck (namely, i " k if b ě ck).
We reduce the general case to the case of single probabilities as follows. Given an
instance graph G to the (general) Max-Probability problem, we define a new graph G1
that will have a single probability in each site. For every vertex v with a probability
pvpciq of obtaining the item at a cost ci, where 1 ď i ď k, we define new vertices
u1, . . . , uk, such that in each site ui, where 2 ď i ď k, either the item can be acquired
ř
pvpciq
at a cost of ci with a probability pui "
j"1 pvpcjq, or not available at all. In u1,
1´
i´1
either the item can be acquired at a cost of c1 with a probability pu1 " pvpc1q, or not
available at all. We replace the vertex v in G1 with u1, and create edges between ui and
ui`1, for all 1 ď i ď k ´ 1, with associated weights of 0.
Therefore, an agent that reaches u1 in G1 with a remaining budget of b can travel
without any cost from u1 to uk and back to u1. For i for which ci ď b ă ci`1, or for
i " k if b ě ck, the probability of failure from this travel is as follows:
¸
1 ´ pvpc2q
" 1 ´ iÿ
1 ´ pvpc1q
ř
pvpciq
i´1
j"1 pvpcjq
p1 ´ pu1q . . . p1 ´ puiq " p1 ´ pvpc1qq
1 ´
pvpcjq,
. . .
1 ´
j"1
which is the same probability of failure of an agent that reaches the corresponding site
v in G with a reaming budget of b. Therefore, the Max-Probability problem on G can
8
be approximated using the approximation algorithm from the previous section on G1.
Since G1 has k n nodes, we conclude:
Theorem 2 The Max-Probability problem can be approximated within a ratio of Oplog n`
ř
pvpciq
log kq, for any instance of the problem for which it holds that
j"1 pvpcjq ě 1{c
1´
i´1
for every vertex v and any cost ci P Cv, where c is any constant larger than 1.
For k " Opnq the Max-Probability problem can be approximated within a ratio of
Oplog nq, for the same instances.
Min-Budget
Although Min-Budget is the dual of Max-Probability and their decision versions are the
same, it seems that Min-Budget is much harder to approximate on general graphs. In-
deed, converting the Min-Budget problem to the dual of the Deadline-TSP is hopeless;
we have a proof that unlike the Deadline-TSP problem, the dual of the Deadline-TSP
problem is hard to approximate within a factor of c log n, for any constant c. We thus
consider restricted instances. We show that the Min-Budget problem with a specific in-
stance of equal vertex costs and equal single probabilities can be approximated within
a ratio of 5 ` for any ą 0. The idea is to run the 2 ` approximation algorithm
of [14] for the rooted k-MST problem and then travel along the tree. The rooted k-MST
problem, that was shown to be NP-hard [13], is as follows:
Definition 2 Given a graph G " pV, Eq on n nodes with a root node r, nonnegative
edge weights, and a specified number k, find a tree of minimum weight that includes r,
which spans at least k nodes other than r.
Theorem 3 The Min-Budget problem with a specific instance of equal vertex costs and
equal single probabilities can be approximated within a ratio of 5 ` for any ą 0.
Proof. Given an instance of Min-Budget, we define an instance for the rooted k-MST
problem, where r " v1 and,
R
V
k "
logp1 ´ psuccq
logp1 ´ pq
.
(5)
We then run the approximation algorithm of [14] and return the path received by trav-
eling along the tree of [14]. The initial budget is set to c plus twice the tree's cost.
Obviously, the path returned by the algorithm meets all the constraints of the minimum
budget problem: if the tree spans k vertices then since k ě logp1´psuccq
, it holds that
logp1´pq
logp1 ´ psuccq ě k logp1 ´ pq, thus the probability that the algorithm will succeed is
at least 1 ´ p1 ´ pqk ě psucc. Moreover, since we add c to the budget, the item can be
bought at every node in the returned path.
Now, let M apx be the value returned by the approximation algorithm of [14] for the
rooted k-MST problem and let M be the optimum value of the rooted k-MST problem.
Similarly, let Bapx be the budget required by the above approximation algorithm for
9
the Min-Budget problem, and let B be the minimal budget for the instance of the
Min-Budget problem. Thus
Bapx " 2 M apx ` c ď 2 p2 ` q M ` c
ď 2 p2 ` q B ` c ď p5 ` 2q B.
(6)
l
On the other hand, we show that the Min-Budget problem is hard to approximate
within a factor of α " 1.003553. We do so by using the hardness of approximation of
the Min-Excess-Path problem proven in [5]. The excess of a path is defines as follows:
Definition 3 Given a graph G " pV, Eq on n nodes with a root node s and an end
node t, nonnegative edge weights, nonnegative prizes for each vertex, and a quota Q,
the excess of a path is the difference between the length of an s ´ t path that collects
prizes of at least Q, and the length of the shortest path between s and t.
That is, any path must spend a minimum amount of time equal to the shortest distance
between s and t, only to reach the destination t; the excess of the path is the extra
time it spent to gather prizes along the way. The Min-Excess-Path problem is to find
a minimum-excess path from s to t collecting prizes of at least Q, and [5] show that
the Min-Excess-Path problem is NP-hard to approximate to within a factor of β "
220{219.
Theorem 4 The Min-Budget problem is hard to approximate within a ratio of α "
1.003553.
Proof. We reduce the Min-Excess-Path problem to the Min-Budget problem. To do so
we use the hard instance of the Min-Excess-Path problem described in [5] as follows.
Let G " pV, Eq be a complete graph on n nodes, with edge weights in the set t1, 2u,
let r be both the starting node and ending node. and let n be the desired quota. W.o.l.g.
assume that n ě 1000. Given the above instance of the Min-Excess-Path problem we
define an instance for the Min-Budget problem using the same graph, v1 " r, and
in each vertex there is a single cost of 1 with a constant probability p. In addition,
let psucc " 1 ´ p1 ´ pqn. Now, assume that there is an approximation algorithm for
the Min-Budget problem with an α ratio. We show that this implies an approximation
algorithm for the Min-Excess-Path problem with a β ratio, thus contradicting [5]. Let
AB be an α-approximation of the Min-Budget problem. Then run AB on the instance
defined above. Let s be the ending node of the path returned by this algorithm. Then
take the path returned by this algorithm, and add edge ps, rq to the path, and its weight
to the path's cost. The resulting cycle is a solution for the Min-Excess-Path problem.
We now analyze the approximation ratio of this algorithm. Let AEX be the value of the
path returned by the above algorithm to the Min-Excess-Path problem, OB the optimal
value of the Min-Budget problem for the defined instance, and OEXpu, tq the optimal
value of the Min-Excess-Path problem starting at u and ending at t. Let t be the ending
10
node of an optimal Min-Budget solution. Then,
AEXpr, rq
ď
AEXpr, sq ď AB ´ dpr, sq ´ 1
ď
α OB ´ dpr, sq ´ 1
ď
αpdpr, tq ` OEXpr, tq ` 1q ´ dpr, sq ´ 1
ďpq αpdpr, tq ` OEXpr, rq ` 1q ´ dpr, sq ´ 1
ď
α OEXpr, rq ` α 3 ´ 2.
(7)
Notice that OEXpr, rq ě n ´ 2. This is true since a path has to traverse all the nodes
in order to collect enough prizes, each edge is of a length of at least 1, and the shortest
path between the last vertex in which the quota is met and r is at most 2. Thus we get
that
3 α ´ 2 " 3 α ´ 2
n ´ 2
ď 3 α ´ 2
n ´ 2
pn ´ 2q
OEXpr, rq ď β OEXpr, rq.
(8)
(The last inequality is valid since n ě 1000, so 1 ă α ď βpn´2q`2
). This contradicts
the fact that the Min-Excess-Path problem cannot be approximated within a ratio of
β [5].
Proof of (*): Notice that OEX " minwtOEXpr, wqu, since there is a node on the
cycle going through r in which all the needed prizes were already collected. If node
w for which the minimal value is received is not t (=the last vertex on the path of the
above optimal value of the Min Budget) then we can take the path from r to w and get
n`1
AB " OEXpr, wq ` dpr, wq ` 1
ă OEXpr, tq ` dpr, wq ` 1
ď OEXpr, tq ` 3 " OB ´ dpr, tq ´ 1 ` 3
" OB ´ dpr, tq ` 2 ď QB ` 1.
(9)
This implies that AB ď OB, so we can attain an optimal solution of the Min-Budget
that returns a path for which w is the last vertex. Thus we can assume w.o.l.g. that
OEXpr, rq " OEXpr, tq.
l
Heuristics and Experimental Analysis
Our theoretical results in the previous section led us to consider heuristics for practi-
cal use. In this section we propose several heuristics and experimentally evaluate them
against the optimal solution. We concentrate on the Min-Budget problem, and the same
ideas can be used to build heuristics for the Max-Probability problem (the implemen-
tation is even simpler). Indeed, we tested the heuristics for Max-Probability, and even
the simplest greedy heuristic almost always achieved a probability that was very close
to the optimal probability.
11
We use the following notations. Let P be the path that the agent traversed hitherto,
P " xv1, . . . , v(cid:96)y. That is, v(cid:96) is the site where the agent is currently located. Let NP be
the set of all neighbors of sites in P, that is NP " tvu P P,pu, vq P Eu. If v P NP,
v be the total weight of the shortest path from v(cid:96) to v that uses only sites from P.
let wP
We tested the following methods:
i
• Optimal. In the cases where it was computationally feasible to do so, we ex-
haustively evaluated every possible path with several budgets, in order to find
the real optimal solution as a comparison. We implemented a branch-and-bound
algorithm, that is based on the algorithm of [6], to reduce the running time.
ř
• Greedy. Let the score of a site v P NP and a cost ci P Cv be SpP, v, ciq "
j"1 pvpcjq
. In each iteration, the heuristic locally chooses the next best site and
v ci
wP
the best cost there: arg maxvPNP arg maxciPCv SpP, v, ciq. That is, the heuristic
chooses the site that has the maximal success probability to cost ratio, over all
possible probabilities and costs. The heuristic then increases the initial budget
so that the agent will be able to travel to the chosen site and obtain the item at
v ci instead of
the chosen cost. Note that the heuristic calculates a cost of wP
v ` ci. Intuitively, it captures the "penalty" for exploring a distant site (with a
wP
high wP
v ) that will incur a high traveling cost for returning, if needed. In addition,
v `ci, and
we experimentally tested the greedy heuristic with a denominator of wP
it performed much worse.
• Ant Colony Optimization (ACO). Following the successful application of the ant
colony optimization technique for producing near-optimal solutions for the Trav-
eling Salesman problem [8] and Vehicle Routing with Time Windows problem
[2], we developed an ACO version for the Min-Budget problem, as follows. We
ran 50 iterations. In each iteration the ant chooses the next site v P NP and the
cost ci P Cv with a probability of
v is the aver-
age pheromone level of the edges in the shortest path from v(cid:96) to v that uses only
sites from P. That is, the ant randomly chooses the next site and cost, where the
probability of selection depends on the attractiveness of the site and the costs.
The pheromone level of each edge is initially set to 1, and after each iteration
it evaporates by 0.05. However, after finding a path P which is better than the
current best path, the ant updates the pheromone level of each edge pu, vq of the
path to wpu, vq V pPq{wpPq.
, where hP
SpP,v,ciqhP
vPNP ,ciPCv
ř
v
SpP,v,ciqhP
v
• Bounded-Length (BL). This heuristic is a restricted version of the optimal branch-
and-bound algorithm, which bounds the solution's length by two means. First,
the heuristic prunes any path that is longer than the length of the best solu-
tion found so far. In addition, the heuristic does not allow the agent to traverse
through an unvisited site without spending any budget there. Clearly, this re-
stricted branch-and-bound algorithm is no longer guaranteed to be optimal. How-
ever, it is expected to run faster than the optimal algorithm since the solution's
length has a major impact on the optimal algorithm's running time.
12
• No-Backtrack (NB). Another reason for the long running time of the optimal
algorithm is the backtracking phase that checks paths with repetitions, i.e., where
the agent visits the same sites more than once. This motivated us to consider a
restricted version of the optimal algorithm, where in addition to bounding the
length of solution (as in the BL heuristic) the algorithm does not backtrack and
thus only checks paths without repetitions. Unlike the other heuristic, the NB
heuristic does not necessarily find a solution for every instance.
Experimental Design and Results
For the empirical evaluation of our heuristics we used a real graph structure with the
traveling costs set as the real distance between the vertices, which we extracted from
GIS data of the highways network of the USA2. Since the original network is too large
we sampled 40 random sub-graphs, with an average number of 6325.5 vertices. An
illustration of the full graph and of one of the sampled subgraphs are depicted in Fig-
ures 1 and 2, respectively As for the costs, for each vertex we randomly generated
Figure 1: The full real graph, extracted from GIS data of the highways netowrk of the USA.
Figure 2: An example of one of the subgraphs (the yellow nodes) that we sampled from the full
netwrok.
between 1 and 5 costs to obtain the item with a non-zero probability. The costs were
2http://www.mapcruzin.com/download-mexico-canada-us-transportaton-shapefile.htm
13
generated using a normal distribution with an expectation of 2700 and a standard devi-
ation of 900 (the costs were bounded within two standard deviations from the expecta-
tion).
We began by testing the effect of the target success probability, psucc, on the per-
formance of our heuristics. We thus randomly generated probabilities for each vertex
using a normal distribution with an expectation of 0.24 and a standard deviation of
0.08. We then varied psucc between 0.7 and 0.975. The results are depicted in Figure 3,
where each point is the average over the 40 graphs. As expected, a higher target suc-
(a) Minimal required budegt.
(b) Runing time.
Figure 3: Varying the target success probability, psucc.
cess probability results in a higher minimal required budget and longer running time.
However, there was no statistically significant difference between the budget required
by the optimal and BL heuristic and NB was only a little behind. ACO was statistically
significantly better than Greedy, but ACO still required between 72-91% more budget
than NB. As for the running time, all of our heuristics were able to find solutions within
a reasonable time, but the optimal algorithm demonstrated its anticipated exponential
running time behavior in the early stages. Surprisingly, the NB heuristic was faster than
almost all the heuristics (only the greedy heuristic was faster) while still producing so-
lutions that are near-optimal. Our explanation is that the hard instances for the optimal
algorithm, when there is a need to backtrack in order to find a good solution, possibly
occur when the graph has many dead-ends, i.e., vertices with a degree of 1, or with
edges that are very costly. Since we use a real graph structure with real costs, such
vertices are rarely found.
We also wanted to test the performance of our heuristics when we decrease the
probabilities (for acquiring the item) in the vertices. We thus randomly generated prob-
abilities for each vertex using normal distributions, where we varied the expectation
between 0.3 and 0.09. The standard deviation was set to a third of the expectation, and
the target success probability was set to 0.90. As Figure 3 shows, when we decrease
the expectation, which results in smaller values of probabilities, the minimal required
budget increases. Again, BL and NB find near-optimal solutions that are statistically
significantly better than Greedy and ACO. The optimal algorithm required much longer
running time, and it is thus omitted from Figure 4b. However, BL demonstrated an ex-
ponential running time behavior when we decreased the expectation (for generating the
probabilities). We thus conclude that NB clearly is the winner, since it runs very fast
even with small probabilities and a high psucc, but still finds near-optimal solutions.
14
02000400060008000100000.70.7250.750.7750.80.8250.850.8750.90.9250.950.975Budget Target success probability GreedyACONBBLOptimal0200004000060000800001000001200000.70.7250.750.7750.80.8250.850.8750.90.9250.950.975Running Time (ms) Target success probability GreedyACONBBLOptimal (a) Minimal required budegt.
(b) Runing time.
Figure 4: Varying the expectation for generating probabilities.
Finally, we conducted experiments on synthetic, small-world graphs with 25, 000
vertices. Each vertex was connected to its 6 nearest neighbors and edges in the graphs
were randomly rewired to different vertices with a probability of 0.09. The traveling
cost on each edge was chosen uniformly between 40-1040 so that the average edge cost
will be the same as in the real graph structure setting, and the rest of the parameters
were set exactly as in the real graph structure setting. The results are depicted in Fig-
ure 5, where each point is the average over 40 randomly generated small-world graphs.
As Figure 5 shows, the performance of the heuristics is quite similar to the performance
with the real graph structure.
(a) Minimal required budegt.
Figure 5: Varying the target success probability, psucc, for small-world graphs.
(b) Runing time.
Conclusions and Future Work
This paper considers probabilistic physical search on graphs. We show a connection
between Max-Probability and the Deadline-Tsp problems, which enables the Oplog nq
approximation for Max-Probability with probabilities that are not too small. We believe
that this connection can lead to future cross-fertilization between probabilistic physi-
cal search problems and other variants of the Deadline-Tsp that have been extensively
studied. We then provide a 5 ` approximation, for every ą 0, for a special case
of Min-Budget, and a hardness of approximation within a ratio of 1.003553 for the
general Min-Budget problem. We further suggest several heuristics for practical use,
15
02000400060008000100000.30.270.240.210.180.150.120.09Budget Expectation (for generating probabilities) GreedyACONBBLOptimal01002003004005006007008000.30.270.240.210.180.150.120.09Running Time (ms) Expectation (for generating probabilities) GreedyACONBBL02000400060008000100000.70.7250.750.7750.80.8250.850.8750.90.9250.950.975Budget Target success probability GreedyACONBBLOptimal0200004000060000800001000001200000.70.7250.750.7750.80.8250.850.8750.90.9250.950.975Running Time (ms) Target success probability GreedyACONBBLOptimal and experimentally show that our no-backtrack branch-and-bound algorithm is able to
find near-optimal solutions and handles even very large instances. We conjuncture that
even NB will have an exponential running time when it will encounter specific graphs
with many dead-ends and very small probabilities. However, it is possible that there
are no such graphs that represent real problem instances. In addition, it is possible
that Greedy and ACO heuristics will be able to handle such settings adequately, due
to their almost constant running time. An important future direction is thus to explore
the hardness landscape of our problems, in order to derive better insights as to which
heuristic to use when. We also see great importance in extending the single-agent anal-
ysis to multi-agent settings. Finally, providing a tighter gap between the approximation
and hardness of approximation results for the Min-Budget problem remains an open
challenge.
References
[1] Y. Aumann, N. Hazon, S. Kraus, and D. Sarne. Physical search problems applying
economic search models. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third AAAI Conference
on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2008), pages 9 -- 16, 2008. 2, 3
[2] A. Bachem, W. Hochstttler, and M. Malich. The simulated trading heuristic for
solving vehicle routing problems. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 65(1 -- 3):47 -- 72,
1996. 12
[3] E. Balas. The prize collecting traveling salesman problem. Networks, 19:621 --
636, 1989. 3
[4] N. Bansal, A. Blum, S. Chawla, and A. Meyerson. Approximation algorithms
for deadline-tsp and vehicle routing with time-windows. In Proceedings of the
Thirty-Sixth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC-2004),
pages 166 -- 174, 2004. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
[5] A. Blum, S. Chawla, D. R. Karger, T. Lane, A. Meyerson, and M. Minkoff. Ap-
proximation algorithms for orienteering and discounted-reward tsp. SIAM Jour-
nal on Computing, 37(2):653 -- 670, 2007. 10, 11
[6] D. Brown, J. Hudack, and B. Banerjee. Algorithms for stochastic physical search
on general graphs. In Workshops at the Twenty-Ninth AAAI Conference on Artifi-
cial Intelligence, 2015. 3, 12
[7] D. Brown, S. Loscalzo, and N. Gemelli.
k-agent sufficiency for multiagent
stochastic physical search problems. In Proceedings of the 4th International Con-
ference on Algorithmic Decision Theory (ADT-15), pages 171 -- 186, 2015. 3
[8] Marco Dorigo, Vittorio Maniezzo, and Alberto Colorni. Ant system: optimization
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and
by a colony of cooperating agents.
Cybernetics, Part B, 26(1):29 -- 41, 1996. 12
16
[9] N. Hazon, Y. Aumann, and S. Kraus. Collaborative multi agent physical search
In Proceedings of the Twenty-first International
with probabilistic knowledge.
Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-2009), pages 164 -- 167, 2009. 3
[10] N. Hazon, Y. Aumann, S. Kraus, and D. Sarne. Physical search problems with
probabilistic knowledge. Artificial Intelligence, 196:26 -- 52, 2013. 2, 3, 4
[11] J. McMillan and M. Rothschild. Search. In R. Aumann and S. Amsterdam, edi-
tors, Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, chapter 27, pages
905 -- 927. Elsevier, 1994. 3
[12] T. Ramesh. Traveling purchaser problem. Opsearch, 18:78 -- 91, 1981. 1
[13] R. Ravi, R. Sundaram, M. V. Marathe, D. J. Rosenkrantz, and S. S. Ravi. Span-
ning trees short or small. In Proceedings of the fifth annual ACM-SIAM sympo-
sium on Discrete algorithms SODA '94, pages 546 -- 555, 1994. 9
[14] S.Arora and G.Karakostas. A 2 ` approximation algorithm for the k-mst prob-
lem. In Proceedings of the 11th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Al-
gorithms, pages 754 -- 759, 2000. 9
[15] T. Tsiligirides. Heuristic methods applied to orienteering. Journal of the Opera-
tional Research Society, 35(9):797 -- 809, 1984. 3
[16] Martin L Weitzman. Optimal search for the best alternative. Econometrica,
47(3):641 -- 54, May 1979. 3
17
|
1607.03340 | 1 | 1607 | 2016-07-12T13:01:12 | Real-time Rescheduling in Distributed Railway Network: An Agent-Based Approach | [
"cs.MA"
] | This paper addresses the issues concerning the rescheduling of a static timetable in case of a disaster encountered in a large and complex railway network system. The proposed approach tries to modify the schedule so as to minimise the overall delay of trains. This is achieved by representing the rescheduling problem in the form of a Petri-Net and the highly uncertain disaster recovery times in such a model is handled as Markov Decision Processes (MDP ). For solving the rescheduling problem, a istributed Constraint Optimisation (DCOP ) based strategy involving the use of autonomous agents is used to generate the desired schedule. The proposed approach is evaluated on the actual schedule of the Eastern Railways, India by constructing vari- ous disaster scenarios using the Java Agent DEvelopment Framework (JADE). When compared to the existing approaches, the proposed framework substantially reduces the delay of trains after rescheduling. | cs.MA | cs |
Real-time Rescheduling in Distributed Railway Network: An
Agent-Based Approach
Poulami Dalapati1,B, Piyush Agarwal1, Animesh Dutta1, Swapan Bhattacharya2
1Dept of Information Technology, National Institute of Technology Durgapur, India
2Dept of Computer Science and Engineering, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
BE-mail: [email protected]
Abstract: This paper addresses the issues concerning the rescheduling of a static timetable in case
of a disaster encountered in a large and complex railway network system. The proposed approach
tries to modify the schedule so as to minimise the overall delay of trains. This is achieved by
representing the rescheduling problem in the form of a Petri-Net and the highly uncertain dis-
aster recovery times in such a model is handled as Markov Decision Processes (M DP ). For
solving the rescheduling problem, a Distributed Constraint Optimisation (DCOP ) based strategy
involving the use of autonomous agents is used to generate the desired schedule. The proposed
approach is evaluated on the actual schedule of the Eastern Railways, India by constructing vari-
ous disaster scenarios using the Java Agent DEvelopment Framework (JADE). When compared
to the existing approaches, the proposed framework substantially reduces the delay of trains after
rescheduling.
1 Introduction
The railway system is a major mode of transport which is geographically distributed throughout the
country [1]. The construction of schedules for trains in such system [2 -- 6] in an efficient and opti-
mised manner is a challenging task with considerations like situational complexity of the network
and the enormous constraints that have to be handled. Some of these constraints are availability of
tracks between stations and availability of platforms on those stations, which influence the arrival
and departure time of trains. Moreover, any disruption in railway network [1, 7] due to natural
calamities, sabotage, temporary platform blockage and accident on track(s) or platform make the
offline schedule sub-optimal for use. Affected trains need to be rescheduled dynamically to min-
imise the impact of such disruptions. Where not only the objective function changes over time
but the constraints can also transform [8, 9]. This uncertainty and dynamic constraints make the
global optima less effective. Therefore, the entire scheduling problem is considered as an agent
based Distributed constraint optimization problem (DCOP) [10, 11], where all agents cooperate
with each other using commonly agreed protocols and constraints. The uncertainty of recovery
time and its probabilistic nature is represented mathematically in terms of Markov decision pro-
cesses (MDP) [12 -- 14]. Here, each node is considered as a possible state of disaster scenario in
railway network. The state transition functions are mapped to the constraints of DCOP, where each
agent chooses its action to minimise its expected delay based on its policy. The action of the set of
all agents in an MDP setting is to find the optimal solution which minimises the total delay of the
railway network with the constraints in place.
1
In this paper, a framework with multiple trains, stations and tracks is considered where some of
the trains are on tracks and some others are at stations, as shown in Figure 1a. In case of a disaster,
in and around a station, the station authorities inform the neighbouring stations, the incoming and
the outgoing trains. According to the proposed approach, each train and station agent checks for
disaster recovery time and resources available to reach the destination. If the disaster recovery
time does not affect the scheduled arrival or departure time of trains, then original schedule is
maintained. Otherwise, the proposed rescheduling method, as described in section 6, is used to
generate a new dynamic schedule and trains are informed.
The rest of the paper is organised as follows: In section 2 some previous works in related do-
main are discussed. Section 3 is devoted to the description of railway network and scheduling
topology. Section 4 models the system. DCOP and MDP representations of the system are de-
picted in section 5. Disaster handling and rescheduling approach is formulated in section 6. The
simulation results are evaluated in section 7. Finally section 8 concludes the propose work with
future scope.
2 Literature Reviews
The existing approaches mainly consider line topology and network topology while rescheduling
trains under disturbance [15 -- 18]. The disturbance scenarios are modelled as certain and uncer-
tain [19] based on its recovery time. Further decision scenarios for rescheduling are classified as
retiming, rerouting or reordering [20, 21] with respect to delay management of passenger railway
services [16, 22, 23].
A rescheduling system in tuberail trains dispatching problem is proposed in [24], which focuses
on freight gross transport [19] in time, but not the delay time of passengers in railway and subway.
Here, the operation is centralised and controlled by operation support system which communicates
with all trains, turnouts and handling equipment, so that all trains are operated in global information
condition. A track-backup rescheduling approach [2] is proposed to minimise the negative effects
arising from the disturbances, which optimally assigns a backup track to each affected train, based
on original timetable, estimated recovery time, and track changing cost in line topology. In [25], a
heuristic-based mixed-integer linear programming model is proposed to tackle delay propagation
in traffic disturbances. This model is robust to its configuration provided an appropriate selection of
boosting method is performed. A rescheduling model for last trains with the consideration of train
delays caused by incidents that occurred in train operations is also discussed in [26]. Here authors
aim to minimise running-time, dwell-time (as defined in [27]), and differences between resched-
uled and original timetable and maximise average transfer redundant time. Similarly in [20], a
proactive rerouting mechanism is proposed to minimise computational overhead and congestion
where links are affected by failures. An agent based game theoretic coalition formation model is
proposed in [28] to re-optimise a railway timetable. Train rerouting on an N-track railway net-
work [21] and robust railway station planning [29] as well as optimisation in multi-train operation
in subway system [30] are also proposed to improve the robustness of rescheduling process in the
complex scenario.
Although the train rescheduling problem has been widely studied, most of the previous work
consider either a centralised approach or line topology. However, a real time railway network is
distributed in nature with dynamic entities and disruption can happen anytime. Authorities have
to take decisions on the basis of real world scenario and concurrent decisions have to be made for
efficient handling of the problem. Moreover, recovery time of such disturbances is highly uncer-
2
tain [31]. The distributed nature of the system can be effectively represented as DCOPs [10, 11]
and probabilistic decision making can be mapped with MDP [12], where the outcomes are partly
random and partly under the control of decision maker. Again, the inherent dynamic nature and
concurrent decision making can be suitably modelled using Petri-Net [32 -- 36].
In light of the discussion above, our main contributions in this paper include:
• Modelling of real-time railway system as a Petri-Net along with mathematical representation
of the scenario with DCOP and MDP to enable formal analysis.
• An agent based disaster handling and rescheduling approach is also proposed considering
network topology, which is capable of providing sufficiently good solution.
• Situational complexity of scalability issues in terms of number of decision variables and con-
straints are also taken into consideration while optimising total journey time delay of trains.
3 Railway Network and Scheduling Topology
A railway network consists of Stations (S), Trains (T ) and Tracks as shown in Figure 1a. Multiple
trains are either at stations or running on tracks at time instant t. Railway scheduling and reschedul-
ing is performed in such a way that, the highest priority train is rescheduled first. Depending on
the scenario, the priority changes dynamically reducing total journey time delay.
3.1 Assumptions
• There can be multiple tracks between two stations.
• Each station may consist of multiple platforms.
• Stations can communicate with trains and neighbouring stations.
• Trains can communicate with stations only.
• Station conveys the recovery status of the blocked tracks or platform to trains and its neigh-
bouring stations.
• All the trains begin and end their journey at stations.
3.2 Classification of Railway Parameters
3.2.1 Stations (S)
• Stations where train T is scheduled to stop.
• Stations where train T does not stop, but station is a junction.
• Stations where train T neither stops nor the station is a junction, but in case of inconvenience,
train may stop, so that other trains can pass.
So, for generalisation, dwell-time [27] is taken as a parameter. If dwell-time of train T at any
stations S is greater than zero, then S is a stopping station for T .
3
S10
T3
T1
S11
S7
S1
S9
S8
S2
S12
T3
S3
Platform 1
Platform 2
T2
T5
T1
S3
T4
T2
S3
S4
T4
S5
S6
a
Figure 1. Railway Network.
a Graphical Representation of Railway Network.
b Station with Multiple Tracks.
3.2.2 Tracks (T )
As depicted in Figure 1b,
Main Track
UP/DOWN
Platform 1
Platform 2
Platform 3
UP line
UP/DOWN
Main Track
Down line
b
• Double-line tracks between two stations, U P and DOW N.
• Only a single line between two stations, used as either U P or DOW N as per schedule.
• Three or more tracks between two stations, U P , DOW N and general tracks, used as either
U P or DOW N as per need.
For simplicity, we consider different directions of same track as two or more different tracks, i.e.
U P as one resource and DOW N as another, and rescheduling of either UP or DOWN line trains
at a time.
3.2.3 Trains
In a railway network [1], depending upon various criteria, such as speed, facilities, distance cov-
ered, public demand, frequencies etc., train T can be classified as Long-distance Train (T L) and
Short-distance Train (T S). (T L) can again be categorised as Premium Train (T P r), Mail Trains
(T M ), and Freight Train (T F ), whereas (T S) can be categorised as Passenger Train (T P ) and Lo-
cal Train (T Lo). i.e., T = T L ∪ T S, T L = T P r ∪ T M ∪ T F , T S = T P ∪ T Lo.
Except T P r, during busy schedule (i.e. office hours), T S get higher priority than any T L. Oth-
erwise, during normal hours, T L get higher priority. Again, as railway system faces delay due to
many reasons, these priorities change dynamically over time. As an example, if any T L is delayed
by more than the permissible threshold delay, then other trains get higher priority which are on
time. Priorities are assigned like, y1 = P rio (T P r), y2 = P rio (T M ), y3 = P rio (T F ),
y4 = P rio (T P ), y5 = P rio (T Lo). This priority allocation policy is defined by the existing
railway system of the region, considered in the experiments as described in subsection 7.1. In gen-
eral, y1 > y2 > y4 > y5 > y3. However when t = tBusy (from 9 : 00 am to 11 : 00 am and 5 : 00
pm to 7 : 00 pm), y1 > y4 > y5 > y2 > y3. Again, in case of delayed trains, priority changes
dynamically like, y4 ≥ y1 ≥ y5 ≥ y2 > y3.
There are two kinds of inputs in our system, static input, which is pre-planned as per the sched-
ule and dynamic input, which is triggered by the changes due to disruption. At any time instant
4
t, each station has a fixed number of incoming and outgoing tracks. Station database is updated
with the information about incoming and outgoing trains in terms of their arrival and departure
time. When a disaster occurs, one or more tracks between stations get deleted from the databases
and platform counts decreases from station databases. As railway network is represented as a con-
nected multigraph, there may be other possible paths to reach to the destination. After disaster has
occurred, system checks for the trains which may reach a particular station within the calculated
buffer time τ B.
4 Railway Architecture Model
Given this background, a Multi-agent System (MAS) [12,37] is a natural choice for modelling such
distributed system. Here, we represent the railway network (RN) as a pair of multigraph (G) and
an agency (Ag). i.e., RN = < G, Ag >. Again, G = < V, E >, where V is set of vertices and
E is set of edges. From notations in Table 1, V = {vi i ∈ [1, n]} and vi = Si means vertex is
a station, E represents tracks between stations, T = {Tj j ∈ [1, m]}, indicates trains (see Figure
1a, and Ag = {Aga a ∈ [1, q]}, denotes agency. Each station and train is associated with an agent.
SA and T A denote the set of station agents and set of train agents respectively, where Si ∈ S with
Saa ∈ SA and Tj ∈ T with T aa ∈ T A.
Table 1 Notation
Indices and Parameters
Stations
Trains
Station index
Train index
Track index
Platform index
Number of stations
Number of trains
Maximum number of platforms at each station
Arrival time of train j at station i in original timetable
Departure time of train j from station i in original
timetable
Delay of train j at station i
Delay of train j on track l
Threshold value for delay of all trains
oJ
ji
od
ji
xJ
jl
a
q
t
tD
tR
tBusy
i′ ∈ [1, n]\i
j′ ∈ [1, m]\j
Journey time of train j in original timetable
Original dwell time of train j at station Si
Journey time of train j on track l
Agent index
Number of agents, where q = m + n
Time instant
Time of disaster
Time of recovery
Busy Time Period of the day
Index of station other than the ith station.
Index of train other than the jth train.
i′′ ∈ [1, n]\i, i′
j′′ ∈ [1, m]\j, j′
τ B
Index of station other than the ith and i′th sta-
tion.
Index of train other than the jth and j′th train.
Buffer Time, where tD + τ1 ≤ τ B ≤ tD + τ2
Decision Variables
S
T
i
j
l
k
n
m
p
oAT
ji
oDT
ji
δji
δjl
δT h
xAT
ji
Pjik
Arrival time of train j at station i due to disaster
Platform indicator, Pjik = 1 if train j occupies kth
platform of station i, otherwise 0
P rio(Tj) Priority of train Tj
τ1
Minimum time required to recover from the disaster
τR
Time to recover with the density function φ(x),
where, x ∈ [τ1, τ2]
Departure time of train j from station i due to
disaster
Track indicator, Ljil = 1 if train j occupies lth
track connecting to station i, otherwise 0 and
when Ljil = 1, Lj ′il = 0
Actual operation time of train j at station Si
Maximum time required to recover from the
disaster
xDT
ji
Ljil
xd
ji
τ2
5
4.1 Petri-Net Model of Railway System
Now we introduce the general concepts of Petri-Net [32, 33] describing a railway network. Major
use of various kinds of Petri-Net [34 -- 36] is modelling of static and dynamic properties of com-
plex systems, where concurrent occurrences of events are possible, but there are constraints on the
occurrences, precedence or frequency of these occurrences. Graphically a Petri-Net is a directed
bipartite graph where nodes represent places, transition and directed arcs which link places to tran-
sitions or transitions to places. The state of a Petri-Net is given by the marking, describing the
distribution of tokens in the places. Our proposed Petri-Net model deals with dynamism, uncer-
tainty, and conflict situations in decision making choices upon different conditions. To overcome
such conflicts the idea of colour token is introduced that enables a particular condition. Agents are
considered as a token which can move from one environmental state to other. In real time system
agents perform some action if it sense a particular environment; in contradiction some states are
just used as an intermediate one. The Petri-Net model for railway network is proposed as follows:
{P, T r, F, T ok, fC, M0}
P : {P1, P2, . . . , Pb}, where b > 0 is a finite set of Places.
P = PN ∪ Pfc, where PN is the set of places where no explicit function is executed on arrival of
resource token and Pfc is the set of places which executes a function or checks condition on arrival
of resource token.
T r : {T r1, T r2, . . . , T rz}, where z > 0 is a finite set of Transitions.
T r = T rI ∪ T rc, where T rI is the set of immediate transition which is fired as soon as the required
tokens are available at input place and an action is performed. T rc is the set of colour transition
which is fired when the colour token is available in the input place.
F : (P × T r) ∪ (T r × P ) is the set of Flow Function.
F = F+ ∪ F−, where F+ refers finite set of input flow and F− refers finite set of output flow.
T ok : Set of Token.
T ok = T okc ∪ T okAg and T okc ∩ T okAg = φ, where T okc is the set of colour token, c represents
colour and T okAg is the resource token (Agent token).
fc : {fc1, fc2, . . . , fcu}, where u ≥ 0 is the set of Functions that execute in Pfc when a resource
token arrived at the place. Function can generate colour token or perform some operations.
M0 : Initial Marking of Petri-Net.
β : F+(T okc × T okAg) → F−(T okAg) or (T okc × T okAg) → T okAg
β says that colour token is only used for taking a decision to resolve conflict. It won't propa-
gate to next state.
In our Petri-Net model, shown in Figure 2, place is represented by a circle, transition by a rect-
angle, and input and output flow by arrow and the corresponding description is given in Table 2.
6
Table 2 Description of P N 1
Description of Places of P N1
Places(P)
Description
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
P6
P7
P8
P9
P10
P11
P12
P13
P14
Trains Tj is at station Si and count waiting time to leave.
Trains Tj ′ is at station Si′ and count waiting time to leave.
Tj starts running.
Tj ′ starts running.
Tj is on track.
Tj ′ is on track.
Tj and Tj ′ both sense junction station and checks whether it has free platform.
Tj senses simple station and checks whether it has free platform.
Tj ′ senses simple station and checks whether it has free platform.
Tj has completed its journey and ready for the next journey.
Tj entering into station.
No free platform for Tj ′.
No free platform for Tj.
Tj andor Tj ′ reached to the station.
Description of Transitions of P N1
Transitions(Tr)
Description
Tr1
Tr2
Tr3
Tr4
Tr5
Tr6
Tr7
Tr8
Tr9
Tr10
Tr11
Tr12
Tr13
Tr14
Tr15
Tr16
Tr17
Tr18
Tr19
It will fire when Tj finishes its waiting time at Si.
It will fire when Tj ′ finishes its waiting time at Si.
It will fire when Tj is on track.
It will fire when Tj ′ is on track.
It will fire if Tj senses a simple station.
It will fire if Tj senses a junction station.
It will fire if Tj ′ senses a junction station.
It will fire if Tj ′ senses a simple station.
It will fire if no platform is free for Tj.
It will fire when at least one platform is free for Tj.
It will fire when at least one platform is free for Tj ′.
It will fire if no platform is free for Tj ′.
It will fire when at least one platform is free for highest priority train.
It will fire if a platform gets free for Tj.
It will fire if a platform gets free for Tj ′.
It will fire when train entering into the station.
It will fire when train leaving a junction station.
It will fire when Tj reaches its destination.
It will fire when Tj is ready to leave for a new journey.
Description of colour tokens of P N1
Colour Token(ct) Description
ct1
ct2
ct3
ct4
ct5
ct6
ct7
ct8
ct9
P5 generates it if Tj senses a simple station in front of it and enables transition Tr5.
P5 generates it if Tj senses a junction station in front of it and enables transition Tr6.
P6 generates it if Tj ′ senses a junction station in front of it and enables transition Tr7.
P6 generates it if Tj ′ senses a simple station in front of it and enables transition Tr8.
P8 generates it if no free platform is available and enables transition Tr9.
P8 generates it if at least one platform is available and Tr10 is enabled and enables transition Tr10.
P7 generates it if at least one platform is available and enables transition Tr13.
P9 generates it if at least one platform is available and Tr11 is enabled and enables transition Tr11.
P9 generates it if no free platform is available and enables transition Tr12.
7
P 2
P 1
T r2
T r1
T r18
P 10
P 4
P 3
T r19
T r4
P 6
T r17
P 11
ct4
ct3
T r3
P 5
ct2
ct1
T r8
T r7
T r13
T r6
ct8
P 9
ct9
ct7
P 7
T r16
T r5
P 8
ct5
ct6
T r12
T r9
T r11
P 12
P 13
T r10
T r15
T r14
P 14
Figure 2. Petri-Net model P N1 of Railway Network.
5 DCOP and MDP Representation of the Proposed Rescheduling Approach
5.1 Representation as DCOP
The problem of train rescheduling is represented as DCOP with four tuples, hAg, X, D, Ci, where,
Ag : Set of agents
X : Set of variables, X = {xAT
D : Set of domains, D = tD + τR
C : Set of constraints
ji ∪ Pjik ∪ Ljil }
ji ∪ xDT
5.1.1 Constraints (C)
• Continuity Constraint:
ji ≥ xDT
xAT
ji′ + xJ
jl
(1)
the arrival time of any train at any station depends on its departure time from the previous
i.e.
station and the total journey time between these stations.
• Time Delay Constraint:
(2)
xAT
ji ≥ oAT
ji − oAT
xAT
ji
ji = δj (cid:27)
i.e.
the actual arrival time of Tj at Si must be greater or equal to its original arrival time at
that station. If both are equal then the train is on time, otherwise there is some delay δj. Delay is
calculated by the difference between the original journey time and the actual journey time.
• Index of platforms that trains occupy can not be greater than p.
and
∀j ∈ [1, m] ∃ Pjik ∈ [0, 1], where 1 ≤ k ≤ p, ∀ Si
Pjik ≤ p, where 1 ≤ k ≤ p
Xk
8
(3)
(4)
• If train Tj occupies lth. track, connecting to station Si, then train Tj ′ can not occupy the same
track at the same time.
if Ljil = 1, then Lj ′il = 0
(5)
• Required resources of Tj at time t, Re(Tj)t, is either a platform at a station or a track between
two stations.
• Route of the train Tj, Rou(Tj), is a series of P and L.
Re(Tj)t = Ljil or Re(Tj)t = Pjik
Rou(Tj) = (
n−1
^i=1
PjikLjil) ∪ Pjnk, where j ∈ [1, m]
(6)
(7)
5.2 Representation as MDP
In real world, agents inhabit an environment whose state changes either because of agent's action
or due to some external event. Agents sense the state of world and the choice of new state depends
only on agent's current state and agent's action.
• Set of World State (W )
Here, W represents the set of agent's state(s) in railway network under disturbance. Train
agents can sense three kind of states. If Si is assumed to be a station where disaster happens,
then Tj is either on track connecting Si or at a platform of Si or at a platform of stationSi′,
connected to Si.
i.e. W = {(Ljil = 1), (Pjik = 1), (Pj ′i′k = 1)}
• Transition Function (Ψ)
The state transition function is denoted as Ψ(ω, C, ω′). In our proposed approach, each action
C maps to constraint(s) of DCOP to satisfy to reach from state ω to the next state ω′, where
ω, ω′ ∈ W .
If the train Tj is on the lth track, connecting to station Si, where disaster happened, i.e.
Ljil = 1, but no platform is available, i.e. Pjik = 1, then Tj must wait on the current track.
So, there is no state change from the current state Ljil = 1. Now, if platform is free, i.e.
Pjik = 0, then Tj can reach to the next station. So, state transition from current state Ljil = 1
is possible.
If Tj is on pth platform of Si and the lth track is free but the platform at the next station Si′
is not free, i.e. Pji′k′ = 1, no state change is possible from current state Pjik = 1. Similarly,
even if there is free platform at Si′, if the lth track is not free or both the track and platform is
not available at time t, no state change is possible.
In Figure 3, every node represents a state and each arc represents an action which is indeed a
constraint. The transition from one state to another state happens iff the corresponding agent
satisfies the specific constraint(s).
9
[Ljil = 1 ∧ Pji′k′ = 0]∨
[Ljil = 0 ∧ Pji′k′ = 1]∨
[Ljil = 1 ∧ Pji′k′ = 1]
Pjik
[Pjik = 0]
[Ljil = 0 ∧ Pji′k′ = 0]
[Ljil = 1 ∧ Pjik = 0]
Ljil
Pji′k′
[Pjik = 1]
[Ljil = 1 ∧ Pjik = 1]∨
[Ljil = 0 ∧ Pjik = 1]∨
[Ljil = 1 ∧ Pjik = 0]∨
Figure 3. MDP representation with set of states and transition functions.
6 Disaster Handling and Rescheduling Model
According to real-time scenario, in case of platform blockage or track blockage, disaster handling
and rescheduling model of railway system refers three situations:
• Delay or Stop at the station or on track (Retiming).
• Change in Departure Sequence of trains at the station depending on priority of trains (Reordering).
• Reschedule to alternative path (Rerouting).
6.1 Case 1: Partial Node Deletion from the graph G
A station Si faces problem due to disaster and the train Tj is on track l, approaching to the station
Si,
i.e.
Ljil = 1
(8)
6.1.1 Case 1.1
If Si has a free platform at the time when Tj reaches to Si, then the system can allow Tj to reach Si,
iff the priority of the incoming train Tj has the highest priority amongst all trains T and the resource
(Re) required for any other high priority train Tj ′′ does not hamper the resource requirement of Tj.
PjikxAT
ji
= 1, if f [P rio(Tj) > P rio(Tj ′)j6=j ′, j∈[1, m]] ∧ [Re(Tj ′′)τ B
P rio(Tj′′ )>P rio(Tj) 6= Re(Tj)τ B
]
(9)
6.1.1.1 Case 1.1.1
After satisfying the condition described in case 1.1, if all the necessary resources are available
throughout its journey, selecting any alternative path, then reroute train Tj. Route of Tj after
departure from Si at time xDT
ji
i.e.
is [Rou(Tj)t≤xDT
].
n−1
+ Rou(Tj)xAT
ji >xDT
ji
ji
if Rou(Tj)xAT
ji >xDT
ji
=
then reschedule Tj.
^i′>i
10
(Pji′kLji′l) ∪ Pjnk = 0
(10)
6.1.1.2 Case 1.1.2
If case 1.1.1 is invalid, then stop Tj at Si until recovery is done or any other alternative path
becomes free. So, Tj occupies one of the platforms at Si.
i.e.
and
where,
Pjik = 1
xDT
ji = oDT
ji + δj
δj = tR − oDT
ji and tR = tD + τR
(11)
(12)
6.1.2 Case 1.2
If the scenario does not conform with case 1.1, then stop train Tj on the current track. So, now Tj
occupies lth track.
i.e.
Ljil = 1
(13)
and
(14)
The above described scenario depicted in equations (8)-(14) is now represented in Petri-Net model
in Figure 4a and the corresponding description of respective places, transitions and tokens are
described in Table 3.
xAT
ji = oAT
ji + δj
P 6
T r7
T r6
ct1
P 1
ct2
T r1
T r2
ct3
P 2
ct4
2
2
ct5
P 3
T r3
P 4
ct6
ct7
T r4
T r5
T r8
P 5
P 7
a
M0=[1 1 0 0 0 0 0]
M0=[1 1 0 0 0 0 0]
M0=[1 1 0 0 0 0 0]
T r2
T r1
T r2
M1=[0 0 2 0 0 0 0]
M1 = 'old′
M1=[0 0 2 0 0 0 0]
(b) Firing sequence 2
T r3
M2=[0 1 0 1 0 0 0]
T r4
M3=[0 1 0 0 1 0 0]
T r6
M4=[0 1 0 0 0 1 0]
T r7
M5 = 'old′
(a) Firing sequence 1
b
T r3
M2=[0 1 0 1 0 0 0]
T r5
M3=[0 1 0 1 0 0 1]
T r8
M2=[0 1 0 1 0 0 0]
T r4
M4=[0 1 0 0 1 0 0]
T r6
M5=[0 1 0 0 0 1 0]
T r7
M6 = 'old′
(c) Firing sequence 3
Figure 4. Petri-Net P N2
a Petri-Net model P N2 of Case 1.
b Reachability tree of P N2 for different firing sequences.
Analysis of P N2:
Table 3 presents the description of the places P = {P 1, P 2, P 3, P 4, P 5, P 6, P 7} and transitions
T r = {T r1, T r2, T r3, T r4, T r5, T r6, T r7, T r8} and the initial marking is M0 = [1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0].
11
Table 3 Description of P N 2
Description of Places of P N2
Places(P)
Description
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
P6
P7
Tj is on track l and approaching to disastrous station Si.
Tj ′ is on track l′ and approaching to disastrous station Si.
Tj and Tj ′ both approaching to same station Si.
Tj reaches to Si and is at Si.
Tj reaches its destination.
Tj completed its previous journey and started the next.
Tj is waiting for availability of resources.
Transitions(Tr)
Description
Description of Transitions of P N2
Tr1
Tr2
Tr3
Tr4
Tr5
Tr6
Tr7
Tr8
It will fire if platform is not available at Si the time of Arrival.
It will fire if platform is available at Si the time of Arrival.
It will fire if Tj gets highest priority.
It will fire if all resources are available to Continue the journey.
It will fire if all resources are not available to Continue the journey.
It will fire when Tj reaches its destination.
It will fire when Tj is ready for its new journey.
It will fire when Tj is not allowed to start its journey.
Description of colour tokens of P N2
Colour Token(ct) Description
ct1
ct2
ct3
ct4
ct5
ct6
ct7
P1 generates it when equation (8) is satisfied but Tj senses no free platform is available and enables transition Tr1.
P1 generates it when equation (8) is satisfied but Tj senses free platform is available and enables transition Tr2.
P2 generates it when equation (8) is satisfied but Tj ′ senses no free platform is available and enables transition Tr1.
P2 generates it when equation (8) is satisfied but Tj ′ senses free platform is available and enables transition Tr2.
P3 generates it to denote Tj has highest priority and enables transition Tr3.
P4 generates it Tj senses all resources are available and enables transition Tr4.
P4 generates it Tj senses all resources are available and enables transition Tr5.
• Reachability graph analysis:
Reachability graph analysis is the simplest method to analyse the behaviour of a Petri-Net. It
decides whether the system is bounded and live or not. From our resultant tree in 4b it can
be proved that: a) the reachability set R(M0) is finite, b) maximum number of tokens that a
place can have is 2, so our P N2 is 2-bounded, c) all transitions can be fired, so there are no
dead transitions.
• State equation:
The structural behaviour of the Petri-Net can be measured by using the algebraic analysis
of the incidence matrix. If marking M is reachable from initial marking M0 through the
transition sequence σ, then the following state equation holds: M 0 + [A] × Xσ = M .
Incidence matrix is defined as A = [euv], it is a rA × cA matrix where (1 ≤ u ≤ rA), (1 ≤ v ≤
cA). The order of the places in the matrix is P = {P 1, P 2, P 3, P 4, P 5, P 6, P 7}, denoted
by rows and the order of the transitions is T r = {T r1, T r2, T r3, T r4, T r5, T r6, T r7, T r8},
denoted by columns.
Xσ is an m-dimensional vector with its jth entry denoting the number of times transition tj
12
occurs in σ.
A =
0 −1
0 −1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
−1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
−1 −1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
−1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
−1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
−1
Thus, if we view a marking M 0 as a k-dimensional column vector in which the ith compo-
nent is M0(pi), each column of [A] is then a k-dimensional vector such that M 0
σ−→ M .
In our system, marking M = [1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] is reachable from initial marking M 0 =
[1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] through the firing sequence σ1 = T r2, T r3, T r4, T r6, T r7.
M0
T r7−−→ M5(= ′old′).
T r4−−→ M3
T r6−−→ M4
T r3−−→ M2
T r2−−→ M1
0 −1
0 −1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
−1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
−1 −1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
−1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
−1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
−1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
+
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
×
=
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
Similarly, marking M = [1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] is reachable from initial marking M 0 = [1, 1, 0,
0, 0, 0, 0] through the firing sequence σ2 = T r1 and σ3 = T r2, T r3, T r5, T r8, T r4, T r6, T r7.
M0
M0
T r2−−→ M1(= ′old′).
T r2−−→ M1
T r3−−→ M2
T r7−−→ M6(= ′old′).
T r5−−→ M3
T r8−−→ M2
T r4−−→ M4
T r6−−→ M5
0 −1
0 −1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0 −1
0 −1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
−1
1
0
0
0
0
1
−1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
−1 −1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
−1 −1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
−1
1
0
0
0
0
0
−1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
−1
0
1
0
0
0
0
−1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
+
+
−1
−1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
×
×
=
=
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
6.2 Case 2: Partial Node Deletion from the graph G with Deletion of an Edge
Currently multiple trains are on various platforms which follow a sequence according to their
departure time within the buffer time τ B. Here, τ B is related to the disaster recovery time tR of
that station. The track is free but more than one trains are yet to come.
i.e.
and
Ljil = 0
m
(15)
(16)
As the station Si faces disaster, a particular kth platform can not be used until the recovery time has
elapsed. If there is any incoming train Tj within buffer period τ B, the system allows Tj to reach Si
Pjik ≤ (p − 1)
Xj=1
13
if a platform is available, i.e. Pjik = 0. The system also checks for the priority of Tj to reorder the
departure schedule of all trains from Si introducing delay δji to Tj, if needed.
i.e. ∀j, if P rio(Tj ′) > P rio(Tj)
ji + δji
(17)
Otherwise, if all the resources are available for Tj and it has the highest priority among all the
trains currently waiting at Si, the scheduled departure of Tj is the original departure time as per
the original railway timetable.
i.e.
ji = oDT
xDT
iff P rio(Tj) > P rio(Tj ′)j6=j ′, j∈[1, m]
ji = oDT
xDT
ji
(18)
The scenario of Case 2 with equations (15)-(18) is represented in Petri-Net model in Figure 5a
and the corresponding description of respective places, transitions and tokens are described in
Table 4.
P 2
T r1
T r2
3
ct1
T r3
P 5
2
ct3
T r5
T r4
ct2
P 6
2
P 3
P 4
P 1
2
a
Figure 5. Petri-Net P N3
a Petri-Net model P N3 of Case 2.
b Reachability tree of P N3 for different firing sequences.
M0=[2 3 0 0 0 0]
T r1
M1=[0 2 3 0 0 0]
T r2
M2=[2 2 1 0 0 0]
T r3
M3=[1 2 0 0 2 0]
T r4
M4=[1 2 0 1 1 0]
b
14
Table 4 Description of P N 3
Description of Places of P N3
Places(P)
Description
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
P6
Trains are at Si where disaster happens and only one platform is free.
Trains are at station connecting to Si.
More than one trains are requesting for a single platform.
Highest priority train reaches to Si.
All the trains are at Si waiting to depart.
Highest priority train departs from Si.
Description of Transitions of P N3
Transitions(Tr)
Description
Tr1
Tr2
Tr3
Tr4
Tr5
Only one platform is available at Si and more than one train are approaching to Si.
One platform is available and Tj has highest priority.
All the trains are at Si and requesting for same track to depart.
Reorder the scheduled trains as per priority.
Original departure schedule maintained as highest priority train is departing first as per original schedule.
Colour Token(ct) Description
Description of colour tokens of P N3
ct1
ct2
ct3
P3 generates it to indicate that train Tj has the highest priority and enables transition Tr2.
P5 generates it when reordering in train departure is decided and enables transition Tr4.
P5 generates it if original ordering in departure schedule of trains are maintained and enables transition Tr5.
Analysis of P N3:
Table 4 presents the description of the places P = {P 1, P 2, P 3, P 4, P 5, P 6} and transitions
T r = {T r1, T r2, T r3, T r4, T r5} and the initial marking is M 0 = [2, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0].
• Reachability graph analysis:
Similarly, as discussed in subsection 6.1.2, here initial marking M0 is the root node as shown
in Figure 5b. From our resultant tree it can be proved that : a) the reachability set is R(M0)
finite, b) maximum number of tokens that a place can have is 3, so our P N3 is 3-bounded, c)
all transitions can be fired, so there are no dead transitions.
• State equation:
The order of the places in the incidence matrix A is P = {P 1, P 2, P 3, P 4, P 5, P 6}, de-
noted by rows and the order of the transitions is T r = {T r1, T r2, T r3, T r4, T r5}, denoted
by columns.
A =
−1
−1
1
0
0
0
1
0
−1
1
0
0
−1
0
0
−1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
Here, marking M = [1, 2, 0, 1, 1, 0] is reachable from initial marking M 0 = [2, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0]
through the firing sequence σ1 = T r1, T r2, T r3, T r4.
M0
T r4−−→ M4.
T r3−−→ M3
T r2−−→ M2
T r1−−→ M1
15
0
3
−1
"2
0# +"−1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
−1
1
0
0
−1
0
0
−1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
1
0
0
0
1# ×(cid:20)1
0(cid:21) ="1
0#
0
1
1
0
1
0
6.3 Case 3: Extended Impact of Edge and Node deletion
Train Tj is neither waiting at the station Si where disaster happened, i.e. Pjik = 0 nor on the
connecting track, i.e. Ljil = 0. But Tj reaches the station Si within τ B.
6.3.1 Case 3.1
Train Tj is at station Si′′, where Si′′ is in neighbourhood of Si.
i.e.
Pji′′k = 1, Si′′ ∈ S \ Si and i ∈ [1, n]
(19)
If any platform is available at the next station and the connecting track is also free, the system
checks for the priority of the train Tj. Tj maintains its original schedule iff it has the highest prior-
ity while reaching Si.
i.e. if
(Pjik′ = 0) ∧ (Ljil = 0) ∧ (P rio(Tj)t=xAT
ji
> P rio(Tj ′)j6=j ′, j∈[1, m])
then,
xAT
ji = oAT
ji
Ljil = 1 and Pjik′t=xAT
ji
= 0
Pjik′t=xAT
ji
= 1 and Ljil = 0
(20)
(21)
(22)
(23)
Here, damaged platform is k.
k′ = {1, 2, . . . , p} \ {k}
6.3.2 Case 3.2
Train Tj is at Si′, i.e. Pji′k = 1, where, i, i′ ∈ [1, n] and i 6= i′.
There are multiple tracks between two stations Si and Si′. i.e. 1 < l ≤ 4. If the track l breaks
down due to disaster, it is assumed that track l is not free. i.e.
Lji′l = 1, 1 ≤ l < 4
(24)
Then, the trains which are scheduled to use that track face problem. In that case, first Si′ checks
for other available tracks, one of which can be allotted to Tj, provided Tj has the highest priority
satisfying all the constraints and there is no resource conflict within τ B.
[Lji′l′ = 0] ∧ [P rio(Tj)t=xDT
ji′
> P rio(Tj ′)j6=j ′, j∈[1, m]] ∧ [Re(Tj)xAT
ji
6= Re(Tj ′)xAT
ji
]
(25)
Figure 6a represents Petri-Net model for the scenario of Case 3, described in equations (19)-(25)
and the corresponding description of respective places, transitions and tokens are described in
Table 5.
16
P 1
P 2
ct1
T r1
P 5
P 3
T r2
P 4
T r3
P 6
a
M0=[2 1 0 0 1 0]
T r1
M1=[1 0 1 0 1 0]
T r2
M2=[1 0 0 1 0 0]
T r3
M3=[1 1 0 0 0 1]
b
Figure 6. Petri-Net P N4
a Petri-Net model P N4 of Case 3.
b Reachability tree of P N4 for different firing sequences.
Table 5 Description of P N 4
Description of Places of P N4
Places(P)
Description
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
P6
Tj and Tj ′ are at station Si′, connecting to station Si where disaster happens.
Any one of the connecting track is free.
Trains are ready to leave.
Highest priority train Tj is running on the track.
Platform is free at Si.
Highest priority train Tj reaches station Si.
Description of Transitions of P N4
Transitions(Tr)
Description
Tr1
Tr2
Tr3
It will fire if P1 has more than one tokens and generates ct1 and there is also a token available in P2.
It will fire if Tj has finished its waiting time at station Si′ and a token is available at P5.
It will fire if a token is available at P4 indicating Tj is moving forward to Si.
Colour Token(ct) Description
Description of colour tokens of P N4
ct1
P1 generates it to indicate Tj has the highest priority while at Si′ and enables transition Tr1.
Analysis of P N4:
Table 5 presents the description of the places P = {P 1, P 2, P 3, P 4, P 5, P 6} and transitions
T r = {T r1, T r2, T r3} and the initial marking is M 0 = [2, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0].
• Reachability graph analysis:
As discussed in subsection 6.1.2, initial marking M0 is the root node as shown in Figure 6b.
Again, a) the reachability set is R(M0) finite, b) maximum number of tokens that a place
17
can have is 2, so our P N4 is 2-bounded, c) all transitions can be fired, so there are no dead
transitions.
• State equation:
Here, in the incidence matrix A, P = {P 1, P 2, P 3, P 4, P 5, P 6}, denoted by rows. and the
order of the transitions is T r = {T r1, T r2, T r3}, denoted by columns.
A =
−1
−1
0
0
1 −1
0
1
0
0
1 −1
0 −1
0
0
0
1
In our system, marking M = [1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1] is reachable from initial marking M 0 =
[2, 1, 0, 0, 1, 0] through the firing sequence σ1 = T r1, T r2, T r3.
M0
T r3−−→ M3.
T r2−−→ M2
T r1−−→ M1
2
1
0
0
1
0
+
−1
−1
0
0
1 −1
0
1
0
0
1 −1
0 −1
0
0
0
1
1
1# =
×"1
1
1
0
0
0
1
Table 6 Summary of Disaster Handling Cases Described in Section 6
Case No. Description
1
1.1
1.1.1
1.1.2
1.2
2
3
Station Si faces problem and train Tj is on track l
Station Si has free platforms when Tj reaches
Re(Tj) is available after Si
No alternative route found for Tj from Si
Station Si has no free platforms when Tj reaches
Number of trains are about to depart from Si within buffer
time τ B
Train Tj neither waits at affected station Si nor on track l
connected to Si, but reaches to Si within τ B
Decision Variable(s)
Ljil
Pjik, P rio(Tj), Re(Tj)
Pjik, Ljil, xDT
ji
xDT
ji
Pjik, xAT
ji
Ljil, Pjik, P rio(Tj), xDT
ji
, xAT
ji
Decision Taken
Reroute or Retime
Reroute or Retime from station
Reroute from Si
Delay at Si
Stop on track l, Retime
Reorder
Ljil, Pjik, P rio(Tj), xAT
ji
Retime
6.4 Delay Handling
Delay Minimisation can be formulated as:
).
• Delay minimisation at station Si (δmin
).
• Delay minimisation on the track l (δmin
ji
jl
: This aims to minimise the delay in such a way that even if the train Tj comes late, it should
δmin
ji
try to minimise the deviation from scheduled departure time,
i.e.
xAT
ji ≥ oAT
xDT
ji = oDT
ji
ji
(26)
(27)
So, it compromises dwell time of Tj at Si,
i.e.
(28)
: This aims to minimise the delay considering the journey time (from source to destination),
xd
ji < od
ji
δmin
jl
i. e.
xJ
jl = oJ
jl
18
(29)
6.4.1 Evaluating Optimised Objective Function
The proposed rescheduling approach aims to minimise the total delay of trains in case of any
disaster while rescheduling.
Objective Function:
min[Xj
δj] = min[ XRou(Tj )
(δmin
ji + δmin
jl
)] = min[XPjik
δmin
ji
] + min[XLjil
δmin
jl
]
(30)
7 Simulation Results
To evaluate the performance of the proposed approach, experiments are conducted in different
scenarios with different combination of tracks, trains and stations. Both the delay on track and at
station are considered in the experiments.
Figure 7. Major part of Howrah and Asansol Division, Eastern Railway, India.
19
Table 7 Parameter used in Experimental Studies with Station and Train details
Parameter used
Parameter
Total number of stations
Max number of platforms at station
Min number of tracks at station
Max number of tracks at station
Total number of trains
Threshold delay
Values
28
6
1
4
21
30 (in minute)
Station Details of Eastern Railway(Howrah and Asansol division)
Station
Code
HWH
BLY
SHE
DKAE
BDC
KQU
TAK
KWAE
SKG
BWN
KAN
SNT
RPH
DHN
Station Name
Howrah
Bally
Sheoraphuli Junction
Dankuni
Bandel Junction
Kamarkundu
Tarkeshwar
Katwa Junction
Saktigarh
Barddhaman
Khana Junction
Sainthia
Rampurhat
Dhanbad
Station
Code
BMGA
PAN
PAW
DGR
UDL
RNG
ASN
STN
CRJ
JMT
MDP
STL
JAJ
BRR
Station Name
Bhimgara
Panagarh
Pandabeswar
Durgapur
Andal
Raniganj
Asansol
Sitarampur
Chittaranjan
Jamtara
Madhupur
Simultala
Jhajha
Barakar
Train Details of Eastern Railway (Howrah and Asansol division)
Train No.
Train Name
Category
Priority
12313
12301
12273
12303
12019
22387
13051
12329
12339
12341
13009
37211
13017
37911
63541
53061
15662
63525
63523
53131
12359
Sealdah-New Delhi Rajdhani Express
Howrah - New Delhi Rajdhani Express
Howrah - New Delhi Duronto Express
Poorva Express
Howrah-Ranchi Shatabdi Express
Black Diamond Express
Hool Express
West Bengal Sampark Kranti Express
Coalfield Express
Agnibina Express
Doon Express
Howrah-Bandel Jn Local
Ganadevta Express
Howrah-Katwa Jn Local
Asansol-Gomoh MEMU
Barddhaman Jn-Hatia Passenger
Kamakhya - Ranchi Express
Barddhaman Jn-Asansol Jn MEMU
Barddhaman Jn-Asansol Jn MEMU
Sealdah-Muzaffarpur Fast Passenger
Kolkata - Patna Garib Rath Express
20
j
j
j
j
T P r
T P r
T P r
T M
T P r
j
T P
j
T P
j
T M
j
T P
j
T P
j
T M
T Lo
j
T P
j
T Lo
T Lo
T Lo
T M
T Lo
T Lo
j
T P
j
T P r
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
y1
y1
y1
y2
y1
y4
y4
y2
y4
y4
y2
y5
y4
y5
y5
y5
y2
y5
y5
y4
y1
7.1 Experimental Setup
The simulation is coded in Java in JADE [38] in UNIX platform of personal computer with 2.90
GHz processor speed and 4GB memory. The results and computations are evaluated under same
running environment. A part of Eastern Railway, India [39], shown in Figure 7, is taken for
experimental studies.
Table 7 describes the parameters with their values taken for the experiments, station details and
the train categorisation as discussed in subsection 3.2. Total 28 major stations and 21 different
types of trains are taken to generate the real-time scenarios.
First the database is set with all the station details and train details and the neighbourhood of
the stations in railway network. For both the Asansol and Howrah division, there are maximum 4
tracks in between two stations and for some part, stations are connected with 1 single track. Each
station is assumed to have max p = 6 number of platforms. The permissible threshold delay, as
discussed before, is taken as 30 min. For simplicity we assume, all stations are equidistant and
trains are running at a constant speed throughout its journey.
7.2 Illustration
To illustrate the proposed method 7 different scenarios are taken at different times of a day, based
upon the cases discussed in Section 6. Some scenarios describe affected stations, whereas some
describe the disruption on track as well as blocked stations. The first scenario Sc1 describes the
blocked station BLY , but no track is blocked. The disaster happened at 6 : 00 am. Based on
the proposed approach, train no. 12019, 13051, 12303 are delayed and rescheduled. Total delay
encountered here is 15 min. Similar incidents are described in Sc2, Sc3, and Sc5 in different
times, where only stations are blocked. Scenario Sc7 highlights a disaster, happened at 21 : 00,
where track no. 2, i.e., DOWN track between stations U DL and RN G is blocked. Train no.
12341, 13009, 12359 are rescheduled in this case with our proposed approach, facing a total delay
of 24 min. Similar scenarios are mentioned in Sc4, Sc6. The details of blocked stations, blocked
tracks, affected trains, and total delay observed in each scenario is described in Table 8.
Table 8 Scenarios taken in Experimental Studies
Scenario
Time of disaster Blocked Station Blocked Track
Sc1
Sc2
Sc3
Sc4
Sc5
Sc6
Sc7
6:00
7:00
7:30
13:00
17:40
20:00
21:00
BLY
KAN
UDL
BWN, KAN
KAN
ASN, STN
UDL, RNG
-
-
-
(BW N ←→ KAN)2
-
(ASN ←→ ST N)1
(U DL ←→ RN G)2
Affected Train No.
12019, 13051, 12303
12303, 12019, 13051, 53131
12019, 53061, 22387
12273
12339, 12313, 12301, 63523, 63525
12339, 12341, 12359, 63525
12341, 13009, 12359
Total Delay(in min)
15
34
29
0
15
10
24
Depending upon the impact of the occurred disaster, the scenario is distinguished in four dif-
ferent categories, such as: (a) More number of trains in circulation and high impact of disruption,
(b) More number of trains in circulation and low impact of disruption, (c) Less number of trains in
circulation and low impact of disruption, (d) Less number of trains in circulation and high impact
of disruption. In figure 8a, graphical representation of the expected delay of each train is shown
depending upon this categorisation.
In Figure 8b, the changes in delay of each train is shown when same disaster happens at normal
time and at busy time. Without any disaster, all trains maintain original schedule and no delay is
observed. So, the graph maintains a straight line with zero delay for all trains.
21
n
e
k
a
t
o
i
r
a
n
e
c
s
n
o
p
u
d
e
s
a
b
s
n
a
r
t
f
i
o
r
e
b
m
u
N
i
)
n
m
n
i
(
y
a
e
D
l
l
a
t
o
T
20
15
10
5
0
50
40
30
20
10
0
More number of trains in circulation and high impact of disruption
More number of trains in circulation and low impact of disruption
Less number of trains in circulation and low impact of disruption
Less number of trains in circulation and high impact of disruption
0
10
20
30
40
50
Expected delay of each train (in min)
a
Our proposed method
Threshold Delay
i
)
n
m
n
i
(
y
a
e
D
d
e
l
t
c
e
p
x
E
l
a
t
o
T
5
10
20
Time of Disaster (Clock Time)
15
25
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
5
b
Our proposed agent based distributed method
Existing centralized method
10
15
20
25
Time of Disaster (Clock Time)
c
d
Figure 8. Simulation Results
a Change of number of affected trains and their expected delay under disruption scenarios.
b Delay of trains with disaster at normal time and busy time.
c Delay Minimisation through our proposed method.
d Comparison between existing centralised approach and our proposed agent-based distributed
approach.
22
Figure 8c represents the delay minimisation, achieved through proposed approach. Threshold
delay is taken as 30 min. We vary the time of disaster in 24h time period to observe the total delay
of trains through the proposed method.
To exhibit the advantage of proposed approach, results are compared with the existing cen-
tralised decision making approach of Indian Railway. In this method, all the rescheduling deci-
sions are taken by the central authority. All the low level authorities pass the necessary messages
to the next higher level authority in the railway hierarchy and so on. The higher authority checks
for all feasible solutions and the best decision message for rescheduling is passed from central au-
thority to the lower authorities for necessary changes. This procedure is time consuming and may
face disadvantages of traditional centralised systems like, single-point failure, lesser autonomy,
under utilisation etc. The comparison between existing centralised and the proposed agent-based
distributed approach is shown in Figure 8d. In case of every disaster scenario, happened in dif-
ferent time of a day in the railway network, significant reduction in delay is observed through the
proposed approach.
8 Conclusion
This paper proposes a new train rescheduling approach to handle delay optimisation in case of
disruptions in a railway network. An agent based solution using the DCOP and MDP was designed
to address the distributed nature of the scenario and the uncertainty of disaster recovery time.
Experimental studies are conducted on Eastern Railway, India to evaluate the effectiveness of the
approach. In disastrous situation with noticeably large recovery time, the proposed approach is
shown to produce lower delay than existing approaches.
One of the future research directions will aim at extending this approach for rescheduling of
trains which follow a meet-pass sequence [40] using headway time [41]. This will increase the
number of constraints noticeably which need to be handled efficiently. Further, cross-over points
between any two stations will also be considered which can help in handling various collision
scenarios.
9 References
[1] Indian railways. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Railways. Last modified on
10 May 2016.
[2] Xiang Li Biying Shou and Dan Ralescu. Train rescheduling with stochastic recovery time: A
new track-backup approach. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems,
2014.
[3] J.T. Krasemann. Greedy algorithm for railway traffic re-scheduling during disturbances: a
swedish case. IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 4:375 -- 386, 2010.
[4] R.P Feynman and F.L Vernon Jr. A mip-based timetable rescheduling formulation and algo-
rithm minimizing further inconvenience to passengers. Journal of Rail Transport Planning &
Management, pages 38 -- 53, 2013.
[5] Bart Kersbergen, Ton van den Boom, and Bart De Schutter. Reducing the time needed to solve
the global rescheduling problem for railway networks. Proceedings of the 16th International
23
IEEE Annual Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC 2013), pages 791 -- 796,
2013.
[6] Poulami Dalapati, James Arambam Singh, Animesh Dutta, et al. Multiagent based railway
scheduling and optimization. IEEE TENCON, Bangkok, Thailand, 2014.
[7] Indian rail incidents. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_rail_incidents.
Last modified on 6 May 2016.
[8] Trung Thanh Nguyen and Xin Yao. Benchmarking and solving dynamic constrained prob-
lems. IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pages 690 -- 697, 2009.
[9] Fabien Leurent. Transport capacity constraints on the mass transit system: a systemic analy-
sis. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev., 3:11 -- 21, 2011.
[10] James Atlas and Keith Decker. A complete distributed constraint optimization method for
non-traditional pseudotree arrangements. AAMAS, 2007.
[11] Duc Thien Nguyen, William Yeoh, and Hoong Chuin Lau. Stochastic dominance in stochastic
dcops for risk-sensitive applications. AAMAS, 2012.
[12] Jose M Vidal. Fundamentals of multiagent systems. 2010.
[13] Daniel S. Bernstein, Robert Givan, Neil Immerman, et al. The complexity of decentralized
control of markov decision processes. UNCERTAINTY IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
PROCEEDINGS, 2000.
[14] Daniel S. Bernstein, Christopher Amato, Eric A. Hansen, et al. Policy iteration for decen-
tralized control of markov decision processes. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research,
34:89 -- 132, 2009.
[15] L. Meng and X. S. Zhou. Robust single-track train dispatching model under a dynamic and
stochastic environment: A scenario-based rolling horizon solution approach. Transp. Res. B,
45:1080 -- 1102, 2011.
[16] Rodrigo Acuna-Agost, Philippe Michelon, Dominique Feillet c, et al. Sapi: Statistical analy-
sis of propagation of incidents. a new approach for rescheduling trains after disruptions. Eur.
J. Oper. Res., 215:227 -- 243, 2011.
[17] R. Acuna-Agost, D. Feillet, S. Gueye, et al. A mip-based local search method for the railway
rescheduling problem. Networks, 57:69 -- 86, 2011.
[18] Ravi Sekhar Chalumuri and Asakura Yasuo. Modelling travel time distribution under various
uncertainties on hanshin expressway of japan. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev., 6:85 -- 92, 2014.
[19] Lixing Yang, Ziyou Gao, and Keping Li. Railway freight transportation planning with mixed
uncertainty of randomness and fuzziness. Applied Soft Computing, 2010.
[20] Ibrahim Takouna and Roberto Rojas-Cessa. Routing schemes for network recovery under
link and node failures. IEEE, pages 69 -- 73, 2008.
[21] Lingyun Meng and Xuesong Zhou. Simultaneous train rerouting and rescheduling on an
n-track network: A model reformulation with network-based cumulative flow variables. EL-
SEVIER, Transportation Research Part B, 67:208 -- 234, 2014.
24
[22] Zuraida Alwadood, Adibah Shuib, and Norlida Abd. Hamid. A review on quantitative models
in railway rescheduling. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, 3, 2012.
[23] Malik Muneeb Abid and Muhammad Babar Khan. Sensitivity analysis of train schedule of
a railway track network using an optimization modeling technique. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev.,
7:2 -- 7, 2015.
[24] Li Wang, Limin Jia, Yong Qin, Jie Xu, and Xuelei Meng. Method for tuberail train reschedul-
ing system. International Conference on Computer Application and System Modeling (IC-
CASM), pages 563 -- 567, 2010.
[25] Paola Pellegrini, GrÃl'gory Marliôlre, et al. Recife-milp: An effective milp-based heuristic
IEEE Transactions On Intelligent
for the real-time railway traffic management problem.
Transportation Systems, 2015.
[26] Liujiang Kang, Jianjun Wu, Huijun Sun, et al. A practical model for last train rescheduling
with train delay in urban railway transit networks. Elsevier, Omega 50, pages 29 -- 42, 2015.
[27] Terminal dwell time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_dwell_time. Last
modified on 4 February 2016.
[28] Vito Fragnelli and Simona Sanguineti. A game theoretic model for re-optimizing a railway
timetable. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev., 6:113 -- 125, 2014.
[29] Thijs Dewilde, Peter Sels, Dirk Cattrysse, et al. Robust railway station planning: An inter-
action between routing, timetabling and platforming. ELSEVIER, Journal of Rail Transport
Planning & Management, 3:68 -- 77, 2013.
[30] Shuai Su, Tao Tang, Xiang Li, and Ziyou Gao. Optimization of multitrain operations in a
subway system. IEEE Transactions On Intelligent Transportation Systems, 15, 2014.
[31] Mariagrazia Dotoli, Nicola Epicoco, Marco Falagario, et al. A real time traffic management
model for regional railway networks under disturbances. IEEE International Conference on
Automation Science and Engineering (CASE), 2013.
[32] Hsu-Chun Yen. Introduction to petri net theory. Studies in Computational Intelligence, 25,
2006.
[33] T. Murata. Petri nets: Properties, analysis and applications. Proceedings of the IEEE, 77:541 --
580, 1989.
[34] N. Chaki and S. Bhattacharya. Performance analysis of multistage interconnection networks
with a new high-level net model. Journal of Systems Architecture, ELSEVIER, 52:57 -- 70,
2006.
[35] Kurt Jensen and Lars M. Kristensen. Coloured petri nets, modelling and validation of con-
current systems. Springer, 2009.
[36] Pengling Wang, Lei Ma, Rob M. P. Goverde, et al. Rescheduling trains using petri nets and
heuristic search. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS,
17:726 -- 735, 2016.
[37] Michael Wooldridge. An Introduction to Multiagent Systems. 1966.
25
[38] Jade. http://jade.tilab.com/.
[39] Eastern railway zone. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Railway_zone. Last
modified on 4 May 2016.
[40] Lingyun Meng and Xuesong Zhou. Robust single-track train dispatching model under a
dynamic and stochastic environment: a scenario-based rolling horizon solution approach.
publication in Transportation Research Part B, pages 1 -- 33, 2011.
[41] Headway. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headway. Last modified on 29 February
2016.
26
|
1906.12250 | 1 | 1906 | 2019-06-01T10:05:57 | Adaptation and learning over networks under subspace constraints -- Part II: Performance Analysis | [
"cs.MA",
"eess.SP"
] | Part I of this paper considered optimization problems over networks where agents have individual objectives to meet, or individual parameter vectors to estimate, subject to subspace constraints that require the objectives across the network to lie in low-dimensional subspaces. Starting from the centralized projected gradient descent, an iterative and distributed solution was proposed that responds to streaming data and employs stochastic approximations in place of actual gradient vectors, which are generally unavailable. We examined the second-order stability of the learning algorithm and we showed that, for small step-sizes $\mu$, the proposed strategy leads to small estimation errors on the order of $\mu$. This Part II examines steady-state performance. The results reveal explicitly the influence of the gradient noise, data characteristics, and subspace constraints, on the network performance. The results also show that in the small step-size regime, the iterates generated by the distributed algorithm achieve the centralized steady-state performance. | cs.MA | cs | Adaptation and learning over networks under
subspace constraints -- Part II: Performance Analysis
1
Roula Nassif†, Member, IEEE, Stefan Vlaski†,‡, Student Member, IEEE,
Ali H. Sayed†, Fellow Member, IEEE
† Institute of Electrical Engineering, EPFL, Switzerland
‡ Electrical Engineering Department, UCLA, USA
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Abstract
Part I of this paper considered optimization problems over networks where agents have individual objectives to
meet, or individual parameter vectors to estimate, subject to subspace constraints that require the objectives across
the network to lie in low-dimensional subspaces. Starting from the centralized projected gradient descent, an iterative
and distributed solution was proposed that responds to streaming data and employs stochastic approximations in
place of actual gradient vectors, which are generally unavailable. We examined the second-order stability of the
learning algorithm and we showed that, for small step-sizes µ, the proposed strategy leads to small estimation errors
on the order of µ. This Part II examines steady-state performance. The results reveal explicitly the influence of the
gradient noise, data characteristics, and subspace constraints, on the network performance. The results also show that
in the small step-size regime, the iterates generated by the distributed algorithm achieve the centralized steady-state
performance.
Distributed optimization, subspace projection, gradient noise, steady-state performance.
Index Terms
9
1
0
2
n
u
J
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
0
5
2
2
1
.
6
0
9
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
This work was supported in part by NSF grant CCF-1524250. A short conference version of this work appears in [1].
2
I. INTRODUCTION
As pointed out in Part I [2] of this work, most prior literature on distributed inference over networks focuses
on consensus problems, where agents with separate objective functions need to agree on a common parameter
vector corresponding to the minimizer of the aggregate sum of individual costs [3] -- [12]. In this paper, and its
accompanying Part I [2], we focus instead on multitask networks where the agents need to estimate and track
multiple objectives simultaneously [13] -- [20]. Based on the type of prior information that may be available about
how the tasks are related to each other, multitask algorithms can be derived by translating the prior information
into constraints on the parameter vectors to be inferred.
In this paper, and the accompanying Part I [2], we consider multitask inference problems where each agent seeks
to minimize an individual cost, and where the collection of parameter vectors to be estimated across the network
is required to lie in a low-dimensional subspace. That is, we let wk ∈ CMk denote some parameter vector at node
k and let W = col{w1, . . . , wN} denote the collection of parameter vectors from across the network (N is the
number of agents in the network). We associate with each agent k a differentiable convex cost Jk(wk) : CMk → R,
which is expressed as the expectation of some loss function Qk(·) and written as Jk(wk) = EQk(wk; xk), where
k=1 Mk.
xk denotes the random data. The expectation is computed over the distribution of the data. Let M =(cid:80)N
We consider constrained problems of the form:
Wo = arg min
W
J glob(W) (cid:44)
N(cid:88)
k=1
Jk(wk),
(1)
where R(·) denotes the range space operator, and U is an M × P full-column rank matrix with P (cid:28) M. Each
agent k is interested in estimating the k-th Mk × 1 subvector wo
k of Wo = col{wo
1, . . . , wo
N}.
In order to solve problem (1), we proposed in Part I [2] the following adaptive and distributed strategy:
subject to W ∈ R(U),
ψk,i = wk,i−1 − µ (cid:92)∇w∗
wk,i = (cid:80)
Ak(cid:96)ψ(cid:96),i,
k
(cid:96)∈Nk
Jk(wk,i−1),
(2)
k at agent
where µ > 0 is a small step-size parameter, ψk,i is an intermediate estimate, wk,i is the estimate of wo
Jk(·) is the (Wirtinger) complex gradient [4,
k and iteration i, Nk denotes the neighborhood of agent k, and ∇w∗
Jk(·)
Appendix A] of Jk(·) relative to w∗
are employed in (2) instead of true gradient vectors ∇w∗
Jk(·) since we are interested in solving (1) in the stochastic
setting when the distribution of the data xk is unknown. A common construction in stochastic approximation theory
is to employ the following approximation at iteration i:
k (complex conjugate of wk). Notice that approximate gradient vectors (cid:92)∇w∗
k
k
k
(cid:92)∇w∗
Jk(wk) = ∇w∗
k
k
Qk(wk; xk,i),
(3)
where xk,i represents the data observed at iteration i. The difference between the true gradient and its approximation
is called the gradient noise sk,i(·):
sk,i(w) (cid:44) ∇w∗
k
Jk(w) − (cid:92)∇w∗
k
Jk(w).
(4)
(cid:40) lim
i→∞Ai = PU,
Ak(cid:96) = [A]k(cid:96) = 0,
This noise will seep into the operation of the algorithm and one main challenge is to show that despite its presence,
k asymptotically. The matrix Ak(cid:96) appearing in (2) is of size Mk×M(cid:96). It multiplies
agent k is still able to approach wo
the intermediate estimate ψ(cid:96),i arriving from neighboring agent (cid:96) to agent k. Let A (cid:44) [Ak(cid:96)] ∈ CM×M denote the
matrix that collects all these blocks. This N × N block matrix is chosen by the designer to satisfy the following
two conditions:
if (cid:96) /∈ Nk and k (cid:54)= (cid:96),
(6)
where [A]k(cid:96) denotes the (k, (cid:96))-th block of A and PU is the projector onto the P -dimensional subspace of CM
spanned by the columns of U:
PU = U(U∗U)−1U∗.
(7)
The sparsity condition (6) characterizes the network topology and ensures local exchange of information at each
time instant i. It is shown in Part I [2] that the matrix equation (5) holds, if and only if, the following conditions
on the projector PU and the matrix A are satisfied:
AU = U,
U∗A = U∗.
ρ(A − PU) < 1,
3
(5)
(8)
(9)
(11)
(10)
where ρ(·) denotes the spectral radius of its matrix argument. Conditions (8) and (9) state that the P columns
of U are right and left eigenvectors of A associated with the eigenvalue 1. Together with these two conditions,
condition (10) means that A has P eigenvalues at one, and that all other eigenvalues are strictly less than one in
magnitude. Combining conditions (8) -- (10) with the sparsity condition (6), the design of a matrix A to run (2) can
be written as the following feasibility problem:
A
find
such that AU = U, U∗A = U∗,
ρ(A − PU) < 1,
[A]k(cid:96) = 0, if (cid:96) /∈ Nk and (cid:96) (cid:54)= k.
Not all network topologies satisfying (6) guarantee the existence of an A satisfying condition (5). The higher the
dimension of the signal subspace is, the greater the graph connectivity has to be. In the works [1], [20], it is
assumed that the sparsity constraints (6) and the signal subspace lead to a feasible problem. That is, it is assumed
that problem (11) admits at least one solution. As a remedy for the violation of such assumption, one may increase
the network connectivity by increasing the transmit power of each node, i.e., adding more links [20]. In Section III
of this part, we shall relax the feasibility assumption by considering the problem of finding an A that minimizes
the number of edges to be added to the original topology while satisfying the constraints (8), (9), and (10). In this
case, if the original topology leads to a feasible solution, then no links will be added. Otherwise, we assume that
the designer is able to add some links to make the problem feasible.
4
When studying the performance of algorithm (2) relative to Wo, we assume that a feasible A (topology) is
computed by the designer and that its blocks {Ak(cid:96)}(cid:96)∈Nk are provided to agent k in order to run (2). We carried out
in Part I [2] a detailed stability analysis of the proposed strategy (2). We showed that, despite the gradient noise,
the distributed strategy (2) is able to converge in the mean-square-error sense within O(µ) from the solution of the
constrained problem (1), for sufficiently small step-sizes µ. We particularly established that, for each agent k, the
k −
error variance relative to wo
wk,i(cid:107)2 = O(µ). In Section II of this Part II, we will assess the size of this mean-square-error by deriving closed-form
expression for the network mean-square-deviation (MSD) defined by [4]:
k enters a bounded region whose size is in the order of µ, namely, lim supi→∞ E(cid:107)wo
MSD (cid:44) µ lim
µ→0
(12)
where Wi (cid:44) col{wk,i}N
k=1. In other words, we will assess the size of the constant multiplying µ in the O(µ)−term.
This closed form expression will reveal explicitly the influence of the data characteristics (captured by the second-
lim sup
i→∞
N
,
order properties of the costs and second-order moments of the gradient noises) and subspace constraints (captured
by U), on the network performance. In this way, we will be able to conclude that distributed strategies of the
form (2) with small step-sizes are able to lead to reliable performance even in the presence of gradient noise. We
will be able also to conclude that the iterates generated by the distributed implementation achieve the centralized
steady-state performance. Particularly, we compare the performance of strategy (2) to the following centralized
(cid:18)
(cid:18) 1
E
1
µ
(cid:19)(cid:19)
(cid:107)Wo − Wi(cid:107)2
stochastic gradient projection algorithm [21]:
(cid:18)
(cid:110) (cid:92)∇w∗
k
(cid:111)N
(cid:19)
,
Wc
i = PU
(13)
N,i} is the estimate of Wo at iteration i. Observe that each agent at each iteration needs
where Wc
to send its data to a fusion center, which performs the projection in (13), and then sends the resulting estimates
i = col{wc
i−1 − µ col
1,i, . . . , wc
i ≥ 0,
Jk(wc
k,i−1)
Wc
k=1
wc
k,i back to the agents. Finally, simulations will be provided in Section IV to verify the theoretical findings.
II. STOCHASTIC PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
In Part I [2], we carried out a detailed stability analysis of the proposed strategy (2). We showed, under some
Assumptions on the risks {Jk(·)} and on the gradient noise processes {sk,i(·)} defined by (4), that a network
running strategy (2) with a matrix A satisfying conditions (6), (8), (9), and (10) is mean-square-error stable for
sufficiently small step-sizes, namely, it holds that:
E(cid:107)wo
k − wk,i(cid:107)2 = O(µ),
k = 1, . . . , N,
lim sup
i→∞
(14)
for small enough µ -- see [2, Theorem 1]. Expression (14) indicates that the mean-square error E(cid:107)Wo − Wi(cid:107)2 is on
the order of µ. In this section, we are interested in characterizing how close the Wi gets to the network limit point
Wo. In particular, we will be able to characterize the network mean-square deviation (MSD) (defined by (12)) value
in terms of the step-size µ, the data-type variable h defined in Table I, the second-order properties of the costs
DEFINITION OF SOME VARIABLES USED THROUGHOUT THE ANALYSIS. I IS A PERMUTATION MATRIX DEFINED BY (16).
TABLE I
Variable
Real data case
Complex data case
5
Data-type variable h
Gradient vector
Error vector (cid:101)we
k,i
1
k
Jk(wk)
∇w(cid:62)
(cid:101)wk,i from (39)
Gradient noise se
k,i(w)
sk,i(w) from (4)
Bias vector be
k
bk from (40)
(k, (cid:96))-th block of Ae
Matrix U e
Matrix J e
Ak(cid:96)
U
J from (28)
Matrix V e
R,
VR, from (28)
Matrix (V e
L,)∗
V∗
L, from (28)
Noise covariance Ro
k
Rq,k from (51),(52)
2
0
Jk(wk)
∗
k,i)(cid:62)
∇w∗
k
(b∗
k)(cid:62)
(s∗
k,i(w))(cid:62)
0
(A∗
k(cid:96))(cid:62)
(cid:101)wk,i
((cid:101)w
sk,i(w)
bk
Ak(cid:96)
U
J
VR,
V∗
Rs,k Rq,k
I
0
(V∗
R,)(cid:62)
0
(J ∗
)(cid:62)
(U∗)(cid:62)
0
V(cid:62)
L,
q,k R(cid:62)
R∗
s,k
0
0
0
L,
0
I(cid:62)
0
I(cid:62)
(captured by Ho defined below in (45)), the second-order moments of the gradient noises (captured by S defined
below in (64)), and the subspace constraints (captured by U e defined in Table I) as follows:
(cid:16)
(cid:17)
MSD =
µ
2hN
Tr
((U e)∗HoU e)
−1 ((U e)∗SU e)
.
(15)
As explained in Part I [2], in the general complex data case, extended vectors and matrices need to be introduced
in order to analyze the network evolution. The arguments and results presented in this section are applicable to
both cases of real and complex data through the use of data-type variable h. Table I lists a couple of variables
and symbols that will be used in the sequel for both real and complex data cases. The matrix I in Table I is a
permutation matrix of 2N × 2N blocks with (m, n)-th block given by:
[I]mn (cid:44)
for m, n = 1, . . . , 2N and k = 1, . . . , N.
IMk,
IMk,
0,
if m = k, n = 2(k − 1) + 1
if m = k + N, n = 2k
otherwise
(16)
6
A. Modeling assumptions from Part I [2]
In this section, we recall the assumptions used in Part I [2] to establish the network mean-square error stabil-
ity (14). We first introduce the Hermitian Hessian matrix functions (see [2, Sec. II-A]):
Hk(wk) (cid:44) ∇2
H(W) (cid:44) diag{Hk(wk)}N
Jk(wk),
wk
(hMk × hMk)
(hM × hM ).
(18)
Assumption 1. (Conditions on aggregate and individual costs). The individual costs Jk(wk) ∈ R are assumed to
be twice differentiable and convex such that:
k=1 ,
(17)
where νk ≥ 0 for k = 1, . . . , N. It is further assumed that, for any W, H(W) satisfies:
νk
h
IhMk ≤ Hk(wk) ≤ δk
h
IhMk,
0 <
ν
h
IhP ≤ (U e)∗H(W)U e ≤ δ
h
IhP ,
(19)
(20)
for some positive parameters ν ≤ δ. The data-type variable h and the matrix U e are defined in Table I.
As explained in [2], condition (20) ensures that problem (1) has a unique minimizer Wo.
Assumption 2. (Conditions on gradient noise). The gradient noise process defined in (4) satisfies for any w ∈ F i−1
and for all k, (cid:96) = 1, . . . , N:
E[sk,i(w)F i−1] = 0,
(cid:96),i(w)F i−1] = 0,
(cid:96),i(w)F i−1] = 0,
E[sk,i(w)s∗
E[sk,i(w)s(cid:62)
k (cid:54)= (cid:96),
k (cid:54)= (cid:96),
(21)
(22)
(23)
k ≥ 0, σ2
E[(cid:107)sk,i(w)(cid:107)2F i−1] ≤ (βk/h)2(cid:107)w(cid:107)2 + σ2
s,k,
(24)
s,k ≥ 0, and where F i−1 denotes the filtration generated by the random processes {w(cid:96),j} for
for some β2
all (cid:96) = 1, . . . , N and j ≤ i − 1.
Assumption 3. (Condition on U). The full-column rank matrix U is assumed to be semi-unitary, i.e., its column
vectors are orthonormal and U∗U = IP .
Consider the N × N block matrix Ae whose (k, (cid:96))-th block is defined in Table I. This matrix will appear in our
subsequent study. In [2, Lemma 2], we showed that this hM × hM matrix Ae admits a Jordan decomposition of
the form:
with
IhP
0
0
J e
Λe
=
, V e
Ae (cid:44) V e
(V e
)−1,
Λe
= [U e V e
R,], (V e
)−1 =
(25)
(26)
(U e)∗
(V e
L,)∗
,V e
R,, and (V e
where U e,J e
L, originating from the
eigen-structure of A. Under Assumption 3, the M ×M combination matrix A satisfying conditions (8), (9), and (10)
admits a Jordan canonical decomposition of the form:
L,)∗ are defined in Table I with the matrices J, VR,, and V∗
7
with:
IP
0
0 J
Λ =
, V =
A (cid:44) VΛV,
(cid:104) U VR,
(cid:105)
, V−1
=
,
(27)
(28)
U∗
V∗
L,
where J is a Jordan matrix with the eigenvalues (which may be complex but have magnitude less than one) on
the diagonal and > 0 on the super-diagonal. The eigen-decomposition (25) will be useful for establishing the
mean-square performance.
The results in Part I [2] established that the iterates wk,i converge in the mean-square error sense to a small
O(µ)−neighborhood around the solution wo. In this part, we will be more precise and determine the size of this
neighborhood, i.e., assess the size of the constant multiplying µ in the O(µ)−term. To do so, we shall derive an
accurate first-order expression for the mean-square error (14); the expression will be accurate to first-order in µ.
To arrive at the desired expression, we start by motivating a long-term model for the evolution of the network
error vector after sufficient iterations have passed, i.e., for i (cid:29) 1. It turns out that the performance expressions
obtained from analyzing the long-term model provide accurate expressions for the performance of the original
network model to first order in µ. To derive the long-term model, we follow the approach developed in [4]. The
k−wk,i(cid:107)4. Under
first step is to establish the asymptotic stability of the fourth-order moment of the error vector, E(cid:107)wo
the same settings of Theorem 1 in [2] with the second-order moment condition (24) replaced by the fourth-order
(29)
s4,k ≥ 0, and using similar arguments as in [4, Theorem 9.2], we can show that the fourth-order
moments of the network error vectors are stable for sufficiently small µ, namely, it holds that (see Appendix F)
4,k ≥ 0, σ4
with β4
s4,k,
E(cid:107)wo
k − wk,i(cid:107)4 = O(µ2),
k = 1, . . . , N.
lim sup
i→∞
(30)
As explained in [4], condition (29) implies (24). We analyze the long-term model under the same settings of
Theorem 1 in [2] and the following smoothness assumption on the individual costs.
Assumption 4. (Smoothness condition on individual costs). It is assumed that each Jk(wk) satisfies the following
smoothness condition close to the limit point wo
k:
(cid:107)∇wkJk(wo
for small perturbations (cid:107)∆wk(cid:107) and κd ≥ 0.
k + ∆wk) − ∇wkJk(wo
k)(cid:107) ≤ κd(cid:107)∆wk(cid:107),
(31)
moment condition:
E(cid:2)(cid:107)sk,i(w)(cid:107)4F i−1
(cid:3) ≤ (β4,k/h)4(cid:107)w(cid:107)4 + σ4
8
B. Long-term-error model
To introduce the long-term model, we reconsider the network error recursion from Part I [2], namely,
i + µAebe
i−1 − µAese
1,i, . . . ,(cid:101)we
(cid:9) ,
N,i
i
(cid:101)We
i = Bi−1(cid:101)We
(cid:44) col(cid:8)(cid:101)we
(cid:101)We
(cid:44) col(cid:8)se
(cid:90) 1
se
i
be (cid:44) col{be
H k,i−1 (cid:44)
0
Hi−1 (cid:44) diag{H 1,i−1, . . . , H N,i−1} ,
Bi−1 (cid:44) Ae(IhM − µHi−1),
N,i(wN,i−1)(cid:9) ,
1,i(w1,i−1), . . . , se
1, . . . , be
N} ,
k − t(cid:101)wk,i−1)dt,
Jk(wo
∇2
wk
where:
where:
and (cid:101)we
(32)
(33)
(34)
(35)
(36)
(37)
(38)
(39)
(40)
(41)
(42)
(43)
(44)
(45)
(46)
(47)
k,i, se
k,i(wk,i−1), and be
k are defined in Table I with:
(cid:101)wk,i (cid:44) wo
bk (cid:44) ∇w∗
k − wk,i,
Jk(wo
k).
k
(cid:101)We
i = B(cid:101)We
We rewrite (32) as:
i + µAebe + µAeci−1,
in terms of the constant matrix B and the random perturbation sequence ci−1:
i−1 − µAese
where Ho and (cid:101)Hi−1 are given by:
B (cid:44) Ae(IhM − µHo),
i−1,
ci−1 (cid:44) (cid:101)Hi−1(cid:101)We
(cid:101)Hi−1 (cid:44) Ho − Hi−1,
Ho (cid:44) diag{H o
1 , . . . , H o
N},
with each H o
k given by the value of the Hessian matrix at the limit point, namely,
H o
k
(cid:44) ∇2
wk
Jk(wo
k).
By exploiting the smoothness condition (31), and following an argument similar to [4, pp. 554], we can show from
Theorem 1 in [2] that, for i (cid:29) 1, (cid:107)ci−1(cid:107) = O(µ) with high probability. Motivated by this observation, we introduce
the following approximate model, where the last term µAeci−1 that appears in (41), which is O(µ2), is removed:
(cid:101)We(cid:48)
i = B(cid:101)We(cid:48)
i−1 − µAese
i (Wi−1) + µAebe,
for i (cid:29) 1. Obviously, the iterates {(cid:101)We(cid:48)
We start by showing that the mean-square difference between {(cid:101)We(cid:48)
i , (cid:101)We
i } generated by (47) are generally different from the iterates generated by the
original recursion (32). To highlight this fact, we are using the prime notation for the state of the long-term model.
i (Wi−1) in (47) is the same gradient noise process from the original recursion (32).
i} is asymptotically bounded by O(µ2) and
2 ) from the one of the original recursion (32).
that the mean-square-error of the long term model (47) is within O(µ
Note that the driving process se
3
9
Working with (47) is much more tractable for performance analysis because its dynamics is driven by the constant
matrix B as opposed to the random matrix Bi−1 in (32). Therefore, we shall work with model (47) and evaluate
its performance, which will provide an accurate representation for the performance of (2) to first order in µ.
Theorem 1. (Size of approximation error). Consider a network of N agents running the distributed strategy (2)
with a matrix A satisfying conditions (8), (9), and (10) and U satisfying Assumption 3. Assume the individual costs,
Jk(wk), satisfy the conditions in Assumptions 1 and 4. Assume further that the gradient noise processes satisfy
the conditions in Assumption 2 with the second-order moment condition (24) replaced by the fourth-order moment
condition (29). Then, it holds that, for sufficiently small step-sizes:
lim sup
i→∞
E(cid:107)(cid:101)We
i − (cid:101)We(cid:48)
E(cid:107)(cid:101)We
lim sup
i→∞
i (cid:107)2 = O(µ2),
i(cid:107)2 = lim sup
i→∞
E(cid:107)(cid:101)We(cid:48)
i (cid:107)2 + O(µ3/2).
(48)
(49)
Proof. See Appendix A.
Using similar eigenvalue perturbation arguments as in [4, Theorem 9.3], we can show that, under the same settings
of Theorem 1, the constant matrix B defined by (42) is stable for sufficiently small step-sizes (see Appendix G).
C. Mean-square-error performance
We showed in Theorem 1 in Part I [2] that a network running the distributed strategy (2) is mean-square stable
k − wk,i(cid:107)2 = O(µ). In this section, we assess
for sufficiently small µ. Particularly, we showed that lim supi→∞ E(cid:107)wo
the size of the mean-square error by measuring the network MSD defined by (12).
We refer to the individual gradient noise process in (4) and denote its conditional covariance matrix by:
We assume that, in the limit, the following moment matrices tend to constant values when evaluated at wo
k:
Re
s,k,i(w) (cid:44) E(cid:2)se
E(cid:2)sk,i(wo
E(cid:104)
Rs,k (cid:44) lim
i→∞
Rq,k (cid:44) lim
i→∞
sk,i(wo
k,i(w)se∗
k,i(w)F i−1
k)s∗
k)s(cid:62)
k,i(wo
k,i(wo
k)F i−1
k)F i−1
(cid:3) .
(cid:3) ,
(cid:105)
.
(50)
(51)
(52)
Assumption 5. (Smoothness condition on noise covariance). It is assumed that the conditional second-order
moments of the individual noise processes satisfy the following smoothness condition,
(cid:107)Re
s,k,i(wo
k + ∆wk) − Re
s,k,i(wo
k)(cid:107) ≤ κd(cid:107)∆wk(cid:107)γ,
(53)
10
for small perturbations (cid:107)∆wk(cid:107), and for some constant κd ≥ 0 and exponent 0 < γ ≤ 4.
One useful conclusion that follows from (53) is that, for i (cid:29) 1 and for sufficiently small step-size, we can express the
covariance matrix of se
k defined in Table I as follows (see [4, Lemma 11.1]):
k,i(w) in terms of the limiting matrix Ro
Ese
k,i(wk,i−1)se∗
k,i(wk,i−1) = Ro
k + O(µmin{1, γ
2
}).
(54)
Before proceeding, we introduce the (hM )2 × (hM )2 matrix F that will play a critical role in characterizing
the performance:
F = B(cid:62) ⊗b B∗.
(55)
This matrix is defined in in terms of the block Kronecker operation. In the derivation that follows, we shall use
the block Kronecker product ⊗b operator [22] and the block vectorization operator bvec(·)1. As explained in [4],
these operations preserve the locality of the blocks in the original matrix arguments. The matrix F will sometimes
appear transformed under the similarity transformation:
F (cid:44)(cid:16)
)∗(cid:17)F(cid:16)
)∗(cid:17)−1
(V e
)(cid:62) ⊗b (V e
(V e
)(cid:62) ⊗b (V e
.
(56)
Lemma 1. (Low-rank approximation). Assume the matrix A satisfies conditions (8), (9), and (10) with U satisfying
Assumption 3. For sufficiently small step-sizes, it holds that F is stable and that:
(I − F)−1 = O(1/µ),
(I − F)−1 =
O(1) O(1)
O(1/µ) O(1)
Z−1(cid:16)
,
(U e)(cid:62) ⊗b (U e)∗(cid:17)
(cid:16)
[(U e)∗](cid:62) ⊗b U e(cid:17)
(I − F)−1 =
+ O(1),
where the leading (hP )2 × (hP )2 block in (I − F)−1 is O(1/µ). Moreover, we can also write:
in terms of the block Kronecker operation, where the matrix Z has dimension (hP )2 × (hP )2:
Z = (IhP ⊗ D∗
11) + (D(cid:62)
11 ⊗ IhP ) = O(µ),
(57)
(58)
(59)
(60)
with D11 = µ (U e)∗HoU e which is positive definite under Assumption 1.
Proof. See Appendix B.
1In our derivations, the block Kronecker product and the block vectorization operations are applied to 2× 2 block matrices C = [Ck(cid:96)] and
D = [Dk(cid:96)] with blocks {C11, D11} of size hP ×hP , blocks {C12, D12} of size hP ×h(M−P ), blocks {C21, D21} of size h(M−P )×hP ,
and blocks {C22, D22} of size h(M − P ) × h(M − P ).
Theorem 2. (Mean-square-error performance). Consider the same settings of Theorem 1. Assume further that
Assumption 5 holds. Let γm (cid:44) 1
2 min{1, γ} > 0 with γ ∈ (0, 4] from (53). Then, it holds that:
E(cid:107)(cid:101)We
i(cid:107)2
(cid:32) ∞(cid:88)
n=0
=
lim sup
i→∞
1
hN
1
hN
=
Tr
1
hN
(bvec(Y(cid:62)))(cid:62)(I − F)−1bvec(IhM ) + O(µ1+γm),
(cid:33)
BnY(B∗)n
+ O(µ1+γm),
where:
Y = µ2AeS(Ae)∗,
S = diag{Ro
1, Ro
2, . . . , Ro
N}.
((U e)∗HoU e)
−1 ((U e)∗SU e)
.
(cid:17)
Furthermore, it holds that:
Proof. See Appendix C.
MSD =
µ
2hN
Tr
(cid:16)
11
(61)
(62)
(63)
(64)
(65)
(66)
Since (I −F) is of size (hM )2 × (hM )2, the first term on the R.H.S. of expression (61) may be hard to evaluate
due to numerical reasons. In comparison, the first term in expression (62) only requires manipulations of matrices
of size hM × hM. In practice, a reasonable number of terms can be used instead of n → ∞ to obtain accurate
evaluation.
Note that the MSD of the centralized solution is equal to (65) since the centralized implementation can be
obtained from (2) by replacing PU by A and by assuming fully-connected network. We therefore conclude, for
sufficiently small step-sizes (i.e., in the slow adaptation regime), that the distributed strategy (2) is able to attain
the same MSD performance as the centralized solution.
III. FINDING A COMBINATION MATRIX A
In the following, we consider the problem of finding an A that minimizes the number of edges to be added to the
original topology while satisfying the constraints (10), (8), and (9). That is, we consider the following optimization
problem:
N(cid:80)
(cid:80)
f (A) =
minimizeA
subject to AU = U, A = A∗,
ρ(A − PU) ≤ 1 − ,
(cid:96) /∈Nk
k=1
Ak(cid:96)1 + γ
2(cid:107)A(cid:107)2
F,
(cid:44)(cid:80)Mk
n=1 [Ak(cid:96)]mn ∈ R, (cid:107)A(cid:107)F =(cid:112)Tr(A∗A) ∈ R is the Frobenius norm of A, γ ≥ 0 is a
(cid:80)M(cid:96)
where Ak(cid:96)1
regularization parameter, and ∈ (0, 1] is a small positive number. In general, the spectral radius of a matrix is not
convex over the matrix space. We therefore restrict our search to the class of Hermitian matrices, since their spectral
m=1
radius coincides with their spectral norm (maximum singular value), which is a convex function. Problem (66) is
12
to slow convergence and large gives fast convergence. The convex (cid:96)1-norm based function(cid:80)N
is used as a relaxation of the pseudo (cid:96)0-norm h(A) = (cid:80)N
convex since the objective is convex, the equality constraints are linear, and the inequality constraint function is
convex [23]. The parameter controls the convergence rate of Ai towards the projector PU. That is, small leads
Ak(cid:96)1
k=1 card{(cid:96)Ak(cid:96) (cid:54)= 0, (cid:96) /∈ Nk}, which is a non-convex
function that leads to computational challenges. Among the potentially multiple feasible solutions, the cardinality
(cid:80)M
function h(A) in the objective in (66) selects as optimum the one that minimizes the number of edges to be added
n=1 amn2 in (66)
to the network topology in order to satisfy constraint (5). The quadratic term (cid:107)A(cid:107)2
makes the objective strictly convex, and therefore problem (66) has a unique minimum. Problem (66) can be solved
F =(cid:80)M
(cid:80)
(cid:96) /∈Nk
k=1
m=1
using general convex optimization solvers such as CVX [24]. These solvers generally implement second-order
methods that require calculation of Hessian matrices. Therefore, problems with more than few thousand entries are
probably beyond the capabilities of these solvers. The Douglas-Rachford algorithm can also be employed to solve
problem (66). As we shall see in the following, the required proximal operators for implementing this algorithm
can be computed efficiently using closed form expressions.
In the following, we shall assume that U ∈ RM×P and, therefore, we shall solve (66) over real-valued matrices
A ∈ RM×M . In order to solve the constrained problem (66), we shall apply the Douglas-Rachford splitting
algorithm [25], which is used to solve problems of the form:
minimize
x∈RN
g1(x) + g2(x),
(67)
where g1(·) and g2(·) are functions in Γ0(RN ) such that (ri domg1) ∩ (ri domg2) (cid:54)= 0 and g1(x) + g2(x) → +∞
as (cid:107)x(cid:107) → +∞. By selecting g1(·) as f (·) in (66) and g2(·) as the indicator function IΩ(·) of the closed nonempty
convex set:
Ω = {AAU = U,A = A(cid:62),(cid:107)A − PU(cid:107) ≤ 1 − }
defined as:
(68)
(69)
(70)
the Douglas-Rachford algorithm to solve (66) has the following form:
IΩ(A) (cid:44)
0,
Ai = proxηf (Ci)
Ci+1 = Ci + proxηIΩ
+∞,
if A ∈ Ω,
if A /∈ Ω,
(2Ai − Ci) − Ai,
where η > 0 and proxηg : RM×M → RM×M is the proximal operator of ηg(·) (g : RM×M → R ∪ {+∞}) defined
as [25], [26]:
proxηg(C) = arg minA g(A) +
1
2η
(cid:107)A − C(cid:107)2
F.
(71)
Every sequence (Ai)i∈N generated by algorithm (70) converges to a solution of problem (66) [25, Proposition 4.3].
The Douglas-Rachford algorithm operates by splitting since it employs the functions f (·) and IΩ(·) separately. It
requires the implementation of two proximal steps at each iteration, which can be computed efficiently as explained
in the following.
13
The function f (A) is an entrywise matrix function that treats the matrix A ∈ RM×M as a vector in RM 2 and
then uses a corresponding vector function; the proximal operator is then the same as that of the vector function.
Let Ck(cid:96) denote the (k, (cid:96))-th block of an N × N block matrix C and let [Ck(cid:96)]mn denote the (m, n)-th entry of Ck(cid:96).
The (k, (cid:96))-th block of the proximal operator of ηf (·) is given by:
(cid:18) 1
1 + ηγ
(cid:19)
·
Ck(cid:96),
Cs
k(cid:96),
if (cid:96) ∈ Nk or k = (cid:96),
if (cid:96) /∈ Nk,
[proxηf (C)]k(cid:96) =
where the matrix Cs
k(cid:96) is of size Mk × M(cid:96) with (m, n)-th entry given by:
[Cs
k(cid:96)]mn =
[Ck(cid:96)]mn − η,
0,
[Ck(cid:96)]mn + η,
if [Ck(cid:96)]mn ≥ η,
if [Ck(cid:96)]mn ≤ η,
if [Ck(cid:96)]mn ≤ −η.
Since IΩ is the indicator function of the closed convex set Ω, its proximal operator reduces to the projection onto
Ω defined as:
proxηIΩ
(D) = ΠΩ(D) =
arg minA
subject to A ∈ Ω
1
2(cid:107)A − D(cid:107)2
F
(72)
(73)
(74)
(77)
(78)
(79)
(80)
where the parameter η does not appear since the proximal operator is a projection. The set Ω in (68) can be written
alternatively as Ω = Ω1 ∩ Ω2 where Ω1 and Ω2 are two closed convex sets defined as:
Ω1 = {AAU = U,A = A(cid:62)},
Ω2 = {A(cid:107)A − PU(cid:107) ≤ 1 − }.
(75)
(76)
As we shall explain in the following, the projection onto the intersection Ω can be obtained by properly projecting
onto the individual sets Ω1 and Ω2 according to:
The projection onto Ω1 is given by (see Appendix D):
ΠΩ1(D) = (I − PU)
(I − PU) + PU,
and the projection of the symmetric matrix ΠΩ1(D) onto Ω2 is given by (see Appendix D):
ΠΩ(D) = ΠΩ2(ΠΩ1(D)).
(cid:18)D + D(cid:62)
(cid:19)
M(cid:88)
2
ΠΩ2(ΠΩ1(D)) = PU +
βmvmv(cid:62)
m,
m=1
−1 + ,
λm,
1 − ,
if λm < −1 + ,
if λm < 1 − ,
if λm > 1 − .
where:
βm =
14
Fig. 1. Experimental setup. (Left) Network topology. (Right) Graph spectral content of W(cid:63) with w(cid:63)
m=1 are the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the symmetric matrix (I − PU)
where {λm, vm}M
order to establish (77), we introduce the following lemma.
Lemma 2. (Characterization of the projection). If Ω1 is an affine set, Ω2 is a closed convex set, and ΠΩ2(ΠΩ1(C)) ∈
Ω1, then ΠΩ1∩Ω2(C) = ΠΩ2(ΠΩ1(C)).
(I − PU). In
2
m = (v(cid:62)
m ⊗ IL)W(cid:63).
(cid:16)D+D(cid:62)
(cid:17)
Proof. See Appendix E.
Since the projection onto Ω2 (given by (79)) changes only the eigenvalues of a matrix without affecting the
eigenvectors, we have ΠΩ2(ΠΩ1(C)) ∈ Ω1. We then conclude from Lemma 2 that (77) holds.
IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
We apply strategy (2) to solve distributed inference under smoothness (described in Remark 4 of Section II
in [2]). We consider a connected mean-square-error (MSE) network of N = 50 nodes and Mk = L = 5. The N
nodes are placed randomly in the [0, 1] × [0, 1] square, and the weighted graph is then constructed according to a
thresholded Gaussian kernel weighting function based on the distance between nodes. Particularly, the weight ck(cid:96)
of edge (k, (cid:96)) connecting nodes k and (cid:96) that are dk(cid:96) apart is:
exp(cid:0)−d2
0,
k(cid:96)/(2σ2)(cid:1),
ck(cid:96) =
if dk(cid:96) ≤ κ
otherwise
(81)
with σ = 0.12 and κ = 0.33. We assume real data case. Each agent is subjected to streaming data {dk(i), uk,i}
assumed to satisfy a linear regression model [4]:
dk(i) = u(cid:62)
k = 1, . . . , N,
(82)
k + vk(i),
k,iw(cid:63)
for some unknown L× 1 vector w(cid:63)
networks, the risk functions take the form of mean-square-error costs:
k to be estimated with vk(i) denoting a zero-mean measurement noise. For these
Jk(wk) =
Edk(i) − u(cid:62)
k,iwk2,
1
2
k = 1, . . . , N.
(83)
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9100.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9100.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9100.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.900.020.040.060.080.040.060.080.10.120.140.160.180.2 15
u,k and σ2
(cid:96),i = Ru,k = σ2
Inference under smoothness. Performance of algorithm (2) for 5 different choices of the matrix U in (1) with U = U ⊗ IL, and
Fig. 2.
non-cooperative strategy. (Left) Performance w.r.t. W(cid:63). (Right) Performance w.r.t. Wo.
The processes {uk,i, vk(i)} are assumed to be zero-mean Gaussian with: i) Euk,iu(cid:62)
u,kIL if k = (cid:96)
and zero otherwise; ii) Evk(i)v(cid:96)(i) = σ2
v,k if k = (cid:96) and zero otherwise; and iii) uk,i and vk(i) are independent of
v,k are generated from the uniform distributions unif(0.5, 2) and unif(0.2, 0.8),
each other. The variances σ2
respectively. Let W(cid:63) = col{w(cid:63)
N}. The signal W(cid:63) is generated by smoothing a signal Wo by a diffusion
kernel. Particularly, we generate W(cid:63) according to W(cid:63) = [(V e−τ ΛV (cid:62))⊗IL]Wo with τ = 30, Wo a randomly generated
vector from the Gaussian distribution N (0.1 × 1N L, IN L), and {V = [v1, . . . , vN ], Λ = diag{λ1, . . . , λN}} are the
matrices of eigenvectors and eigenvalues of Lc = diag{C1N}− C with [C]k(cid:96) = ck(cid:96) given by (81). Figure 1 (right)
m ⊗ IL)W(cid:63). It can be observed
illustrates the normalized squared (cid:96)2-norm of the spectral component w(cid:63)
that the signal is mainly localized in [0, 0.1]. Note that, for MSE networks, it holds that Hk(wk) = Ru,k ∀wk.
Furthermore, the gradient noise process (4) is given by:
m = (v(cid:62)
1, . . . , w(cid:63)
sk,i(wk) = (u(cid:62)
k,iuk,i − Ru,k)(wo
k − wk) + u(cid:62)
k,ivk(i),
with covariance Ro
k given by:
k,iuk,i − Ru,k)] + σ2
k,iuk,i − Ru,k)Wk(u(cid:62)
k = E[(u(cid:62)
Ro
= Ru,kWkRu,k + Ru,kTr(Ru,kWk) + σ2
v,kRu,k
k)(cid:62), and where we used the fact that E[u(cid:62)
k − wo
v,kRu,k
(84)
(85)
where Wk = (w(cid:63)
Ru,kTr(Ru,kWk) since the regressors are zero-mean real Gaussian [27].
k)(w(cid:63)
k − wo
k,iuk,iWku(cid:62)
k,iuk,i] = 2Ru,kWkRu,k +
We run algorithm (2) for 5 different choices of matrix U in (1) with U = U ⊗ IL: i) matrix U chosen as the first
eigenvector of the Laplacian U = [v1] = 1√
1N ; ii) matrix U chosen as the first two eigenvectors of the Laplacian
U = [v1 v2]; iii) U = [v1 v2 v3]; iv) U = [v1 . . . v4]; v) U = [v1 . . . v5]. Since U = U ⊗ IL, the matrix A is of
the form A ⊗ IL with A = [ak(cid:96)] an N × N matrix. In each case, the combination matrix A is set as the solution
of the optimization problem (66) ( = 0.01, γ = 0, Ak(cid:96)1 = ak(cid:96)), which is solved by the Douglas-Rachford
algorithm (70) with η = 0.003. Note that, for the 5 different choices of U, the distributed implementation is feasible
N
010002000300040005000600070008000900010000-40-35-30-25-20-15-10-5 16
PERFORMANCE OF STRATEGY (2) W.R.T. Wo IN (1) FOR 2 DIFFERENT CHOICES OF µ.
TABLE II
Step-size µ
Solution
10−2
10−3
10−4
Centralized
Distributed
Centralized
Distributed
Centralized
Distributed
MSD
Exp. (62)
−27.6dB
Simulation
Exp. (65)
−29.66dB −29.74dB −29.603dB
−29.66dB
−27.298dB
−39.66dB −39.67dB −39.691dB
−39.66dB −39.26dB −39.196dB
−49.66dB −50.19dB −49.772dB
−49.66dB −50.14dB −49.335dB
and the steady-state value of the cost in (66) is zero. We set µ = 0.001. We report the network MSD(cid:63) learning
E(cid:107)W(cid:63) − Wi(cid:107)2 in Fig. 2 (left). The results are averaged over 200 Monte-Carlo runs. The learning curve
curves 1
N
of the non-cooperative solution, obtained from (2) by setting A = ILN , is also reported. The results show that the
best performance is obtained when U = [v1 v2 v3 v4]⊗ IL. This is due to the fact that the columns of U constitute
a basis spanning the useful signal subspace (see Fig. 1 (right)). As a consequence, a strong noise reduction may be
obtained by projecting onto this subspace compared with the non-cooperative strategy where each agent estimates
k without any cooperation. By forcing consensus (i.e., by choosing U = [v1]), the resulting estimate wk,i will be
w(cid:63)
biased with respect to w(cid:63)
k, which is not common across agents. The performance obtained when U = [v1 . . . v5]
is worse than the case where U = [v1 . . . v4] due to a smaller noise reduction.
Finally, we illustrate Theorem 2 in Table II by reporting the steady-state MSD = lim supi→∞ 1
N
E(cid:107)Wo − Wi(cid:107)2
when U = [v1 . . . v4] ⊗ IL for 3 different values of the step-size µ = {10−2, 10−3, 10−4}. A closed form solution
for Wo in (1) exists and is given by:
Wo = U(U(cid:62)H U)−1U(cid:62)HW(cid:63),
(86)
k=1. We observe that, in the small adaptation regime, i.e., when µ → 0, the network MSD
where H = diag{Ru,k}N
increases approximately 10dB per decade (when µ goes from µ1 to 10µ1). This means that the steady-state MSD is
on the order of µ. We also observe that, in the small adaptation regime, the distributed solution is able to attain the
same performance as the centralized one. Finally, note that, for relatively large step-size (µ = 10−2), expression (62)
provides better results than (65) in the distributed case. This is due to neglecting the O(1) term in (58) which is
multiplied by O(µ2) (since Y = O(µ2)) when replaced in (62).
V. CONCLUSION
In this paper, and its accompanying Part I [2], we considered inference problems over networks where agents
have individual parameter vectors to estimate subject to subspace constraints that require the parameters across
the network to lie in low-dimensional subspaces. Based on the gradient projection algorithm, we proposed an
iterative and distributed implementation of the projection step, which runs in parallel with the stochastic gradient
descent update. We showed that, for small step-size parameter, the network is able to approach the minimizer of
the constrained problem to arbitrarily good accuracy levels. Furthermore, we derived a closed-form expressions for
the steady-state mean-square-error (MSE) performance. These expressions revealed explicitly the influence of the
gradient noise, data characteristics, and subspace constraints, on the network performance. Finally, among many
possible convex formulations, we considered the design of feasible distributed solution that minimizes the number
of edges to be added to the original graph.
17
APPENDIX A
PROOF OF THEOREM 1
To simplify the notation, we introduce the difference vector zi (cid:44) (cid:101)We
Bi−1 = B + µAe(cid:101)Hi−1,
Bi−1 in (35), we can write:
i − (cid:101)We(cid:48)
i . Using (44) in the expression for
(87)
(88)
(89)
(90)
(91)
(92)
(93)
in terms of the constant coefficient matrix B in (42). Using (87) and (43), and subtracting (32) and (47), we then
get:
If we multiply both sides of (88) from the left by (V e
)−1 we obtain:
zi = Bzi−1 + µAeci−1.
+
ci−1
c(cid:86)i−1
z(cid:86)i−1
)−1ci−1 into:
z(cid:86)i
zi
zi−1
= B
zi
, µΛe
(V e
z(cid:86)i
ci−1
c(cid:86)i−1
where we partitioned the vectors (V e
)−1zi and µΛe
(V e
)−1zi (cid:44)
(V e
)−1ci−1 (cid:44)
with the leading vectors, {zi, ci−1}, having dimensions hP × 1 each. The matrix B is given by:
B (cid:44) (V e
(42),(25)
= Λe
(V e
)−1BV e
− µΛe
IhP − D11
−D21
)−1HoV e
−D12
J e
− D22
=
with the blocks {Dmn} given by:
D11 (cid:44) µ (U e)∗HoU e,
D21 (cid:44) µJ e
(V e
D12 (cid:44) µ (U e)∗HoV e
R,,
L,)∗HoV e
R,.
L,)∗HoU e, D22 (cid:44) µJ e
(V e
18
Recursion (89) has a form similar to the earlier recursion (66) in Part I [2] with three differences. First, the
matrices {Dmn} in (90) are constant matrices; nevertheless, they satisfy the same bounds as the matrices {Dmn,i−1}
in eq. (66) in Part I [2]. In particular, from (115), (116), and (122) in Part I [2], it continues to hold that:
(cid:107)IhP − D11(cid:107) ≤ 1 − µσ11,
(cid:107)D21(cid:107) ≤ µσ21,
(cid:107)D12(cid:107) ≤ µσ12,
(cid:107)D22(cid:107) ≤ µσ22,
(94)
(95)
for some positive constants σ11, σ12, σ21, σ22 that are independent of µ. Second, Third, the bias term b(cid:86)e in (66) in
Part I [2] is absent from (90). Third, the gradient noise terms that appeared in recursion (66) in Part I [2] are now
replaced by the perturbation sequences {ci−1, c(cid:86)i−1}. However, these sequences can be bounded as follows:
for some constant r that is independent of µ since:
(cid:107)ci−1(cid:107)2 ≤ µ2r2(cid:107)(cid:101)We
(cid:107)c(cid:86)i−1(cid:107)2 ≤ µ2r2(cid:107)(cid:101)We
i−1(cid:107)4,
i−1(cid:107)4,
)−1ci−1(cid:107)2 ≤ µ2r2(cid:107)(cid:101)We
(V e
(cid:107)µΛe
i−1(cid:107)4.
(97)
To establish the above inequality, we start by noting that any cost Jk(·) satisfying (19) and (31) will also satisfy [4,
Lemmas E.4, E.8]:
(96)
(98)
(99)
(100)
(101)
(102)
(103)
for any ∆wk and where κ(cid:48)
(cid:107)H o
d
Therefore,
wk
wk
(cid:107)∇2
(cid:107)∇2
Jk(wo
Jk(wo
k)(cid:107) ≤ κ(cid:48)
d(cid:107)∆wk(cid:107),
k − t(cid:101)wk,i−1)(cid:107)dt
k + ∆wk) − ∇2
(cid:90) 1
(cid:44) max{κd, (δk − νk)/(h)}. Then, for each agent k we have:
(cid:90) 1
k − H k,i−1(cid:107) (38),(46)≤
d(cid:107)t(cid:101)wk,i−1(cid:107)dt =
(cid:18)
(cid:107)(cid:101)Hi−1(cid:107) (44)
d(cid:107)(cid:101)wk,i−1(cid:107)
k) − ∇2
κ(cid:48)
Jk(wo
Jk(wo
(cid:107)H o
0
κ(cid:48)
(98)≤
1
2
wk
wk
0
(cid:19)
k − H k,i−1(cid:107)
(cid:107)(cid:101)wk,i−1(cid:107)
d(cid:107)(cid:101)We
i−1(cid:107).
κ(cid:48)
= max
1≤k≤N
κ(cid:48)
≤ 1
2
Now, replacing ci−1 in (97) by (43) and using (100) we conclude (97).
max
1≤k≤N
≤ 1
2
d
Repeating the argument that led to inequalities (129) and (130) in Part I [2] we obtain:
E(cid:107)(cid:101)We
i−1(cid:107)4
E(cid:107)zi(cid:107)2 ≤(1 − µσ11)E(cid:107)zi−1(cid:107)2 +
E(cid:107)z(cid:86)i−1(cid:107)2 +
2µσ2
12
σ11
2µr2
σ11
(cid:18)
and
E(cid:107)z(cid:86)i(cid:107)2 ≤
ρ(J) + +
3µ2σ2
22
1 − ρ(J) −
E(cid:107)z(cid:86)i−1(cid:107)2 +
3µ2σ2
21
1 − ρ(J) −
E(cid:107)zi−1(cid:107)2 +
3µ2r2
1 − ρ(J) −
E(cid:107)(cid:101)We
i−1(cid:107)4.
We can combine (101) and (102) into a single inequality recursion as follows:
E(cid:107)zi(cid:107)2
E(cid:107)z(cid:86)i(cid:107)2
(cid:22)
E(cid:107)zi−1(cid:107)2
E(cid:107)z(cid:86)i−1(cid:107)2
+
e
f
E(cid:107)(cid:101)We
i−1(cid:107)4.
(cid:19)
a b
(cid:124)
(cid:123)(cid:122)
c d
Γ
(cid:125)
where a = 1 − O(µ), b = O(µ), c = O(µ2), d = ρ(J) + + O(µ2), e = O(µ), and f = O(µ2). Using (30) and
eq. (134) in Part I [2] we conclude that:
19
E(cid:107)zi(cid:107)2 = O(µ2),
E(cid:107)z(cid:86)i(cid:107)2 = O(µ4),
lim sup
i→∞
lim sup
i→∞
lishes (48). Finally, note that:
(104)
i − (cid:101)We(cid:48)
and, hence, lim supi→∞ E(cid:107)zi(cid:107)2 = O(µ2). It follows that lim supi→∞ E(cid:107)(cid:101)We
i (cid:107)2 = O(µ2), which estab-
i )∗(cid:101)We
i − (cid:101)We
i(cid:107)2 + 2E((cid:101)We(cid:48)
(cid:113)
i
i − (cid:101)We
E(cid:107)(cid:101)We(cid:48)
i(cid:107)2E(cid:107)(cid:101)We
i(cid:107)2
i(cid:107)2 + 2
i(cid:107)2 ≤ E(cid:107)(cid:101)We(cid:48)
≤ E(cid:107)(cid:101)We(cid:48)
i(cid:107)2 + E(cid:107)(cid:101)We
i(cid:107)2 + E(cid:107)(cid:101)We
i (cid:107)2 = E(cid:107)(cid:101)We(cid:48)
i − (cid:101)We
i − (cid:101)We
i − (cid:101)We
i + (cid:101)We
E(cid:107)(cid:101)We(cid:48)
(105)
where we used Ex ≤ Ex from Jensen's inequality and where we applied Holder's inequality:
Ex∗y ≤ (Exp)
1
p (Eyq)
1
q , when 1/p + 1/q = 1.
Hence, from (14) and (48) we get:
(E(cid:107)(cid:101)We(cid:48)
i (cid:107)2 − E(cid:107)(cid:101)We
lim sup
i→∞
i(cid:107)2) ≤ O(µ2) + O(µ3/2) = O(µ3/2)
since µ2 < µ3/2 for small µ (cid:28) 1, which establishes (49).
From (14) and (107), it follows that:
E(cid:107)(cid:101)We(cid:48)
i (cid:107)2 = O(µ),
lim sup
i→∞
and, therefore, the long-term approximate model (47) is also mean-square stable.
APPENDIX B
LOW-RANK APPROXIMATION
From (91), we obtain:
(cid:16)
)(cid:62)(cid:17)−1
(V e
B(cid:62) =
B∗ = ((V e
)∗)
−1
IhP − D(cid:62)
IhP − D∗
−D(cid:62)
12
11
11
−D∗
12
(V e
(V e
)∗
)(cid:62)
(J e
22
21
−D(cid:62)
)(cid:62) − D(cid:62)
−D∗
)∗ − D∗
21
22
(J e
where the block matrices {D(cid:62)
mn,D∗
mn} are all on the order of µ with:
(106)
(107)
(108)
(109)
(110)
(111)
D(cid:62)
11 = µ (U e)(cid:62)(Ho)(cid:62)[(U e)∗](cid:62) = O(µ),
D∗
11 = D11 = µ (U e)∗HoU e = O(µ),
(112)
of dimensions hP ×hP . Substituting (109) and (110) into (55) and using property (A⊗b B)(C⊗b D) = AC⊗b BD,
for block Kronecker products, we obtain:
(V e
)∗(cid:17)−1 X(cid:16)
)∗(cid:17)
)(cid:62) ⊗b (V e
)(cid:62) ⊗b (V e
F =
(113)
(V e
(cid:16)
,
20
where we introduced:
X (cid:44)
IhP − D(cid:62)
11
−D(cid:62)
12
−D(cid:62)
)(cid:62) − D(cid:62)
21
22
(J e
We partition X into the following block structure:
where, for example, X11 is (hP )2 × (hP )2 and is given by:
Since
(I − F)−1=
(V e
)(cid:62) ⊗b (V e
we proceed to evaluate I − F. It follows that:
I − X =
−D∗
)∗ − D∗
21
22
(J e
)∗(cid:17)
(V e
)(cid:62) ⊗b (V e
.
(114)
(115)
(116)
(117)
(118)
X11 (cid:44)(cid:16)
(cid:16)
X =
IhP − D(cid:62)
12
11
−D∗
X21 X22
IhP − D∗
⊗b
X11 X12
(cid:17) ⊗ (IhP − D∗
−1(cid:16)
)∗(cid:17)−1
I(hP )2 − X11 −X12
(cid:17) ⊗ (IhP − D∗
I − X22
(I − X )
−X21
11) .
11
(119)
(120)
(121)
(122)
and, in a manner similar to the way we assessed the size of the block matrices {Dmn,i−1} in the proof of Theorem 1
in Part I [2], we can verify that:
I − X11 = I(hP )2 −(cid:16)
IhP − D(cid:62)
X12 = O(µ), X21 = O(µ),
11
11) = O(µ),
I − X22 = O(1).
The matrix I − X is invertible since I − F is invertible; this is because ρ(F) = [ρ(B)]2 < 1. Therefore, applying
the block matrix inversion formula to I − X we get:
(I(hP )2 − X11)−1 0
+
0
0
Y11 Y12
Y21 ∆−1
(I − X )
−1 =
where Y11 = (I − X11)−1X12∆−1X21(I − X11)−1, Y12 = (I − X11)−1X12∆−1, Y21 = ∆−1X21(I − X11)−1, and
∆ = (I − X22) − X21(I − X11)−1X12. The entries of (I(hP )2 − X11)−1 are O(1/µ), while the entries in the second
matrix on the right-hand side of the above equation are O(1) when the step-size is small. That is, we can write:
Moreover, since O(1/µ) dominates O(1) for sufficiently small µ, we can also write:
O(1) O(1)
.
O(1/µ) O(1)
+ O(1)
11 ⊗ I(hP ))(cid:1)−1 0
0
11) + (D(cid:62)
(I − X )
−1 =
0
(I(hP )2 − X11)−1 0
(cid:0)(I(hP ) ⊗ D∗
Z−1(cid:104)
I(hP )2
0
I(hP )2
0
0
(cid:105)
0
+ O(1).
(I − X )
−1 =
=
=
+ O(1)
where the term involving se
i (We
i−1) is eliminated because E[se
E[(cid:101)We(cid:48)
i F i−1] = B(cid:101)We(cid:48)
i−1 + µAebe,
(124)
(cid:17)
i = B(cid:16)E(cid:101)We(cid:48)
iF i−1] = 0. Taking expectations again we arrive at:
E(cid:101)We(cid:48)
+ µAebe.
i − E(cid:101)We(cid:48)
(cid:44) (cid:101)We(cid:48)
(125)
i−1
i .
21
Substituting (122) into (117) we arrive at (59). Since Z = O(µ), we conclude that (57) holds. We also conclude
that (58) holds since:
(I − F)−1 = (I − X )−1.
APPENDIX C
PROOF OF THEOREM 2
(123)
Consider the long-term model (47). Conditioning both sides of (47) on F i−1, invoking the conditions on the
gradient noise process from Assumption 2, and computing the conditional expectation, we obtain:
Since recursion (47) includes a constant driving term µAebe, we introduce the centered variable yi
Subtracting (125) from (47), we find that yi satisfies the following recursion:
i (Wi−1).
yi = Byi−1 − µAese
Although we are interested in evaluating lim supi→∞ E(cid:107)(cid:101)We(cid:48)
i (cid:107)2 − (cid:107)E(cid:101)We(cid:48)
E(cid:107)zi(cid:107)2 = E(cid:107)(cid:101)We(cid:48)
(127)
where we used the fact that lim supi→∞ (cid:107)E(cid:101)We(cid:48)
i (cid:107) = O(µ) (see Appendix H). Therefore, from (49) and (127), we
E(cid:107)(cid:101)We
(126)
i (cid:107)2, we can still rely on yi since it holds for i (cid:29) 1:
i (cid:107)2 = E(cid:107)(cid:101)We(cid:48)
E(cid:107)yi(cid:107)2 + O(µ3/2).
i (cid:107)2 + O(µ2),
obtain:
(128)
i(cid:107)2 = lim sup
i→∞
1
hN
lim sup
i→∞
1
hN
Let Σ denote an arbitrary Hermitian positive semi-definite matrix that we are free to choose. Equating the squared
weighted values of both sides of (126) and taking expectations conditioned on the past history gives:
E[(cid:107)yi(cid:107)2
ΣF i−1] = (cid:107)yi−1(cid:107)2B∗ΣB + µ2E[(cid:107)se
(Ae)∗ΣAeF i−1].
i(cid:107)2
Taking expectations again, we get:
E(cid:107)yi(cid:107)2
Σ = E(cid:107)yi−1(cid:107)2B∗ΣB + µ2E(cid:107)se
i(cid:107)2
(Ae)∗ΣAe.
(129)
(130)
From (54) and using same arguments as in [4, pp. 586], we can rewrite the second term on the R.H.S. of (130) as:
i(cid:107)2
µ2E(cid:107)se
(Ae)∗ΣAe = µ2Tr (ΣAeE[se
i ](Ae)∗)
i se∗
= Tr(ΣY) + Tr(Σ) · O(µ2+γm).
for i (cid:29) 1. Therefore, we obtain:
E(cid:107)yi(cid:107)2
Σ−B∗ΣB = Tr(ΣY) + Tr(Σ) · O(µ2+γm).
lim sup
i→∞
(131)
(132)
22
In order to reduce the weighting matrix on the mean-square value of zi in (132) to the identity, we need to select
Σ as the solution to the following Lyapunov equation:
(133)
This equation has a unique Hermitian non-negative definite solution Σ [4, pp. 772] since the matrix B is stable for
sufficiently small step-size. Now, by applying the block vectorization operation to both sides of (133) and by using
Σ − B∗ΣB = IhM .
the property that:
we find that:
bvec(ACB) = (B(cid:62) ⊗b A)bvec(C),
bvec(Σ) = (I − F)−1bvec(IhM )
(134)
(135)
in terms of the matrix F defined in (55).
Now, substituting Σ in (135) into (132), we obtain E(cid:107)yi(cid:107)2 on the left-hand side while the term Tr(ΣY) on the
right-hand side becomes:
Tr(ΣY) = (bvec(Y(cid:62)))(cid:62)(I − F)−1bvec(IhM ).
(136)
where we used the property that:
(137)
Using the fact that (I − F)−1 = O(1/µ) and following similar arguments as in [4, pp. 590], we can show that:
Tr(AB) = [bvec(B(cid:62))](cid:62)bvec(A),
Tr(Σ) · O(µ2+γm) = O(µ1+γm).
(138)
Replacing (136) and (138) into (132) gives (61). Observe that the first term on the R.H.S. of (61) is O(µ) since
(cid:107)Y(cid:107) = O(µ2) and (cid:107)(I − F)−1(cid:107) = O(1/µ). Therefore, this term dominates the factor O(µ1+γm).
Since F is a stable matrix for sufficiently small step-sizes, we can employ the expansion (I − F)−1 = I + F +
F 2 + F 3 + . . . , replace F by (55), and use properties (137) and (134) to write the first term on the R.H.S. of (61)
as(cid:80)∞
n=0 Tr(BnY(B∗)n).
Now, in order to establish (65), we shall use the low-rank approximation (59). Using definition (12) and (61),
we obtain:
MSD =
µ
hN
lim
µ→0
lim sup
i→∞
1
µ
From (59) we get:
(bvec(Y(cid:62)))(cid:62)(I − F)−1bvec(IhM ) = (bvec(Y(cid:62)))(cid:62)(cid:16)
(U e)(cid:62) ⊗b (U e)∗(cid:17)
(cid:16)
(bvec(Y(cid:62)))(cid:62)(I − F)−1bvec(IhM )
(139)
[(U e)∗](cid:62) ⊗b U e(cid:17)
Z−1(cid:16)
(U e)(cid:62) ⊗b (U e)∗(cid:17)
bvec(IhM ) + O(µ2).
(140)
Using property (134), it is straightforward to verify that the last three terms combine into the following result:
bvec(IhM ) = bvec(IhP ) = vec(IhP ),
(141)
Let us therefore evaluate the matrix vector product x (cid:44) Z−1vec(IhP ). Using the definition (60) for Z, the vector
x is therefore the unique solution to the linear system of equations:
23
(IhP ⊗ D∗
11)x + (D(cid:62)
11 ⊗ IhP )x = vec(IhP ).
(142)
Let X = unvec(x) denote the hP × hP matrix whose vector representation is x. Applying to each of the terms
appearing on the left-hand side of the above expression the Kronecker product property (134), albeit using vec
instead of bvec operation, we find that (IhP ⊗D∗
11 ⊗ IhP )x = vec(XD11). We conclude
from these equalities and from (142) that X is the unique solution to the (continuous-time) Lyapunov equation
D∗
11X + XD11 = IhP . Since D11 in (92) is Hermitian, we obtain:
11X), and (D(cid:62)
11)x = vec(D∗
X =
D−1
11 =
1
2
1
2µ
((U e)∗HoU e)
−1 .
(143)
Therefore, substituting into (140) gives:
(bvec(Y(cid:62)))(cid:62)(I − F)−1bvec(IhM ) = (bvec(Y(cid:62)))(cid:62)(cid:16)
[(U e)∗](cid:62) ⊗b U e(cid:17)
vec(X) + O(µ2)
(134)
(63)
(137)
= (bvec(Y(cid:62)))(cid:62)bvec(U eX(U e)∗) + O(µ2)
= Tr(U eX(U e)∗Y) + O(µ2) = Tr((U e)∗YU eX) + O(µ2)
= µ2Tr((U e)∗AeS(Ae)∗U eX) + O(µ2)
= µ2Tr((U e)∗SU eX) + O(µ2)
(cid:17)
(cid:16)
(143)
=
µ
2
Tr
((U e)∗HoU e)
−1 ((U e)∗SU e)
+ O(µ2).
(144)
where we used the fact that (U e)∗Ae = (U e)∗. Now substituting the above expression into the right-hand side
of (139) and computing the limit as µ → 0, we arrive at expression (65).
APPENDIX D
PROJECTION ONTO Ω1 IN (75) AND Ω2 IN (76)
The closed convex set Ω1 in (75) can be rewritten alternatively as:
Ω1 = {AAU = U,U(cid:62)A = U(cid:62),A = A(cid:62)},
and the projection onto it is given by:
arg minA
ΠΩ1(D) =
1
2(cid:107)A − D(cid:107)2
F
subject to AU = U,U(cid:62)A = U(cid:62),A = A(cid:62).
The Lagrangian of the convex optimization problem in (146) is defined as:
L(A; X, Y, W ) =
1
2
(cid:107)A − D(cid:107)2
F + Tr(X(cid:62)(AU − U))+
Tr(Y (cid:62)(U(cid:62)A − U(cid:62))) + Tr(Z(cid:62)(A − A(cid:62))),
(145)
(146)
(147)
24
where X ∈ RM×P , Y ∈ RP×M , and Z ∈ RM×M are the matrices of Lagrange multipliers. From the Karush-
Kuhn-Tucker (KKT) conditions, we obtain at the optimum (Ao; X o, Y o, Zo):
AoU = U,
U(cid:62)Ao = U(cid:62),
Ao = (Ao)(cid:62),
∇AL = Ao − D + X oU(cid:62) + UY o + Zo − (Zo)(cid:62) = 0.
From (151), we obtain:
Ao = D − X oU(cid:62) − UY o − Zo + (Zo)(cid:62).
Multiplying both sides of (152) by U and using the fact that U(cid:62)U = I from Assumption 3, we obtain:
AoU = DU − X o − UY oU − ZoU + (Zo)(cid:62)U.
Combining the previous expression with (148), we get:
X o = DU − UY oU − ZoU + (Zo)(cid:62)U − U.
Replacing (154) into (152) and using the fact that PU = UU(cid:62), we arrive at:
Ao =D − DPU + UY oPU + ZoPU − (Zo)(cid:62)PU + PU − UY o − Zo + (Zo)(cid:62).
Pre-multiplying both sides of the previous equation by U(cid:62) and using the fact that U(cid:62)U = I, we obtain:
(148)
(149)
(150)
(151)
(152)
(153)
(154)
(155)
U(cid:62)Ao = U(cid:62)D − U(cid:62)DPU + Y oPU + U(cid:62)ZoPU − U(cid:62)(Zo)(cid:62)PU + U(cid:62) − Y o − U(cid:62)Zo + U(cid:62)(Zo)(cid:62).
(156)
Combining the previous expression with (149), we arrive at:
U(cid:62)D − U(cid:62)DPU + Y oPU + U(cid:62)ZoPU − U(cid:62)(Zo)(cid:62)PU − Y o − U(cid:62)Zo + U(cid:62)(Zo)(cid:62) = 0.
(157)
Pre-multiplying both sides of the previous equation by U and using the fact that PU = UU(cid:62), we obtain:
UY oPU − UY o = − PUD + PUDPU − PUZoPU + PU(Zo)(cid:62)PU + PUZo − PU(Zo)(cid:62).
(158)
Replacing (158) into (155), we arrive at:
Ao =(I − PU)D(I − PU) − (I − PU)(Zo − (Zo)(cid:62))(I − PU) + PU,
and thus,
Ao(cid:62) = (I − PU)D(cid:62)(I − PU) + (I − PU)(Zo − (Zo)(cid:62))(I − PU) + PU
Combining (150) and the previous two equations, we obtain:
(cid:18)D − D(cid:62)
(cid:19)
(I − PU)
2
(I − PU)=(I − PU)(Zo − (Zo)(cid:62))(I − PU)
(159)
(160)
(161)
Replacing the previous equation into (159), we arrive at:
Now, projecting a symmetric matrix C onto Ω2 in (76) is given by:
2(cid:107)A − C(cid:107)2
F
ΠΩ2(C) =
subject to (cid:107)A − PU(cid:107) ≤ 1 −
(cid:19)
(I − PU) + PU
(I − PU) + PU.
ΠΩ1(D) = (I − PU)
= (I − PU)
2
2
(cid:18)
D − D − D(cid:62)
(cid:18)D + D(cid:62)
(cid:19)
arg minA
arg minY
1
= PU +
= PU + ΠΩ3(C − PU)
1
2(cid:107)Y − (C − PU)(cid:107)2
F
subject to (cid:107)Y(cid:107) ≤ 1 −
25
(162)
(163)
(164)
(165)
eigenvalue decomposition C −PU =(cid:80)M
where Ω3 (cid:44) {A(cid:107)A(cid:107) ≤ 1 − }. In order to project the symmetric matrix C − PU onto Ω3, we need to compute its
m=1 to have absolute
m and then threshold the eigenvalues {λm}M
m=1 λmvmv(cid:62)
magnitude at most 1 − [26, pp. 191 -- 194]. Thus we obtain:
where:
−1 + ,
λm,
1 − ,
Now, replacing the matrix C by (162), we obtain (79).
βm =
ΠΩ2(C) = PU +
βmvmv(cid:62)
m,
M(cid:88)
m=1
if λm < −1 + ,
if λm < 1 − ,
if λm > 1 − .
APPENDIX E
PROOF OF LEMMA 2
In order to establish Lemma 2, we first need to introduce Lemmas 3 and 4.
Lemma 3. Let Ω denote a closed convex set. For any C /∈ Ω, Ao = ΠΩ(C) if and only if (cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105) ≤ 0,
∀A ∈ Ω where (cid:104)X, Y (cid:105) = Tr(X(cid:62)Y ).
Proof. (⇒) Let Ao = ΠΩ(C) for any given C /∈ Ω, that is, suppose that Ao is the unique solution to the optimization
problem. Let A ∈ Ω be such that A (cid:54)= Ao. Let α ∈ (0, 1). Since Ω is convex, (1−α)Ao+αA = Ao+α(A−Ao) ∈ Ω.
By the assumed optimality of Ao, we must have:
(cid:107)C − Ao(cid:107)2
F ≤ (cid:107)C − [Ao + α(A − Ao)](cid:107)2
F + α2(cid:107)A − Ao(cid:107)2
= (cid:107)C − Ao(cid:107)2
F
F − 2α(cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105),
and we obtain:
(cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105) ≤ α
2
(cid:107)A − Ao(cid:107)2
F.
(166)
(167)
26
Now, note that (167) holds for any α ∈ (0, 1). Since the RHS of (167) can be made arbitrarily small for a given
A, the LHS can not be strictly positive. Thus, we conclude as desired:
(cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105) ≤ 0, ∀A ∈ Ω.
(168)
(⇐) Let Ao ∈ Ω be such that (cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105) ≤ 0,∀A ∈ Ω. We shall show that it must be the optimal solution.
Let A ∈ Ω and A (cid:54)= Ao. We have:
(cid:107)C − A(cid:107)2
F − (cid:107)C − Ao(cid:107)2
F = (cid:107)C − Ao + Ao − A(cid:107)2
= (cid:107)C − Ao(cid:107)2
F + (cid:107)Ao − A(cid:107)2
F − (cid:107)C − Ao(cid:107)2
F
F − 2(cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105) − (cid:107)C − Ao(cid:107)2
F > 0.
Hence, Ao is the optimal solution to the optimization problem, and thus Ao = ΠΩ(C) by definition.
Lemma 4. If Ω is further affine, then, for any C /∈ Ω, Ao = ΠΩ(C) if and only if (cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105) = 0, ∀A ∈ Ω.
Proof. (⇒) Let Ao = ΠΩ(C) for any given C /∈ Ω, that is, suppose that Ao is the unique solution to the optimization
problem. Let A ∈ Ω be such that A (cid:54)= Ao. Let α ∈ R. Since Ω is affine, (1− α)Ao + αA = Ao + α(A−Ao) ∈ Ω.
By the assumed optimality of Ao, we must have:
(169)
(cid:107)C − Ao(cid:107)2
F ≤ (cid:107)C − [Ao + α(A − Ao)](cid:107)2
= (cid:107)C − Ao(cid:107)2
F + α2(cid:107)A − Ao(cid:107)2
F
F − 2α(cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105),
and we obtain:
If α ≥ 0, we obtain:
2α(cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105) ≤ α2(cid:107)A − Ao(cid:107)2
F.
(cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105) ≤ α
2
(cid:107)A − Ao(cid:107)2
F.
(170)
(171)
(172)
Now, note that (172) holds for any α ≥ 0. Since the RHS of (172) can be made arbitrarily small for a given A,
the LHS can not be strictly positive. Thus, we conclude:
If α ≤ 0, we obtain:
(cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105) ≤ 0, ∀A ∈ Ω.
(cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105) ≥ α
2
(cid:107)A − Ao(cid:107)2
F.
(173)
(174)
Now, note that (174) holds for any α ≤ 0. Since the RHS of (174) can be made arbitrarily large for a given A,
the LHS can not be strictly negative. Thus, we conclude:
(cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105) ≥ 0, ∀A ∈ Ω.
Combining (173) and (175), we conclude as desired:
(cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105) = 0, ∀A ∈ Ω.
(175)
(176)
(⇐) Let Ao ∈ Ω be such that (cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105) = 0,∀A ∈ Ω. We shall show that it must be the optimal solution.
Let A ∈ Ω and A (cid:54)= Ao. We have:
27
(cid:107)C − A(cid:107)2
F − (cid:107)C − Ao(cid:107)2
F = (cid:107)C − Ao + Ao − A(cid:107)2
= (cid:107)C − Ao(cid:107)2
F + (cid:107)Ao − A(cid:107)2
F − (cid:107)C − Ao(cid:107)2
F
F > 0.
Hence, Ao is the optimal solution to the optimization problem, and thus Ao = ΠΩ(C) by definition.
F − 2(cid:104)C − Ao,A − Ao(cid:105) − (cid:107)C − Ao(cid:107)2
Now we prove Lemma 2. Let Y = ΠΩ1(C). From Lemma 4, we have:
(cid:104)C − Y,A − Y (cid:105) = 0,
∀A ∈ Ω1.
Let Z = ΠΩ2(Y ). From Lemma 3, we have:
(cid:104)Y − Z,A − Z(cid:105) ≤ 0,
∀A ∈ Ω2.
For Z = ΠΩ2(ΠΩ1(C)) to be the projection of C onto Ω1 ∩ Ω2, we need to show from Lemma 3 that:
(cid:104)C − Z,A − Z(cid:105) ≤ 0,
∀A ∈ Ω1 ∩ Ω2,
under the conditions in Lemma 2. For any A ∈ Ω1 ∩ Ω2, we have:
(cid:104)C − Z,A − Z(cid:105) = (cid:104)C − Y + Y − Z,A − Z(cid:105)
= (cid:104)C − Y,A − Z(cid:105) + (cid:104)Y − Z,A − Z(cid:105)
= (cid:104)C − Y,A − Y + Y − Z(cid:105) + (cid:104)Y − Z,A − Z(cid:105)
= (cid:104)C − Y,A − Y (cid:105)
− (cid:104)C − Y, Z − Y (cid:105)
=0 from (178) and Z∈Ω1
(cid:125)
(cid:124)
=0 from (178)
(cid:125)
(cid:124)
(cid:123)(cid:122)
(cid:124)
(cid:123)(cid:122)
(cid:123)(cid:122)
+(cid:104)Y − Z,A − Z(cid:105)
≤ 0
≤0 from (179)
(cid:125)
(177)
(178)
(179)
(180)
(181)
which concludes the proof.
APPENDIX F
STABILITY OF FOURTH-ORDER ERROR MOMENT
In this Appendix, we show that, under the same settings of Theorem 1 in [2] with the second-order moment
condition (24) replaced by the fourth-order moment condition (29), the fourth-order moment of the network error
vector is stable for sufficiently small µ, namely, (30) holds for small enough µ. We start by recalling that for any
two complex column vectors x and y, it holds that (cid:107)x + y(cid:107)4 ≤ (cid:107)x(cid:107)4 + 3(cid:107)y(cid:107)4 + 8(cid:107)x(cid:107)2(cid:107)y(cid:107)2 + 4(cid:107)x(cid:107)2Re(x∗y) [4,
28
pp. 523]. Applying this inequality to eq. (60) in [2], conditioning on F i−1, computing the expectations of both
sides, using Assumption 2, taking expectations again, and exploiting the convexity of (cid:107)x(cid:107)4, we conclude that:
i−1(cid:107)4 + 3E(cid:107)se
i(cid:107)4+
i−1(cid:107)2(cid:1)(cid:0)E(cid:107)se
i(cid:107)2(cid:1)
E(cid:107)We
i(cid:107)4 ≤ E(cid:107)(IhP − D11,i−1)We
8E
= E(cid:107)(1 − t)
i−1 − D12,i−1W(cid:86)e
8E(cid:0)(cid:107)(IhP − D11,i−1)We
(cid:18)
1
1 − t
(cid:107)(1 − t)
i−1 − D12,i−1W(cid:86)e
i−1 − t
1
t
(IhP − D11,i−1)We
(IhP − D11,i−1)We
1
1 − t
(1 − t)3
i−1(cid:107)4(cid:3) +
E(cid:2)(cid:107)IhP − D11,i−1(cid:107)2(cid:107)We
i−1 − t
1
t3
E(cid:2)(cid:107)IhP − D11,i−1(cid:107)4(cid:107)We
i(cid:107)2(cid:1)(cid:18) 1
8(cid:0)E(cid:107)se
≤ (1 − µσ11)4
i(cid:107)2(cid:1)(cid:18) (1 − µσ11)2
8(cid:0)E(cid:107)se
(1 − t)3
1 − t
i−1(cid:107)4 +
µ4σ4
12
t3
E(cid:107)We
E(cid:107)We
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
≤
1
1 − t
D12,i−1W(cid:86)e
1
t
i(cid:107)4+
i−1(cid:107)2
i−1(cid:107)4 + 3E(cid:107)se
(cid:19)(cid:0)E(cid:107)se
i(cid:107)2(cid:1)
i−1(cid:107)4(cid:3) + 3E(cid:107)se
i−1(cid:107)2(cid:3)(cid:19)
E(cid:2)(cid:107)D12,i−1(cid:107)2(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
D12,i−1W(cid:86)e
E(cid:2)(cid:107)D12,i−1(cid:107)4(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)2(cid:3) +
i(cid:107)4+
1
t
i(cid:107)4+
i−1(cid:107)4 + 3E(cid:107)se
µ2σ2
i−1(cid:107)2 +
12
t
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)2
(cid:19)
,
(182)
for any arbitrary positive number t ∈ (0, 1). In the last inequality we used the bounds (115) and (116) in [2]. By
selecting t = µσ11, we arrive at:
E(cid:107)We
i(cid:107)4 ≤ (1 − µσ11)E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)4 +
i(cid:107)2(cid:1)(cid:18)
8(cid:0)E(cid:107)se
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
µσ4
12
σ3
11
(1 − µσ11)E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)4 + 3E(cid:107)se
µσ2
i−1(cid:107)2 +
12
σ11
i(cid:107)4+
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)2
(cid:19)
.
(183)
Applying similar arguments for relation (61) in [2] and using the relation (cid:107)a + b + c(cid:107)4 ≤ 27(cid:107)a(cid:107)4 + 27(cid:107)b(cid:107)4 + 27(cid:107)c(cid:107)4,
we obtain:
29
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i(cid:107)4 ≤ E(cid:107)(J e
8
8
E
1
t
1
t
= E
J e
W(cid:86)e
(cid:107)4E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
− D22,i−1)W(cid:86)e
− D22,i−1)W(cid:86)e
i−1 − (1 − t)
(cid:16)E(cid:107)(J e
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)t
(cid:32)
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)t
i(cid:107)2(cid:1)(cid:18) 1
t3(cid:107)J e
≤ 1
8(cid:0)E(cid:107)s(cid:86)e
i(cid:107)2(cid:1)(cid:18) 1
t3(cid:107)J e
≤ 1
8(cid:0)E(cid:107)s(cid:86)e
≤ (ρ(J) + )4
i(cid:107)2(cid:1)(cid:18) (ρ(J) + )2
8(cid:0)E(cid:107)s(cid:86)e
J e
W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)4 +
(cid:107)J e
t
i−1(cid:107)4 +
(cid:107)J e
(cid:107)4E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
t
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)4 +
t3
1
t
(1 − t)3
(cid:107)2E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
27
)
)
i(cid:107)4+
+ 3E(cid:107)s(cid:86)e
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2(cid:33)(cid:0)E(cid:107)s(cid:86)e
i(cid:107)2(cid:1)
i−1 − b(cid:86)e
(cid:19)
i−1 − b(cid:86)e(cid:107)4 + 3E(cid:107)s(cid:86)e
i(cid:107)4+
i−1 − b(cid:86)e(cid:107)2
(cid:19)
i(cid:107)4+
i−1(cid:107)4 + (cid:107)b(cid:86)e(cid:107)4) + 3E(cid:107)s(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)2 + (cid:107)b(cid:86)e(cid:107)2)
(cid:19)
i(cid:107)4+
i−1(cid:107)2 + E(cid:107)D21,i−1(cid:107)2(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)4 +
3µ2σ2
21
1 − t
(1 − t)3(cid:107)b(cid:86)e(cid:107)4 + 3E(cid:107)s(cid:86)e
(cid:107)b(cid:86)e(cid:107)2
E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)2 +
3
1 − t
27
i−1 + b(cid:86)e(cid:107)4 + 3E(cid:107)s(cid:86)e
i−1 + b(cid:86)e(cid:107)2(cid:17)(cid:0)E(cid:107)s(cid:86)e
i(cid:107)2(cid:1)
i(cid:107)4+
i−1 + D21,i−1We
i−1 − b(cid:86)e
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)4
i−1 − D21,i−1We
i−1 − D21,i−1We
(D22,i−1W(cid:86)e
1
1 − t
i−1 − (1 − t)
(D22,i−1W(cid:86)e
1
1 − t
E(cid:107)D22,i−1W(cid:86)e
i−1 + D21,i−1We
i−1 + D21,i−1We
E(cid:107)D22,i−1W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)2 +
1
1 − t
i−1 + D21,i−1We
i−1(cid:107)4 + E(cid:107)D21,i−1(cid:107)4(cid:107)We
(cid:107)2E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)2 +
(E(cid:107)D22,i−1(cid:107)2(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
(1 − t)3 (E(cid:107)D22,i−1(cid:107)4(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
3
1 − t
i−1(cid:107)4 +
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
3µ2σ2
22
1 − t
i−1(cid:107)2 +
27µ4σ4
22
(1 − t)3
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
27µ4σ4
21
(1 − t)3
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)2 +
(184)
for any arbitrary positive number t ∈ (0, 1). In the last inequality we used relation (122) in [2]. Selecting t =
ρ(J) + < 1, we arrive at:
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i(cid:107)4 ≤ (ρ(J) + )E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i(cid:107)2(cid:1)(cid:18)
8(cid:0)E(cid:107)s(cid:86)e
27µ4σ4
i−1(cid:107)4 +
22
(1 − t)3
(ρ(J) + )E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)2 +
E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)4 +
3µ2σ2
22
1 − t
27µ4σ4
21
(1 − t)3
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)2 +
i−1(cid:107)4 +
3µ2σ2
21
1 − t
27
(1 − t)3(cid:107)b(cid:86)e(cid:107)4 + 3E(cid:107)s(cid:86)e
E(cid:107)We
(cid:107)b(cid:86)e(cid:107)2
i−1(cid:107)2 +
3
1 − t
(cid:19)
i(cid:107)4+
where 1 − t = 1 − ρ(J) − .
(185)
In order to bound the fourth-order noise terms E(cid:107)se
i(cid:107)4 and E(cid:107)s(cid:86)e
i(cid:107)4 appearing in (183) and (185), we first note
from eq. (58) in [2] that:
Now, applying Jensen's inequality to the convex function f (x) = x2, we can write:
E(cid:107)se
i(cid:107)4 + E(cid:107)s(cid:86)i(cid:107)4 ≤ E((cid:107)se
(cid:33)2
(cid:32) N(cid:88)
i(cid:107)2 + (cid:107)s(cid:86)i(cid:107)2)2=E(cid:107)µ(V e
)−1Aese
(cid:33)2
(cid:32) N(cid:88)
(cid:107)sk,i(cid:107)2
= 4E
N(cid:107)sk,i(cid:107)2
1
N
≤ 4NE
k=1
k=1
(cid:32) N(cid:88)
k=1
i(cid:107)4 ≤ µ4v4
1
E(cid:107)se
i(cid:107)4.
(cid:33)
(cid:107)sk,i(cid:107)4
= 4N
E(cid:107)se
i(cid:107)4 = E((cid:107)se
i(cid:107)2)2 = 4E
(186)
N(cid:88)
k=1
E(cid:107)sk,i(cid:107)4,
(187)
30
in terms of the individual gradient noise processes, E(cid:107)sk,i(cid:107)4. For each term sk,i, we have from (29) and from the
Jensen's inequality applied to the convex norm (cid:107)x(cid:107)4:
E(cid:107)sk,i(wk,i−1)(cid:107)4 ≤ (β4,k/h)4E(cid:107)wk,i−1(cid:107)4 + σ4
= (β4,k/h)4E(cid:107)wk,i−1 − wo
s4,k
k(cid:107)4 + σ4
≤ 8(β4,k/h)4E(cid:107)(cid:101)wk,i−1(cid:107)4 + 8(β4,k/h)4(cid:107)wo
k + wo
s4,k
k(cid:107)4 + σ4
s4,k
≤ ¯β4
4,k
E(cid:107)(cid:101)wk,i−1(cid:107)4 + ¯σ4
k(cid:107)4 + σ4
s4,k
N(cid:88)
where ¯β4
4,k = 8(β4,k/h)4 and ¯σ4
s4,k = 8(β4,k/h)4(cid:107)wo
s4,k. Using the relations,
k=1
(cid:107)(cid:101)We
(cid:107)(cid:101)wk,i−1(cid:107)4 ≤ ((cid:107)(cid:101)w1,i−1(cid:107)2+(cid:107)(cid:101)w2,i−1(cid:107)2+. . .+(cid:107)(cid:101)wN,i−1(cid:107)2)2 = (cid:107)(cid:101)Wi−1(cid:107)4 =
i−1(cid:107)2
i(cid:107)2)2 ≤ 2(cid:107)We
i(cid:107)4 + 2(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i(cid:107)4,
N(cid:88)
i−1(cid:107)4 = ((cid:107)We
N(cid:88)
the term E(cid:107)si(cid:107)4 in (187) can be bounded as follows:
)−1(cid:101)We
i(cid:107)2 + (cid:107)W(cid:86)e
(cid:107)(V e
2
(cid:18) 1
(188)
(cid:19)2
(cid:107)(cid:101)We
i−1(cid:107)4, (189)
=
1
4
(190)
E(cid:107)se
i(cid:107)4 ≤ 4N
k=1
≤ 4β4
4,max
¯σ4
s4,k
k=1
¯β4
4,k
N(cid:88)
E(cid:107)(cid:101)wk,i−1(cid:107)4 + 4N
E(cid:107)(cid:101)wk,i−1(cid:107)4 + σ4
)−1(cid:101)We
i−1(cid:107)4 + σ4
E(cid:107)V e
(V e
)−1(cid:101)We
(cid:107)4E(cid:107)(V e
i−1(cid:107)4 + σ4
i−1(cid:107)4 + E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
2[E(cid:107)We
k=1
s4
s4
s4
i−1(cid:107)4] + σ4
s4
4,max
(189)≤ β4
≤ β4
(190)≤ 2β4
4,max(cid:107)V e
4,maxv4
(cid:44) 4N(cid:80)N
k=1 ¯σ4
2[E(cid:107)We
1v4
where β4
4,max
(cid:44) N max1≤k≤N
¯β4
4,k, and σ4
s4
s4,k. Substituting into (186), we get:
E(cid:107)se
i(cid:107)4 + E(cid:107)s(cid:86)i(cid:107)4 ≤ 2µ4β4
4,maxv4
i−1(cid:107)4 + E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)4] + µ4v4
1σ4
s4.
Returning to (183), and using the bounds (128) in [2] and (192), we find that:
E(cid:107)We
i(cid:107)4 ≤ (1 − µσ11)E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)4 +
3µ4v4
1σ4
8µ2v2
1σ2
8µ3 σ2
12
σ11
1β2
maxv2
s4 + 8µ2v2
s (1 − µσ11)E(cid:107)We
2(E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
maxv2
1β2
v2
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
µσ4
12
σ3
11
2(1 − µσ11)(E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)2 + 8µ3 σ2
12
σ11
i−1(cid:107)2)2 + 8µ3 σ2
12
σ11
i−1(cid:107)4 + 6µ4β4
4,maxv4
2[E(cid:107)We
1v4
i−1(cid:107)2)2 + 8µ2v2
i−1(cid:107)4]+
i−1(cid:107)4 + E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
2(1 − µσ11)E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)2+
1β2
maxv2
i−1(cid:107)2E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
v2
1β2
maxv2
2
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)2.
1σ2
v2
s
i−1(cid:107)2E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)2+
Using the properties that, for any two random variables a and c, it holds that [4, pp. 528]:
(Ea)2 ≤ Ea2,
2(Ea2)(Ec2) ≤ Ea4 + Ec4,
(191)
(192)
(193)
we can write:
so that:
where:
2(E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)2)(E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
(E(cid:107)We
(E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)2) ≤ E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)2)2 ≤ E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)2)2 ≤ E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)4 + E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)4,
i−1(cid:107)4,
i−1(cid:107)4,
E(cid:107)We
i(cid:107)4 ≤ aE(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)4 + bE(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)4 + a(cid:48)E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)2 + b(cid:48)E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)2 + e
a = 1 − µσ11 + O(µ2),
b = O(µ),
a(cid:48) = O(µ2),
b(cid:48) = O(µ3),
e = O(µ4).
Returning to (185) and using similar arguments, we can verify that:
31
(194)
(195)
(196)
(197)
(198)
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i(cid:107)4 ≤ (ρ(J) + )E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
27
27µ4σ4
22
27µ4σ4
21
1σ4
1β2
E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)4 +
i−1(cid:107)4] + 3µ4v4
(1 − ρ(J) − )3
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
(1 − ρ(J) − )3
2[E(cid:107)We
1v4
4,maxv4
i−1(cid:107)4 + E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
1β2
i−1(cid:107)4 +
i−1(cid:107)4 + E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)4] + 8(ρ(J) + )µ2v2
1β2
maxv2
2
12µ4v2
2σ2
maxv2
i−1(cid:107)4 + E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)4]+
22
1 − ρ(J) −
24µ4σ2
maxv2
1β2
21v2
2
1 − ρ(J) −
i−1(cid:107)2+
E(cid:107)We
[E(cid:107)We
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
maxv2
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
(1 − ρ(J) − )3(cid:107)b(cid:86)e(cid:107)4 + 6µ4β4
2[E(cid:107)We
4(ρ(J) + )µ2v2
i−1(cid:107)2 +
8(ρ(J) + )µ2v2
24µ4v2
2σ2
maxv2
i−1(cid:107)4 +
22
1 − ρ(J) −
maxv2
12µ4σ2
i−1(cid:107)4 + E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
2
1 − ρ(J) −
maxv2
24µ2v2
i−1(cid:107)2 + E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
2
1 − ρ(J) −
1σ2
s
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
(cid:107)b(cid:86)e(cid:107)2[E(cid:107)We
[E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)2 +
1σ2
21v2
24µ4σ2
s
1 − ρ(J) −
24µ2v2
1σ2
s
1 − ρ(J) −
22v2
24µ4σ2
1σ2
s
1 − ρ(J) −
i−1(cid:107)4] +
i−1(cid:107)2] +
(cid:107)b(cid:86)e(cid:107)2,
21v2
1β2
1β2
1β2
i−1(cid:107)4+
s4+
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)4+
E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)4+
so that,
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i(cid:107)4 ≤ cE(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)4 + dE(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)4 + c(cid:48)E(cid:107)We
i−1(cid:107)2 + d(cid:48)E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)2 + f,
where the coefficients {c, d, c(cid:48), d(cid:48), f} have the following form:
c = O(µ2),
d = ρ(J) + + O(µ2),
c(cid:48) = O(µ4),
d(cid:48) = O(µ2),
f = O(µ4).
E(cid:107)We
Therefore, we can write
i(cid:107)4
i(cid:107)4
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
(cid:22)
E(cid:107)We
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)4
i−1(cid:107)4
+
a(cid:48)
b(cid:48)
c(cid:48) d(cid:48)
E(cid:107)We
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)2
i−1(cid:107)2
+
e
f
in terms of the 2 × 2 coefficient matrix Γ of the form (132) in [2] which is stable matrix for sufficiently small µ
and . Moreover, using relation (135) in [2], we have:
E(cid:107)We
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i−1(cid:107)2
i−1(cid:107)2
=
O(µ3)
O(µ4)
.
(199)
(200)
(201)
(202)
(203)
a b
(cid:124)
(cid:123)(cid:122)
c d
Γ
(cid:125)
a(cid:48)
lim sup
i→∞
b(cid:48)
c(cid:48) d(cid:48)
32
In this case, we can iterate (202) and use relation (134) in [2] to conclude that:
E(cid:107)We
i(cid:107)4 = O(µ2),
lim sup
i→∞
E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i(cid:107)4 = O(µ4),
lim sup
i→∞
and, therefore,
E(cid:107)(cid:101)We
i(cid:107)4 = lim sup
i→∞
lim sup
i→∞
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)V
E
We
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)4
i
W(cid:86)e
i
i(cid:107)2)2
i(cid:107)2 + (cid:107)W(cid:86)e
i(cid:107)4 + E(cid:107)W(cid:86)e
≤ v4
2 lim sup
i→∞
≤ lim sup
i→∞
2v4
E((cid:107)We
2(E(cid:107)We
i(cid:107)4) = O(µ2).
(204)
(205)
APPENDIX G
STABILITY OF THE COEFFICIENT MATRIX B
In this Appendix, we show that, under the same settings of Theorem 1, the constant matrix B defined by (42) is
stable for sufficiently small step-sizes. To establish this, we use similar argument as in [4], [6]. We first note that
the matrix B in (42) is similar to the matrix B in (91), and therefore has the same eigenvalues as the block matrix
B written as:
IhP − D11
−D21
B ∼
,
−D12
− D22
J e
where the blocks entries {Dmn} are given by (92) -- (93). In a manner similar to the arguments used in the proof of
Theorem 1 in [2], we can verify that:
D11 = O(µ),
D21 = O(µ),
D12 = O(µ),
D22 = O(µ),
ρ(IhP − D11) = 1 − σ11µ = 1 − O(µ),
where σ11 is a positive scalar independent of µ. Thus, we obtain:
IhP − O(µ)
O(µ)
B ∼
.
O(µ)
J e
+ O(µ)
defined in Table I is h(M − P )× h(M − P ) and has a Jordan structure. We consider
Now recall that the matrix J e
here the complex data case since the real data case can be easily deduced from the complex case by removing the
(206)
(207)
(208)
(209)
(210)
block (J ∗
)(cid:62). It can be expressed in the following upper-triangular form:
J e
=
λa,2
...
K
λa,L
λ∗
a,2
...
K
λ∗
a,L
33
(211)
with scalars {λa,(cid:96), λ∗
the strictly upper-triangular matrix K are either or zero. It follows that:
a,(cid:96)} on the diagonal, all of which have norms strictly less than one, and where the entries of
J e
+ O(µ) =
λa,2 + O(µ)
K + O(µ)
...
O(µ)
λa,L + O(µ)
O(µ)
λ∗
a,2 + O(µ)
O(µ)
...
K + O(µ)
O(µ)
λ∗
a,L + O(µ)
(212)
We introduce the eigen-decomposition of the Hermitian positive-definite matrix D11 and denote it by [4], [6]:
D11 (cid:44) UdΛdU∗
d
(213)
where Ud is unitary and Λd has positive diagonal entries {λk}; the matrices Ud and Λd are hP × hP . Using Ud,
we further introduce the following block-diagonal similarity transformation:
T (cid:44) diag{µP/M Ud, µ(hP +1)/hM , . . . , µ(hM−1)/hM , µ}.
We now use (91) to get:
T −1BT =
B
O(µ(hM +1)/hM )
O(µP/M )
λa,2 + O(µ)
O(µ(hM−1)/hM )
...
O(µ1/hM )
λ∗
a,L + O(µ)
where we introduced the hP × hP diagonal matrix:
B (cid:44) IhP − Λd.
(214)
(215)
(216)
It follows that all off-diagonal entries of the above transformed matrix are at most O(µ1/hM ). Although the factor
µ1/hM decays slower than µ, it nevertheless becomes small for sufficiently small µ. Calling upon the Gershgorin's
34
theorem2, we conclude that the eigenvalues of B are either located in the Gershgorin circles that are centered at
the eigenvalues of B with radii O(µ(hM +1)/hM ) or in the Gershgorin circles that are centered at the {λa,(cid:96), λ∗
a,(cid:96)}
with radii O(µ1/M ), namely,
λ(B)−λ(B) ≤ O(µ(hM +1)/hM ) or
λ(B)−λa,(cid:96) +O(µ) ≤ O(µ1/hM ) or
λ(B)−λ∗
a,(cid:96) +O(µ) ≤ O(µ1/hM )
(217)
where λ(B) and λ(B) denote any of the eigenvalues of B and B, and (cid:96) = 1, . . . , L. It follows that:
ρ(B) ≤ ρ(B) + O(µ(hM +1)/hM ) or ρ(B) ≤ ρ(J) + O(µ) + O(µ1/hM ).
Now since J is a stable matrix, we know that ρ(J) < 1. We express this spectral radius as:
ρ(J) = 1 − δJ
where δJ is positive and independent of µ. We also know from (209) that:
since B = U∗
d (IhP − D11)Ud. We conclude from (218) that:
ρ(B) = 1 − σ11µ < 1,
ρ(B) ≤ 1 − σ11µ + O(µ(hM +1)/hM )
or ρ(B) ≤ 1 − δJ + O(µ) + O(µ1/hM ).
If we now select µ (cid:28) 1 small enough such that:
O(µ(hM +1)/hM ) < σ11µ,
and O(µ1/hM ) + O(µ) < δJ
(218)
(219)
(220)
(221)
(222)
then we would be able to conclude that ρ(B) < 1 so that B is stable for sufficiently small step-sizes, as claimed.
If we exploit the structure of B in (91) we can further show, for sufficiently small step-sizes, that:
(I − B)−1 = O(1/µ)
(I − B)−1 =
O(1/µ) O(1)
(223)
(224)
O(1) O(1)
where the leading (1, 1) block in (I − B)−1 has dimensions hP × hP .
at akk and with rk =(cid:80)N
2Consider an N × N matrix A with scalar entries {ak(cid:96)}. With each diagonal entry akk we associate a disc in the complex plane centered
(cid:96)=1,(cid:96)(cid:54)=k ak(cid:96). That is, rk is equal to the sum of the magnitudes of the non-diagonal entries on the same row as
akk. We denote the disc by Dk; it consists of all points that satisfy Dk = {z ∈ C such that z − akk ≤ rk}. Gershgorin's theorem states
that the spectrum of A (i.e., the set of all its eigenvalues, denoted by λ(A)) is contained in the union of all N Gershgorin discs
λ(A) ⊂ ∪N
k=1Dk.
A stronger statement of the Gershgorin theorem covers the situation in which some of the Gershgorin discs happen to be disjoint. Specifically,
if the union of the L discs is disjoint from the union of the remaining N − L discs, then the theorem further asserts that L eigenvalues of
A will lie in the first union of L discs and the remaining N − L eigenvalues of A will lie in the second union of N − L discs.
To establish this we first note that, by similarity, the matrix B is stable. Let
D11
D21
(cid:44)
X11 X12
X21 X22
D12
+ D22
I − J e
X = I − B =
where from (207) -- (208), we have:
X11 = O(µ),
X21 = O(µ),
X12 = O(µ),
X22 = O(1).
(227)
The matrix X is invertible since I − B is invertible. Moreover, X11 is invertible since D11 is Hermitian positive
definite. Using the block matrix inversion formula, we can write:
11 X12∆−1X21X −1
−∆−1X21X −1
X −1
11 X12∆−1
∆−1
11 −X −1
11 + X −1
X −1 =
(228)
11
where ∆ denotes the Schur complement of X relative to X11:
∆ = X22 − X21X −1
11 X12 = O(1).
We then use (226) -- (227) to conclude (224).
APPENDIX H
STABILITY OF FIRST-ORDER ERROR MOMENT OF (47)
In this Appendix, we show that, under the same settings of Theorem 1, the first-order moment of the long-term
model (47) is stable for sufficiently small step-sizes, namely, it holds that:
i (cid:107) = O(µ).
We first multiply both sides of recursion (125) from the left by (V e
lim sup
i→∞
(cid:107)E(cid:101)We(cid:48)
where the matrix B in (91) is stable as shown in Appendix G. Recursion (231) can be written more compactly as:
EWe(cid:48)
(cid:123)(cid:122)
(cid:124)
EW(cid:86)e(cid:48)
i
(cid:44)yi
i
(cid:125)
IhP − D11
(cid:123)(cid:122)
(cid:124)
−D21
=
yi = Byi−1 +
+
b(cid:86)e
(cid:44)B
(cid:125)
0
i−1
EW(cid:86)e(cid:48)
i−1
(cid:44)yi−1
−D12
− D22
J e
EWe(cid:48)
)−1 and use relation (59) in [2] to get:
(cid:123)(cid:122)
(cid:124)
(cid:125)
.
0
(224)
O(1/µ) O(1)
0
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) = O(µ),
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)
EWe(cid:48)
= O(µ).
O(1) O(1)
EW(cid:86)e(cid:48)
O(µ)
b(cid:86)e
=
i
i
0
b(cid:86)e
lim sup
i→∞
Since B is stable and b(cid:86)e
= O(µ), we conclude from (232) and (224) that:
i→∞ yi = (I − B)−1
lim
It follows that
,
35
(225)
(226)
(229)
(230)
(231)
(232)
(233)
(234)
36
and, hence,
(cid:107)E(cid:101)We(cid:48)
i (cid:107) = lim sup
i→∞
lim sup
i→∞
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)V e
EWe(cid:48)
EW(cid:86)e(cid:48)
i
i
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ (cid:107)V e
(cid:107)
lim sup
i→∞
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)
EWe(cid:48)
EW(cid:86)e(cid:48)
i
i
(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)
= O(µ).
(235)
REFERENCES
[1] R. Nassif, S. Vlaski, and A. H. Sayed, "Distributed inference over networks under subspace constraints," in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf.
Acoust., Speech, and Signal Process., Brighton, UK, May 2019, pp. 1 -- 5.
[2] R. Nassif, S. Vlaski, and A. H. Sayed, "Adaptation and learning over networks under subspace constraints -- Part I: Stability analysis,"
Submitted for publication, May 2019.
[3] A. H. Sayed, S. Y. Tu, J. Chen, X. Zhao, and Z. J. Towfic, "Diffusion strategies for adaptation and learning over networks," IEEE
Signal Process. Mag., vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 155 -- 171, 2013.
[4] A. H. Sayed, "Adaptation, learning, and optimization over networks," Foundations and Trends in Machine Learning, vol. 7, no. 4-5,
pp. 311 -- 801, 2014.
[5] J. Chen and A. H. Sayed, "Distributed Pareto optimization via diffusion strategies," IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 7, no. 2,
pp. 205 -- 220, Apr. 2013.
[6] X. Zhao and A. H. Sayed, "Asynchronous adaptation and learning over networks -- Part I: Modeling and stability analysis," IEEE Trans.
Signal Process., vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 811 -- 826, Feb. 2015.
[7] S. Vlaski and A. H. Sayed, "Diffusion learning in non-convex environments," in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoust., Speech, and Signal
Process., Brighton, UK, May 2019.
[8] M. G. Rabbat and R. D. Nowak, "Quantized incremental algorithms for distributed optimization," IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol.
23, no. 4, pp. 798 -- 808, Apr. 2005.
[9] S. Kar and J. M. F. Moura, "Distributed consensus algorithms in sensor networks with imperfect communication: Link failures and
channel noise," IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 355 -- 369, Jan. 2009.
[10] K. Srivastava and A. Nedic, "Distributed asynchronous constrained stochastic optimization," IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol.
5, no. 4, pp. 772 -- 790, Aug. 2011.
[11] R. Olfati-Saber, J. A. Fax, and R. M. Murray, "Consensus and cooperation in networked multi-agent systems," Proc. IEEE, vol. 95,
no. 1, pp. 215 -- 233, 2007.
[12] S. S. Ram, A. Nedi´c, and V. V. Veeravalli, "Distributed stochastic subgradient projection algorithms for convex optimization," J. Optim.
Theory Appl., vol. 147, no. 3, pp. 516 -- 545, 2010.
[13] J. Plata-Chaves, A. Bertrand, M. Moonen, S. Theodoridis, and A. M. Zoubir, "Heterogeneous and multitask wireless sensor networks
-- Algorithms, applications, and challenges," IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 450 -- 465, 2017.
[14] J. Chen, C. Richard, and A. H. Sayed, "Diffusion LMS over multitask networks," IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 63, no. 11, pp.
2733 -- 2748, Jun. 2015.
[15] R. Nassif, C. Richard, A. Ferrari, and A. H. Sayed, "Proximal multitask learning over networks with sparsity-inducing coregularization,"
IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 64, no. 23, pp. 6329 -- 6344, Dec. 2016.
[16] C. Eksin and A. Ribeiro, "Distributed network optimization with heuristic rational agents," IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 60, no.
10, pp. 5396 -- 5411, Oct. 2012.
[17] A. Hassani, J. Plata-Chaves, M. H. Bahari, M. Moonen, and A. Bertrand, "Multi-task wireless sensor network for joint distributed
node-specific signal enhancement, LCMV beamforming and DOA estimation," IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 11, no. 3, pp.
518 -- 533, 2017.
[18] J. F. C. Mota, J. M. F. Xavier, P. M. Q. Aguiar, and M. Puschel, "Distributed optimization with local domains: Applications in MPC
and network flows," IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 60, no. 7, pp. 2004 -- 2009, Jul. 2015.
37
[19] X. Zhao and A. H. Sayed, "Distributed clustering and learning over networks," IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 63, no. 13, pp.
3285 -- 3300, Jul. 2015.
[20] S. Barbarossa, G. Scutari, and T. Battisti, "Distributed signal subspace projection algorithms with maximum convergence rate for sensor
networks with topological constraints," in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoust., Speech, and Signal Process., Taipei, Taiwan, Apr. 2009, pp.
2893 -- 2896.
[21] D. P. Bertsekas, Nonlinear Programming, Athena Scientific, 1999.
[22] R. H. Koning, H. Neudecker, and T. Wansbeek, "Block Kronecker products and the vecb operator," Linear Algebra Appl., vol. 149,
pp. 165 -- 184, Apr. 1991.
[23] S. Boyd and L. Vandenberghe, Convex Optimization, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 2004.
[24] M. Grant and S. Boyd, "CVX: Matlab software for disciplined convex programming, version 2.1," http://cvxr.com/cvx, Mar. 2014.
[25] P. L. Combettes and J.-C. Pesquet, "Proximal splitting methods in signal processing," in Fixed-Point Algorithms for Inverse Problems
in Science and Engineering, H. H. Bauschke et al., Ed., pp. 185 -- 212. Springer, New York, NY, USA, 2011.
[26] N. Parikh and S. Boyd, "Proximal algorithms," Foundations and Trends in Optimization, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 127 -- 239, Jan. 2014.
[27] L. Isserlis, "On a formula for the product-moment coefficient of any order of a normal frequency distribution in any number of
variables," Biometrika, vol. 12, no. 1/2, pp. 134 -- 139, Nov. 1918.
|
1611.00518 | 1 | 1611 | 2016-11-02T09:31:07 | A Dynamic Multi Agent based scheduling for flexible flow line manufacturing system accompanied by dynamic customer demand | [
"cs.MA"
] | Dynamic rescheduling decision-making problem is an important issue in modern manufacturing system with the feature of combinational computation complexity. This paper introduces a multi-agent based approach using the detailed process, provided by Prometheus methodology, which used for the design of a simultaneous dynamic rescheduling decision making for flexible flow line manufacturing system that working under dynamic customer demand. The application has been completely modeled with the Prometheus Design Tool (PDT), which offers full support to Prometheus Methodology. The proposed dynamic scheduling decision making system is developed for Automated UPVC door and Windows Company and can be support both static and dynamic scheduling. | cs.MA | cs | A Dynamic Multi Agent based scheduling for flexible
flow line manufacturing system accompanied by dynamic
customer demand
Danial Roudi
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, North Cyprus Via 10,
Mersin, Turkey
[email protected]
Ali Vatankhah Barenji
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, North Cyprus Via 10,
Mersin, Turkey
[email protected]
Reza Vatankhah Barenji
Department of Industrial Engineering, Hacettepe University, Beytepe Campus 06800, Ankara, Turkey
[email protected]
Majid Hashemipour
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, North Cyprus Via 10,
Mersin, Turkey
Abstract-Dynamic rescheduling decision-making problem is an important issue in modern manufacturing system with
the feature of combinational computation complexity. This paper introduces a multi-agent based approach using the
detailed process, provided by Prometheus methodology, which used for the design of a simultaneous dynamic
rescheduling decision making for flexible flow line manufacturing system that working under dynamic customer demand.
The application has been completely modeled with the Prometheus Design Tool (PDT), which offers full support to
Prometheus Methodology. The proposed dynamic scheduling decision making system is developed for Automated UPVC
door and Windows Company and can be support both static and dynamic scheduling.
Keywords-Multi Agent System; Dynamic Scheduling; Flow Line Manufacturing
I.
INTRODUCTION
An automated UPVC doors and windows fabrication is processing of cutting, welding and assembling UPVC
doors and windows. This fabrication is composed of several component with deferent shape and size, although
requires hundreds of operation with entrant flow although consists of some workstations and each contains one or
even more machines. This companies follow the flow line manufacturing system, therefore scheduling problem of this
system is called flow line manufacturing cell-scheduling problem (FMCSP) [1] , additionally dynamic costumer
demand (time based constraints) is added to problems of these companies so it can be consider that scheduling
problem of this companies is a real time system problems [2].
A manufacturing scheduling problem with time-based limitation can be considered as the scheduling problem of
a real-time system [3]. The real-time systems are defined as those systems in which the correctness of the systems
depends on both logical and time-based correctness [4]. The logical correctness refers to the satisfactions of resource
capacity constraints and precedence limitation of operations [5]. The time-based correctness, namely timeliness,
refers to the satisfactions of the time-based constraints such as interoperation time-based constraints and due dates.
According to the Hyun Joong Yoon et al [1] real time system can be divided into two kinds of deadline, hard
deadline and soft deadlines. The real time system with hard deadlines is the system in which time-based correctness
is critical, whereas the one with soft deadlines is the system in which time-based correctness is important, but not
critical. The scheduling techniques of real time systems are divided into static scheduling (offline scheduling) and
dynamic scheduling.
Static scheduling techniques are applicable to real time systems in which jobs are periodic. They perform offline
feasibility or schedule ability analyses. For instance hybrid harmony [6] search is used for solving the multi object
FMCSP or A rate monotonic scheduling algorithm is the best known static priority scheduling method, in which
higher priorities are assigned to the jobs with a shorter period and also NP hard method is used more to solving
FMCSP in the static scheduling problem [7].
Dynamic scheduling techniques are advantageous in a system that uncertainty such as aperiodic jobs and
machine failures can be taken into consideration [8]. Dynamic scheduling techniques are divided into dynamic
planning-based approaches and dynamic best effort approaches. In dynamic planning-based approaches, schedule
ability is checked at run time when a job arrives, and the job is accepted only if timeliness is guaranteed [9]. On the
other hand, dynamic best effort approaches do not check schedule ability at all. Hence, dynamic planning-based
approaches are adequate for the real-time systems with hard deadlines, whereas the dynamic best effort approaches
are adequate for those with soft deadlines. There are quite few studies which consider dynamic scheduling of
manufacturing system, especially dynamic scheduling of manufacturing system by considering dynamic customer
demand [10]. In the previous work by authors addressed a multi agent decision making system for flexible
manufacturing system [4,8, 11, 12]. The proposed architecture is design for handling machine breakdown and
optimizing machine utility in the FMS focus on reconfiguration of control system [13]. However, dynamic
scheduling and dynamic customer demand is not considered in their previous studies.
This paper present a multi agent based dynamic scheduling decision-making system for automated door and
Windows Company (is flexible assemble line) with considering dynamic customer demand. Dynamic behaviors in
this company such as diversification of production and reconfiguration are taken into consideration. The multi agent
dynamic scheduling system is developed based on Prometheus methodology TM. Prometheus methodology is a
general-purpose design methodology for the development of software agent systems in which it is not tied to any
specific model of agency in software platform [14]. The multi agent based dynamic scheduling system is
completely modeled by the Prometheus Design Tool (PDT), which offers full support to Prometheus Methodology.
The proposed scheduling method is designed mainly for the work cell with time-based constraints, although it is
applicable of keeping the work cell free from time-based constraints.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: introduce multi agent system in dynamic scheduling in section 2;
in section 3 the definition of case study and illustration of existing lacks in FLMs is expressed; the design of
proposed multi agent system given in section 4; in section 5 decision making mechanism which is proposed the
rescheduling algorithm of the system for dynamic customer demand; section 6 consist of discussion and conclusion.
II.
Literature review
Multi agent system, a branch in artificial intelligence, provides a new way for solving distributed, dynamic
problems. Agent technology has been widely accepted and developed in implementation of the dynamic scheduling
and distributed control system [6,15, 16]. Multi agent-based software platforms are usually endowed with distributed
intelligent functions, and are becoming a key technology in new manufacturing systems built in a distributed
manner, such as intelligent manufacturing systems (IMSs). Many researchers have attempted to develop agent-based
architectures to support manufacturing activities [15]. Since the late 1980s, a number of researchers have applied
agent technology to perform production planning and control on the shop floor [17]. V Kaplanoğlu [18] proposed a
real time dynamic scheduling system based on the agent-based system, which has the advantages of less sensitive to
fluctuations in demand or available vehicles than more traditional transportation planning heuristics (Local Control,
Serial Scheduling) and provides a lot of flexibility by solving local problems . Kai-Ying Chen et al. [19] Applying
multi-agent technique in multi-section flexible manufacturing system. To set up the dynamic dispatching rules, a
distributed agent based system is implemented, which is assist the agents to choose suitable dispatching rule in
pertaining dispatching region and also the whole-hog dispatching of manufacturing system resolved through the
agents cooperation. Leitao [20] surveyed the literature in manufacturing control systems using distributed AI
techniques. Up to now there isn't practical implementation of this approach in the real factory cases due to lack of
standard way and there is a need for conducting more scientific research in this field.
The main aim of this paper is proposing approach for dynamic scheduling of flow line manufacturing system.
Our proposed approach not only works in the dynamic environment but also work in the static environment although
proposed approach could contribute to real manufacturing systems. Agent based systems have provided an excellent
opportunity for modeling and solving dynamic scheduling problems. Agent-based models consist of rule-based
agents which are dynamically interacting. The agents within the systems, in which they interact with, can create
real-world-like complexity. Based on that observation, the context of this study is to schedule the machine and
material handling system (MHs) by means of emphasizing flexibility in a flow line manufacturing system through
Multi-Agent System (MAS) approach. The proposed scheduling scheme is designed by means of Prometheus TM
methodology.
III.
Design of the proposed multi-agent system
Agent-based modeling and design differs from the conventional systems design. In the present study, multi-
agent based dynamic scheduling system is designed by using Prometheus TM methodology [21]. Prometheus
methodology is a general-purpose design methodology for the development of software agent systems in which it is
not tied to any specific model of agency of software platform. The Prometheus methodology defines a detailed
process for specifying, designing, implementing and testing/debugging agent-oriented software systems. In addition
to detailed processes (and many practical tips), it defines a range of artifacts that are produced along the way. The
Prometheus methodology consist of four steps, the first three steps of this methodology is in design of any agent
oriented software are same but the last step namely implementation step is different, In this study Jack will be
selected as platform for implementing proposed MAS in the future work.
A. Steps of Prometheus methodology are as follows:
a) The system specification phase focuses on identifying the goals and basic functionalities of the system,
along with inputs (percepts) and outputs (actions).
b) The architectural design phase uses the outputs from the previous phase to determine which agent types the
system will contain and how they will interact.
c) The detailed design phase looks at the internals of each agent and how it will accomplish its tasks within the
overall system.
IV.
Case study:
YBG (Yaran Bahar Golestan) is a small enterprise that produces make-to-order UPVC doors and windows by
automated machines. YBG is situated in the north of IRAN and provides doors and windows to representatives in all
over IRAN. The company is made up of two main departments: an administrative office, located in a downtown area
with major communication and commercial infrastructures that expedite relations with partners and clients and the
promotion of new products, and a production facility located a few kilometers away in the industrial area. The
production process involves the production of the frames of the windows/doors and several assemblies' phases, in
addition, test and quality control phases are performed.
The window components, such as fittings, profiles, and glasses, are ordered to partner companies that
manufacture them according to the windows/doors designs. The windows frames are manufactured in the YBG plant
from first substances (UPVC profiles). Nearly to fifteen models of doors and windows are manufactured: Tilt and
turn windows, slide hung, top light, sliding folding, center hinge/pivot and etc. Three profile qualities are available:
high quality with two different colors, medium with five different colors and economic one with two different
colors. First substance or all finished windows components are stored in four different warehouses. UPVC profiles
are standard lengths long enough to manufacture the largest frame size and undergo quality control according to a
defined protocol. Finished UPVC components arrive with quality control already certified.
The problems that exist in current scheduling and control architecture which can be potentially improved by multi
agent based dynamic decision making are as follows:
The manufacturing system is schedule by static scheduling which is located on an administrative office thus
all the decisions are issued by this unit.
The stations (machines) have no autonomous scheduling unit for their operations
The system lacks the real time scheduling and is not flexible in the case of dynamic customer demand.
The scheduling of this system in the dynamic environment is hard NP problem.
Development of a multi agent based dynamic decision system to address these problems is justified as follows:
When the dynamic customer demand accrues, the dynamic decision making system can be schedule the
system in the dynamic manner.
Development of multi agent based dynamic decision system can be fined optimal scheduling in the machine
fail disturbance.
The proposed system makes autonomous station level
proposed MAS create real time communication in the system
A. System Specification Design:
System specification phase is first part of Prometheus methodology, System specification design phase consist of
four sub phases namely: Analysis Overview, Scenario Overview, Goal Overview, System Role Overview.
Specification of system goals is design in the Goal Overview diagram, resulting in a list of goals and sub goals, with
associated descriptors. This phase responsible for identification of, system goals, development of set of scenarios
that have adequate coverage of the goals, functionalities that are linked to one or more goals, negotiations among the
types of agents and scenarios of the system are determined. Figure 2 shows Goal Overview diagram of the system.
Figure 1 Shows Goal Overview Diagram of the System.
Scenario Overview was developed by set of scenarios that have adequate coverage of the goals, and which
provide a process oriented view of the system to be developed. System Role Overview defined set of functionalities
that are linked to one or more goals, and capture a limited piece of system behavior. Figure 3 shows System Role
Overview of the System in which, there are four main roles in the system: Manger role, Shop Management role, cell
role, Negotiation Management role.
Figure 2 Shows System Role Overview of the System.
The sub goal is also designed in the system specification stage. For example four-sub goal of the Machine
Scheduling after unpredictable orders arrived goal is defined; "Machine is busy and has task", "Machine is free and
has a tack", "Machine is free and has no task", "Machine is loaded and has no tack".
B. Architecture Design:
This stage includes the identification of agent types according to Prometheus methodology in which the roles of
the agents in the system are determined. This phase consist of three parts namely; "Data Coupling Overview",
"Agent Role Grouping Overview" and "System Overview". The negotiation protocols between agent types are
designed in this phase. A system overview diagram is given in Figure 4. All agents are defined at this stage namely;
"Manger Agent", "Shop Manager Agent", "Cell Agent", "MHs agent", "Scheduler Machine Agent", "MHs
Resource Agent", "Machine Resource Agent". The last two agents are interface agents other five agents are software
agents that used for dynamic scheduling decision-making system. The proposed system follow top to down
approach but by considering real time negotiation between all types of agent. All negotiation protocols between
agents are defined at Figure 4 diagram by arrows. Protocols consist of "Order Protocol", "Shop Protocol", "Material
Handling System Negotiation Protocol", "Machine Negotiation Protocol", "Resource Protocol" and "Machine
Resource Protocol".
Figure 3 Shows System Overview Diagram in the Architectural Design Stage
C. Detailed Design:
Detailed design is done for each of the agent type one by one in this step. Types of agents at this stage take the
message from the event of their environment or other agents, which operate on their plans, and thus they act
according to the record in their data base.
For example Manager Agent (MA) is responsible to managing customer and updating new order to the system.
Manager Agent uses its belief sets, plans and message events so that it will accomplish this task. Manager Agent
architecture is shown in Figure 6 in the form of Prometheus TM design view.
Figure 4 Manager agent architecture.
Machine agent is responsible for managing and controlling the cell level of factory and this agent consist of
two sub agents namely MHs Agent and Scheduler Machine Agent. Detail design of this agent is in the Figure 7
having been showed.
Figure 7 Detail Design of Machine Agent
Other important agent is play important role to rescheduling and dynamic scheduling of cell level is
Scheduler Machine Agent. This agent consists of two data based Machine–status and Machine-Negotiation-Results.
The detailed design of this agent illustrated in Figure 8.
Figure 8 Detail Design of Scheduler Machine Agent
D. Decision making mechanism:
Algorithm for rescheduling of the system for dynamic customer demand is proposed at this section. Figure 9 is
sequence diagram of decision-making mechanism in the proposed multi agent system. The Manager Agent informs
the new or unpredictable order to the Shop Manager Agent. Shop Manager Agent send related question to the Cell
Agent and this agent ask from Scheduler Machine Agent and MHs agent. Scheduler Machine Agent by having real
time communication with Machine Resource Agent send related information to the Cell Agent and this agent by
considering the information of Scheduler Machine Agent answers the question asked by Shop Manager Agent. Shop
Manager Agent by considering information from cell level make a decision and send to Manager agent, if Manager
Agent conform this decision, it will send related information to Shop Manger Agent, and Shop Manager Agent
create new scheduling and new sub agent and send to the Cell Agent and MHs Agent. Cell Agent send new data to
the scheduler Machine Agent and this agent create update new scheduler to the machine.
Figure 9 Sequence Diagram of Decision-Making Mechanism
V.
Conclusion and future research
In the current study, the focus is on solving the scheduling problems of flow line manufacturing by proposing
multi agent based decision-making system. The proposed multi-agent based design is developed in order to solve
these complexities during the manufacturing process. The design uses the capabilities of multi-agent systems in
order to solve real-time scheduling complexities. Feasible and effective schedules are supposed to be emerged from
negotiation/bidding mechanisms between agents. In the present study, we try to make the problems of flow line
manufacturing more clearly and how multi agent based system can be helpful for these types of companies. The
other main of this study designing MAS based decision-making system for flow line manufacturing system by using
Prometheus methodology.
Future research directions include
• Implementing the proposed MASs by using programming language.
• Finding test-bed studies in order to compare the results of multi-agent systems with other approximations.
• Developing simulation models in order to test the effectiveness of the proposed mode.
References
H. J. Yoon and W. Shen, "A multiagent-based decision-making system for semiconductor wafer fabrication
[1]
with hard temporal constraints," Semiconductor Manufacturing, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 21, pp. 83-91, 2008.
R. W. Brennan and D. H. Norrie, "Agents, holons and function blocks: distributed intelligent control in
[2]
manufacturing," Journal of Applied Systems Studies, vol. 2, pp. 1-19, 2001.
S. H. Lu and P. Kumar, "Distributed scheduling based on due dates and buffer priorities," Automatic
[3]
Control, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 36, pp. 1406-1416, 1991.
[4]
A. Vatankhah Barenji, R. Vatankhah Barenji, and M. Hashemipour, "Structural modeling of a RFID-
enabled reconfigurable architecture for a flexible manufacturing system," in Smart Objects, Systems and
Technologies (SmartSysTech), Proceedings of 2013 European Conference on, 2013, pp. 1-10.
Barenji, Reza Vatankhah, et al. "Toward a framework for intra-enterprise competency modeling." 2012 2nd
[5]
International Conference on Advances in Computational Tools for Engineering Applications (ACTEA). 2012.
Y. Li, X. Li, and J. N. Gupta, "Solving the multi-objective flowline manufacturing cell scheduling problem
[6]
by hybrid harmony search," Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 42, pp. 1409-1417, 2015.
F. Zhao, J. Wang, J. Wang, and J. Jonrinaldi, "A dynamic rescheduling model with multi-agent system and
[7]
its solution method," Strojniški vestnik-Journal of Mechanical Engineering, vol. 58, pp. 81-92, 2012.
[8]
A. V. Barenji, R. V. Barenji, and M. Hashemipour, "A frameworks for structural modelling of an RFID-
enabled intelligent distributed manufacturing control system," South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, vol.
25, pp. 48-66, 2014.
[9]
R. Y. Zhong, G. Q. Huang, S. Lan, Q. Dai, T. Zhang, and C. Xu, "A two-level advanced production
planning and scheduling model for RFID-enabled ubiquitous manufacturing," Advanced Engineering Informatics,
2015.
A. V. Barenji, R. V. Barenji, and M. Hashemipour, "Flexible testing platform for employment of RFID-
[10]
enabled multi-agent system on flexible assembly line," Advances in Engineering Software, vol. 91, pp. 1-11, 2016.
A. V. Barenji, "An RFID-based distributed control system for flexible manufacturing system," Eastern
[11]
Mediterranean University (EMU)-Doğu Akdeniz Üniversitesi (DAÜ), 2013.
[12]
R. V. Barenji, A. V. Barenji, and M. Hashemipour, "A multi-agent RFID-enabled distributed control
system for a flexible manufacturing shop," The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol.
71, pp. 1773-1791, 2014.
A. V. Barcnji, R. V. Barenji, and B. L. Sefidgari, "An RFID-enabled distributed control and monitoring
[13]
system for a manufacturing system," in Innovative Computing Technology (INTECH), 2013 Third International
Conference on, 2013, pp. 498-503.
[14]
L. Padgham, J. Thangarajah, and M. Winikoff, "Prometheus Design Tool," in AAAI, 2008, pp. 1882-1883.
[15]
R. Erol, C. Sahin, A. Baykasoglu, and V. Kaplanoglu, "A multi-agent based approach to dynamic
scheduling of machines and automated guided vehicles in manufacturing systems," Applied Soft Computing, vol.
12, pp. 1720-1732, 2012.
S. Kumari, A. Singh, N. Mishra, and J. A. Garza-Reyes, "A multi-agent architecture for outsourcing SMEs
[16]
manufacturing supply chain," Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 2015.
T. Wong, C. Leung, and H. Tang, "A multi-agent system framework for manufacturing planning and
[17]
control," in Intelligent Control and Automation, 2008. WCICA 2008. 7th World Congress on, 2008, pp. 410-415.
V. Kaplanoğlu, "Multi-agent based approach for single machine scheduling with sequence-dependent setup
[18]
times and machine maintenance," Applied Soft Computing, vol. 23, pp. 165-179, 2014.
K.-Y. Chen and C.-J. Chen, "Applying multi-agent technique in multi-section flexible manufacturing
[19]
system," Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 37, pp. 7310-7318, 2010.
[20]
Applications of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 22, pp. 979-991, 2009.
P. Leitão, "Agent-based distributed manufacturing control: A state-of-the-art survey," Engineering
L. Padgham and M. Winikoff, "Prometheus: A practical agent-oriented methodology," Agent-oriented
[21]
methodologies, pp. 107-135, 2005.
[22] Barenji, Ali Vatankhah, and Canberk Değirmenci. "Robot Control System based on Web Application and
RFID Technology." In MATEC Web of Conferences, vol. 28, p. 04001. EDP Sciences, 2015.
BIOGRAPHY
Danial Roudi is a Master of Engineering in Manufacturing Systems in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the Eastern
Mediterranean University, Famagusta, North Cyprus via 10, Mersin, Turkey. His research interests include manufacturing,
simulation, optimization, reliability, and scheduling.
Ali Vatankhah Barenji has an MSc in mechanical engineering and is currently a PhD candidate at the University of Eastern
Mediterranean. He is research assistance at the EMU. He has more than 15 papers published at international journal and
proceedings of international conferences. His main research topics focus on reconfigurable production systems, intelligent
supervisory control, and multi agent based control system.
|
1211.1146 | 1 | 1211 | 2012-11-06T09:07:00 | Discrete modelling of bacterial conjugation dynamics | [
"cs.MA",
"physics.bio-ph",
"q-bio.CB"
] | In bacterial populations, cells are able to cooperate in order to yield complex collective functionalities. Interest in population-level cellular behaviour is increasing, due to both our expanding knowledge of the underlying biological principles, and the growing range of possible applications for engineered microbial consortia. Researchers in the field of synthetic biology - the application of engineering principles to living systems - have, for example, recently shown how useful decision-making circuits may be distributed across a bacterial population. The ability of cells to interact through small signalling molecules (a mechanism known as it quorum sensing) is the basis for the majority of existing engineered systems. However, horizontal gene transfer (or conjugation) offers the possibility of cells exchanging messages (using DNA) that are much more information-rich. The potential of engineering this conjugation mechanism to suit specific goals will guide future developments in this area. Motivated by a lack of computational models for examining the specific dynamics of conjugation, we present a simulation framework for its further study. We present an agent-based model for conjugation dynamics, with realistic handling of physical forces. Our framework combines the management of intercellular interactions together with simulation of intracellular genetic networks, to provide a general-purpose platform. We validate our simulations against existing experimental data, and then demonstrate how the emergent mixing patterns of multi-strain populations can affect conjugation dynamics. Our model of conjugation, based on a probability distribution, may be easily tuned to correspond to the behaviour of different cell types. Simulation code and movies are available at http://code.google.com/p/discus/. | cs.MA | cs |
Discrete modelling of bacterial conjugation dynamics
1
Angel Goni-Moreno1 and Martyn Amos1
1 School of Computing, Mathematics and Digital Technology, Manchester Metropolitan
University, Manchester M1 5GD, UK.
contact: Angel Goni-Moreno: [email protected]; Martyn Amos: [email protected]
Abstract
In bacterial populations, cells are able to cooperate in order to yield complex col lective func-
tionalities. Interest in population-level cellular behaviour is increasing, due to both our expanding
knowledge of the underlying biological principles, and the growing range of possible applications for
engineered microbial consortia. Researchers in the field of synthetic biology - the application of en-
gineering principles to living systems - have, for example, recently shown how useful decision-making
circuits may be distributed across a bacterial population. The ability of cells to interact through
small signalling molecules (a mechanism known as quorum sensing) is the basis for the ma jority of
existing engineered systems. However, horizontal gene transfer (or conjugation) offers the possibility
of cells exchanging messages (using DNA) that are much more information-rich. The potential of
engineering this conjugation mechanism to suit specific goals will guide future developments in this
area. Motivated by a lack of computational models for examining the specific dynamics of conju-
gation, we present a simulation framework for its further study. We present an agent-based model
for conjugation dynamics, with realistic handling of physical forces. Our framework combines the
management of intercellular interactions together with simulation of intracellular genetic networks,
to provide a general-purpose platform. We validate our simulations against existing experimental
data, and then demonstrate how the emergent mixing patterns of multi-strain populations can affect
conjugation dynamics. Our model of conjugation, based on a probability distribution, may be easily
tuned to correspond to the behaviour of different cell types. Simulation code and movies are available
at http://code.google.com/p/discus/.
1 Introduction
Researchers in the emerging field of synthetic biol-
ogy [1] have demonstrated the successful construc-
tion of devices based on populations of engineered
microbes [2, 3, 4]. Recent work has focussed atten-
tion on the combination of single-cell intracellular
devices [5, 6] with intercellular engineering, in order
to build increasingly complex systems.
To date, most work on engineered cell-cell com-
munication has focussed on quorum-sensing (QS)
[7], which may be thought of as a communication
protocol to facilitate inter-bacterial communication
via the generation and receiving of small signal
molecules. However, recent studies on DNA mes-
saging [8] highlight the importance and utility of
transferring whole sets of DNA molecules from one
cell (the so-called donor) to another (the recipient).
Bacterial conjugation is a cell-to-cell communica-
tion mechanism [9, 10] that enables such transfers
to occur.
In this paper we present a simulation platform
that realistically simulates (in a modular fashion)
both intracellular genetic networks and intercellu-
lar communication via conjugation. To our knowl-
edge, this is the first such platform to offer both of
these facilities. We first review previous work on
cell simulation, before presenting the details of our
model. We validate it against previous experimen-
tal work, and then discuss possible applications of
our method.
2 Previous work
The rapid development of bacterial-based devices
is accompanied by a need for computational sim-
ulations and mathematical modelling to facilitate
the characterisation and design of such systems. A
number of of platforms and methods are available
for this purpose. Agent-based models (AbMs) are
widely used [11], and were first used to study mi-
crobial growth in BacSim [12]. Continuous models
have also been proposed [13], and recent develop-
ments make use of hardware optimisation, by using
GPUs (Graphics Processing Units) in order to scale
up the number of cells simulated [14].
Because of the complexity of the system under
study, several computational platforms focus on
either specific cellular behaviours (e.g., bacterial
chemotaxis [15], morphogenesis of dense tissue like
systems [16]) , or on specific organisms (e.g., Myx-
ococcus xanthus [17]). Platforms that incorporate
cell-cell communication generally focus their atten-
tion on quorum-sensing. Simulations of conjugation
do exist, but these consider cells as abstracted cir-
cular objects [18, 19]. We demonstrate in this paper
how a consideration of the shape of cells is an es-
sential feature for understanding the conjugation
behaviour of the population. We now describe our
model for bacterial growth, in which conjugation is
handled explicitly.
3 Methods
We use an individual-based model ling approach [20]
to the study of conjugation dynamics. This mod-
els each cell as an individual, mobile entity, each
of which is sub ject to physical forces arising from
contact with other cells and the environment (e.g.,
surfaces). Each cell has a number of different at-
tributes,
listed in Table
1, which correspond to
various physiological states and characteristics.
Bacteria are modelled as rod-shaped cells with
a constant radius (parameter width in Table 2).
Elongation processes occur along the longitudinal
axis, which has a minimum dimension of length,
and division takes place whenever a the cell mea-
sures 2*length. The division of a cell into two new
daughter cells is also controlled by max overlap,
which monitors the physical pressure affecting each
cell; if the pressure exceeds this parameter value,
the cell delays its growth and division. Thus, a cell
with pressure grows slower than without it. In Fig-
ure 1A we see an snapshot of a population with dif-
ferent cell lengths, due to the pressure-dependent
behaviour. The global parameter growth speed
(Table 2) also helps us simulate cell flexibility in
a realistic fashion. This parameter defines a “cut
off” value for the number of iterations in which the
physics engine must resolve al l the current forces
and collisions. Thus, smaller values will cause the
solver to be effectively “overloaded”, and some colli-
2
sions may, as a result, be partially undetected. This
means that cells behave as flexible shapes, which
gives the simulation a more realistic performance.
In Figure 1C we show how changes in growth speed
affect the simulation, using bigger (left) to smaller
(right) values.
Horizontal genetic transfer (or conjugation) is
modelled using an elastic spring to connect donor
and recipient cells. Parameter c time defines the
duration of that linkage, which determines the time
in which the DNA is transferred. The springs are
constantly monitored to ensure that they physically
connect both cells during conjugation. Importantly,
during conjugation, the resolution of collisions in-
volving relevant cells considers the forces produced
by the spring connection, in order to calculate the
final movement of the bacteria. By coupling cells in
this way, we obtain realistic population-level phys-
ical patterns that emerge as a result of large num-
bers of conjugation events. Figure 1B shows this
process, with a donor cell (red) and a recipient cell
(grey) which becomes a transconjugant (yellow). A
transconjugant cell is one that was initially a re-
cipient, but which has been conjugated during its
lifetime. Thus, it already has the DNA information
transferred by the donor.
This agent-based algorithm has an iteration-
driven structure, where - after initialisation of the
main global parameters - it repeatedly performs the
following steps for each cell:
1. Update springs (position and timing).
2. Perform cell division (if cell is ready).
3. Elongate cell (every growth speed steps).
4. Handle conjugation.
5. Update physical position.
Conjugation decisions (step 4) made by cells are
driven by three sequential steps:
1. The cell decides, following a probability dis-
tribution, whether or not to conjugate (one
trial per iteration).
2. If conjugating, randomly select a mate from
surrounding bacteria (if present).
3
Table 1. Cell attributes.
type
Attribute
pymunk.Shape
shape
[m0 . . . mi ]
program
[int,int]
elongation
[x,y]
position
float
speed
conjugating Boolean
Boolean
plasmid
int
role
int
partner
Definition
Shape of the cell
List of the i regulatory network molecules (m)
Elongation values (one per cell pole)
Coordinates of centre point, x and y
Velocity
Conjugation state
Program state (present/not present)
Donor (0), recipient (1) or transconjugant (2)
Role of plasmid transfer cell
Figure 1. Cell behaviours at low scale. (A): Different cell length due to asynchronous growth (pressure
dependent). Two cells marked with red arrows. (B): A donor cell (red) starts the conjugation process
with a recipient (grey) which turns into transconjugant (yellow). The pilus (green) is an elastic spring
that links the two cells until the process is finished. (C): Different overlapping levels within the cells of
a population.
3. If valid mate is found, effect conjugation
transfer.
4
spring damping; these are three parameters to
model the material and behaviour of the bacterial
pilus (i.e.
the spring) during conjugation. Pa-
rameter cell infancy is a delay period, during
which a cell is considered to be too young to conju-
gate (as observed experimentally [21]). Parameters
pymunk steps and pymunk clock ticks are used
by the physics engine to update the world, and may
be adjusted by the user in order to alter the per-
formance of the simulation (machine dependent).
Parameters bac mass and bac friction play a role
in collision handling.
Our platform is writting in Python, and
makes
use
of
the
physics
engine
pymunk
(www.pymunk.org) as a wrapper
the 2D
for
physics library Chipmunk, which is written in C
(www.chipmunk-physics.net/). As cells are rep-
resented as semi-rigid bodies in a 2D lattice, py-
munk handles the physical environment on our be-
half. For monitoring purposes, parameters Gt and
real Gt allow us to stablise the relation between it-
erations and clock minutes: minute = Gt/real Gt
(units:
iterations). The platform, which we call
DiSCUS (Discrete Simulation of Conjugation Us-
ing Springs) is available at the pro ject repository
at http://code.google.com/p/discus/.
4 Results
We now describe the results of experiments to vali-
date our conjugation model, using four sets of sim-
ulations. As we aim to understand the behaviour
of cells in small-scale two-dimensional populations
(as occur in microfluidic environments), we avoid
the sorts of extreme overlapping situations shown
in Figure 1C(right). We first validate individual
conjugation dynamics; then we validate the biome-
chanical properties of the simulation; the third set
of experiments concerns the transfer of the two-
component oscillator, and the final set of experi-
ments study the effects of mixing on conjugation
dynamics. We now describe in detail the results of
each set of experiments.
4.1 Conjugation dynamics
The ob jective of the first set of experiments is to val-
idate the software in terms of conjugation dynam-
ics. For that purpose, we first focus on conjugation,
and
The discrete probability distribution used for
the conjugation process is C (N , p, c time), where
N is the number of trials in a cell lifetime (width
* length), p is the success probability in each trial
(with p ∈ [0. . .1]) and c time is the time interval
during p = 0.0 (i.e., when the cell is already con-
jugating). As stated in [21], p can vary, depending
on whether the cell is a donor (p d), a transconju-
gant that received the DNA message from a donor
(p t1), or a transconjugant that received the DNA
from another transconjugant (p t2).
Intracellular circuitry is modelled separately,
and then introduced into each cell by storing the
state of the circuit in an attribute of the cell
(program). Thus, there are effectively as many
copies of the circuit as cells in the simulation. This
circuit simulation is implemented in a modular fash-
ion, so that the internal cellular “program” may be
easily replaced with any other.
In this paper we
demonstrate the principle using a two-component
genetic oscillator as the DNA message that is ex-
changed through conjugation. The ordinary differ-
(cid:18)
(cid:19)
ential equations (ODEs) for this circuit are:
1 + αx2
1 + x2 + σy2 − x
1 + αx2
1 + x2 − y
which are detailed in [22], as well as the meaning
and value of the parameters (we use the same values
in the code provided). We have also recently used
our software platform to investigate the spatial be-
haviour of a reconfigurable genetic logic circuit [23],
which demonstrates how it may easily be modified
to accommodate different sets of equations. The ac-
tions controlling the growth rates of cells occur on
a longer time scale than the integration steps that
control molecular reactions (as equations 1 and 2).
In order to ensure synchronisation, the parameter
network steps defines the number of integration
steps of the ODEs that run per Gt. Thus, a number
of network steps/Gt integration steps will update
the attribute network of each cell every iteration.
Other important physical parameters listed in
Table 2 are
spring rest length,
spring stiffness
dx
dt
= ∆
β
(1)
(2)
dy
dt
= ∆γ
5
)
t
n
e
m
o
m
e
h
t
g
n
i
t
a
l
u
c
l
a
c
r
o
f
(
l
l
e
c
e
h
t
f
o
s
s
a
M
)
l
e
d
o
m
n
o
i
t
c
i
r
f
b
m
o
l
u
o
C
(
t
n
e
i
c
ffi
e
o
c
n
o
i
t
c
i
r
F
n
o
i
t
c
i
r
f
c
a
b
s
s
a
m
c
a
b
d
n
o
c
e
s
r
e
p
s
e
m
a
r
f
-
S
P
F
(
y
c
n
e
u
q
e
r
f
e
m
a
r
F
s
k
c
i
t
k
c
o
l
c
k
n
u
m
y
p
p
e
t
s
e
m
i
t
n
e
v
i
g
e
h
t
r
o
f
e
c
a
p
s
e
h
t
e
t
a
d
p
U
)
e
g
a
t
n
e
c
r
e
p
(
g
a
l
e
m
i
T
y
c
n
a
f
n
i
l
l
e
c
s
p
e
t
s
k
n
u
m
y
p
)
s
e
t
u
n
i
m
(
s
l
l
e
c
d
e
i
d
u
t
s
e
h
t
f
o
e
m
i
t
g
n
i
l
b
u
o
d
l
a
e
R
)
1
.
j
n
o
c
s
n
a
r
t
(
t
n
e
v
e
n
o
i
t
a
g
u
j
n
o
c
)
2
.
j
n
o
c
s
n
a
r
t
(
t
n
e
v
e
n
o
i
t
a
g
u
j
n
o
c
)
s
r
o
n
o
d
(
t
n
e
v
e
n
o
i
t
a
g
u
j
n
o
c
f
o
f
o
f
o
y
t
i
l
i
b
a
b
o
r
P
y
t
i
l
i
b
a
b
o
r
P
y
t
i
l
i
b
a
b
o
r
P
s
s
e
c
o
r
p
n
o
i
t
a
g
u
j
n
o
c
e
h
t
f
o
n
o
i
t
a
r
u
D
y
l
p
p
a
o
t
g
n
i
p
m
a
d
s
u
o
c
s
i
v
f
o
t
n
u
o
m
a
e
h
T
g
n
i
p
m
a
d
g
n
i
r
p
s
)
s
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
t
i
(
s
l
l
e
c
d
e
t
a
l
u
m
i
s
e
h
t
f
o
e
m
i
t
g
n
i
l
b
u
o
D
t
G
l
a
e
r
t
G
1
t
2
t
d
e
m
i
t
p
p
p
c
g
n
i
r
p
s
e
h
t
f
o
s
u
l
u
d
o
m
e
l
i
s
n
e
t
e
h
T
s
s
e
n
f
f
i
t
s
g
n
i
r
p
s
s
e
s
s
e
c
o
r
p
n
o
i
t
a
g
n
o
l
e
n
e
e
w
t
e
b
s
n
o
i
t
a
r
e
t
I
d
e
e
p
s
h
t
w
o
r
g
t
G
r
e
p
s
E
D
O
e
h
t
f
o
s
p
e
t
s
f
o
r
e
b
m
u
N
s
l
l
e
c
t
n
e
i
p
i
c
e
r
s
l
l
e
c
r
o
n
o
d
f
o
f
o
r
e
b
m
u
n
l
a
i
t
i
n
I
r
e
b
m
u
n
l
a
i
t
i
n
I
n
o
i
t
i
n
fi
e
D
s
t
n
e
i
p
i
c
e
r
r
e
b
m
u
n
s
p
e
t
s
k
r
o
w
t
e
n
s
r
o
n
o
d
r
e
b
m
u
n
r
e
t
e
m
a
r
a
P
n
o
i
t
c
a
r
t
n
o
c
/
n
o
i
s
n
a
p
x
e
t
n
i
r
p
s
l
a
r
u
t
a
N
h
t
g
n
e
l
t
s
e
r
g
n
i
r
p
s
)
s
e
r
a
u
q
s
e
c
i
t
t
a
l
(
l
l
e
c
h
c
a
e
f
o
h
t
d
i
W
)
s
e
r
a
u
q
s
e
c
i
t
t
a
l
(
l
l
e
c
h
c
a
e
f
o
h
t
g
n
e
L
h
t
g
n
e
l
h
t
d
i
w
d
l
r
o
w
d
e
t
a
l
u
m
i
s
e
h
t
f
o
e
z
i
S
s
l
l
e
c
f
o
e
c
n
a
r
e
l
o
t
e
r
u
s
s
e
r
P
w
e
i
v
n
e
e
r
c
s
p
a
l
r
e
v
o
x
a
m
n
o
i
t
i
n
fi
e
D
r
e
t
e
m
a
r
a
P
.
s
r
e
t
e
m
a
r
a
p
n
o
i
t
a
l
u
m
i
s
l
a
b
o
l
G
.
2
e
l
b
a
T
6
Figure 2. Validation of cell movement and conjugation dynamics using real data. (A): Figure
extracted from [21] where a colony of Pseudomonas putida is divided into dark red donor cells (DsRed),
yellow recipient cells (YFP) and transconjugants, expressing both yellow and green light (YFP and
GFP). The upper row shows the transconjugant signal, and the bottom row shows the whole
community. (B and C): Simulation results. Two simulations of similar colonies are recorded over
exactly the same time intervals (min). The colours of the cells match the colours observed in (A).
Graphs (D), (F) and( H) are extracted from [24], and show experimental results of Escherichia Coli
growth regarding density, velocity and ordering (respectively). Graphs (E), (G) and (I) correspond to
simulations in similar conditions to [24], for the same parameters (density, velocity and ordering
respectively). Tests 1, 2 and 3 in graphs correspond to different spatial distribution of cells inside the
microfluidic chanel (details in text).
7
Figure 3. Horizontal transfer of a two-component genetic oscillator. A: Transcriptional-level design.
The activator (green) acts on itself and on the repressor (red) by inducing the transcription of both.
The represor acts on the activator by repressing its transcription. As a result, molecule x (as well as y
oscillates in time. B: Cells growing in a cross-shaped channel. At 250 (minutes) we clearly see the
position of both donor (left hand, with the oscillator inside) and recipient (right hand, empty) strains.
The intensity of green colour denotes the amount of molecule x inside cells in that specific time.
Through conjugation, the oscillator is copied to the initial recipient strain (t = 1000 min). C: Using the
same experiment as in B, measurement over time of the maximum level of molecule x in a single cell.
Black arrow highlights the point in time when conjugation starts (t (cid:39) 550 min).
using images of a Pseudomonas putida population
(Figure 2A) extracted with permission from [21].
These show donor cells (dark red) growing in con-
tact with recipients (yellow). The DNA information
they share after conjugation makes the transconju-
gant cells display GFP (green fluorescent protein).
We adjusted the parameters of our simulations until
the behaviour matched the images of real cells (two
simulations shown: Figures 2B and 2C), in terms of
both time-series behaviour and the type of physical
pattern displayed. It is important to note that the
differential probabilities of conjugation of donors
and transconjugants (higher in the latter) causes di-
rectional spreading of the DNA information. After
the first transconjugant appears (160 minutes), the
newly-formed transconjugants appear -most prob-
ably - in the immediate neighbourhood. The final
parameter values used to reproduce this experiment
width=5, length=15, growth speed=30,
are:
p d=0.001, p t1=0.02, p t2=0.05 and c time=450
(the rest of the parameters are as defined in the
DiSCUS distribution). Movie DemoConjugation1
(found in the pro ject repository) shows a simulation
of a similar experiment where the transconjugants
do not act as new donors.
4.2 Biomechanical properties
The second set of validation experiments focuses on
biomechanical movement. We use data from [24],
which describe an Escherichia coli colony growing
in a microfluidic channel (30 * 50 * 1 µm3 ) (Fig-
ures 2D, 2F and 2H). Using the same parameter
setup (width=5, length=24, growth speed=30)
we highlight how different initial positioning of cells
inside the channel can affect the final result (test1,
with more cells observed in the centre than at the
edges; test2 with all cells initially in the centre; test3
with all cells homogeneously spread along the chan-
nel). Density graphs (Figures 2D and 2E) show the
increasing curve as the channel becomes more pop-
ulated (results vary depending on which area is con-
sidered for monitoring). Velocity gradients (Figures
2F and 2G) depict the differential velocity across
the longitudinal axis of the channel with respect to
the centre (we see negative values when the cells in
the centre move faster than the rest). The differ-
ence in the y axis is due to our considering different
spacial intervals in the velocity gradient calculation.
Ordering graphs (Figures 2H and 2I) are based on
8
calculating the cosine of a cell’s angle with respect
to the longitudinal axis of the channel (e.g. angle
0, cos(0)=1, completely aligned). As time increases,
we see that the cells tend to align themselves.
4.3 Internal cell “program”
Figure 3 shows the results of the next set of exper-
iments, aiming at studying the horizontal transfer
of a two-component oscil lator. The transcriptional-
level design of the circuit is shown in Figure 3(A),
which causes the molecular concentration of a re-
pressor (y) and an activator (x) to oscillate over
time. Each molecule is produced by a gene when
its upstream promoter is activated. The activator
can induce its own production at the same time as
inducing the production of the repressor, which in
turns inhibits the production of the activator.
In
Figure 3B we place (250 minutes) an initial donor
colony (with the two-component oscillator inside)
on the left-hand side of a cross-shaped channel,
while a recipient colony is placed on the right.
As the equations for the oscillator have no
stochasticity, every cell of the donor strain shows
exactly the same state of the circuit as every other
cell. At the beginning (250 minutes), these cells
show a green colour (corresponding to the molecular
concentration of x) which is switched off during the
time intervals in which the repressor is on (see time
profile of Figure 3C). When conjugation starts (at
around t (cid:39) 550), the newly formed transconjugant
cells are given the circuit but, importantly, they do
not share the state of the circuit of the cells from
which they receive the message. During the DNA
transfer, it is only the plasmid (circuit carrier) that
is copied into the recipient; therefore, both molec-
ular concentrations are null, and the circuit begins
its functioning from the initial stage. That is why
we clearly observe different green intensities within
the community. This asynchronous behaviour hap-
pens only in the transconjugants, while the circuits
inside the donors always run synchronously (due to
deterministic equations).
A time profile of the previous experiment is
shown in Figure 3C, where the maximum level of
activator (x) concentration in a single cell (com-
pared with the whole population) is recorded over
time. Before conjugation starts, all cells in the con-
sortia display perfect synchrony. After conjugation
(shown with an arrow on the graph) there is al-
ways a cell with the maximum level of activator,
which demonstrates high asynchrony. All param-
eter values regarding cell dimensions or conjuga-
tion probabilities are the same as in Figures 2B
and 2C. Parameters relevant to the oscillator are:
network steps=18 and Gt=450. Movie DemoCon-
jutagion2 (found in the pro ject repository) shows
this experiment and Movie DemoDynamics1 shows
donor cells growing with a stochastic version of the
oscillator.
4.4 Effects of mixing
Conjugation behaviour within a population may be
altered in different ways to achieve different be-
haviours, depending on the desired application. For
example, in the previous experiments described in
this paper, transconjugants are unable to act as re-
cipients (simulating a radical entry exclusion [25]).
That is to say, they will not receive more plasmids
(genetic circuits) from either donors or transcon-
jugants. Furthermore, we may also engineer the
transconjugants to stop acting as new donors [10],
so that only the original donors have the ability
to transfer the DNA message. Mixing of the cell
population becomes essential in this last scenario,
in order to ensure maximal contact between donors
and recipients. In Figure 3B we see how, at the end
of the experiment (1000 minutes), donors and the
transconjugants cover different areas of the channel
(left and right respectively), without being mixed.
We now study the autonomous mixing be-
haviour of cells under different environmental condi-
tions, with the third sets of experiments (Figure 4).
Firstly we investigate how morphological changes
in a longitudinal microfluidic channel can affect the
patterns being formed by the consortia and its mix-
ing. Figure 4A shows three bacterial strains (each
shown in a different colour) growing in a channel
from different starting points. As we can see, their
mixing is highly improbable. The main reason for
this is the velocity and directionality of the cells. As
the cells are washed out at the edges of the channel,
all of them travel (they only have passive movement
while being pushed) at variable speed from centre
to left or from centre to right. This causes the cells
to have the same direction (see vector field), which
in turn makes mixing more difficult. In Figures 4B
and 4C we show the result of altering the morphol-
ogy of the channels, by adding columns and zig-zag
9
walls, respectively. As a result, the cells show differ-
ent directionality (see vector fields) and the strains
have a higher probability of being mixed. In both
experiments (unlike 4(A)), the three strains are in
contact at some point. If the experimental applica-
tion relied on the conjugation of purple and yellow
cell pairs, for example, we can see that these phys-
ical changes in the channel would be essential.
Another way to intensify the mixing of strains
in a microfluidic trap is to change the main channel
flow strength, with the ob jective of creating turbu-
lence inside the trap. Figures 4D and 4E show a
three-strain population growing in a trap (identi-
cal initial positioning of cells in both) with the only
difference being that the strong flow in the main
channel (white arrows) of 4E creates turbulence (in
the direction of the circled arrow). Two different
colonies are simulated in each experiment, inside
both symmetrical and independent traps. We see
how turbulence helps the cells to get mixed, thanks
to the constant change of direction they display
(see vector field in Figure 4F). Furthermore, we can
avoid missing one strain, as happens with the yel-
low cells in 4D (see Movie DemoDynamics2 -found
in the pro ject repository-), where another run of
this experiment is shown).
Investigations of how manual mixing can affect
conjugation frequencies are described in in [10], us-
ing an Escherichia coli population. We now repro-
duce those results using our software, and give valu-
able insight into the reasons for that behaviour: the
isolation of the recipients. For that purpose (Figure
5) we grow a population of donors (D, red) and re-
cipients (R, yellow) in which the ratio D/R is 50%
and the transconjungants (T, green) are unable to
act as new donors. The frequency of conjugation,
Y, is measured as Y = T/(R + T). The graph in
Figure 5C shows the frequency after 560 minutes of
untouched populations (not mixed, blue bars) and
populations that have been manual ly mixed at 420
minutes (red bars). The difference that the mix-
ing produces is based on the isolation of the recip-
ients in untouched populations. Figure 5A shows
two different occasions in which clusters of recipi-
ents are formed, where the transconjugants do not
allow donors to reach new possible mates. After the
population is completely “shuffled” (5B), the clus-
ters are dissolved, and new pairs of donor-recipient
can arise in the new topology.
10
Figure 4. Dynamical mixing of bacterial strains under different conditions. (A): Three strains (purple,
yellow and blue) growing in a longitudinal pipe. Detail (on the right) shows the vector field
corresponding to the red square (on the left) where the arrows display both directionality and velocity
of every cell. (B): Similar to (A), but with four columns placed in the middle of the pipe. (C): Similar
to A, but with zig-zag borders along the pipe. In (A), (B) and (C), the speed in vector fields is
measured in arbitrary units (a.u.). (D): Six strains (three per trap) grow in two square traps on one
side of the main longitudinal channel. The flow in the channels follows the direction of the arrows. (E):
Similar to (D) but with a much stronger flow in channels, causing turbulence in traps (long circled
arrow). (F): Vector field of experiment (E).
Figure 5. Effects of manual mixing on conjugation frequency. (A): Recipient-trapping behaviour of a
population with donors (red), transconjugants (green) and recipients (yellow). Two snapshots depict
clearly-observed clusters. (B): Population after random mixing, where the clusters are automatically
dissolved. (C): Graph showing conjugation frequencies (Y = T/(R + T)) of 560-minute experiments
(ratio D/R = 50%). Blue bars represent Y on an untouched population, while red bars represent Y
when the population is mixed at 420 minutes. The two sets of bars correspond to experiments with
different cell dimensions (1x3 -left- and 1x2 -right). Error bars show variation across 15 experiments of
each class.
An interesting result from Figure 5C is the fact
that the smaller the size of the cell, the higher re-
sults we observe for conjugation frequencies. This
may be due to the fact that smaller cells are able to
slip through physical gaps, and the biomechanical
ordering of the population becomes more “fuzzy”.
This underlines the importance of considering the
physical shape of cells, since circle-shaped cells
would not give valid results.
5 Discussion
The conjugation model presented here is the first
agent-based model to explicitly simulates the con-
jugation process with growing rod-shaped cells. Full
validation against real data is performed, which
shows the capacity of the software to reproduce ob-
served behaviour. In addition, the mixing study of-
fers valuable insights into the design of multi-strain
populations. The software also allows for genetic
programs to be instal led inside cells; the potential
for horizontal gene transfer to recreate distributed
information processing within a microbial consor-
tium is of significant interest in synthetic biology,
and the software presented will aid the design and
testing of systems before their wet-lab implementa-
tion.
References
1. Heinemann M, Panke S (2006) Synthetic
biology–putting engineering into biology.
Bioinformatics 22: 2790–9.
2. Basu S, Gerchman Y, Collins CH, Arnold
FH, Weiss R (2005) A synthetic multicellular
system for programmed pattern formation.
Nature 434: 1130–4.
3. Mac´ıa J, Posas F, Sol´e RV (2012) Distributed
computation: the new wave of synthetic bi-
ology devices. Trends in Biotechnology 30:
342–9.
11
5. Gardner TS, Cantor CR, Collins JJ (2000)
Construction of a genetic toggle switch in Es-
cherichia coli. Nature 403: 339–42.
6. Auslander S, Auslander D, Muller M,
Wieland M, Fussenegger M (2012) Pro-
grammable single-cell mammalian biocom-
puters. Nature 487: 123–127.
7. Atkinson S, Williams P (2009) Quorum sens-
ing and social networking in the microbial
world. Journal of the Royal Society Interface
6: 959–78.
8. Ortiz ME, Endy D (2012) Engineered cell-cell
communication via DNA messaging. Journal
of Biological Engineering 6.
9. de la Cruz F, Frost LS, Meyer RJ, Zechner
EL (2010) Conjugative DNA metabolism in
Gram-negative bacteria. FEMS Microbiology
Reviews 34: 18–40.
10. del Campo I, Ruiz R, Cuevas A, Revilla C,
Vielva L, et al. (2012) Determination of con-
jugation rates on solid surfaces. Plasmid 67:
174–82.
11. Gorochowski TE, Matyjaszkiewicz A, Todd
T, Oak N, Kowalska K, et al. (2012) BSim:
an agent-based tool for modeling bacterial
populations in systems and synthetic biology.
PLOS ONE 7: e42790.
12. Kreft JU, Booth G, Wimpenny JW (1998)
BacSim, a simulator for individual-based
modelling of bacterial colony growth. Micro-
biology 144: 3275–87.
13. Melke P, Sahlin P, Levchenko A, Jo H (2010)
A cell-based model for quorum sensing in het-
erogeneous bacterial colonies. PLoS Compu-
tational Biology 6: e1000819.
14. Rudge TJ, Steiner PJ, Phillips A, Haseloff J
(2012) Computational modeling of synthetic
microbial biofilms. ACS Synthetic Biology 1:
345–352.
4. Tamsir A, Tabor JJ, Voigt Ca (2011) Robust
multicellular computing using genetically en-
coded NOR gates and chemical ’wires’. Na-
ture 469: 212–5.
15. Emonet T, Macal CM, North MJ, Wicker-
sham CE, Cluzel P (2005) AgentCell: a digi-
tal single-cell assay for bacterial chemotaxis.
Bioinformatics 21: 2714–21.
16. Izaguirre J, Chaturvedi R, Huang C, Cick-
ovski T, Coffland J, et al. (2004) CompuCell,
a multi-model framework for simulation of
morphogenesis. Bioinformatics 20: 1129–37.
17. Holmes AB, Kalvala S, Whitworth DE (2010)
Spatial simulations of myxobacterial devel-
opment. PLoS Computational Biology 6:
e1000686.
18. Krone SM, Lu R, Fox R, Suzuki H, Top
EM (2007) Modelling the spatial dynamics
of plasmid transfer and persistence. Microbi-
ology 153: 2803–16.
19. Merkey BV, Lardon LA, Seoane JM, Kreft
Ju, Smets BF (2011) Growth dependence of
conjugation explains limited plasmid invasion
in biofilms : an individual-based. Environ-
mental Microbiology 13: 2435–2452.
20. Lardon L, Merkey B, Martins S, Dotsch
A, Picioreanu C, et al. (2011) iDynoMiCS
: next-generation individual-based modelling
of biofilms. Environmental Microbiology 13:
2416–2434.
12
21. Seoane J, Yankelevich T, Dechesne A,
Merkey B, Sternberg C, et al. (2011) An
individual-based approach to explain plasmid
invasion in bacterial populations. FEMS Mi-
crobiology Ecology 75: 17–27.
22. Guantes R, Poyatos JF (2006) Dynamical
principles of two-component genetic oscilla-
tors. PLoS Computational Biology 2: e30.
23. Goni-Moreno A, Amos M (2012) A reconfig-
urable NAND/NOR genetic logic gate. BMC
Systems Biology 6.
24. Volfson D, Cookson S, Hasty J, Tsimring
LS (2008) Biomechanical ordering of dense
cell populations. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America 105: 15346–51.
25. Garcill´an-Barcia MP, Cruz FD (2008) Why
is entry exclusion an essential feature of con-
jugative plasmids? Plasmid 60: 1–18.
|
1804.05409 | 1 | 1804 | 2018-04-15T19:03:17 | Simon's Anthill: Mapping and Navigating Belief Spaces | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.CY"
] | In the parable of Simon's Ant, an ant follows a complex path along a beach on to reach its goal. The story shows how the interaction of simple rules and a complex environment result in complex behavior. But this relationship can be looked at in another way - given path and rules, we can infer the environment. With a large population of agents - human or animal - it should be possible to build a detailed map of a population's social and physical environment. In this abstract, we describe the development of a framework to create such maps of human belief space. These maps are built from the combined trajectories of a large number of agents. Currently, these maps are built using multidimensional agent-based simulation, but the framework is designed to work using data from computer-mediated human communication. Maps incorporating human data should support visualization and navigation of the "plains of research", "fashionable foothills" and "conspiracy cliffs" of human belief spaces. | cs.MA | cs | Simon's Anthill: Mapping and Navigating Belief Spaces
PHILIP FELDMAN AND AARON DANT, ASRC Federal
WAYNE LUTTERS, University of Maryland Baltimore County
8
1
0
2
r
p
A
5
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
9
0
4
5
0
.
4
0
8
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Fig. 1. Flocking (green) and stampeding (red) agents
Fig. 2. Belief Map, using simulated lexical trajectories
INTRODUCTION
1.
In the parable of Simon's Ant [Simon 1968], an ant follows a complex path along a beach on to reach its goal. The story
shows how the interaction of simple rules and a complex environment result in complex behavior. But this relationship
can be looked at in another way – given path and rules, we can infer the environment. With a large population of agents
– human or animal – it should be possible to build a detailed map of a population's social and physical environment.
In this abstract, we describe the development of a framework to create such "maps" of human belief space. These
maps are built from the combined trajectories of a large number of agents. Currently, these maps are built using
multidimensional agent-based simulation, but the framework is designed to work using data from computer-mediated
human communication. Maps incorporating human data should support visualization and navigation of the "plains of
research" , "fashionable foothills" and "conspiracy cliffs" of human belief spaces.
2. PREVIOUS WORK
Coming to consensus is rarely an act of compromise. Imagine the passengers of a car, lost and stopped at an intersection
with no GPS. Each passenger has a different idea of where to go. If everyone compromises, then the car will stay at
the intersection. Instead, the passengers need to find a way to agree on a single direction. [Moscovici and Doise 1994]
studied how these kinds of groups first simplify a complex problem, and then align themselves for or against this
simplification. A neurological basis for this sense of "shared direction" has been uncovered by [Stephens et al. 2010],
who showed that fMRI patterns in the brains of storytellers and listeners aligned as a function of shared understanding.
Finding consensus has similarities to collective animal behavior in physical space. Flocking has been shown to
represent a form of group cognition [Petit and Bon 2010]. Schooling fish are better at sensing food in noisy environ-
ments [Grunbaum 1998]. Danchen et. al. showed that animals and humans both use inadvertent social information to
Collective Intelligence 2018.
1:2
•
P. Feldman, A. Dant, and W. Lutters
influence decisions about environmental quality and appropriateness [Danchin et al. 2004]. Agent-based simulation
has proven to be a particularly effective mechanism for modeling these animal patterns [Reynolds 1987], while also
proving effective at modeling cognitive actions such as culture dissemination [Sen and Chakrabarti 2013]. The com-
mon properties of these and other collective behaviors have been explored by [Olfati-Saber et al. 2007], who provides
a theoretical framework for analysis of consensus algorithms for multi-agent networked systems.
3. THE MODEL
Our model is based on two ideas: 1) that human navigation through belief space (a subset of information space that
contains items associated with opinions) is analogous to animal motion through physical space, and 2) that the digital
inadvertent social information provided by humans interacting with the belief environment can be used to characterize
the underlying belief space. To explore these concepts in depth, we built a standalone simulator (Fig.1), based on the
Reynolds model [Reynolds 1987], that represents belief space as a hypercube composed of labeled cells, that supports
manipulating the following elements:
(1) Dimension – Since the number of beliefs that a person may hold is not limited by physical space, the Reynolds
algorithm was modified to work with arbitrary numbers of dimensions.
(2) Velocity – Humans and animals dynamically interact with their physical and information environments. Although
they may have regions or territories that they prefer [Dosen and Ostwald 2013], movement in the physical and
political sense is a defining characteristic.
(3) Heading – There appears to be a rate-limited alignment component that is needed for a group to coalesce. This is
obvious in the physical patters of flocking or schooling, but also manifests in language (e.g. "political alignment")
[DeNicola 2017] and fashion [Curran 1999].
(4) Influence – Agents within a specified social influence horizon (SIH) are capable of influencing each other's ori-
entation and speed in that space, inversely proportional to distance. This interacts with heading, as more aligned
agents have more time to influence each other [Olfati-Saber et al. 2007].
The model produces distinct emergent patterns, by adjusting only the SIH. A zero radius has no interaction, while an
infinite radius interacts with the entire population equally. Additionally, these behaviors emerge more easily at lower
dimensions. We describe the patterns, shown here as agents on a heatmap, as:
Fig. 3. Nomadic Phase
Fig. 4. Flocking Phase
Fig. 5. Stampede Phase
Nomadic Phase (figure 3) - A low SIH means low influence by other agents, so each agent moves along its own
largely independent path.
Flocking Phase (figure 4) - An intermediate SIH results in an agent whose movement is affected by nearby individ-
uals. There is alignment with neighbors, but they do not converge.
Stampede Phase (figure 5) - At high SIH, all members are exposed equally to each other. Alignment converges and
supports runaway conditions [Lande 1981]. This is represented in other literature as "filter bubbles", "echo chambers"
[Flaxman et al. 2016], "group polarization", and "extremism" [Moscovici and Doise 1994].
Collective Intelligence 2018.
Simon's Anthill
•
1:3
4. RESULTS
We used Dynamic Time Warping (DTW) [Salvador and Chan
2007] to determine population membership with respect to SIH.
DTW attempts to find the lowest distance that one set of points
need to be moved to exactly match another sequence of points.
The distribution of DTW distance by agent SIH is shown in
Figure 6. The populations are distinctive and non-overlapping
in our datasets.
The simulator stores a trajectory for each agent that con-
tains the labels of each "belief cell" that they traversed at each
time sample, which serve as a proxy for word embeddings. Like
Yao's dynamic Word2Vec work [Yao et al. 2018], these sets of
terms describes the agent's semantic path. To construct maps
of the environmental and social features of the belief space, we
build a network of term-nodes, using all the agents' trajectories.
Each trajectory creates a string of nodes, one for each cell that
the agent passed through. Common nodes are shared. As trajec-
tories accumulate, identifiable characteristics emerge. Layout is
calculated using the F-R Force-directed algorithm [Fruchterman
and Reingold 1991]. Examples of these constructions are shown in Figures 7, 8, and 9.
Fig. 6. Nomad, Flock, and Stampede DTW
Fig. 7. Nomad map
Fig. 8. Flock map
Fig. 9. Stampede map
In these maps, node size represents the average time that an agent spent "over" the cell, while brightness represents
unique visitors. These maps reflect the characteristics of their respective populations. The nomadic group reproduces
the rectangular shape of the environment. With flocking social influence tends to pull agents towards denser areas away
from the borders. This results in a map with detailed popular areas where agents congregate and unexplored areas
that do not have a reliable relationship with the underlying terms. The stampeding group has the same environmental
awareness of a single agent, but the social inertia of a population. In the map produced by this behavior, the relationship
of the trajectories to the underlying coordinate frame is completely lost.
When we lay out the flocking and stampeding values on the nomadic network, we can see a belief map (Fig 2)
that shows the bounds of the explored environment and the populations. In the image, cylinder diameter is the average
agent dwell time and height is the number of unique visitors. The white nomad population establishes the environment.
The flocking population clusters towards the center, reflecting the mix of social and environmental influences. The red
cylinders reflect the socially dominated behavior of stampeding agents. The gray mesh is all nomad paths.
The next goal of this effort will be to validate our theoretical, simulated model against clean, annotated data of
computer-mediated human interaction. In success, this should lead to the automated production of maps that allow
users to contextualize the beliefs they hold and those they encounter.
Collective Intelligence 2018.
1:4
•
P. Feldman, A. Dant, and W. Lutters
REFERENCES
Louise Curran. 1999. An analysis of cycles in skirt lengths and widths in the UK and Germany, 1954-1990. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal
17, 2 (1999), 65–72.
Etienne Danchin, Luc-Alain Giraldeau, Thomas J Valone, and Richard H Wagner. 2004. Public information: from nosy neighbors to cultural
evolution. Science 305, 5683 (2004), 487–491.
Daniel R DeNicola. 2017. Understanding Ignorance: The Surprising Impact of What We Don't Know. MIT Press.
Annemarie S Dosen and Michael J Ostwald. 2013. Methodological characteristics of research testing prospect–refuge theory: a comparative
analysis. Architectural Science Review 56, 3 (2013), 232–241.
Seth Flaxman, Sharad Goel, and Justin M Rao. 2016. Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly 80,
S1 (2016), 298–320.
Thomas M. J. Fruchterman and Edward M. Reingold. 1991. Graph drawing by force-directed placement. Software: Practice and Experience 21,
11 (1991), 1129–1164. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/spe.4380211102
Daniel Grunbaum. 1998. Schooling as a strategy for taxis in a noisy environment. Evolutionary Ecology 12, 5 (1998), 503–522.
Russell Lande. 1981. Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 78, 6 (1981),
3721–3725.
Serge Moscovici and Willem Doise. 1994. Conflict and consensus: A general theory of collective decisions. Sage.
R. Olfati-Saber, J. A. Fax, and R. M. Murray. 2007. Consensus and Cooperation in Networked Multi-Agent Systems. Proc. IEEE 95, 1 (Jan 2007),
215–233. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2006.887293
Odile Petit and Richard Bon. 2010. Decision-making processes: the case of collective movements. Behavioural Processes 84, 3 (2010), 635–647.
Craig W. Reynolds. 1987. Flocks, Herds and Schools: A Distributed Behavioral Model. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference on Computer
Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH '87). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 25–34. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/37401.37406
Stan Salvador and Philip Chan. 2007. Toward accurate dynamic time warping in linear time and space. Intelligent Data Analysis 11, 5 (2007),
561–580.
Parongama Sen and Bikas K Chakrabarti. 2013. Sociophysics: an introduction. Oxford University Press.
Herbert A Simon. 1968. The sciences of the artificial. MIT press.
Greg J. Stephens, Lauren J. Silbert, and Uri Hasson. 2010. Speaker–listener neural coupling underlies successful communication. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences 107, 32 (2010), 14425–14430. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1008662107
Zijun Yao, Yifan Sun, Weicong Ding, Nikhil Rao, and Hui Xiong. 2018. Dynamic Word Embeddings for Evolving Semantic Discovery. In Pro-
ceedings of the Eleventh ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 673–681.
DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3159652.3159703
Collective Intelligence 2018.
|
cs/0509050 | 1 | 0509 | 2005-09-16T17:15:46 | Effect of door delay on aircraft evacuation time | [
"cs.MA"
] | The recent commercial launch of twin-deck Very Large Transport Aircraft (VLTA) such as the Airbus A380 has raised questions concerning the speed at which they may be evacuated. The abnormal height of emergency exits on the upper deck has led to speculation that emotional factors such as fear may lead to door delay, and thus play a significant role in increasing overall evacuation time. Full-scale evacuation tests are financially expensive and potentially hazardous, and systematic studies of the evacuation of VLTA are rare. Here we present a computationally cheap agent-based framework for the general simulation of aircraft evacuation, and apply it to the particular case of the Airbus A380. In particular, we investigate the effect of door delay, and conclude that even a moderate average delay can lead to evacuation times that exceed the maximum for safety certification. The model suggests practical ways to minimise evacuation time, as well as providing a general framework for the simulation of evacuation. | cs.MA | cs | Effect of door delay on aircraft evacuation time
Martyn Amos and Andrew Wood
Department of Computer Science, University of Exeter, Harrison Building, North Park
Road, Exeter EX4 4QF, UK
The recent commercial launch of twin-deck Very Large Transport Aircraft
(VLTA) such as the Airbus A380 has raised questions concerning the speed at
which they may be evacuated 1. The abnormal height of emergency exits on the
upper deck has led to speculation that emotional factors such as fear may lead to
door delay, and thus play a significant role in increasing overall evacuation time 2.
Full-scale evacuation tests are financially expensive and potentially hazardous, and
systematic studies of the evacuation of VLTA are rare 3. Here we present a
computationally cheap agent-based framework 4 for the general simulation of
aircraft evacuation 5-7, and apply it to the particular case of the Airbus A380. In
particular, we investigate the effect of door delay, and conclude that even a
moderate average delay can lead to evacuation times that exceed the maximum for
safety certification. The model suggests practical ways to minimise evacuation
time, as well as providing a general framework for the simulation of evacuation.
The safe and rapid evacuation of passengers from aircraft during emergencies is
clearly of paramount importance. In order for an aircraft to meet national and
international regulations 8,9, and thus receive certification of its worthiness to fly, tests
must be carried out to ensure that certain evacuation conditions are met. The most
crucial of these conditions is that an aircraft must be capable of being fully evacuated of
passengers and crew within 90 seconds, with only half of the emergency exits available.
Full-scale live evacuation trials using volunteers are expensive to implement and
potentially dangerous for the participants 3. An aircraft's certification is therefore often
2
based on the results of a single trial, and these results are usually kept confidential for
commercial reasons. At the time of writing, no full evacuation test has been carried out
for the Airbus A380. This aircraft is unusual in that it has a “ double-decker ” design,
with two passenger decks stacked one on top of the other. This configuration raises
particular issues concerning evacuation; specifically, the height of the upper exit doors
from the ground. Fears have been raised that the abnormal height (7.9m) of the upper
exits may lead to some passengers delaying their exit from the aircraft 2. Door hesitation
may prove costly in terms of the overall evacuation time, but we are unaware of any
detailed and realistic studies examining the impact of this particular factor.
In order to augment live trials, several computer models have been developed to
simulate the effect on overall evacuation speed of varying factors such as seat
configuration 10, exit spacing 11 and passenger/crew behaviour 6, as well as events such
as fire 7. We propose, along similar lines, a model that may be used to quickly
investigate the particular effect of exit door hesitation on aircraft evacuation time. We
use an agent-based passenger modelling approach, combined with a grid-based
environmental representation. The model was implemented in the NetLogo
programming language 12, a standard multi-agent modelling environment. The internal
structure of the aircraft is represented as a two-dimensional grid of “ patches” , each of
which represents a real area of 0.25m2 (i.e., each patch is 0.5m by 0.5m). The front of
the aircraft is to the right, with the port side at the top, and the starboard side at the
bottom. The mechanism to implement realistic movement of passengers towards the
exits is inspired by a model of slime-mold 13, which uses simple pheromone-based cues
to facilitate cellular aggregation. Each patch is colour-coded according to its proximity
to an exit (coloured red, two patches wide). The brightness of a patch is directly
proportional to its proximity to an exit, and by defining the intensity of various patches
we may highlight one or more routes from any square to the nearest exit. In this way, we
may embed within the simulation signals corresponding to both the aircraft's floor-
3
situated guidance lights and directional instructions issued by the flight crew. In order to
conform to certification regulations, we choose three exits at random (the front and rear
port exits, and the central starboard exit) and block them off with dark patches. Black
patches represent either the gap between seat rows or the wall of the aircraft. An
example of the initial configuration, corresponding to the upper deck of the Airbus
A380, is depicted in Figure 1. We model only the upper deck, and assume no passenger
movement between decks (this is consistent with the planned evacuation test).
Passengers are represented as 199 individual entities (the small arrows in Figure 1) that
are initially placed in seat squares, and which move around the
grid in a probabilistic fashion. The figure of 199 represents full capacity for the A380
upper deck. Each passenger, Pi, has the following attributes defined: pi (current grid
position), hi (heading), mi (maximum speed), si (current speed), di (door delay). The
following global system variables are defined: D (mean passenger door delay, measured
in seconds), and O (exit opening time). The value for O represents the time taken for the
cabin crew to open the exit doors and for emergency slides to be fully deployed, and is
fixed at 14 seconds, based on previous studies 3. The origin of the coordinate system
used is at the centre of the aircraft, so internal grid positions run from -33 to 32 in the x-
dimension, and from 5 to -5 in the y-dimension. Headings range from 0 to 360
(degrees), with the default being 90 (i.e., pointing towards the front of the aircraft).
Door delay, di, is the time taken by an agent at an exit before leaving the aircraft, and is
initialised as a random Poisson-distributed real number with mean D. In order to
represent a full and realistic range of passenger ages and abilities, each agent is assigned
4
a minimum speed of 0 and a randomly-generated, Poisson-distributed maximum speed
between 0.3 m/s and 1.05 m/s, in line with previous studies 3.
A time variable, T, is set to 0, and incremented by 1 every 0.1s. During each
system “ tick” the following occurs: first, the exits are checked. If an agent Ai is on an
exit (and T*10 > O), then di is decremented by 0.1; if di reaches 0 (and T*10 >= O) then
the agent is considered to have exited the aircraft, and is removed from the simulation.
Each agent Pi is then instructed to move towards the nearest exit. This is achieved by Pi
adjusting its heading to try to move up the colour gradient defining the path to the
nearest exit (that is, if a patch adjacent to an agent has a higher colour intensity than the
one currently occupied, the agent will try to move to that patch). Adjacency is defined
by the Moore neighbourhood 14 (i.e., the 8 surrounding patches). All movement is
subject to the restriction that only one agent may occupy a given patch during a single
tick. If the patch ahead is occupied by another agent Pj, then Pi matches the speed of Pj
and decelerates (ensuring that si does not fall below 0); if the patch is empty, then Pi
accelerates (ensuring that si does not exceed mi) and then moves forward a distance
defined by si. This mechanism prevents agents from overtaking one another in the
corridor, leading to gradual group deceleration and the formation of “ traffic jams” , as
well as allowing agents to accelerate into available empty space.
The model was first calibrated with D=0. As data on actual evacuation tests are
commercially-sensitive and not freely available, we used the results obtained by a
previous study 3, which simulated a 90-second certification trial in an aircraft of similar
layout carrying 236 passengers on the upper deck. The average evacuation time in these
simulated trials was 64.1s (range 59.2 – 72.7 ). With a 16% smaller passenger capacity,
we would expect to obtain an average evacuation time in the vicinity of (0.84 * 64.1 =
54s). The average evacuation time for our model, over 100 trials, was 57.9s (std. dev.
1.50), suggesting that the base model is valid. We observed realistic traffic flow
5
patterns, with passengers making full use of alternative routes to the exit, where
available (movies illustrating this are supplied with the supplementary materials.)
We then investigated the effect of increasing average door delay, D. We carried
out 100 trials for each value 0.1 <= D <= 1.5 (in intervals of 0.1). Our findings are
plotted in Figure 2. Based on these results, we predict that the 90s certification threshold
for the Airbus A380 will be exceeded if average door delay, D, exceeds 1.1s. A small-
scale study 2, using a double-deck mock-up with 42 passengers and one exit, yielded an
average door delay of 1.53s. Increasing D to 1.5s within our model gives an average
evacuation time of 106.40s (118% of the certification threshold time.)
We now comment on generic aspects of our simulation framework. The model is
computationally cheap to run; in the worst case (i.e., where D = 1.5), 100 trials were
completed in 395 seconds (under 4 seconds per trial) on an NEC Versa laptop (140 GHz
Intel Pentium, 224 Mb of RAM) running Microsoft Windows XP. It is also
straightforward to add extra environmental or passenger-specific factors to the model,
with little additional computational cost (for example, we have included a “ general
6
uncertainty” variable in the model in order to study the effect of smoke or failure of
cabin warning systems, but this was unused in the current study).
Our agent-based evacuation model is based on plausible assumptions, and
generates realistic overall behaviour using a minimal set of variables. Having calibrated
the model according to available data, we are able to reproduce the findings of previous
studies of aircraft evacuation. We therefore conclude that it is suitable for drawing
conclusions about the effect of exit door hesitation on the evacuation of aircraft. In
addition, the use of environmental cues based on pheromones is a novel aspect of our
simulation which may well find broader application. The main implication of our
findings is that door delay must be minimised for effective evacuation, and this impacts
on airline policy on cabin crew training and passenger briefing. We now call for
complementary data from live evacuations in order to test our model quantitatively.
1. Muir, H. and Thomas, L. Passenger safety and very large transportation aircraft
Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology 76(5), 479-486 (2004).
2. Jungermann, H. & Gohlert, C. Emergency evacuation from double-deck aircraft. In
Foresight and Precaution. Proceedings of ESREL 2000 (eds. Cottam, M.P., Harvey,
D.W., Pape, R.P. and Tait, J.) 989-982 (A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, 2000).
3. Galea, E.R., Blake, S. & Gwynne, S. A methodology and procedure for the
introduction of aircraft evacuation simulation to the aircraft certification process.
European Commission VERRES project, available at
http://fseg.gre.ac.uk/fire/VERRES_Project.html
4. Wooldridge, M. An Introduction to Multiagent Systems (John Wiley & Sons, 2002).
5. Galea, E.R. & Perez Galparsoro,J.M. A computer-based simulation model for the
prediction of evacuation from mass-transport vehicles. Fire Safety Journal 22(4), 341-
366 (1994).
7
6. Muir, H.C., Bottomley, DM & Marrison, C. Effects of motivation and cabin
configuration on emergency aircraft evacuation behavior and rates of egress.
International Journal of Aviation Psychology 6(1), 57-77 (1996).
7. Galea, E.R., Owen, M. & Lawrence, P.J. Computer modelling of human behaviour in
aircraft fire accidents. Toxicology 115, 63-78 (1996).
8. Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), Federal Aviation Regulations,
Washington, USA (1999).
9. JAR Section 1, Part 25.807. Large Aeroplanes: Subpart D Design and Construction,
as published in Joint Aviation Requirements (Change 15), 2001.
10. McLean, G.A., Chittum, C.B., Funkhouser, G.E., Fairlie, G.W. & Folk, E.W.
Effects of seating configuration and number of type III Exits on emergency aircraft
evacuation. FAA Office of Aerospace Medicine Report DOT/FAA/AM-92/27 (1992).
11. Blake, S.J., Galea, E.R., Gwynne, S., Lawrence, P.J. and Filippidis, L. Examining
the effect of exit separation on aircraft evacuation performance during 90-second
certification trials using evacuation modelling techniques. The Aeronautical Journal of
the Royal Aeronautical Society, 1-16 (2002).
12. Wilensky, U. NetLogo. http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/. Center for Connected
Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University. Evanston, IL.
(1999).
13. Resnick, M. Turtles, Termites and Traffic Jams: Explorations in Massively Parallel
Microworlds (MIT Press, Cambridge MA. 1994).
14. Tomassini, M., Sipper, M. & Perrenoud, M. On the generation of high-quality
random numbers by two-dimensional cellular automata. IEEE Transactions on
Computers 49(10), 1146–1151 ( 2000).
8
Authors declare they have no competing financial interests. A.W. contributed to model design and
implementation. M.A. contributed to model design and implementation, carried out experiments and
wrote the paper.
Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to M.A. ([email protected]).
Figure 1: Initial configuration of simulation. The internal layout of the aircraft is
defined by a grid of squares, with the port side at the top of the screen. Each
square is coloured according to its proximity to an exit, with the brightest
squares being closest. Passengers are represented by arrows. This example
depicts the situation where half of the exits are unavailable (rear and front port
side, middle starboard side).
Figure 2: Simulation results for different values of average door delay, D. Each
data point shows the average evacuation time over 100 trials for a particular
value of D. Error bars show standard deviation.
|
1503.08131 | 1 | 1503 | 2015-03-27T16:32:08 | Formation of Robust Multi-Agent Networks Through Self-Organizing Random Regular Graphs | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.SI",
"eess.SY",
"math.CO"
] | Multi-agent networks are often modeled as interaction graphs, where the nodes represent the agents and the edges denote some direct interactions. The robustness of a multi-agent network to perturbations such as failures, noise, or malicious attacks largely depends on the corresponding graph. In many applications, networks are desired to have well-connected interaction graphs with relatively small number of links. One family of such graphs is the random regular graphs. In this paper, we present a decentralized scheme for transforming any connected interaction graph with a possibly non-integer average degree of k into a connected random m-regular graph for some m in [k, k + 2]. Accordingly, the agents improve the robustness of the network with a minimal change in the overall sparsity by optimizing the graph connectivity through the proposed local operations. | cs.MA | cs | Formation of Robust Multi-Agent Networks Through Self-Organizing
Random Regular Graphs
A. Yasin Yazıcıoglu, Magnus Egerstedt, and Jeff S. Shamma
5
1
0
2
r
a
M
7
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
1
3
1
8
0
.
3
0
5
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract -- Multi-agent networks are often modeled as in-
teraction graphs, where the nodes represent the agents and
the edges denote some direct interactions. The robustness of a
multi-agent network to perturbations such as failures, noise,
or malicious attacks largely depends on the corresponding
graph. In many applications, networks are desired to have
well-connected interaction graphs with relatively small number
of links. One family of such graphs is the random regular
graphs. In this paper, we present a decentralized scheme for
transforming any connected interaction graph with a possibly
non-integer average degree of k into a connected random m-
regular graph for some m ∈ [k, k + 2]. Accordingly, the agents
improve the robustness of the network with a minimal change
in the overall sparsity by optimizing the graph connectivity
through the proposed local operations.
I. INTRODUCTION
Multi-agent networks have been used to characterize a
large number of natural and engineered systems such as
biological systems, financial networks, social networks, com-
munication systems, transportation systems, power grids, and
robotic swarms. Multi-agent networks are often represented
via their interaction graphs, where the nodes correspond to
the agents and the edges exist between the agents having
some direct interaction. Various system properties such as
the robustness, mixing time, or controllability of a network
greatly depend on the structure of the corresponding graph
(e.g., [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]). Therefore, graph theoretic analy-
sis of networked systems has received a considerable amount
of attention during the last decade (e.g., [6], [7]).
In many applications, multi-agent networks face various
perturbations such as component failures, noise, or malicious
attacks. One of the fundamental measures that capture the ro-
bustness of networks to such perturbations is the connectivity
of the corresponding graph. A graph is said to be k-node
(or -edge) connected if at least k nodes (or edges) should
be removed to render the graph disconnected. In general,
graphs with higher connectivity have higher robustness to
the targeted removal of their components [1], [2]. For many
networks, well-connected interaction graphs provide robust-
ness to not only the structural failures but also the functional
This work was supported by AFOSR/MURI #FA9550-10-1-0573 and
ONR Project #N00014-09-1-0751.
A. Yasin Yazıcıoglu is with the Laboratory for Information and Decision
Systems, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, [email protected].
Magnus Egerstedt is with the School of Electrical and Computer Engi-
neering, Georgia Institute of Technology, [email protected].
Jeff S. Shamma is with the School of Electrical and Computer En-
gineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, [email protected], and
with King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST),
[email protected].
perturbations such as noise (e.g., [8], [9]). Connectivity can
also be quantified via some spectral measures such as the
algebraic connectivity [10] or the Kirchhoff index [11]. An
arguably richer measure of connectivity is the edge (or
node) expansion ratio (e.g., [12], [13]). If the expansion
ratio of a graph is small, then it is possible to disconnect
a large set of nodes by removing only a small number of
edges (or nodes). Graphs with high expansion ratios are
called expanders. A detailed overview of expanders and
their numerous applications can be found in [14] and the
references therein.
The connectivity of a network can be improved by adding
more edges to the graph. However, each edge stands for
some communications, sensing, or a physical link between
the corresponding agents. Hence, more edges require more
resources. Moreover, too many edges may lead to higher
vulnerability to the cascading failures such as epidemics
(e.g., [15], [16]). Consequently, having a small number of
edges (i.e., sparsity) is desired in many applications. One
family of well-connected yet sparse graphs is the random
regular graphs. A graph is called an m-regular graph if the
number of edges incident to each node (the degree) is equal
to m. A random m-regular graph of order n is a graph that is
selected uniformly at random from the set of all m-regular
graphs with n nodes. As n goes to infinity, almost every
m-regular graph is an expander for any m ≥ 3 [13], [17].
In this paper, we present a decentralized scheme to
transform any connected interaction graph into a connected
random regular graph with a similar number of edges as the
initial graph. Some preliminary results of this work were
presented in [18] and [19], where any initial graph with
an integer average degree, k ∈ N, was transformed into a
random k-regular graph. In this paper, we extend our earlier
works to obtain a method that is applicable to the most
generic case, i.e. k ∈ R. The proposed method transforms
any graph with a possibly non-integer average degree of k
into a random m-regular graph for some m ∈ [k, k + 2]. As
such, the graph becomes well-connected, regardless of the
network size.
The organization of this paper is as follows: Section II
presents some related work. Section III provides some graph
theory preliminaries. Section IV formulates the problem
and presents the proposed solution. Section V provides a
distributed implementation and an analysis of the resulting
dynamics. Section VI provides some simulation results to
demonstrate the performance of the proposed solution. Fi-
nally, Section VII concludes the paper.
II. RELATED WORK
In some applications, the robustness of a graph is related
to the centrality measures such as the degree, betweenness,
closeness, and eigenvector centralities. Loosely speaking, the
centrality measures capture the relative importances of the
nodes in a graph. Detailed reviews on the centrality measures
and their applications can be found in [20], [21] and the
references therein. Typically, the perturbations applied to the
nodes with higher centrality scores have a stronger impact
on the overall system (e.g., [22], [23], [24], [25]). Hence,
graphs with unbalanced centrality distributions are usually
vulnerable to such worst-case perturbations.
In the literature,
there are many works related to the
interaction graphs. Some of these
construction of robust
works consider how a robustness measure can be improved
via some modifications to the graph topology. For instance,
such improvement can be achieved by rewiring a small
percentage of the existing edges (e.g., [26]) or adding a small
number of edges to the graph (e.g., [27], [9]).
Another group of studies consider the explicit construc-
tion of expanders. Expanders can be constructed via graph
operations such as zig-zag product (e.g., [28], [29]), or
derandomized graph squaring [30]. Furthermore, for any
m ∈ N such that m−1 is a prime power, an explicit algebraic
construction method for a family of m-regular expanders, i.e.
Ramanujan graphs, was presented in [31]. In [32], Watts-
Strogatz small-word networks are transformed into quasi
Ramanujan graphs by rewiring some of the edges.
Expanders can also be built as random m-regular graphs.
A detailed survey of the various models of random regular
graphs as well as their properties can be found in [33] and
the references therein. As n goes to infinity, almost every m-
regular graph has an algebraic connectivity arbitrarily close
to m − 2√m − 1 for m ≥ 3 [13], [17]. For regular graphs,
high algebraic connectivity implies high expansion ratios
(e.g., [34]). Hence, for any fixed m ≥ 3, a random m-
regular graph has the algebraic connectivity and expansion
ratios bounded away from zero, even if the network size is
arbitrarily large.
A random m-regular graph with n nodes can be con-
structed by generating m copies for each node, picking a
uniform random perfect matching on the nm copies, and
connecting any two nodes if the matching contains an edge
between their copies (e.g., [35], [36]). In [37], the authors
present a distributed scheme for incrementally building ran-
dom 2m-regular multi-graphs with m Hamiltonian cycles.
Alternatively, some graph processes may be designed to
transform an initial m-regular graph into a random m-regular
graph by inducing a Markov chain with a uniform limiting
distribution over the set of m-regular graphs (e.g., [38], [39]).
The method in this paper is also based on designing a graph
process with a uniform limiting distribution over the set of
m-regular graphs. Compared to the similar works in the
literature, the proposed scheme is applicable to the most
generic case, and it is decentralized. The initial graph is
not required to satisfy some strong properties such as being
regular or having an integer average degree. Furthermore, the
global transformation is achieved via only some local graph
operations.
III. PRELIMINARIES
An undirected graph, G = (V, E), consists of a set of
nodes, V , and a set of edges, E, given by unordered pairs of
nodes. A graph is connected if there exists a path between
any pair of nodes. A path is a sequence of nodes such that
an edge exists between any two consecutive nodes in the
sequence. Any two nodes are said to be adjacent if an edge
exists between them. We refer to the set of nodes adjacent
to any node, i ∈ V , as its neighborhood, Ni, defined as
Ni = {j (i, j) ∈ E}.
(1)
For any node i, the number of nodes in its neighborhood
is called its degree, di, i.e.,
di = Ni,
(2)
where Ni denotes the cardinality of Ni. For any graph G,
we use δ(G), ∆(G) and ¯d(G) to denote the minimum, the
maximum, and the average degrees, respectively. We refer
to the difference of the maximum and the minimum node
degrees in a graph as the degree range, f (G), i.e.
(3)
For any undirected graph, G = (V, E), the graph Lapla-
cian, L, is a symmetric matrix whose entries are given as
f (G) = ∆(G) − δ(G).
[L]ij =
di
−1
0
if i = j,
if (i, j) ∈ E,
otherwise.
(4)
The second-smallest eigenvalue of the graph Laplacian is
known as the algebraic connectivity of the graph, α(G).
Local graph transformations can be represented using the
framework of graph grammars (e.g., [40]). A grammar, Φ,
is a set of rules, where each rule is defined as a label-
dependent graph transformation. Each rule is represented as
an ordered pair of labeled graphs, r = (gl, gr), where the
labels represent the node states. Graph grammars operate
on labeled graphs. A labeled graph, G = (V, E, l), consists
of a node set, V , an edge set, E, and a labeling function,
l : V (cid:55)→ Σ, where Σ is the set of feasible node labels. A rule
is said to be applicable to a labeled graph, G = (V, E, l), if G
has a subgraph isomorphic to gl, i.e. if there is a bijection,
which preserves node labels and edges, between gl and a
subgraph of G. A rule, r = (gl, gr), transforms any graph
isomorphic to gl to a graph isomorphic to gr. A labeled
initial graph, G(0), along with a grammar, Φ, defines a non-
deterministic system represented as (G(0), Φ).
IV. DECENTRALIZED FORMATION OF RANDOM
REGULAR GRAPHS
A. Problem Formulation
Motivated by the connectivity properties of almost every
m-regular graph for m ≥ 3, this paper is focused on the
following problem: Assume that a multi-agent network is
initialized with an arbitrary connected interaction graph. How
can the agents reconfigure their links locally in a decentral-
ized fashion such that the resulting dynamics transform the
interaction graph into a connected random regular graph with
a similar sparsity as the initial graph? Such a transformation
is illustrated in Fig. 1.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 1. A fragile interaction graph (a) with an average degree 2.8 is trans-
formed into a random 3-regular graph (b). The graphs have similar sparsities,
whereas the structure in (b) has a significantly improved connectivity.
In order to transform the interaction graph into a random
regular graph, the agents need to pursue three global ob-
jectives: 1) balance the degree distribution, 2) randomize
the links, and 3) drive the average degree to an integer
close to its initial value. Furthermore, the agents should
ensure that the graph remains connected as they modify
their links. This paper presents a set of locally applicable
graph reconfiguration rules to pursue all of these global
objectives in parallel. In the remainder of this section, we
will
incrementally build the proposed scheme using the
framework of graph grammars.
B. Degree Balancing
As the first step towards building random regular graphs,
we present a local rule for balancing the degree distribution
in a network while maintaining the connectivity and the
total number of edges. The degree balancing task can be
considered as a quantized consensus problem (e.g., [41],
[42]), where each local update needs to be realized via some
local changes in the structure of the graph. In this part, we
design a single-rule grammar, ΦR, for balancing the degree
distribution. In ΦR, each node is labeled with its degree, i.e.
l(i) = di, ∀i ∈ V.
The proposed grammar, ΦR, is defined as
(5)
In accordance with ΦR, nodes behave as follows: Let i and
j be any pair of adjacent nodes. If dj < di, then a new link
is formed between j and an arbitrary neighbor of i, say h,
that is not currently linked with j. At the same time, the link
between i and h is terminated to maintain the overall sparsity.
Note that if dj < di, then i has at least one such exclusive
neighbor, h. Furthermore, if a connected graph is not regular
then there always exists at least one pair of adjacent nodes,
i and j, such that di > dj. Hence, any connected graph is
stationary (i.e., ΦR is not applicable anywhere on the graph)
if and only if it is a regular graph. Moreover, any concurrent
application of ΦR on a connected graph, G, maintains the
connectivity and the average degree of G.
A detailed analysis of the dynamics induced by ΦR can
be found in [18], where it is shown that the degree range,
f (G), monotonically decreases and converges to its minimum
feasible value under ΦR. As such, the graph converges to
a regular graph (i.e., f (G) = 0) if the average degree is
an integer. Otherwise, f (G) converges to 1. For the sake of
brevity, we skip the details of this analysis and only provide
its main result in Theorem 4.1.
Theorem 4.1 Let G(0) be a connected graph and let τ =
{G(0),G(1), . . .} be a feasible trajectory of (G(0), ΦR).
Then, τf = {f (G(0)), f (G(1)), . . .}, almost surely converges
to an integer, τ∗
if ¯d(G(0)) ∈ N
otherwise,
(6)
1
f , such that
∗
f =(cid:26) 0
τ
where ¯d(G(0)) denotes the average degree of G(0).
The grammar ΦR transforms any connected graph with
an integer average degree, k ∈ N,
into a connected k-
regular graph. Note that, although almost every k-regular
graph is an expander for k ≥ 3, ΦR may still result in a rare
configuration with an arbitrarily small expansion rate. For
instance, both of the 3-regular graphs in Fig. 2 are stationary
under ΦR whereas the graph in Fig. 2a can have half of the
network disconnected due the failure of a single edge or a
single node. The probability of converging to an undesired
equilibrium such as the graph in Fig. 2a depends on the initial
graph. In the next part, we will build on ΦR to avoid such
undesired outcomes.
where di, dj, and dh denote the degrees of the corresponding
nodes.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 2. A poorly-connected 3-regular graph (a) and a well-connected 3-
regular graph (b).
djdidhdj+1di−1dhifdi>djr1:,ΦR: C. Link Randomization
In order to ensure that the interaction graph does not
converge to a poorly-connected configuration, we extend ΦR
by adding a second rule for randomizing the links between
the agents. The purpose of this additional rule is to induce a
uniform limiting distribution over the set of all connected k-
regular graphs instead of having the network converge to
an element of that set. As such, the resulting graph will
be a random k-regular graph. A locally applicable method
was introduced in [39] for transforming regular graphs into
random regular graphs. We define an additional rule for ΦR
based on this method. The resulting grammar, ΦRR, uses the
same labels as ΦR, and it is defined as
where di, dj, dh, and df denote the degrees of the corre-
sponding nodes. In accordance with ΦRR, if a node has more
links than one of its neighbors has, then it rewires one of its
other neighbors to its less-connected neighbor (r1). Also,
adjacent nodes exchange their exclusive neighbors (r2).
Both rules in ΦRR maintain the number of edges and
the connectivity. Unlike ΦR, a connected graph is never
stationary under ΦRR (unless it is a complete graph). Once
a regular graph is reached, r1 is not applicable anymore, but
the agents keep randomizing their links via r2.
There may be many feasible concurrent applications of
ΦRR on an interaction graph. In such cases,
the agents
need to execute one of the alternatives randomly. These
randomizations do not have to be uniform, and assigning
each alternative a non-zero probability is sufficient for the
desired limiting behavior to emerge. We provide Algorithm
I as a such distributed implementation that leads to a uniform
limiting distribution over the set of connected k-regular
graphs.
Algorithm I is memoryless since each iteration only
depends on the current graph, and the probability of any
feasible transition is independent of the past. As such, it
induces a Markov chain, PRR, over the set of connected
graphs with the same average degree as the initial graph, i.e.
Gn,k = {G = (V, E) V = n,E =
(7)
n,k ⊆ Gn,k be the set of connected
where k = ¯d(G(0)). Let G0
k-regular graphs. Note that if k ∈ N, then G0
n,k (cid:54)= ∅. A
thorough analysis of the dynamics induced by Algorithm I
kn
2 },
along with the following result can be found in [19].
Theorem 4.2 Let Gn,k satisfy k ∈ N. Then, PRR has a
unique limiting distribution, µ∗, satisfying
if G ∈ G0
n,k,
otherwise.
(G) =(cid:26) 1/G0
n,k
∗
µ
(8)
0
Algorithm I: Distributed Implementation of ΦRR
1 : initialize: G = (V, E) connected, ∈ (0, 1)
2 : repeat
Each agent, i, is active with probability 1 − .
Each active i picks a random j ∈ Ni.
For each i, Ri = {i(cid:48) ∈ Ni i(cid:48) picked i}.
for (each (i, j) s.t. i ∈ Rj, j ∈ Ri, di ≥ dj)
3 :
4 :
5 :
9 :
13 :
12 :
11 :
10 :
6 :
7 : max{i, j} picks a random r ∈ ΦRR.
8 :
if (r = r1, di > dj, Ri ≥ 2)
i picks a random h ∈ Ri \ {j}.
if ((j, h) /∈ E)
E = (E \ {(i, h)}) ∪ {(j, h)}.
end if
else if (r = r2, Ri ≥ 2, Rj ≥ 2)
i picks a random h ∈ Ri \ {j}.
j picks a random f ∈ Rj \ {i}.
if ((i, f ) /∈ E, (j, h) /∈ E)
E = (E \ {(i, h), (j, f )}) ∪ {(i, f ), (j, h)}.
end if
end if
end for
20 :
21 : end repeat
17 :
16 :
14 :
15 :
18 :
19 :
In light of Theorem 4.2, any connected initial graph with
an integer average degree, k ∈ N, can be transformed into a
connected random k-regular graph via ΦRR. For any k ≥ 3,
such graphs have their algebraic connectivity and expansion
ratios bounded away from zero, even when the network size
is arbitrarily large. If k /∈ N, then the degree range converges
to 1 via r1, as given in Theorem 4.1. In that case, the limiting
graph can be loosely described as a random almost-regular
graph. While such graphs have many structural similarities to
random regular graphs, there is not an exact characterization
of their expansion properties. In the next part, we will build
on ΦRR to obtain a grammar that produces random regular
graphs, even when k /∈ N.
D. Average Degree Manipulation
Both ΦR and ΦRR were designed to maintain the overall
network sparsity. In order to obtain random regular graphs
even when the initial graph has a non-integer average degree,
k /∈ N, the agents need to manipulate the total number of
edges. To this end, the sparsity constraint should be relaxed
to allow for occasional increases and decreases in the number
of edges as long as the graph is not regular and the average
degree is within some proximity of its initial value. Also,
the feasible range of the number of edges should ensure that
the average degree can reach an integer value. Since an m-
regular graph with an odd number of nodes does not exist
djdidhdj+1di−1dhr1:djdidhr2:dfdjdidhdfΦRR:ifdi>dj if m is odd, an even integer should always exist within the
feasible range of the average degree. In this part, we derive
such a grammar, Φ∗, by building on ΦRR.
In Φ∗, each node, i ∈ V , has a label, l(i), consisting of two
elements. The first entry of the label is equal to the degree
of the node, just as in ΦR and ΦRR. The second entry of
l(i) is a binary flag that denotes whether the corresponding
agent is allowed to locally increase or decrease the number
of edges in the network. A node, i, can add an extra edge to
the graph only if wi = 0, and it can remove an edge only if
wi = 1. As such, the node labels are defined as
where di denotes the degree of i, and wi ∈ {0, 1}. For any
graph, the degree of each node is already encoded through
the edge set, E. Hence, for the sake of simplicity, a labeled
graph will be denoted as G = (V, E, w) in the sequel. Using
the node labels given in (9), the proposed grammar, Φ∗ =
{r1, r2, r3, r4}, is defined as
l(i) =(cid:20) di
wi (cid:21) ,∀i ∈ V,
(9)
breaks one edge of a triangle if all of its nodes do not have the
same degree and one of the higher degree nodes has its binary
flag equal to 1. Note that the total number of edges decreases
in that case, and the binary flag of the corresponding higher
degree node becomes 0. The final rule, r4, is for exchanging
the binary flags among adjacent nodes. The purpose of r4
is to ensure that the edge additions and removals will be
applicable as long as they are needed to drive the average
degree to an integer. In the remainder of this section, the
dynamics induced by Φ∗ is analyzed.
Lemma 4.3 Graph connectivity is maintained under any
concurrent application of Φ∗.
Proof: Let a connected graph G(t) be transformed into
G(t+1) via some concurrent application of Φ∗. Since G(t) is
connected, for every pair of nodes, v, v(cid:48)
∈ V , G(t) contains
a finite path P between v and v(cid:48). If all the edges traversed
in P are maintained in G(t + 1), then P is also a valid path
on G(t + 1). Otherwise, any missing edge is removed due
to an execution of r1, r2, or r3. Accordingly, the following
procedure can be executed to transform P into a valid path
on G(t + 1) between the same terminal nodes as P :
For each edge that is traversed in P but missing in G(t+1),
1) If the edge was removed via r1 or r3, then replace the
2) If the edge was removed via r2,
corresponding part of the path, {i, h}, with {i, j, h}.
then replace the
corresponding part of the path, {i, h} (or {j, f}), with
{i, j, h} (or {j, i, f}).
Consequently, if G(t) is connected, then G(t + 1) is also
connected.
Note that, unlike ΦR and ΦRR, the the number of edges is
not maintained under Φ∗ due to the possible edge additions
and removals. However, the number of edges is bounded in
an interval through the binary labels, w.
Lemma 4.4 Let G = (V, E, w) be a graph, and let τ be any
feasible trajectory of (G, Φ∗). For any G
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48), w(cid:48)) ∈ τ,
(10)
(cid:48)
− E = 1T w
where 1 is the vector of all ones.
E
(cid:48)
− 1T w,
The rules in Φ∗ can be interpreted as follows: The first
rule, r1, is a variant of the degree balancing rule in ΦRR.
While r1 induces a transformation identical to the degree
balancing rule in ΦRR with a probability, 1 − β, there is
also a nonzero probability, β, that if the higher degree node
has its binary flag equal to 0, then it maintains its link with
the neighbor introduced to its lower degree neighbor. Note
that the total number of edges increases in that case, and the
binary flag of the corresponding higher degree node becomes
1. The second rule, r2, is the same link randomization rule
as in ΦRR. The third rule, r3, is the edge removal rule which
Proof:
Let G(t) = (V, E(t), w(t)) and G(t + 1) = (V, E(t +
1), w(t+1)) be a pair of consecutive graphs on any trajectory,
τ, of (G, Φ∗). Note that the number of edges is maintained
under r2 and r4, and it can increase by 1 only due to r1 or
decrease by 1 only due to r3. If an application of r1 adds an
extra edge to the network, then one of the nodes involved in
that transformation, i, satisfies wi(t+1)−wi(t) = 1, whereas
the other two participating nodes maintain their w entries. On
the other hand, for each application of r3, one of the nodes
involved in that transformation, i, satisfies wi(t+1)−wi(t) =
−1 while the other two participating nodes maintain their w
entries. Furthermore, any rule application that maintains the
number of edges also maintains the sum of w entries of the
djifdi>djr1:r3:Φ∗:wjdhwhdiwidj+1wjdidh+1whdj+1wjdi−1widhwhw.p.β,ifwi=0w.p.1−βr2:dfwfdjwjdiwidhwhr4:djwjdiwidjwidiwjdi1dhwhdjwjifdi>djdi−10dh−1whdjwjdfwfdhwhdjwjdiwi1 participating nodes. In particular, any edge rewiring via r1
or any neighbor swapping via r2 maintain the w entries of
the participating nodes, whereas any label exchange via r4
maintains the sum of labels. Hence, E(t) and E(t+1) satisfy
(11)
E(t + 1) − E(t) = 1T w(t + 1) − 1T w(t).
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48), w(cid:48)) ∈ τ.
Using induction, it can be shown that (11) implies (10) for
any G
Corollary 4.5 Let G = (V, E, 0) be a graph, and let
τ be any feasible trajectory of (G, Φ∗). For any G
(cid:48) =
(V, E(cid:48), w(cid:48)) ∈ τ,
E ≤ E
≤ E + V .
(12)
Proof: Let G = (V, E, 0) be a graph, and let τ be any
feasible trajectory of (G, Φ∗). In light of Lemma 4.4, every
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48), w(cid:48)) ∈ τ satisfies
G
(13)
− E = 1T w
− 1T 0 = 1T w
E
(cid:48)
(cid:48)
(cid:48)
(cid:48)
.
Since each entry of w is either equal to 1 or equal 0,
(cid:48)
0 ≤ 1T w
≤ V .
(14)
Hence, (13) and (14) together imply (12).
Corollary 4.5 provides the upper and the lower bounds on
the of number of edges along any trajectory of (G, Φ∗) for
any G = (V, E, 0). Lemma 4.6 shows that the corresponding
implies an integer
interval always contains a value that
average degree.
Lemma 4.6 For any G = (V, E), a graph, G
satisfying ¯d(G
edges to G.
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48)),
(cid:48)) ∈ N can be formed by adding at most V
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48))
Proof: Let G = (V, E) be a graph, and let G
be a graph that is formed by adding η edges to G. Then,
(15)
2(E + η)
.
) =
(cid:48)
¯d(G
(16)
≤ V since 0 ≤ q < V .
V
For any G = (V, E), there exists unique pair of integers,
p, q ∈ N, such that 0 ≤ q < V and
E = pV + q.
Let η∗ = V − q. Note that η∗
Furthermore, by plugging η∗ into (15), we obtain
2(E + η∗)
(17)
Since p ∈ N, we have 2(p + 1) ∈ N. Hence, for any G =
(V, E), there exists 0 ≤ η ≤ η∗ such that a graph, G
(cid:48) =
(V, E(cid:48)), satisfying ¯d(G
(cid:48)) ∈ N can be obtained by adding η
edges to G.
In light of Lemma 4.6, the interval in (12) always has at
least one value implying an integer average degree. Next, it
is shown that (G, Φ∗) almost surely reaches a regular graph
for any connected G = (V, E, 0) such that ¯d(G) > 2.
+ 2 − 2
= 2(p + 1).
q
V
q
V
= 2p + 2
V
Proof:
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48), w(cid:48)), satisfying E(cid:48)
Lemma 4.7 Let G = (V, E, w) be a connected graph such
that ¯d(G) /∈ N. If 1T w < V , then G can be transformed via
Φ∗ into a graph, G
= E + 1.
If ¯d(G) /∈ N, then G has to be a non-regular
graph. Furthermore, since G is connected, then there has
to be at least a pair of neighboring nodes, i and j, with
different degrees. Without loss of generality let di > dj.
Then, i should have at least one neighbor that is not linked
to j. As such, r1 is applicable on G = (V, E). Furthermore,
since each entry of w is either 0 or 1, at least one entry of w
is equal to 0 if 1T w < V . If wi = 0, then an extra edge can
be added to the graph via r1 with probability β. If wi (cid:54)= 0,
then there exists another node, i(cid:48), such that wi(cid:48) = 0. Apply
r4 along the shortest path between i and i(cid:48) to obtain wi = 0.
Once wi = 0 is obtained, then with probability β an extra
edge can be added to the graph in accordance with r1 to
obtain a graph, G
= E + 1.
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48), w(cid:48)), satisfying E(cid:48)
Lemma 4.8 Let G = (V, E, w) be a connected triangle-free
graph. If ¯d(G) > 2, then G can be transformed via Φ∗ into
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48), w), containing at least one triangle.
a graph, G
Proof: Let G = (V, E, w) be a connected triangle-
free graph. Since ¯d(G) > 2, G has to be a cyclic graph.
Consider the shortest cycle on G, Cs. Note that Cs has to
contain at least 4 nodes, since G is triangle-free. Furthermore,
if ¯d(G) > 2, then Cs cannot contain all the nodes of G, as
otherwise G has to be a cycle graph with ¯d(G) = 2. Also,
since G is a connected graph, at least one node on Cs must
be linked to a node that is not contained in Cs. Without loss
of generality, let i be a node on Cs connected to an off-cycle
node, h. Furthermore, let j denote a neighbor of i on Cs.
Note that h can not be connected to j since G is triangle-free.
Furthermore, since the Cs contains at least 4 nodes, j has to
have another neighbor on Cs, f, which is not connected to
i. If i and j execute r2 by rewiring h and f to each other,
Cs becomes a shorter cycle. Note that w is invariant under
r2. Hence, by repeating this process until Cs consists of 3
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48), w),
nodes, G can be transformed into a graph, G
containing at least one triangle.
Lemma 4.9 Let G = (V, E, w) be a connected graph such
that ¯d(G) /∈ N. If 1T w > 0 and ¯d(G) > 3, then G can be
transformed via Φ∗ into a graph, G
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48), w(cid:48)), satisfying
E(cid:48)
= E − 1.
Proof: Let G = (V, E, w) be a connected graph such
that ¯d(G) /∈ N. Since ¯d(G) /∈ N, the degree range can be
reduced to 1 without changing ¯d and w via r1, as given
in Theorem 4.1. Furthermore, in light of Lemma 4.8, if the
resulting graph is triangle-free, then it can be transformed
via r2 into a graph, G+ = (V, E+, w), which contains at
least one triangle. Since ∆(G+) − δ(G+) = 1 and ¯d(G+) =
¯d(G) > 3, we have δ(G+) ≥ 3.
If 1T w > 0, then at least one entry of w is equal to
1. As such, wi = 1 can be reached for any i ∈ V via a
(cid:54)= d+
i > d+
i(cid:48) or d+
i < d+
1) If d+
i > d+
i(cid:48) , then d+
= E − 1.
i , and either d+
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48)), satisfying E(cid:48)
sequence of r4 applications. Hence, if any of the triangles in
G+ involves nodes with non-uniform degrees, then one edge
of the triangle can be broken in accordance with r3 to obtain
a graph, G
On the other hand, assume that all the triangles on G+
consist of nodes with uniform degrees. Let i, j, and h be the
nodes of such a triangle. Consider the shortest path from any
node of this triangle to a node whose degree is not equal to
the degrees of the triangle nodes. Without loss of generality,
let this path be between i and i(cid:48) such that d+
i . Note
i(cid:48)
that each node other than i(cid:48) on this path has its degree equal
to d+
i(cid:48) . Both cases are
inspected below:
i ≥ 4 given that δ(G+) ≥ 3.
Hence, the node next to i(cid:48) on the shortest path has at least
one neighbor outside the shortest path that is not connected
to i(cid:48). Applying r1 by rewiring such a neighbor to i(cid:48) results
in a shorter path from i to a smaller degree node. Applying
the same procedure eventually results in a smaller degree
node being adjacent to i. Since d+
i ≥ 4, i has at least
one neighbor other than j and h to rewire to its smaller
degree neighbor. After the corresponding application of r1,
we obtain a triangle of nodes with non-uniform degrees.
Hence, one edge of the triangle can be broken in accordance
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48), w(cid:48)), satisfying
with r3 to obtain a graph, G
E(cid:48)
= E − 1.
i(cid:48) , then i(cid:48) can apply r1 to rewire one of
2) If d+
its neighbors to the node on the shortest path next to itself.
This results in a shorter path from i to higher degree node is
obtained. Applying the same procedure eventually increases
the degree of i, and we obtain a triangle of nonuniform
degrees. Hence, one edge of the triangle can be broken in
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48), w(cid:48)),
accordance with r3 to obtain a graph, G
satisfying E(cid:48)
Lemma 4.10 Let G = (V, E, 0) be a connected graph. If
¯d(G) > 2, then (G, Φ∗) almost surely reaches an m-regular
graph such that ¯d(G) ≤ m ≤ ¯d(G) + 2.
= E − 1.
i < d+
Proof: Let G = (V, E, 0) be a connected graph such
that ¯d(G) > 2. Due to Corollary 4.5, the number of edges
stays in {E,E + 1, . . .E + V } along any trajectory
of (G, Φ∗). In light of Lemma 4.6, this interval contains at
least one value, E + η, such that the corresponding average
degree, m, is an integer satisfying
2(E + η)
V
≤ ¯d(G) + 2.
¯d(G) ≤ m =
(18)
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48), w(cid:48)) be
As such, m ≥ 3 since ¯d(G) > 2. Let G
(cid:48)) /∈ N. Then,
a graph reached from G via Φ∗ such that ¯d(G
either E(cid:48)
> E + η. Both cases are
inspected below:
1) If E(cid:48)
− E < V . As
(cid:48) can have its number of edges
such, in light of Lemma 4.7, G
increased by 1 via Φ∗. This process can be repeated unless
the average degree reaches an integer value.
< E + η or E(cid:48)
< E + η, then 1T w(cid:48) = E(cid:48)
> E + η, then 1T w(cid:48) = E(cid:48)
2) If E(cid:48)
− E > 0.
(cid:48)) > 3 since m ≥ 3. As such, in light
Furthermore, ¯d(G
(cid:48) can have its number of edges decreased
of Lemma 4.9, G
by 1 via Φ∗. This process can be repeated unless the average
degree reaches an integer value.
Hence, in either case it is possible to add or remove edges
to the network via Φ∗ until the number of edges implies
an integer average degree, m ∈ [ ¯d(G), ¯d(G) + 2]. Once an
average degree of m is obtained, then the graph can be
driven to a m-regular configuration through a sequence of
(cid:48) has a non-zero probability
r1 applications. As such, any G
of reaching an m-regular graph after a finite sequence of Φ∗
applications. Consequently, (G, Φ∗) almost surely reaches an
m-regular graph such that ¯d(G) ≤ m ≤ ¯d(G) + 2.
Unlike ΦR and ΦRR, the degree range does not monotoni-
cally decrease under Φ∗ due to the possible edge addition and
removals. For instance, increasing the total number of edges
via r1 would increases the degree range if dh = ∆(G) and
δ(G) < dj. However, if a regular graph is reached, then the
graph remains regular since neither r1 nor r3 are applicable
on a regular graph.
Lemma 4.11 Let G be an m-regular graph. Any feasible
trajectory of (G, Φ∗) consists of only m-regular graphs.
Proof: On an m-regular graph, r1 and r3 are not appli-
cable since di = dj for any pair of nodes, i, j. Furthermore,
since the node degrees are invariant to the applications of
r2 and r4, any feasible trajectory of (G, Φ∗) consists of only
m-regular graphs.
Once an m-regular graph is reached, the graph evolves
only under r2 and r4. As such, it keeps randomizing within
the corresponding set of m-regular graphs. The induced
limiting distribution depends on how the agents implement
Φ∗. In the next section, we present a distributed implemen-
tation that leads to a uniform limiting distribution over the
corresponding set of m-regular graphs.
V. DISTRIBUTED IMPLEMENTATION
In this section, we present Algorithm II as a distributed
implementation of Φ∗ and analyze the resulting dynamics.
In accordance with Algorithm II, the nodes behave as
follows: At each iteration, each node is inactive with a
probability, ∈ (0, 1). The inactivation probability, , ensures
that any feasible application of Φ∗ can be realized through
Algorithm II, as it will be shown in Lemma 5.1. Inactive
nodes do not participate in any rule execution in that time
step. Each active agent, i, picks one of its neighbors, j ∈ Ni,
uniformly at random, and it communicates its degree to that
neighbor. Through these communications, each active agent,
i, obtains the list of neighbors that picked itself, Ri ⊆ Ni,
and checks if it is matched, i.e. if j ∈ Ri. If that is not the
case, then i is a follower in that time step, i.e. it will not
initiate a rule execution but it will participate if j wants to
rewire i to some other node. If j ∈ Ri, then i and j are
matched. Each matched pair randomly pick a candidate rule,
r ∈ Φ∗, that they will potentially execute. In Algorithm II,
without loss of generality, the candidate rule is picked by the
agent with the larger node ID, i.e. max{i, j}. Depending on
the chosen rule, r ∈ Φ∗, the matched pair of nodes, i and j,
do one of the following:
1) r = r1: If di > dj and Ri ≥ 2, then i chooses a
neighbor, h (cid:54)= j ∈ Ri, uniformly at random. If h /∈
Nj, then, with probability 1 − β, h is rewired to j.
With the remaining probability β, if wi = 0, a link is
formed between h and j, the link between i and h is
maintained, and w(cid:48)
i = 1.
2) r = r2: If Ri,Rj ≥ 2, both i and j choose one
neighbor, h (cid:54)= j ∈ Ri and f (cid:54)= i ∈ Rj, uniformly at
random. If neither h nor f is linked to both i and j,
then r2 is executed by rewiring h to j and f to i.
3) r = r3: If di > dj, Ri ≥ 2), and wi = 1, then i
chooses a neighbor, h (cid:54)= j ∈ Ri, uniformly at random.
If h ∈ Nj, then the link between i and h is removed
and w(cid:48)
i = wj
and w(cid:48)
4) r = r4: i and j swap their binary flags, i.e. w(cid:48)
i = 0.
j = wi.
A feasible iteration of the algorithm on a network is illus-
trated in Fig. 3, where G = (V, E, w) is transformed into
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48), w(cid:48)) in one time step.
G
Algorithm II: Distributed Implementation of Φ∗
1 : initialize: G = (V, E, w = 0) connected, , β ∈ (0, 1)
2 : repeat
3 :
4 :
5 :
Each agent, i, is active with probability 1 − .
Each active i picks a random j ∈ Ni.
For each i ∈ V , Ri = {i(cid:48) ∈ Ni i(cid:48) picked i}.
for (each (i, j) s.t. i ∈ Rj, j ∈ Ri, di ≥ dj)
6 :
7 : max{i, j} picks a random r ∈ Φ∗.
8 :
if (r = r1, di > dj, Ri ≥ 2)
i picks a random h ∈ Ri \ {j}.
if ((j, h) /∈ E)
i picks a random β(cid:48) ∈ [0, 1].
if (β(cid:48) ≥ β)
E = (E \ {(i, h)}) ∪ {(j, h)}.
else if (wi = 0)
E = E ∪ {(j, h)}, wi = 1.
end if
end if
else if (r = r2, Ri ≥ 2,Rj ≥ 2)
i picks a random h ∈ Ri \ {j}.
j picks a random f ∈ Rj \ {i}.
if ((i, f ) /∈ E, (j, h) /∈ E)
E = (E \ {(i, h), (j, f )}) ∪ {(i, f ), (j, h)}.
9 :
10 :
11 :
12 :
13 :
14 :
15 :
16 :
17 :
18 :
19 :
20 :
21 :
22 :
24 :
25 :
26 :
27 :
23 :
else if (r = r3, di > dj, Ri ≥ 2, wi = 1)
i picks a random h ∈ Ri \ {j}.
if ((j, h) ∈ E)
E = E \ {(i, h)}, wi = 0.
end if
else if (r = r4)
Swap wi and wj.
end if
end for
31 :
32 : end repeat
28 :
29 :
30 :
Some steps of a feasible iteration of Algorithm II on G in (a)
Fig. 3.
resulting in G(cid:48) in (c) along with the probabilities of the corresponding events.
In this example, each node other than 8 is active and picks a neighbor as
illustrated in (b), where each arrow is pointed from a node to its chosen
neighbor. Accordingly, (1,3) and (4,6) are the matched pairs. With a joint
probability of 1/16, node 3 picks r1, and node 6 picks r2 as the candidate
rules for their respective matchings. Furthermore, since R3 \ {1} = {5},
R4 \ {6} = {2}, and R6 \ {4} = {7}; node 3 picks node 5; node 4 picks
node 2; and node 6 picks node 7 to rewire. Finally, the edge between node
3 and 5 is maintained with a probability β (w3 = 0). Hence, given (b), G(cid:48)
can emerge with a probability of β/16.
Note that Algorithm II maintains connectivity due to
Lemma 4.3. Let k = ¯d(G(0)) be the average degree of the
initial graph, G(0) = (V, E(0), 0). Then, the average degree
remains in [k, k + 2] due to Corollary 4.5. Furthermore,
Algorithm II is memoryless since each iteration only depends
on the current graph, and the probability of any feasible
transition is independent of the past. Hence, it induces a
Markov chain over the state space, Gn,[k,k+2], consisting of
connected labeled graphs with n nodes and average degrees
contained in [k, k + 2], i.e.
Gn,[k,k+2] = {G = (V, E, w) V = n,E = 0.5kn+1T w},
(19)
where wi ∈ {0, 1} for every i ∈ V .
space at time t. Then, µ(t) satisfies
Let µ(t) denote the probability distribution over the state
∗
µT (t + 1) = µT (t)P
(20)
where P ∗ is the corresponding probability transition matrix.
Accordingly, the probability of transition from any G to any
(cid:48) is denoted by P ∗(G,G
G
By following Algorithm II, the agents concurrently modify
(cid:48)).
,
1234567812345678w.p.ǫ(1−ǫ)7Yi6=81di12345678R1={3}R2=∅R4={2,6}R6={4,7}R3={1,5}R5=∅R7=∅R8=∅w.p.β16GG′(b)(a)(c)w1=0w2=0w4=0w6=0w8=0w3=0w5=0w7=0w′1=0w′2=0w′4=0w′6=0w′8=0w′3=1w′5=0w′7=0 their neighborhoods in accordance with Φ∗ such that any
feasible transformation occurs with a non-zero probability.
∈ Gn,[k,k+2],
In other words, for any pair of graphs, G,G
the corresponding transition probability, P ∗(G,G
(cid:48)), is non-
(cid:48) in a single time
zero if it is possible to transform G into G
step via Φ∗.
(cid:48)
(cid:48)
(cid:48) can be reached from G in one step via Φ∗,
∈ Gn,[k,k+2] be any pair of graphs.
then
Lemma 5.1 Let G,G
If G
P ∗(G,G
(cid:48)) > 0 .
Proof:
(cid:48) be reachable from G in one step via Φ∗, and let
Let G
G = {g1, g2, . . .} denote the corresponding set of disjoint
(cid:48). Note that
subgraphs of G to be transformed to reach G
for each g ∈ G there is a r = (gl, gr) ∈ Φ∗ satisfying
g (cid:39) gl. In order to show that P ∗(G,G
(cid:48)) > 0, we present a
feasible flow of Algorithm II that transforms G by applying
the corresponding r ∈ Φ∗ to each g ∈ G. For each g ∈ G,
let each node in g be active and pick a neighbor as illustrated
in Fig. 4.
Fig. 4. An arrow is pointed from each agent to the neighbor it picked.
For each g ∈ G, the nodes in g have non-zero probability to pick their
neighbors as shown in (a) if r = r1, (b) if r = r2, (c) if r = r3, and (d)
if r = r4.
Furthermore, let any node that is not included in any g ∈ G
be inactive, which ensures that only the subgraphs in G will
be transformed. Finally, let each g pick the corresponding
r as the candidate ruler to execute. In that case, the agents
are guaranteed to only apply the corresponding r ∈ Φ∗ to
each g ∈ G. Hence, the corresponding transformation has a
non-zero probability in P ∗.
The state space, Gn,[k,k+2] can be represented as the
n,[k,k+2] (regular graphs) and
union of two disjoint sets, G0
G+
n,[k,k+2] (non-regular graphs), defined as
G0
n,[k,k+2] = {G ∈ Gn,[k,k+2] f (G) = 0},
G+
n,[k,k+2] = Gn,[k,k+2] \ G0
(21)
(22)
n,[k,k+2] (cid:54)= ∅ for k > 2. Let M
In light of Lemma 4.10, G0
n,[k,k+2].
denote the set of all such m, i.e.
M = {m ∈ N k ≤ m ≤ k + 2, 0.5mV ∈ N}.
The set of regular graphs, G0
the union of some disjoint sets as
(23)
n,[k,k+2], can be written as
G0
n,[k,k+2] = (cid:91)m∈M
G0
n,m,
(24)
(26)
where each G0
n,m is the set of m-regular graphs defined as
G0
n,m = {G ∈ G0
(25)
n,[k,k+2] ¯d(G) = m}.
In the remainder of this section, the limiting behavior of
P ∗ is analyzed. In light of Lemma 4.10, if k > 2, then any
connected G(0) = (V, E(0), 0) almost surely converges to
n,[k,k+2]. Next, we show that, for each m ∈ M, G0
G0
n,m is a
closed communicating class.
Lemma 5.2 If k > 2, then G0
class of P ∗ for each m ∈ M.
n,m is a closed communicating
Proof:
n,m. Hence, each G0
In Light of Lemma 4.11, only r2 and r4 is
applicable on any m-regular graph, and any resulting graph
is m-regular. Hence, once the system reaches any G0
n,m, it
stays in G0
n,m. Furthermore, in light of Theorem 4.2, any
m-regular structure can be reached from any other via r2.
Moreover, since all the graphs in G0
n,m are connected, any
permutation of the elements in w is also reachable via r4 for
each graph structure in G0
n,m is a closed
communicating class of P ∗.
The limiting behavior of Algorithm II depends on the
limiting behavior of P ∗ in each closed communicating
class. Note that for each G0
n,m, there is a unique stationary
distribution, µ∗
n,m. Next, it is
shown that each µ∗
m is a limiting distribution that is uniform
over G0
n,m. To this end, first it is shown that the transitions
between any two regular graphs are symmetric.
∈ G0
m, of P ∗ whose support is G0
n,m be any pair
(cid:48)
Lemma 5.3 For any m ∈ M, let G,G
of m-regular graphs. Then,
(cid:48)
(cid:48)
(G,G
(G
Proof: For any m ∈ M, let G,G
) = P
P
∗
∗
,G).
(cid:48)
∈ G0
(cid:48),G) > 0.
n,m be any pair
of m-regular graphs. Note that r1 and r3 are not applicable
on any graph in G0
n,m since all the nodes have equal degrees.
(cid:48) is only via r2 or r4. Since
Hence, any transition from G to G
(cid:48)) > 0 if and only if
both r2 and r4 are reversible, P ∗(G,G
P ∗(G
Let us consider an arbitrary execution of Algorithm II,
(cid:48). Let u be the corresponding
where G is transformed into G
vector of randomly picked neighbors in line 4 of Algorithm
II (let ui = null if i is inactive). For each node, i, let
Ri(u) be the set of nodes that picked i, and let M (u) =
{(i, j) i ∈ Rj(u), j ∈ Ri(u)} be the set of matched
pairs. In the remainder of the proof, it is shown that for
any such feasible execution there exists an equally likely
(cid:48) back to G. For
execution of Algorithm II that transforms G
(cid:48) = (V, E(cid:48), w(cid:48)), consider the vector, u(cid:48), whose entries are
G
djwjdhwhdiwidfwfdjwjdiwidhwhdjwjdiwidi1dhwhdjwj(a)(b)(c)(d) (cid:48)
u
uui
i =(cid:26) ui
if ui = null or (i, ui) ∈ E(cid:48),
otherwise.
(27)
Note that Pr[u] = Pr[u(cid:48)] since the inactive nodes will
remain inactive with the same probability, and each active
node picks a neighbor uniformly at random. Furthermore,
M (u) = M (u(cid:48)). Let each (i, j) ∈ M (u) randomly choose
the same candidate rule, r, they executed in the transition
(cid:48). As such, if r = r4, then i and j will swap
from G to G
wi and wj back. On the other hand, if r = r2, then i and j
will reverse the neighbor-swapping in the transition from G
(cid:48) with the same probability (lines 12-17 in Algorithm II)
to G
since Ri(u) = Ri(u(cid:48)) and Rj(u) = Rj(u(cid:48)) for every
(i, j) ∈ M (u). As such, all the local transformations from
(cid:48) can be reversed with the same probability under
G to G
Algorithm II. Consequently, P ∗(G,G
Lemma 5.4 For any m ∈ M, there is a unique limiting
distribution, µ∗
(cid:48)) = P ∗(G
(cid:48),G).
if G ∈ G0
otherwise.
n,m,
(28)
∗
µ
m, of P ∗ satisfying
m(G) =(cid:26) 1/G0
n,m
Proof: For any m ∈ M, G0
0
n,m by G0
m be the G0
n,m is a closed communicat-
ing class due to Lemma 5.2. As such, for each G0
n,m, there
exists a unique stationary distribution, µ∗
m, whose support is
n,m. Let P ∗
G0
n,m probability transition
matrix that only represents the transitions within G0
n,m. Due
to Lemma 5.2, P ∗
m is aperiodic
since P ∗(G,G) > 0 for every G (for instance, there is a
non-zero probability of all the nodes being inactive). As
is a
such,
limiting distribution. Furthermore, due to Lemma 5.3, P ∗
m
is symmetric, and it is consequently doubly stochastic. As a
result, µ∗
the corresponding stationary distribution, µ∗
m,
m is irreducible. Also P ∗
m is uniform over G0
n,m.
Theorem 5.5 For any connected G = (V, E, 0) satisfying
¯d(G) > 2, P ∗ leads to a limiting distribution, µ∗
G, given as
(29)
∗
µ
G = (cid:88)m∈M
∗
m,
n,m]µ
Pr[G → G0
is the probability that
where Pr[G → G0
the chain
initialized at G ever enters the set of m-regular graphs,
n,m, and each µ∗
G0
n,m]
m is uniform over its support, G0
n,m.
Proof: Due to Lemma 4.10, the Markov chain initial-
ized at any connected G = (V, E, 0) satisfying ¯d(G) > 2
almost surely enters a closed communicating class of m-
regular graphs, G0
n,m, such that m ∈ M. Furthermore, each
n,m has a uniform limiting distribution, µ∗
G0
m as given in
Lemma 5.4. Hence, P ∗ leads to the convex combination of
limiting distributions, µ∗
m is weighted by
the probability that the chain starting at G ever enters G0
n,m.
In light of Theorem 5.5, Algorithm II asymptotically trans-
forms any connected initial graph, G = (V, E, 0), satisfying
m, where each µ∗
¯d(G) > 2 into a random m-regular graph for some m ∈ M
as given in (23). When M is not a singleton, the probability
of reaching each G0
n,m depends on the initial graph as well as
the algorithm parameters , β ∈ (0, 1). However, the graphs
observed in the limit are guaranteed to be expanders since
¯d(G) > 2 implies m ≥ 3 for every m ∈ M.
VI. SIMULATION RESULTS
In this section, we present some simulation results for the
proposed scheme. An arbitrary connected graph, G(0) =
(V, E, 0), is generated with 100 nodes and 135 edges. As
the initial average degree is ¯d(G(0)) = 2.7. The
such,
interaction graph is evolved via Algorithm II with = β =
0.01 for a period of 100000 steps. Since ¯d(G(0)) = 2.7,
the average degree is guaranteed to remain in [2.7, 4.7] for
any feasible trajectory, as given in Corollary 4.5. Since the
number of nodes is even, both integers in this interval are
feasible values for the average degree, i.e. M = {3, 4}.
In light of Theorem 5.5, the graph is expected to become
either a random 3-regular graph or a random 4-regular graph.
In the presented simulation, the graph reaches a 3-regular
graph after 45123 time steps. Note that once the system
enters G0
100,3, both f (G(t)) and ¯d(G(t)) are stationary. Fig.
5 illustrates G(0) and G(100000), which have the algebraic
connectivities of 0.02 and 0.25, respectively. The values of
the degree range, f (G(t)), and the average degree, ¯d(G(t)),
for the first 50000 steps are illustrated in Fig. 6. Once a
3-regular graph is reached, the graph keeps randomizing
in G0
100,3 via r2 and r4. The evolution of the algebraic
connectivity throughout this simulation is shown in Fig. 7.
As expected from random 3-regular graphs, the algebraic
connectivity of the network is observed to be at least 3−2√2
with a very high probability after a sufficient amount of time.
VII. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, we presented a decentralized graph reconfig-
uration scheme for building robust multi-agent networks. In
particular, we focused on the connectivity properties of the
interaction graph as the robustness measure. Accordingly, we
provided a decentralized method for transforming interaction
graphs into well-connected graphs with a similar sparsity as
the initial graph. More specifically, the proposed solution
produces random m-regular graphs in the limit. Such graphs
are expanders for any m ≥ 3, i.e. they have the algebraic
connectivity and expansion ratios bounded away from zero
regardless of the network size.
The proposed method was incrementally built in the paper.
First, a single-rule grammar, ΦR, was designed for balancing
the degree distribution in any connected network with an
initial average degree k. ΦR transforms the initial graph into
a connected k-regular graph if k ∈ N. If k /∈ N, then the
degree range converges to 1 via ΦR. Next, ΦR was extended
to ensure that the interaction graph does not convergence to
a poorly-connected k-regular graph. To this end, a local link
randomization rule was added to ΦR. The resulting grammar,
ΦRR, transforms the initial graph into a connected random
k-regular graph if k ∈ N. Finally, ΦRR was extended to
[24] P. Holme, B. J. Kim, C. N. Yoon, and S. K. Han, "Attack vulnerability
of complex networks," Physical Review E, vol. 65, no. 5, p. 056109,
2002.
[25] Z. Wang, A. Scaglione, and R. J. Thomas, "Electrical centrality
measures for electric power grid vulnerability analysis," in IEEE
Conference on Decision and Control, pp. 5792 -- 5797, 2010.
[26] C. M. Schneider, A. A. Moreira, J. S. Andrade, S. Havlin, and H. J.
Herrmann, "Mitigation of malicious attacks on networks," Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 108, no. 10, pp. 3838 -- 3841,
2011.
[27] A. Beygelzimer, G. Grinstein, R. Linsker, and I. Rish, "Improving
network robustness by edge modification," Physica A: Statistical
Mechanics and its Applications, vol. 357, no. 3, pp. 593 -- 612, 2005.
[28] O. Reingold, S. Vadhan, and A. Wigderson, "Entropy waves, the zig-
zag graph product, and new constant-degree expanders," Annals of
Mathematics, pp. 157 -- 187, 2002.
[29] M. Capalbo, O. Reingold, S. Vadhan, and A. Wigderson, "Randomness
conductors and constant-degree lossless expanders," in ACM Sympo-
sium on Theory of Computing, pp. 659 -- 668, 2002.
[30] E. Rozenman and S. Vadhan, "Derandomized squaring of graphs,"
in Approximation, Randomization and Combinatorial Optimization.
Algorithms and Techniques, pp. 436 -- 447, Springer, 2005.
[31] M. Morgenstern, "Existence and explicit constructions of q+1 regular
ramanujan graphs for every prime power q," Journal of Combinatorial
Theory, Series B, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 44 -- 62, 1994.
[32] R. Olfati-Saber, "Algebraic connectivity ratio of ramanujan graphs,"
in American Control Conference, pp. 4619 -- 4624, 2007.
[33] N. C. Wormald, "Models of random regular graphs," London Mathe-
matical Society Lecture Note Series, pp. 239 -- 298, 1999.
[34] B. Mohar, "Isoperimetric numbers of graphs," Journal of Combinato-
rial Theory, Series B, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 274 -- 291, 1989.
[35] B. Bollob´as, "A probabilistic proof of an asymptotic formula for the
number of labelled regular graphs," European Journal of Combina-
torics, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 311 -- 316, 1980.
[36] A. Steger and N. C. Wormald, "Generating random regular graphs
quickly," Combinatorics Probability and Computing, vol. 8, no. 4,
pp. 377 -- 396, 1999.
[37] C. Law and K.-Y. Siu, "Distributed construction of random expander
networks," in IEEE International Conference on Computer Communi-
cations, pp. 2133 -- 2143, 2003.
[38] M. Jerrum and A. Sinclair, "Fast uniform generation of regular
graphs," Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 91 -- 100,
1990.
[39] P. Mahlmann and C. Schindelhauer, "Peer-to-peer networks based
on random transformations of connected regular undirected graphs,"
in ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures,
pp. 155 -- 164, 2005.
[40] E. Klavins, R. Ghrist, and D. Lipsky, "A grammatical approach to self-
organizing robotic systems," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,
vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 949 -- 962, 2006.
[41] A. Kashyap, T. Bas¸ar, and R. Srikant, "Quantized consensus," Auto-
matica, vol. 43, no. 7, pp. 1192 -- 1203, 2007.
[42] A. Nedic, A. Olshevsky, A. Ozdaglar, and J. N. Tsitsiklis, "On dis-
tributed averaging algorithms and quantization effects," IEEE Trans-
actions on Automatic Control,, vol. 54, no. 11, pp. 2506 -- 2517, 2009.
obtain random regular graphs in the most general case, i.e.
even when k /∈ N. For any k > 2, the resulting grammar,
Φ∗, leads to a connected random m-regular graph such that
m ∈ [k, k + 2]. Note that k > 2 implies m ≥ 3. Hence,
the corresponding random m-regular graphs are expanders
with a similar sparsity as the initial graph. Some simulation
results were also presented in the paper to demonstrate the
performance of the proposed method.
REFERENCES
[1] A. H. Dekker and B. D. Colbert, "Network robustness and graph
topology," in Australasian Conference on Computer Science, pp. 359 --
368, 2004.
[2] A. Jamakovic and S. Uhlig, "On the relationship between the algebraic
connectivity and graph's robustness to node and link failures," in
EuroNGI Conference on Next Generation Internet Networks, pp. 96 --
102, 2007.
[3] R. Olfati-Saber, "Ultrafast consensus in small-world networks," in
American Control Conference, pp. 2371 -- 2378, 2005.
[4] A. Rahmani, M. Ji, M. Mesbahi, and M. Egerstedt, "Controllability of
multi-agent systems from a graph-theoretic perspective," SIAM Journal
on Control and Optimization, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 162 -- 186, 2009.
[5] A. Y. Yazıcıoglu, W. Abbas, and M. Egerstedt, "A tight lower bound
on the controllability of networks with multiple leaders," in IEEE
Conference on Decision and Control, pp. 1978 -- 1983, 2012.
[6] M. Mesbahi and M. Egerstedt, Graph theoretic methods in multiagent
networks. Princeton University Press, 2010.
[7] A. Barrat, M. Barthelemy, and A. Vespignani, Dynamical processes
on complex networks. Cambridge University Press Cambridge, 2008.
[8] G. F. Young, L. Scardovi, and N. E. Leonard, "Robustness of noisy
consensus dynamics with directed communication," in American Con-
trol Conference (ACC), pp. 6312 -- 6317, 2010.
[9] W. Abbas and M. Egerstedt, "Robust graph topologies for networked
systems," in IFAC Workshop on Distributed Estimation and Control
in Networked Systems, pp. 85 -- 90, 2012.
[10] M. Fiedler, "Algebraic connectivity of graphs," Czechoslovak Mathe-
matical Journal, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 298 -- 305, 1973.
[11] D. J. Klein and M. Randi´c, "Resistance distance," Journal of Mathe-
matical Chemistry, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 81 -- 95, 1993.
[12] M. S. Pinsker, "On the complexity of a concentrator," in 7th Interna-
tional Telegraffic Conference, vol. 4, pp. 318/1 -- 318/4, 1973.
[13] N. Alon, "Eigenvalues and expanders," Combinatorica, vol. 6, no. 2,
pp. 83 -- 96, 1986.
[14] S. Hoory, N. Linial, and A. Wigderson, "Expander graphs and their
applications," Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 43,
no. 4, pp. 439 -- 561, 2006.
[15] L. Blume, D. Easley, J. Kleinberg, R. Kleinberg, and ´E. Tardos,
"Which networks are least susceptible to cascading failures?," in IEEE
Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 393 -- 402,
2011.
[16] A. Ganesh, L. Massouli´e, and D. Towsley, "The effect of network
topology on the spread of epidemics," in IEEE INFOCOM, vol. 2,
pp. 1455 -- 1466, 2005.
[17] J. Friedman, "A proof of alon's second eigenvalue conjecture," in ACM
Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 720 -- 724, 2003.
[18] A. Y. Yazıcıoglu, M. Egerstedt, and J. S. Shamma, "Decentralized
degree regularization for multi-agent networks," in IEEE Conference
on Decision and Control, pp. 7498 -- 7503, 2013.
[19] A. Y. Yazıcıoglu, M. Egerstedt, and J. S. Shamma, "Decentralized
formation of random regular graphs for robust multi-agent networks,"
in IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, pp. 595 -- 600, 2014.
[20] S. P. Borgatti, "Centrality and network flow," Social Networks, vol. 27,
no. 1, pp. 55 -- 71, 2005.
[21] D. Koschutzki, K. A. Lehmann, L. Peeters, S. Richter, D. Tenfelde-
Podehl, and O. Zlotowski, "Centrality indices," in Network Analysis,
pp. 16 -- 61, Springer, 2005.
[22] D. Acemoglu, V. M. Carvalho, A. Ozdaglar, and A. Tahbaz-
Salehi, "The network origins of aggregate fluctuations," Econometrica,
vol. 80, no. 5, pp. 1977 -- 2016, 2012.
[23] H. Jeong, S. P. Mason, A.-L. Barab´asi, and Z. N. Oltvai, "Lethality and
centrality in protein networks," Nature, vol. 411, no. 6833, pp. 41 -- 42,
2001.
Fig. 5. Agents transform the initial interaction graph in (a), which has an average degree of 2.7, into a random 3-regular graph such as the one in (b) by
following Algorithm II.
(a)
(b)
The average degree, ¯d(G(t)), and the degree range, f (G(t)), for the first 50000 time steps of the simulation. Once a regular graph (i.e.,
Fig. 6.
f (G(t)) = 0) is reached, both ¯d(G(t)) and f (G(t)) remain stationary under Algorithm II.
Fig. 7. The algebraic connectivity, α(G(t)), as the initial graph in Fig. 5a evolves via Algorithm II. After a sufficiently large amount of time, α(G(t))
rarely drops below 3 − 2
2 (marked with a horizontal solid line), as expected from random 3-regular graphs.
√
05,00010,00015,00020,00025,00030,00035,00040,00045,00050,0002.72.82.93time(t)¯d(G(t))05,00010,00015,00020,00025,00030,00035,00040,00045,00050,000012345time(t)f(G(t))010,00020,00030,00040,00050,00060,00070,00080,00090,000100,00000.050.10.150.20.250.30.35time(t)α(G(t)) |
1903.05766 | 1 | 1903 | 2019-03-14T00:02:03 | Simulating Emergent Properties of Human Driving Behavior Using Multi-Agent Reward Augmented Imitation Learning | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI",
"cs.LG"
] | Recent developments in multi-agent imitation learning have shown promising results for modeling the behavior of human drivers. However, it is challenging to capture emergent traffic behaviors that are observed in real-world datasets. Such behaviors arise due to the many local interactions between agents that are not commonly accounted for in imitation learning. This paper proposes Reward Augmented Imitation Learning (RAIL), which integrates reward augmentation into the multi-agent imitation learning framework and allows the designer to specify prior knowledge in a principled fashion. We prove that convergence guarantees for the imitation learning process are preserved under the application of reward augmentation. This method is validated in a driving scenario, where an entire traffic scene is controlled by driving policies learned using our proposed algorithm. Further, we demonstrate improved performance in comparison to traditional imitation learning algorithms both in terms of the local actions of a single agent and the behavior of emergent properties in complex, multi-agent settings. | cs.MA | cs | Simulating Emergent Properties of Human Driving Behavior
Using Multi-Agent Reward Augmented Imitation Learning
Raunak P. Bhattacharyya, Derek J. Phillips, Changliu Liu,
Jayesh K. Gupta, Katherine Driggs-Campbell, and Mykel J. Kochenderfer
in states can quickly compound into large differences in
the resulting vehicle behaviors and motion pattern. Reliable
human driver models must be capable of imitating these
emergent properties of traffic behavior.
9
1
0
2
r
a
M
4
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
6
6
7
5
0
.
3
0
9
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
in multi-agent
Abstract -- Recent developments
imitation
learning have shown promising results for modeling the behav-
ior of human drivers. However, it is challenging to capture
emergent traffic behaviors that are observed in real-world
datasets. Such behaviors arise due to the many local interac-
tions between agents that are not commonly accounted for in
imitation learning. This paper proposes Reward Augmented
Imitation Learning (RAIL), which integrates reward augmen-
tation into the multi-agent imitation learning framework and
allows the designer to specify prior knowledge in a principled
fashion. We prove that convergence guarantees for the imitation
learning process are preserved under the application of reward
augmentation. This method is validated in a driving scenario,
where an entire traffic scene is controlled by driving policies
learned using our proposed algorithm. Further, we demonstrate
improved performance in comparison to traditional imitation
learning algorithms both in terms of the local actions of a
single agent and the behavior of emergent properties in complex,
multi-agent settings.
I. INTRODUCTION
Robot learning from human demonstrations has been a
subject of significant interest in recent years [1]. Imitation
learning has been applied to vehicle navigation, humanoid
robots, and computer games [2]. This paper focuses on
imitation learning for building reliable human driver models.
The autonomous driving literature has established that it
is infeasible to build a statistically significant case for the
safety of a system solely through real-world testing [3], [4].
Validation through simulation is an alternative to real-world
testing, with the ability to evaluate vehicle performance in
large numbers of scenes quickly, safely, and economically [5].
This paper seeks to extend state of the art imitation learning
to improve our ability to accurately generate realistic driving
scenarios. In such safety critical settings, representative
models of human driving behavior are essential
in the
validation of autonomous driving systems.
Human driving situations are inherently multi-agent in
nature. Typical human driving scenes are composed of several
vehicles that interact to exhibit emergent patterns of traffic
behavior that cannot be easily predicted from the properties
of the individual vehicles alone. For example, given two very
similar initial scenes, the vehicles can reach very different
configurations after just a few seconds because small changes
R. Bhattacharyya, D. Phillips, C. Liu, J.K. Gupta, and M.J. Kochen-
derfer are with the Stanford Intelligent Systems Laboratory in the De-
partment of Aeronautics and Astronautics at Stanford University, Stan-
ford, CA 94305, USA (email: {raunakbh, djp42, changliuliu, jayeshkg,
mykel}@stanford.edu}). K. Driggs-Campbell is with the Department of
Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801 (email: [email protected]).
Generative Adversarial Imitation Learning (GAIL) [7] has
recently been used to model human driving behavior. GAIL
performs well when imitating the driving behavior in single
agent settings [8], outperforming behavioral cloning and rule-
based driver models (e.g., IDM+MOBIL [9]). However, GAIL
does not scale to imitating the behavior of multiple human
driven vehicles because the multi-agent setting leads to the
problem of covariate-shift [10].
The PS-GAIL algorithm uses the framework provided by
recent work extending GAIL to the multi-agent setting [11],
borrowing ideas from the PS-TRPO algorithm [12]. PS-GAIL
outperforms GAIL in terms of imitation performance and
scalability in imitating multiple interacting human driven
vehicles [10]. However, PS-GAIL has significant room for
improvement in terms of imitation performance, specifically
in terms of reducing undesirable traffic phenomena arising
out of interactions between vehicles, such as off-road driving,
collisions, and hard braking.
This paper modifies the GAIL approach to enable the use
of external rewards in the multi-agent setting. The result-
ing algorithmic procedure improves imitation performance
compared to PS-GAIL in three ways. First, it performs
better at reproducing individual driving behaviors. Second,
resulting policies exhibit reductions in undesirable traffic
phenomena such as collisions and offroad driving. Third,
emergent properties of multi-agent driving, such as lane
changes and spacing between vehicles, are shown to approach
human driving behavior.
While using shaped rewards in the context of imitation
learning has been proposed previously [13], [14], [15], [16],
this paper differs from the existing literature in two aspects.
First, we propose directly considering the imitation learning
problem in the multi-agent setting using parameter sharing.
Second, this approach penalizes undesirable traffic phenomena
through reward augmentation, and assesses the resulting
impact on emergent properties of multi-agent driving behavior.
This paper makes the following contributions: (1) We
propose a mathematical formulation for incorporating metrics
of undesirable traffic phenomena as constraints in the problem
of finding policies through imitation learning; (2) We provide
a framework for the designer of the imitation learning agent to
provide prior knowledge in the form of reward augmentation
to help the learning process; and (3) We demonstrate the RAIL
The imitation learning pipeline: the demonstration data from the NGSIM dataset [6] (left panel) is fed into RAIL (middle panel)
Fig. 1.
to create driving policies that can be used for validation of autonomous vehicles in simulation (right panel).
algorithm in a case study of modeling human driving behavior
and compare the imitation performance against results from
existing algorithms.
The link to the github repository containing the source code
for the experiments can be found at https://github.
com/sisl/ngsim_env.
II. PROBLEM DEFINITION
We consider the problem of imitation learning in a multi-
agent setting. The objective is to improve imitation perfor-
mance by expanding the scope of the imitation algorithm
to include imitation of emergent properties. We hypothesize
that by imitating both the local and emergent behaviors, the
resulting policy will improve our ability to mimic human
behaviors in a multi-agent setting.
A. Formulation
We formulate highway driving as a sequential decision
making task, in which the driver obeys a stochastic policy that
maps observed road conditions to a probability distribution
over driving actions [17], [18]. Given a dataset consisting
of a sequence of state-action tuples (st, at) demonstrating
highway driving and a class of policies πθ parameterized by
θ, we adopt imitation learning to infer this policy.
We use the multi-agent extension of Markov decision
processes adapted to the imitation learning framework [11],
[19]. Suppose there are n agents. The state, action, and policy
of agent i are denoted si, ai, and πi, respectively. The state,
action, and policy of the multi-agent system are denoted
s = [s1, . . . , sn], a = [a1, . . . , an], and ¯π(s1, . . . , sn) =
(π1(s1), . . . , πn(sn)). The state space and the action space
of the multi-agent system are denoted S and A, respectively.
In the remainder of this paper, we use s and a without the
subscripts to refer to the single agent scenario. We make
some simplifying assumptions to the general Markov Games
framework, which include agents being homogeneous (every
agent has the same action and observation space), each agent
getting independent rewards (as opposed to there being a
joint reward function), and the reward function being the
same for all the agents, as motivated in [10].
of a policy ¯π by ρ¯π(s) = (cid:80)∞
We define the γ-discounted state occupancy measure
t=0 γtPp0,¯π [st = s], where
Pp0,¯π [st = s] is the probability of landing in state s at time
t, when following ¯π starting from s0 ∼ p0. When convenient,
we will overload notation for state-action occupancy measure:
ρ¯π(s, a) = P¯π [a s] ρ¯π(s), where P¯π [a s] is the probability
of executing action a in state s. We denote the support of
the occupancy measure as supp where supp(ρ¯π) := {(s, a) :
ρ¯π(s, a) > 0}.
Consider a multi-agent policy ¯π, which maps the multi-
agent system state in S to a distribution over the multi-agent
action space A. Given the demonstrated data ¯πE, we need
to ensure that the greatest difference between ¯π and ¯πE is
small. The difference is measured between the demonstrated
trajectory and the roll-out trajectory given ¯π in a finite time
horizon. Using the GAIL framework, our goal is to minimize
the distance between the occupancy measures ρ¯π and ρ¯πE .
Further, to ensure centralized training with decentralized
control, and to provide prior knowledge, we introduce
parameter sharing [12] and reward augmentation [20].
Mathematically, introducing parameter-sharing and reward
augmentation poses two constraints on the function space of
the policy ¯π. For parameter-sharing, we are enforcing that
πi = πj = π for any i and j, where π denotes the policy
for single agent. Hence, ¯π(s1, . . . , sn) = (π(s1), . . . , π(sn)).
For reward augmentation, we require that π belongs to a
certain set such that undesired actions are discouraged. For
example, the vehicle should not drive off road, collide with
others, or brake too hard. Such undesired state-action pairs
are denoted as belonging to the set U. The constraint on the
policy is denoted by Π:
Π = {¯π : π = πi,∀ i, and P¯π [a s] = 0,∀ (s, a) ∈ U} (1)
Considering Wasserstein distance [21], the following con-
strained minimax problem for imitation learning is formulated:
min
¯π∈Π
max
D
{E¯πE [D(s, a)] − E¯π[D(s, a)]}
(2)
Algorithm 1 RAIL
Input: Expert trajectories τE ∼ ¯πE, Shared policy param-
eters Θ0, Critic parameters ψ0, Trust region size ∆KL
for k ← 0, 1, . . . do
Rollout trajectories for all agents (cid:126)τ ∼ πθk
Score (cid:126)τ with critic, generating reward p(st, at; ψk) and
added penalty r
Batch trajectories obtained from all the agents
Calculate advantage values
Take a Trust Region Policy Optimization (TRPO) [23]
step to find πθk+1 using ∆KL
Update the critic parameters ψ
end for
C. Theoretical Analysis: Convergence and Optimality
This section shows the convergence and optimality of
the constrained minimax problem using non-parameterized
policy and critic. In the following discussion, the occupancy
measure refers to the state-action occupancy measure. Given
the occupancy measure ρ¯π, we have
E¯π[D(s, a)] =
=
γtD(st, at)
ρ¯π(s, a)D(s, a)dsda,
(5)
where the critic, D, learns to output a high score when en-
countering pairs from ¯πE, and a low score when encountering
pairs from ¯π. D should be optimized for all functions.
minρ¯π∈Σ maxD
∞(cid:88)
(cid:90)
(cid:90)
t=0
A
S
(cid:90)
(cid:90)
(cid:90)
S
(cid:90)
A
−
where st and at are rollout data from the policy ¯π. By
Proposition 3.1 of [7], there is a one-to-one correspondence
between the policy ¯π and the occupancy measure ρ¯π.
The minimax objective function (2) can be re-written as
ρ¯πE (s, a)D(s, a)dsda
ρ¯π(s, a)D(s, a)dsda (6)
A
S
where Σ is the constraint on the occupancy measure equivalent
to (1) with
Σ = {ρ¯π : ρπ(si, ai) = ρπ(sj, aj),∀i, j;
ρ¯π(s, a) = 0,∀(s, a) ∈ U},
(7)
and ρπ(si, ai) is a marginal occupancy measure by integrating
out (sj, aj) for j (cid:54)= i in ρ¯π(s, a).
Theorem 2.1: The solution converges in measure by iter-
atively solving the minimax problem (6) if the following
conditions hold:1
A
tions);
iteration;
1) D and ¯π have enough capacity (representing all func-
2) D(s, a) attains the optimal value D∗(s, a) at each
3) ρ¯π is updated so as
(cid:82)
to improve the criterion
S [ρ¯πE (s, a) − ρ¯π(s, a)] D∗(s, a)dsda.
Moreover, the solution converges in measure to the optimal
(cid:90)
solution of the following problem:
(cid:82)
(cid:90)
minρ¯π∈Σ
Proof:
min
ρ¯π∈Σ
(cid:107)ρ¯πE (s, a) − ρ¯π(s, a)(cid:107)2dsda.
(8)
If (6) is unconstrained, i.e., Σ is the whole
occupancy measure space, [24] and [21] have shown that the
solution converges by iteratively solving the unconstrained
minimax problem if the three conditions hold.
A
S
Consider the constrained version of the optimization. Since
both the objective function (6) and the constraint (7) are
convex in ρ¯π, the constraints will not affect convergence, as
long as the three conditions are satisfied.2 The solution of the
1In practice, these assumptions may not exactly hold.
2We are dealing with the function space which contains ρ¯π. The convexity
means: for any ρ1 and ρ2 satisfying (7), their linear interpolation (1−λ)ρ1 +
λρ2 also satisfy (7) for any λ ∈ [0, 1]. It is easy to verify that this condition
is true for any U, i.e., if ρ1 and ρ2 are 0 on U, then (1 − λ)ρ1 + λρ2
should also be 0 on U. Hence, the convexity of the constraint is not affected
by the shape of U.
B. Solution Approach
The constrained minimax is solved by transforming the
problem to an unconstrained form. The constraint for pa-
rameter sharing is naturally encoded by sharing the same
policy for all agents. The constraint for reward augmentation
is enforced by adding a reward augmentation regularizer in
the function. Thus, the unconstrained problem becomes:
min
π
max
D
E¯πE [D(s, a)] − Eπ[D(s, a)] + rEπ[1U ]
(3)
where r is the penalty, and 1U is an indicator function that
is non-zero if and only if (s, a) ∈ U. The penalty r can
either be a constant value or a barrier function. We have
binary penalty when r is constant, and smooth penalty when
r is a continuous function that reaches zero on the boundary
of the set U. Note that the term Eπ[D(s, a)] is different
from E¯π[D(s, a)], where the former notation requires that all
agents use the same policy π with shared parameters.
We are now ready to introduce an algorithm to solve
the problem as formulated above. This algorithm is called
Reward Augmented Imitation Learning (RAIL, cf. Risk
Averse Imitation Learning [22]). We parameterize the single
agent policy using θ and the critic using ψ. The parameterized
policy and critic are denoted by πθ and Dψ, respectively.
Under this parametrization, the objective function becomes:
E¯πE [Dψ(s, a)] − Eπθ [Dψ(s, a)] + rEπθ [1U ].
(4)
To solve for the desired πθ, the following two steps are
max
min
ψ
θ
performed iteratively:
STEP 1: maximize Dψ. Similar to single agent GAIL, this
step involves the rollout and the update of the critic Dψ.
STEP 2: minimize policy πθ. This step is where the
constraints are taken into account.
Algorithm 1 provides the pseudo code that enacts the above
two step procedure and incorporates the reward augmentation
by providing penalties.
A. Environment
We evaluate our algorithm using the same simulator as
is used in the development of PS-GAIL [10]. The simulator
allows us to sample initial scenes from real traffic data and
then simulate for 20 s at 10 Hz. The most important feature
of this simulator is that expert vehicles observed in the real
data can be replaced with policy controlled agents, crucial
to both learning a good policy and evaluating final policies.
We replace 100 vehicles from the initial scene with vehicles
driven by the learned policy. Another crucial component of the
simulator is the extraction of features from the environment
which are then fed into the policy controller as observations.
The agent's decisions are translated into actions, which the
simulator uses to determine the next state.
We run our experiments on data from the Next Generation
Simulation (NGSIM) project [6]. This dataset is split into
three consecutive 15 min sections of driving data for a fixed
section of highway 101 in California. We use the first section
as the training dataset, from which we learn our policies. The
remaining two sections are used for testing and evaluating
the quality of the resulting policies.
B. Reward Augmentation
Reward augmentation combines imitation learning with
reinforcement learning and helps improve state space explo-
ration of the learning agent. Part of the reinforcement learning
reward signal comes from the critic based on imitating the
expert, and another signal comes from the externally provided
reward specifying the prior knowledge of the expert [13].
The reward augmentation in our experiments is provided
in the form of penalties.
1) Binary Penalty: The first method of reward augmenta-
tion that we employ is to penalize states in a binary manner,
where the penalty is applied when a particular event is
triggered. To calculate the augmented reward, we take the
maximum of the individual penalty values. For example, if
a vehicle is driving off the road and colliding with another
vehicle, we only penalize the collision. This will also be
important when we discuss smoothed penalties.
We explore penalizing three different behaviors. First, we
give a large penalty R to each vehicle involved in a collision.
Next, we impose the same large penalty R for a vehicle
that drives off the road. Finally, performing a hard brake
(acceleration of less than −3 m/s2) is penalized by only R
2 .
The penalty formula is shown in Eq. (10). We denote the
smallest distance from the ego vehicle to any other vehicle
on the road as dc (meters), where dc ≥ 0. We also define
the closest distance from the ego vehicle to the edge of the
road (meters): droad = min{dleft, dright}. We allow droad to be
negative if the vehicle is off the road. Finally, let a be the
acceleration of the vehicle, in m/s2. A negative value of a
indicates that the vehicle is braking. Now, we can formally
define the binary penalty function:
R dc = 0
a ≤ −3
R
2
R droad ≤ −0.1
Penalty =
(10)
The effect of constraint Γ on convergence and the
Fig. 2.
learned policy. Shaded area represents the occupancy measure of
the demonstration ρ¯πE . Curves represent the learned occupancy
measure ρ¯π at different iterations (lighter colors indicate earlier
iterations). A uniform distribution over the constraint Γ initializes
ρ¯π. When supp(ρ¯πE ) ∈ Γ, the demonstrated occupancy measure
can be recovered by ρ¯π. When supp(ρ¯πE ) /∈ Γ, the demonstrated
occupancy measure outside Γ can not be recovered.
inner maximization in (6) is D∗(s, a) ∝ ρ¯πE (s, a)− ρ¯π(s, a).
Then, in the limit, the problem
[ρ¯πE (s, a) − ρ¯π(s, a)] D∗(s, a)dsda
(9)
(cid:90)
(cid:90)
min
ρ¯π∈Σ
A
S
converges to (8) in measure.
According to Theorem 2.1, if the demonstrated data satisfy
the constraint Σ, then ρ¯π → ρ¯πE in the limit. Consider
the case that the demonstrated data does not satisfy Σ.
The constraint for parameter sharing ρπ(si, ai) = ρπ(sj, aj)
introduces an averaging effect, i.e., the learned single agent
policy ρπ is an average of the demonstrated single agent policy
ρπEi (si, ai) for all i. The demonstrated single agent policy
ρπEi (si, ai) is a marginal occupancy measure by integrating
out (sj, aj) for j (cid:54)= i in ρ¯πE (s, a). The average effect
results from identity permutation during minimization of
the two norm in (8). The constraint for reward augmentation
ρ¯π(s, a) = 0,∀(s, a) ∈ U introduces a truncation effect,
which shrinks the support of ρπ such that supp(ρπ) ∈ Γ :=
U c. The truncation effect is illustrated in Fig. 2.
Normally, the constraint from reward augmentation is
satisfied in the demonstration data. For example, the vehicles
do not drive off the road. However, the constraint from
parameter sharing may not be satisfied by the demonstrated
data, i.e., the assumption that all vehicles are homogeneous
may not hold. Then, as discussed above, the learned policy
takes an average over different policies. Therefore, reward
augmentation improves the learning performance in practice,
since it encodes prior knowledge.
III. EXPERIMENTS AND RESULTS
We use the results from PS-GAIL as a baseline to
compare against the RAIL algorithm by learning policies
and calculating specific metrics, as described in Section III-
C. We train three policies for each set of parameters that
we want to compare, selecting the best performing policy
based on the results of 10 000 policy rollouts in the 100-agent
training environment. The results presented in Section III-D
are extracted by evaluating our policies in the same manner,
but on scenes sampled from the held-out testing dataset.
The relative values of the penalties indicate the preferences
of the designer of the imitation learning agent. For example,
in this case study, we penalize hard braking less than the
other undesirable traffic phenomena.
2) Smooth Penalty: In this case, we provide a smooth
penalty for off-road driving and hard braking, where the
penalty is linearly increased from a minimum threshold to
the previously defined event threshold for the binary penalty.
For off-road driving, we linearly increase the penalty from
0 to R when the vehicle is within 0.5 m of the edge of the
road. For hard braking, we linearly increase the penalty from
0 to R/2 for acceleration between −2 m/s2 and −3 m/s2.
C. Metrics
We assess the imitation performance of our driving policies
at three levels. These are imitation of local driving behavior,
reduction of undesirable traffic phenomena, and imitation of
emergent properties of multi-agent driving. First, to measure
imitation of local vehicle behaviors, we use a set of Root Mean
Square Error (RMSE) metrics that quantify the divergence
between the trajectories generated by our learned policies and
the real trajectories in the dataset. We calculate the RMSE
between the original human driven vehicle and its replacement
policy driven vehice in terms of the position, lane offset, and
speed. A perfect policy would have RMSE values close to 0
for the entire rollout duration.
Second, to assess the undesirable traffic phenomena that
arise out of vehicular interactions as compared to local,
single vehicle imitation, we extract metrics that quantify hard
braking, collisions, and offroad driving. It is important to
note that these undesirable traffic phenomena were explicitly
incorporated into the formulation of penalty based reward
augmentation provided to the RAIL algorithm. We also extract
these metrics of undesirable traffic phenomena for the NGSIM
driving data and compare them against the metrics obtained
from rollouts generated by our driving policies.
Third, to quantify imitation of driving properties that are
emergent in that they are not explicitly modeled in the RAIL
formulation, we assess metrics of emergent properties. These
are the average number of lane changes per vehicle, the
average timegap per vehicle, and the distribution of speed
over all vehicles. The timegap for a vehicle is defined as the
time spacing (in seconds) to the vehicle in front of it. These
metrics of emergent driving properties are calculated for the
NGSIM driving data and compared against metrics obtained
from rollouts generated by our driving policies.
D. Results
We compare our proposed algorithm, RAIL, against PS-
GAIL. For comparisons between PS-GAIL, traditional GAIL,
and rule-based models, we guide the reader to [8], [10]. The
policies generated using RAIL were obtained using R = 2000
for the binary penalty, and R = 1000 for the smoothed
penalties. These R values were determined to be the best
after performing a hyperparameter search on penalty values
ranging from 0 and 5000.
Fig. 3. Root mean square error with respect to NGSIM data with
increasing time horizon as a measure of local imitation performance.
Policies trained using RAIL demonstrate closer driving behavior to
human demonstration as compared to the PS-GAIL baseline.
Figure 3 shows the RMSE values for speed, lane offset and
position of the vehicle driven by imitation learned policies
varying with increasing time horizon of the simulation rollout.
Policies learned using RAIL show lower values of RMSE
as compared to PS-GAIL throughout the rollout duration.
Further, between the two RAIL policies, it is observed that
smoothing the penalties improves the RMSE performance.
Thus, RAIL outperforms PS-GAIL in imitating local driving
behavior of individual vehicles.
Figure 4 illustrates the number of undesirable traffic
phenomena through the metrics of collisions, hard braking,
and offroad driving in case of NGSIM data, and policies
trained using PS-GAIL and RAIL. The results show that
policies learned using RAIL are less likely to lead vehicles
into extreme decelerations, off-road driving, and collisions.
Fig. 4. Metrics of undesirable traffic phenomena. These are explicitly
penalized in the reward augmentation formulation. RAIL results in
policies with lower values of collisions, offroad driving and hard
braking as compared to the PS-GAIL baseline.
Fig. 5. Metrics of emergent driving behavior. Policies trained using
reward augmentation result in lane changing and timegap behavior
that is closer to human driving as compared to PS-GAIL.
Additionally, for the case where we provide smooth penal-
ties (off-road duration and hard brake), we see significant
reductions in the associated metrics as compared to PS-GAIL.
Figures 5 and 6 show the imitation performance of policies
in terms of emergent properties of driving behavior. Average
number of lane changes per agent, and average timegap per
agent are illustrated in Fig. 5. While it can be argued that
the results showing improvements in reducing undesirable
traffic phenomena in Fig. 4 can be attributed directly to
penalizing via reward augmentation, the properties of driving
reported in Fig. 5 are truly emergent in that they arise out
of vehicular interactions that are not explicitly accounted for
in the imitation learning formulation. Policies trained using
reward augmentation result in driving behavior that leads to
emergent properties that are closer to human demonstrations
as compared to the baseline policies trained using PS-GAIL.
The distribution of speeds over all the vehicles in the
trajectory is shown in Fig. 6. The speed values over the
trajectory have been normalized and presented as a probability
distribution. Policies trained using reward augmentation
provide speed distributions more closely matching the NGSIM
data. Further, the mode of the distribution is closer to human
demonstrations in case of RAIL.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
This paper discusses the problem of imitation learning in
multi-agent settings in the context of autonomous driving. The
goal of this paper is to create reliable models of human driving
behavior that can imitate emergent properties of driving be-
havior arising out of local vehicular interactions. Specifically,
we provide a framework for multi-agent imitation learning
in terms of policy optimization with added constraints using
GAIL. We demonstrate improved performance in learning
human driving behavior models as measured by both local and
emergent imitation performance. The main contribution of
this paper was including reward augmentation in the imitation
learning framework as an added reinforcement signal to
the learning agent. Using externally specified rewards, the
designer of the learning agent can provide prior knowledge to
guide the training process. This imitation learning procedure
was demonstrated using the RAIL algorithm.
Simulation experiments were performed on learned driving
policies from human driving demonstrations in the NGSIM
dataset. These experiments were performed in the multi-
agent setting where multiple cars in the NGSIM scenes
were replaced by the vehicles driven using polcies learned
using RAIL. Resulting metrics such as root mean square
error, off-road duration, collision rates and hard brake rate
were used to assess the imitation performance. The results
obtained showed better imitation performance using reward
augmentation as compared to previous multi-agent results,
especially in terms of imitating emergent properties of driving
behavior, as measured by lane changes, timegap and speed
distributions of the resulting driving behavior. Further, this
paper also provided theoretical convergence guarantees in the
reward augmented imitation learning framework.
A limitation of this approach is that it does not capture
different types of driving behavior. Future work will include
latent states to capture different driving styles and enable learn-
ing different policies for different agents. Another interesting
extension of this work would focus on populating driving
scenarios with these models trained using imitation learning.
Such scenarios will enable validation of autonomous cars
driven using planning algorithms by simulating interactive
driving behavior between autonomous vehicles and human
driven vehicles. Finally, policies trained using the RAIL
algorithm will be deployed in simulation with an autonomous
vehicle for validation testing.
Fig. 6. Distribution of speeds over all cars over all the simulation
trajectories for human demonstration, policies trained using PS-
GAIL, and policies trained using RAIL. RAIL driving policies
result in closer velocity distribution to the human demonstrations.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank Blake Wulfe and Jeremy Morton for useful
discussions. Toyota Research Institute (TRI) provided funds
to assist the authors with their research, but this article solely
reflects the opinions and conclusions of its authors and not
TRI or any other Toyota entity.
REFERENCES
[1] B. D. Argall, S. Chernova, M. Veloso, and B. Browning, "A survey of
robot learning from demonstration," Robotics and Autonomous Systems,
vol. 57, no. 5, pp. 469 -- 483, 2009.
[2] A. Hussein, M. M. Gaber, E. Elyan, and C. Jayne, "Imitation learning:
A survey of learning methods," ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR),
vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 1 -- 35, 2017.
[3] ISO, "ISO 26262: Road vehicles-functional safety," International
Standard ISO/FDIS, 2011.
[4] P. Koopman and M. Wagner, "Challenges in autonomous vehicle testing
and validation," SAE International Journal of Transportation Safety,
vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 15 -- 24, 2016.
[5] J. Morton, T. Wheeler, and M. J. Kochenderfer, "Closed-loop policies
for operational tests of safety-critical systems," IEEE Transactions on
Intelligent Transportation Systems, pp. 317 -- 328, 2018.
[6] J. Colyar and J. Halkias, "US highway 101 dataset, Tech. Rep. FHWA-
HRT-07-030, Jan. 2007.
[7] J. Ho and S. Ermon, "Generative adversarial imitation learning," in
Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), 2016, pp.
4565 -- 4573.
[8] A. Kuefler, J. Morton, T. A. Wheeler, and M. J. Kochenderfer,
"Imitating driver behavior with generative adversarial networks," in
IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), 2017, pp. 204 -- 211.
[9] M. Treiber, A. Hennecke, and D. Helbing, "Congested traffic states in
empirical observations and microscopic simulations," Physical Review
E, vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 1805 -- 1824, 2000.
[10] R. P. Bhattacharyya, D. J. Phillips, B. Wulfe, J. Morton, A. Kuefler,
and M. J. Kochenderfer, "Multi-agent imitation learning for driving
simulation," in IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots
and Systems (IROS), 2018, pp. 1534 -- 1539.
[11] J. Song, H. Ren, D. Sadigh, and S. Ermon, "Multi-agent generative
adversarial imitation learning," in International Conference on Learning
Representations (ICLR), Workshop Track, 2018.
[12] J. K. Gupta, M. Egorov, and M. Kochenderfer, "Cooperative multi-agent
control using deep reinforcement learning," in International Conference
on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. Springer, 2017, pp.
66 -- 83.
[13] Y. Li, J. Song, and S. Ermon, "Infogail: Interpretable imitation learning
from visual demonstrations," in Advances in Neural Information
Processing Systems (NIPS), 2017, pp. 3815 -- 3825.
[14] K. Judah, A. P. Fern, P. Tadepalli, and R. Goetschalckx, "Imitation
learning with demonstrations and shaping rewards." in AAAI Conference
on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), 2014, pp. 1890 -- 1896.
[15] U. Syed and R. E. Schapire, "Imitation learning with a value-based
prior," arXiv preprint arXiv:1206.5290, 2012.
[16] W. B. Knox and P. Stone, "Reinforcement learning from simultaneous
human and MDP reward," in International Conference on Autonomous
Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), 2012, pp. 475 -- 482.
[17] L. P. Kaelbling, M. L. Littman, and A. R. Cassandra, "Planning and
acting in partially observable stochastic domains," Artificial Intelligence,
vol. 101, no. 1-2, pp. 99 -- 134, 1998.
[18] M. J. Kochenderfer, Decision Making Under Uncertainty: Theory and
Application. MIT Press, 2015.
[19] M. L. Littman, "Markov games as a framework for multi-agent
reinforcement learning," in Machine Learning Proceedings. Elsevier,
1994, pp. 157 -- 163.
[20] A. Y. Ng, D. Harada, and S. Russell, "Policy invariance under
reward transformations: Theory and application to reward shaping,"
in International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 1999, pp.
278 -- 287.
[21] M. Arjovsky, S. Chintala, and L. Bottou, "Wasserstein Generative
Adversarial Networks," in International Conference on Machine
Learning (ICML), 2017, pp. 214 -- 223.
[22] A. Santara, A. Naik, B. Ravindran, D. Das, D. Mudigere, S. Avancha,
and B. Kaul, "Rail: Risk-averse imitation learning," arXiv preprint
arXiv:1707.06658, 2017.
[23] J. Schulman, S. Levine, P. Abbeel, M. Jordan, and P. Moritz, "Trust
region policy optimization," in International Conference on Machine
Learning (ICML), 2015, pp. 1889 -- 1897.
[24] I. Goodfellow, J. Pouget-Abadie, M. Mirza, B. Xu, D. Warde-Farley,
S. Ozair, A. Courville, and Y. Bengio, "Generative adversarial nets,"
in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), 2014,
pp. 2672 -- 2680.
|
1705.00107 | 1 | 1705 | 2017-04-29T01:09:18 | The Social Benefits of Balancing Creativity and Imitation: Evidence from an Agent-based Model | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.SI",
"q-bio.NC"
] | Although creativity is encouraged in the abstract it is often discouraged in educational and workplace settings. Using an agent-based model of cultural evolution, we investigated the idea that tempering the novelty-generating effects of creativity with the novelty-preserving effects of imitation is beneficial for society. In Experiment One we systematically introduced individual differences in creativity, and observed a trade-off between the ratio of creators to imitators, and how creative the creators were. Excess creativity was detrimental because creators invested in unproven ideas at the expense of propagating proven ones. Experiment Two tested the hypothesis that society as a whole benefits if individuals adjust how creative they are in accordance with their creative success. When effective creators created more, and ineffective creators created less (social regulation), the agents segregated into creators and imitators, and the mean fitness of outputs was temporarily higher. We hypothesized that the temporary nature of the effect was due to a ceiling on output fitness. In Experiment Three we made the space of possible outputs open-ended by giving agents the capacity to chain simple outputs into arbitrarily complex ones such that fitter outputs were always possible. With the capacity for chained outputs, the effect of social regulation could indeed be maintained indefinitely. The results are discussed in light of empirical data. | cs.MA | cs | Running head: SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
1
7
1
0
2
r
p
A
9
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
7
0
1
0
0
.
5
0
7
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
The Social Benefits of Balancing Creativity and Imitation: Evidence from an
Agent-based Model
Liane Gabora and Simon Tseng
University of British Columbia
Author Note
Accepted for publication in Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts.
This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It
is not the copy of record.
Correspondence concerning this manuscript may be addressed to: Liane Gabora,
Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Fipke Centre for Innovative
Research, 3247 University Way, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada, V1V 1V7; Email:
[email protected]
This work was supported by a grant (62R06523) from the Natural Sciences and
Engineering Research Council of Canada. Thanks to Fabian Yáñez for assistance with
the manuscript, and to Tiha von Ghyczy for assistance with the analysis. Preliminary
reports on portions of this work were presented at the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive
Science Society and the International Conference on Computational Creativity.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
2
Abstract
Although creativity is encouraged in the abstract it is often discouraged in educational
and workplace settings. Using an agent-based model of cultural evolution, we
investigated the idea that tempering the novelty-generating effects of creativity with the
novelty-preserving effects of imitation is beneficial for society. In Experiment One we
systematically introduced individual differences in creativity, and observed a trade-off
between the ratio of creators to imitators, and how creative the creators were. Excess
creativity was detrimental because creators invested in unproven ideas at the expense of
propagating proven ones. Experiment Two tested the hypothesis that society as a whole
benefits if individuals adjust how creative they are in accordance with their creative
success. When effective creators created more, and ineffective creators created less
(social regulation), the agents segregated into creators and imitators, and the mean
fitness of outputs was temporarily higher. We hypothesized that the temporary nature
of the effect was due to a ceiling on output fitness. In Experiment Three we made the
space of possible outputs open-ended by giving agents the capacity to chain simple
outputs into arbitrarily complex ones such that fitter outputs were always possible.
With the capacity for chained outputs, the effect of social regulation could indeed be
maintained indefinitely. The results are discussed in light of empirical data.
Keywords: agent-based model, creativity, imitation, individual differences, social
regulation
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
3
The Social Benefits of Balancing Creativity and Imitation: Evidence from an
Agent-based Model
Introduction
Creativity is praised as the hallmark of our humanity, responsible for our greatest
achievements (Mithen, 1998). It is essential for maintaining a competitive edge in the
marketplace (Reiter-Palmon & Illies, 2004; Rule & Irwin, 1988), and has long been
associated with personal fulfillment (May, 1975; Rogers, 1959), self-actualization
(Maslow, 1959), and more recently with the positive psychology movement (Adams,
2012; Kaufman & Beghetto, 2014; Simonton, 2002). However, social norms, policies,
and institutions often stifle creativity (Ludwig, 1995; Sulloway, 1996), and educational
systems do not appear to prioritize the cultivation of creativity, and in some ways
discourage it (Snyder, Gregerson, & Kaufman, 2012; Robinson, 2001). Teachers often
have conscious or unconscious biases against creative students, leading them to act in
ways that suppress creativity (Aljughaiman & Mowrer-Reynolds, 2005; Beghetto, 2007;
Plucker, Beghetto, & Dow, 2004; Westby & Dawson, 1995). Workplaces often
discourage creativity by providing insufficient resources and support for the
development of new ideas, and inappropriate levels of challenge and autonomy
(Amabile, 1998), as well as levels of environmental distraction that are not conducive to
creativity (Stokols, Clitheroe, & Zmuidzinaz, 2002). Is there any rhyme or reason to
society's mixed messages about the desirability of creativity?
Balancing Novelty with Continuity
There are drawbacks to creativity (Cropley, Cropley, Kaufman, & Runco, 2010;
Ludwig, 1995), one being that generating creative ideas is difficult and time consuming.
Moreover, a creative solution to one problem often generates other problems, or has
unexpected negative side effects that only become apparent after much effort has been
invested (Tomlinson, 1980). Given the costs of creativity, it seems reasonable to
speculate that there may be an adaptive value to the seemingly mixed messages that
society sends about the desirability of creativity; perhaps society is well-served by the
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
4
tension between creative expression and the reinforcement of conventions and
established protocols.
This paper explores the possibility that mechanisms at work encouraging
individual differences in creativity could be beneficial, by ensuring that the society as a
whole both generates new variants and preserves the best of them. This would be
consistent with growing evidence that group behaviour does not always reduce to
individual behaviour (e.g., Anderson, Richardson, & Chemero, 2012; Goldstone &
Gureckis, 2009). It is also consistent with our everyday experience that an extended
social group can reap the rewards of the creative efforts of an individual, i.e., few of us
would be able to build a computer or write a symphony, but they are nonetheless ours
to use and enjoy. We all benefit from the exchange of knowledge, ideas, and artifacts, in
part because of our capacity for social learning, a phenomenon that Bandura (1995)
described as 'no-trial learning', which involves learning by observing and imitating
others.
In much of the cultural evolution literature, social learning is contrasted with
individual learning, which involves learning for oneself, and novelty is attributed to
things like copying error (e.g., Henrich & Boyd, 2002; Mesoudi, Whiten & Laland, 2006;
Rogers, 1988). Creativity, if mentioned at all, is equated with individual learning.
However, they are not the same thing. Individual learning deals with obtaining
pre-existing information from the environment through non-social means (e.g., reading
a book), whereas creativity involves generating ideas, behavior, or artifacts that did not
previously exist. In the first case the information comes from the external world; in the
second it is generated internally. Indeed there is increasing recognition of the extent to
which creative outcomes are contingent upon internally driven incremental/iterative
processing (Basadur, 1995; Chan & Schunn, 2015; Feinstein, 2006).
It is well known in theoretical biology that cumulative evolution entails a fusion of
variation generating processes, such as mutation, and processes that preserve fit
variants, such as heredity (Haldane, 1932). It has been suggested that in cultural
evolution the role of variation generation is played by creativity, and the role of
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
5
variation preservation is played by social learning processes such as imitation (Gabora,
1995). "In vivo" studies of scientific laboratories reveal that scientists benefit from
opportunities for distributed reasoning and scaffolding of ideas and interpretations
afforded by social networks (Dunbar, 2000). Similarly, through the interplay of
creativity and social learning, ideas in the arts, sciences, and technology, as well as
customs and folk knowledge, exhibit recombinant growth (Weitzman, 1998), and evolve
over time (Dasgupta, 1994; Jacobs, 2000). The pattern of cumulative cultural change
that results when new innovations draw from and build upon on existing products is
sometimes referred to as the ratchet effect (Tomasello, Kruger, & Ratner, 1993).
There is also evidence (reviewed in Hills, Todd, Lazer, Redish, & Couzin, 2015)
that firms as well as societies benefit by balancing exploration with exploitation. The
finding of successful solutions is made possible through exploration, while social
learning processes such as imitation assist in the perpetuation and exploitation of these
successful solutions, and continuity is provided by the maintenance and diffusion of
routines, which must evolve in response to changing markets. Organizational leaders
need to provide employee autonomy and be on the lookout for opportunities emerging
from employee efforts, yet balance this with the provision of sufficient constraints to
make goals seem within reach, and the pruning out of inferior ideas (Hunter,
Thoroughgood, Myer, & Ligon, 2011; Mumford & Hunter, 2005). Further evidence for
the notion that productivity involves a balancing of novelty and continuity comes from
a study of alliances between firms based on data for 116 companies in the chemicals,
automotive and pharmaceutical industries (Nooteboom, Van Haverbeke, Duysters,
Gilsing, & Van den Oord, 2007). The authors found an inverted U-shaped effect of
cognitive distance on innovation, where cognitive distance was operationalized in terms
of differences in technological knowledge between the two firms, and innovativeness was
assessed through an analysis of patent applications. They concluded that alliances
between firms with low cognitive distance introduces too little novelty to increase
productivity, while high cognitive distance means insufficient continuity for cumulative
knowledge growth.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
6
In short, it seems reasonable that the mixed messages society gives about the
desirability of creativity might stem from society's need to balance novelty generation
with novelty preservation, which can be understood in terms of theoretical
considerations of culture as an evolution process.
Agent-based Models
This interplay between 'exploration / generation of novelty' and 'exploitation /
perpetuation of novelty' can be examined with an agent-based model. An agent-based
model (ABM) is a computer program that simulates the actions and interactions of
autonomous agents (both individual or collective entities such as organizations or social
groups) in order to assess their effects on the system as a whole (for a review of ABMs
see Niazi & Hussain, 2011). Because ABMs enable us to manipulate variables and
observe the effects in a more controlled manner than in real life, they have proven useful
for investigating questions concerning the diffusion of creative novelty and its impact on
cultural evolution (e.g., Gabora, 2008a, 2008b; Guardiola, Diaz-Guilera, Perez, Arenas,
& Llas, 2002; Iribarren & Moro, 2011; Jackson & Yariv, 2005; Liu, Madhavan, &
Sudharshan, 2005; Sosa & Connor, 2015; Spencer, 2012; Watts & Gilbert, 2014). For
example, results obtained with ABMs suggest that agents in large, diverse populations
tend to be more creative (Gabora, 2008a; Spencer, 2012), the density of communication
links amongst agents produces diminishing returns in term of the benefits on the
invention rate (Bhattacharyya & Ohlsson, 2010), and diverse communities are better at
generating novelty while communities of specialized agents may be better at
communicating novelty Spencer, 2012).
Some computational models referred to as models of cultural evolution (e.g.,
Henrich & Boyd, 2002) allow for as few as only two alternative forms of a cultural trait,
i.e., there is no accumulative ratcheting of novelty. They are thus properly referred to as
models of cultural transmission, not models of cultural evolution. However, others do
allow for genuine accumulation of novelty. In MAV (for 'meme and variations'), an
ABM of cultural evolution (Gabora, 1995), and precedessor of the model used here,
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
7
novelty was injected into the artificial society through the invention of new actions, and
continuity was preserved through the imitation of existing actions. When agents never
invented, there was nothing to imitate, and there was no cultural evolution. Indeed, it
makes intuitive sense that if everyone relies on the strategy of copying others rather
than coming up with their own ideas, there are no new ideas around to imitate, and the
generation of cultural novelty grinds to a halt. If the ratio of invention to imitation in
MAV was even marginally greater than 0, not only was cumulative cultural evolution
possible, but eventually all agents converged on optimal outputs. When all agents
always invented and never imitated, the mean fitness of cultural outputs was also
sub-optimal because fit ideas were not dispersing through society. (In this cultural
context, fitness refers to value for the agent according to a fitness function, as discussed
at length below.) The society as a whole performed optimally when the ratio of creating
to imitating was approximately 2:1. 1 Extreme levels of creativity were detrimental at
the level of the society, suggesting that there could be an adaptive value to society's
ambivalent attitudes toward creativity.
Hypotheses and Approach
This paper provides a computational test of three hypotheses that have not
previously been explored in the ABM literature, hypotheses that challenge the common
assumption that more creativity is necessarily better. First, we tested the hypothesis
that society as a whole can suffer if either (1) the ratio of creators to imitators is too
high, or (2) creators are too creative. Although experiments with MAV had shown that
the mean fitness of cultural outputs decreased if agents were too creative, in those
experiment all agents were equally creative. Findings of pronounced individual
differences in creativity (Kaufman, 2003; Wolfradt & Pretz, 2001) suggested that a
1Note that this finding cannot be construed as support for Rogers' (1988) claim that cheap social learning
does not necessarily increase mean fitness, for several reasons, one being that in MAV, and in the current
work, the concern is the fitness of cultural outputs, not the biological fitness of individuals. These are
sometimes related, but not necessarily, and indeed sometimes at odds with one another (as when tasks
such as preparing food and caring for offspring are neglected due to immersion in a creative project).
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
8
logical next step was to investigate how varying the extent of such individual differences
impacts the society as a whole.
The second hypothesis tested here is that a society can perform better if
individuals are able to adjust how creative they are over time in accordance with their
perceived creative success. There is empirical evidence that children can adjust their
imitative fidelity and level of innovation (Legare, Wen, Herrmann, & Whitehouse,
2015), and that high imitative fidelity can be related to fear of ostracism
(Watson-Jones, Legare, Whitehouse, & Clegg, 2014). Thus, society may balance novelty
and continuity through mechanisms such as selective ostracization of deviant behaviour
unless it is accompanied by the generation of valuable creative output, and
encouragement or even adulation of those whose creations are successful. In this way
society might self-organize into a balanced mix of novelty generating creators and
continuity perpetuating imitators, both of which are necessary for cumulative cultural
evolution. In theory, if effective creators create more, and ineffective creators create less,
the society's outputs should collectively evolve faster.
A first step in investigating this was to determine whether it is algorithmically
possible to increase the mean fitness of ideas in a society by enabling agents to
self-regulate how creative they are. We refer to this regulatory mechanism as social
regulation (SR) because it could be mediated by social cues such as praise and/or
criticism from peers, family, or teachers, but it is also possible that it involves individual
differences in the ability to detect or respond to such cues, or individuals' own
assessments of the worth of their ideas, or some combination of these.
A third hypothesis investigated here is that in order for the benefit of this social
regulation mechanism to be ongoing (as opposed to temporary), the space of possible
creative outputs must be open-ended, such that it is always possible for superior
possibilities to be found. In other words, social regulation is advantageous only when it
is possible to obtain fitter outputs than those currently in use.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
9
The Computational Model
The ABM used here, referred to as "EVOlution of Culture", abbreviated EVOC,
is a model of cultural evolution that uses neural network based agents that (1) invent
new ideas, (2) imitate actions implemented by neighbors, (3) evaluate ideas, and (4)
implement successful ideas as actions (Gabora, 2008a).2 EVOC was used because it is
amenable to testing the above hypotheses concerning creativity; discussion of general
questions about how culture evolves including comparison with other approaches (e.g.,
Boyd & Richerson, 1985) can be found elsewhere (Gabora, 2008b, 2011, 2013; Gabora &
Kauffman, 2016). The approach is consistent with a growing effort in cognitive science
to leverage computer modeling techniques and knowledge of cognition to understand
aggregate social outcomes (Goldstone & Gureckis, 2009).
EVOC is an elaboration of the above-mentioned MAV (Gabora, 1995), the earliest
computer program to isolate culture as an evolutionary process in its own right so that
it can be compared and contrasted with biological evolution.3 The goal behind MAV,
and also behind EVOC, was to distill the underlying logic of cultural evolution, i.e., the
process by which ideas adapt and build on one another in the minds of interacting
individuals. Agents do not evolve in a biological sense, as they neither die nor have
offspring, but do in a cultural sense, by generating and sharing ideas for actions. The
cultural outputs in EVOC take the form of actions, since Donald (1991) and others
have provided substantial evidence that the earliest elements to evolve through culture,
before grammatical language, were physical actions such as gestures, and the
movements required to make tools.
EVOC has been used to address such questions as how does the presence of leaders
or barriers to the diffusion of ideas affect the fitness and diversity of cultural outputs
2The code is freely available; to gain access please contact the first author.
3The approach can thus be contrasted with computer models of cultural transmission, in which (unlike
models of cultural evolution) there may be as few as two possible outputs, and the outputs do not
become increasingly complex and adapted over time, and with computer models of how individual
learning affects biological evolution (Best, 1999; Higgs, 2000; Hinton & Nowlan, 1987; Hutchins &
Hazelhurst, 1991).
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
10
(Gabora, 2008b). Here, we use it to investigate the social impact of varying the ratio of
creators to imitators and enabling social regulation of individual creativity levels.
We now summarize the architecture of EVOC in sufficient detail to explain our
results.
Agents
Agents consist of (1) a neural network, which encodes ideas for actions and
detects trends in what constitutes a fit action, (2) a "perceptual system", which
observes and evaluates neighbors' actions, and (3) a body, consisting of six body parts
which implement actions.
The neural network is an auto-associator because this enables the agent to learn
and execute the action that a neighbor is executing, and thereby imitate successful
neighbors.4 The network is composed of six input nodes and six corresponding output
nodes that represent concepts of body parts (LEFT ARM, RIGHT ARM, LEFT LEG,
RIGHT LEG, HEAD, and HIPS), and seven hidden nodes that represent more abstract
concepts (LEFT, RIGHT, ARM, LEG, SYMMETRY, OPPOSITE, and MOVEMENT).
Input nodes and output nodes are connected to hidden nodes of which they are
instances (e.g., RIGHT ARM is connected to RIGHT). A schematic illustration of the
neural network is provided in Figure 1. Each body part can occupy one of three possible
positions: a neutral or default position, and two other positions, which are referred to as
active positions. Activation of any input node activates the MOVEMENT hidden node.
Same-direction activation of symmetrical input nodes (e.g., positive activation-which
represents upward motion-of both arms) activates the SYMMETRY node.
Insert Figure 1 here.
The neural network starts with small random weights between input/output
nodes. Weights between hidden nodes, and weights between hidden nodes and
input/output nodes, are fixed at +/- 1.0. Patterns that represent ideas for actions are
4Learning in auto-associative networks is unsupervised in the sense that they take in inputs, and try to
organize internal representations based on them.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
11
learned by training for 50 iterations using the generalized delta rule with a sigmoid
activation function (Rumelhart & McClelland, 1986). (See the Appendix for details.)
Training continues until it has learned the identity function between input and output
patterns.
The neural network enables agents to learn trends over time concerning what
general types of actions tend to be valuable (e.g., that symmetrical actions tend to be
fit), and use this learning to invent new actions more effectively (e.g., to increase the
frequency of symmetrical actions). When the ability to learn such trends is turned off,
agents invent at random and the fitness of their inventions increases much more slowly
(Gabora, 2008b).
Invention
An idea for a new action is a pattern consisting of six elements that dictate the
placement of the six body parts. Agents generate new actions by modifying their initial
action or an action that has been invented previously or acquired through imitation.
During invention, the pattern of activation on the output nodes is fed back to the input
nodes, and invention is biased according to the activations of the SYMMETRY and
MOVEMENT hidden nodes. (Note that, were this not the case, there would be little
point in using a neural network. Note also that while in the first iteration the agent is
simply guessing and learning, over the course of a run, invention becomes increasingly
more sophisticated.) To invent a new idea, for each node of the idea currently
represented on the input layer of the neural network, the agent makes a probabilistic
decision as to whether the position of that body part will change, and if it does, the
direction of change is stochastically biased according to the learning rate. If the new
idea has a higher fitness than the currently implemented idea, the agent learns and
implements the action specified by that idea. When "chaining" is turned on (as
discussed below), an agent can keep adding new sub-actions and thereby execute a
multi-step action, so long as the most recently-added sub-action is both an acceptable
sub-action and different from the previous sub-action of that action (Gabora, Chia, &
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
12
Firouzi, 2013).
Imitation
The process of finding a neighbor to imitate works through a form of lazy
(non-greedy) search. The imitating agent randomly scans its neighbors, and adopts the
first action that is fitter than the action it is currently implementing. If it does not find
a neighbor that is executing a fitter action than its own current action, it continues to
execute the current action.
Evaluation: The Fitness Function
Following (Holland, 1975), we refer to the success of an action in the artificial
world as its fitness, with the caveat that unlike its usage in biology, here the term is
unrelated to number of offspring (or number of ideas derived from a given idea). As
mentioned previously, the fitness function in EVOC involves bodily movement, on the
basis of evidence that the earliest elements to evolve through culture were physical
actions. The fitness function used in the first two experiments rewards activity of all
body parts except for the head, symmetrical limb movement, and positive limb
movement. The rationale for this is that many human actions require a stationary head
(to watch what you're doing), and symmetrical limb movement, i.e., these are relatively
common constraints on many real movements.5 The fitness function was also designed
to meet practical constraints, such as having multiple optima (e.g., an action can be
optimal if either both arms move up or both arms move down.) Multiple optima
enables us to better characterize the effect of a given manipulation on diversity (i.e.,
whether it finds all optima or just one).6
Total body movement, m, is calculated by adding the number of active body
parts, i.e., body parts not in the neutral position. mu is the number of body parts
5Of course, these constraints are not present for all human activities, such as holding a yoga posture.
6Another reason this fitness function was used is that it exhibits a cultural analog of epistasis which
makes it more difficult to solve. In biological epistasis, the fitness conferred by the allele at one gene
depends on which allele is present at another gene. In this cognitive context, epistasis is present when
the fitness contribution to the idea by movement of one limb depends on what other limbs are doing.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
13
moving upwards.
mh = 1if head is stationary;
sa = 1 if arms move symmetrically;
sl = 1 if legs move symmetrically;
pa = 1 if arms move upwards;
pl = 1 if legs move upwards;
0 otherwise
0 otherwise
0 otherwise
0 if arms move downwards
0 if legs move downwards
Fitness of a single-step action, Fn, is determined as follows:
Fn = m + 2mu + 10mh + 5(sa + sl) + 2(pa + pl)
(1)
The weights reflect intuitive notions about the relative importance of different
aspects of what makes for a fit action. For example, since (as mentioned previously)
almost all actions require that the head remain stationary so as to be able to focus on
stimuli of interest, the weight on mh is very high, and since (as also mentioned
previously) many actions require symmetrical movement, the weight on sa and sl are
moderately high.
Learning
Invention makes use of the ability to detect, learn, and respond adaptively to
trends. Since no action acquired through imitation or invention is implemented unless it
is fitter than the current action, new actions provide valuable information about what
constitutes an effective idea. Knowledge acquired through the evaluation of actions is
translated into educated guesses about what constitutes a successful action using weight
updating through feedback. For example, an agent may learn that more overall
movement tends to be either beneficial (as with the fitness function used here) or
detrimental, or that symmetrical movement tends to be either beneficial (as with the
fitness function used here) or detrimental, and bias the generation of new actions
accordingly.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
14
The Artificial World
These experiments used a default artificial world: a toroidal lattice with 1024 cells
each occupied by a single, stationary agent, and a von Neumann neighborhood
structure. Creators and imitators were randomly dispersed.7 Runs lasted 100 iterations,
and all data are averages across 100 runs.
A Typical Run
Fitness and diversity of actions are initially low because all agents are initially
immobile, implementing the same action, with all body parts in the neutral position.
Soon some agent invents an action that has a higher fitness than immobility, and this
action gets imitated, so fitness increases. Fitness increases further as other ideas get
invented, assessed, implemented as actions, and spread through imitation. The diversity
of actions increases as agents explore the space of possible actions, and then decreases
as agents hone in on the fittest actions. Thus, over successive rounds of invention and
imitation, the agents' actions improve. EVOC thereby models how adaptive change
accumulates over time in a purely cultural context.
Experiment One: Effect of Varying the Ratio of Creators to Imitators
The first experiment investigated how varying the level of creativity of individuals
affects the fitness of ideas in society as a whole. To incorporate individual differences in
degree of creativity we modified EVOC such that agents spanned the full range of
possibilities from always creating, to always imitating, to in-between strategies in which
agents created in some iterations and imitated in others. Those that could create at all
are referred to as creators. Those that only obtain new actions by imitating neighbors
are referred to as imitators. It was possible to vary the probability that creators create
versus imitate (i.e., they range from creating all the time to behaving almost like
imitators). Whereas any given agent is either a creator or an imitator throughout the
entire run, the proportion of creators creating or imitating in a given iteration
7In other experiments (Leijnen & Gabora, 2009a) we investigated the results of clustering creators.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
15
fluctuates stochastically.
Procedure
The proportion of creators relative to imitators in the society is referred to as C.
The creativity of the creators-that is, the probability that a creator invents a new
action instead of imitating a neighbor-is referred to as p. If a creator decides to create
on a particular iteration, there is a 1/6 probability of changing the position of any body
part involved in an action8 The society consists of three subgroups:
1. C × p × N creators attempting to create
2. C × (1 − p) × N creators attempting to imitate
3. (1 − C) × N imitators attempting to imitate
In previous investigations we measured the diversity of ideas over the course of a
run for different values of C and p. We found that the cultural diversity, i.e., the
number of different ideas implemented by one or more agent(s), was positively
correlated both with the proportion of creators to imitators, and with how creative the
creators were. We also obtained suggestive evidence that when creators are relatively
uncreative, the mean fitness of ideas increases as a function of the percentage of
creators in the society, but when creators are highly creative, the society appears to be
better off with fewer creators (Leijnen & Gabora, 2009b). However, this study had
shortcomings. First, the simulations were performed with small societies of only 100
agents. Second, since action fitness was obtained at only one time slice (the 50th
iteration) for all ratios of creators to imitators, these results did not reflect the
dynamics of the time series. Given a set of series of accumulating value over time, it is
unclear which series is most representative. The series cannot be unambiguously
ordered unless for each pair of series one strictly dominates the other, and that is not
the case here; the curves representing mean fitness at different values of {C, p} increase
monotonically but they may cross and re-cross as time progresses. Thus here we present
a more extensive investigation of the relationship between creativity and society as a
8This gave on average a probability of one change per newly created action, which previous experiments
(Gabora, 1995) showed to be optimal.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
16
whole that employs a sophisticated solution to the time series problem.
Analysis. We used time series discounting which associates a "present value"
with any future benefit such that the present value of any given benefit diminishes as a
function of elapsed time until the benefit is realized (McDonald & Siegel, 1986). The
standard approach in financial settings is exponential discounting. Given a series of
benefits bt, the Net Present Value (NPV) is defined as:
N P V (b) =
NX
t=1
rt−1bt with 0 < r ≤ 1
(2)
The discount rate r is normally set as r = ( 100+i
100 )−1 where i is the interest rate (in
percentage) for the unit period that an investor can obtain from a safe investment. This
basic idea was adapted to analyze the benefit accrued by attaining fit actions for
different values of C and p in EVOC. The first discounting method used was
Time-to-Threshold (TTT) discounting. Since all fitness trajectories were monotonically
increasing, those that reached a reasonably high threshold τ sooner should be valued
higher. We measured how many iterations (time to threshold) it took for fitness to
reach τ. For these runs, τ = 9 was used as a measure of optimal fitness to allow for a
realistic averaging over time.
Whereas imitators need creators, creators should ignore others if they could do
better on their own (p = 1). In other words, the fitness prospects of creators' ideas
when they work alone can be viewed in a manner analogous to the interest yield of
treasury bonds in investment decisions. This logic suggests another kind of modification
of the standard discounting method. The second adaptation to the basic notion of
discounting we refer to as Present Innovation Value (PIV) discounting. Let N be the
number of iterations and let F C,p
setting {C, p}. Thus F
We define the PIV for any fitness curve as:
be the mean action fitness at iteration t for parameter
is the fitness expectation with no interaction amongst agents.
t
1,1
t
P IV (F C,p) = −N +
NX
t=1
F C,p
F 1,1
(3)
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
17
Thus the PIV value gives us a measure of the extent to which the mean fitness of
outputs benefits or suffers as imitation becomes more prevalent (due to an increase in
either the proportion of imitators or the probability that creators imitate) compared to
a society composed solely of creators creating all the time with no imitation.
Results and Discussion
All results are averages across 100 runs. The 3D graph and contour plot for the
log10 TTT discounting analysis of the time series for different C, p settings are shown in
Figures 2 and 3, respectively. Note that by definition a low TTT value corresponds to
high mean fitness of actions across the society. The TTT method clearly demonstrates
a valley in the adaptive landscape. The line running along the bottom of the valley in
Figure 2 indicates, for any given value of p the optimal value for C, and vice versa.
When p = 1 the optimal value of C = 0.38. When C = 1 the optimal value of p is 0.19.
The global optimum is at approximately {C, p} = {0.4, 1.0}.
Insert Figure 2 here.
Insert Figure 3 here.
The 3D graph and contour plot for the PIV discounting analysis of the time series
for different C, p settings are shown in Figure 4 and Figure 5 respectively. The pattern
is very similar to that obtained with the log10 TTT discounting analysis.
Insert Figure 4 here.
Insert Figure 5 here.
These results show that the first hypothesis-that society as a whole can suffer if
either (1) the ratio of creators to imitators is too high, or (2) creators are too
creative-was supported. Both log10 TTT and PIV analysis of the time series showed
that, although some creativity is essential to get the fitness of cultural novelty
increasing over time, more creativity is not necessarily better. For optimal mean fitness
of agents' actions across the society there is a tradeoff between C, the proportion of
creators in the artificial society, and p, how creative these creators are.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
18
Experiment Two: The Effect of Social Regulation
The second experiment tested the hypothesis that society as a whole benefits
when individuals can vary how creative they are in response to the perceived
effectiveness of their ideas. In theory, if effective creators create more, and ineffective
creators create less, the ideas held by society should collectively evolve faster.
Procedure
Social regulation (SR) was implemented by increasing the invention-to-imitation
ratio for agents that generated superior ideas, and decreasing it for agents that
generated inferior ideas. To implement this the computer code was modified as follows.
Each iteration, for each agent, the fitness of its current action relative to the mean
fitness of actions for all agents at the previous iteration was assessed. Thus we obtained
the relative fitness, RF, of its cultural output. The agent's personal probability of
creating, p(C), was modified as a function of RF as follows:
p(C)n = p(C)n−1 × RFn−1
(4)
The probability of imitating, p(I), was 1 - p(C). Thus when SR was on, if the
relative fitness of an agent's ideas was high the agent invented more, and if it was low
the agent imitated more. p(C) was initialized at 0.5 for both SR and non-SR societies.
We compared runs with SR to runs without it. In this set of experiments only simple,
single-step actions were possible.
Results and Discussion
The mean fitness of the cultural outputs of societies with SR (the ability to
self-regulate inventiveness as a function of inventive success) was higher than that of
societies without SR, as shown in Figure 6. Thus, these results show that the second
hypothesis-that a society can perform better if individuals are able to adjust how
creative they are over time in accordance with their perceived creative success-was
also supported. However, the difference between SR and non-SR societies was
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
19
temporary; the gap between them closed once the space of possible ideas had been
explored. In both SR and non-SR societies mean fitness of actions plateaued when all
agents converged on optimally fit ideas. Thus, the value of segregating into creators and
imitators was short-lived.
Insert Figure 6 here.
The diversity, or number of different ideas, exhibited an increase as the space of
possibilities was explored followed by a decrease as agents converged on fit actions, as
shown in Figure 7. This diversity pattern is typical in evolutionary scenarios where
outputs vary in fitness. What is of particular interest here is that this pattern occurred
earlier, and was more pronounced, in societies with SR than in societies without it.
With SR, superior creators were diverging in multiple directions, so making them more
creative did increase diversity, while Inferior creators merely reinvent the wheel, so
decreasing their creativity had little effect on the total number of different outputs.
Insert Figure 7 here.
Although all agents initially invented and imitated with equal frequency, societies
with SR ended up separating into two distinct groups: one that almost exclusively
invented, and one that almost exclusively imitated, as illustrated in Figure 8. Thus, the
effect of SR on the fitness and diversity of outputs can indeed be attributed to
increasingly pronounced individual differences in their degree of creativity over the
course of a run. Agents that generated superior cultural outputs had more opportunity
to do so, while agents that generated inferior cultural outputs became more likely to
propagate proven effective ideas rather than reinvent the wheel.
Insert Figure 8 here.
Experiment Three: Social Regulation with Chaining
The short-lived but encouraging results of experiment two inspired experiment
three, which tested the hypothesis that benefit from this social regulation mechanism
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
20
could be longterm if the space of possible ideas were open-ended. The space of possible
ideas was made open-ended by allowing simple ideas to be combined or "chained"
together into more complex ideas. Thus, over iterations the complexity of inventions
could steadily increase.
Procedure
The fitness function used in the previous experiments was only useful for
single-step actions; once an agent found an optimal cultural output it continued to do
the same thing, so eventually the mean fitness of actions across the society reached a
plateau. In this next experiment, the chaining of simple actions into complex actions
allowed for a potentially infinite variety of actions and no limit on their fitness.
To implement chaining it was necessary to modify the fitness function. We needed
a fitness function that discouraged simply executing the same fit action again and again
(to capture that cultural evolution entails the learning of sequences of different actions),
that included a natural means of determining when a multi-part action would
terminate, and that was conducive to the cultural evolution of actions that build
cumulatively on previously learned or created actions. This was made possible using
templates to constrain the space of allowable sub-actions that together constitute a
complete action, using an adaptation of the Royal Roads fitness function (Forrest &
Mitchell, 1993). Definitions of terms used in the evaluation of the fitness of an action
are provided in Table One.
Insert Table 1 here.
The fitness function was determined by 45 templates. The templates can be
thought of as defining the cultural significance or utility of types of sub-actions (such as
dance steps). Each template T i consists of six components, one for each body part (i.e.,
T i = ti
j; j = 1..6). Each body part can be in a neutral position (0) , up (1), down (-1),
or an unspecified position (*). Six examples of templates are provided in Table Two.
For example, in template T i = ∗, 1,−1,∗,∗, 0, the left arm is up (LA:1), the right arm is
down (RA:-1), the hips are in the neutral position (HP:0), and the positions of other
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
21
body parts is unspecified (HD:*, LL:*, and RL:*). The templates provide constraints,
as well as flexibility with respect to what constitutes a fit action. For example, in an
optimally fit action, the head must be in the neutral position (in T 1 the first component
is 0) but the positions of other body parts can vary).
Insert Table 2 here.
Calculating the fitness of a template. Assume that D is a sub-action (i.e.,
D = dj; j = 1..6) and T i is the ith template (i.e., T i = ti
j; j = 1..6). Thus, dj represents
the position of the jth body part and the value of dj can be either 0 (neutral), 1 (up), or
j can be 0, 1, -1, or * (unspecified). Accordingly, the
-1 (down). Likewise, the value of ti
fitness of sub-action D is obtained as follows:
19X
i=1
F(D) =
Φ(T i, D) × Ω(T i)
(5)
As shown in this equation, fitness is a function of template weight (Φ(T i, D)) and
template order (Ω(T i)).
Φ(T i, D) is a function that determines the weight of sub-action D by comparing it
with template T i. This weight is set to one if each component of the sub-action (i.e.,
dj; j = 1..6) either matches the corresponding component of the template (i.e.,
j; j = 1..6) or if the corresponding components of the template is unspecified (i.e.,
ti
j = ∗), thus:
ti
(1 if ∀ti
j ∈ T i : ti
j = dj or ∗
0
otherwise
Φ(T i, D) =
Ω(T i) computes the order of the template T i by counting the number of
components that have a specified value (i.e., ti
j 6= ∗).
6X
ti
j
Ω(T i) =
j=1,ti
j6=∗
The acceptable sub-actions are {0, 1,−1, 1,−1, 1}, {0, 1,−1, 1,−1,−1},
(6)
(7)
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
22
{0,−1, 1,−1, 1, 1}, and {0,−1, 1,−1, 1,−1}.
The fitness function is difficult to solve because it is rugged; there are multiple
milestones, or fitness peaks, that agents must achieve before reaching a plateau. For
example, in Table 2 we see that the action 0,0,0,0,0,0 has a fitness of 6. An agent may
move on from this action to find an action that fits the third order templates with a
fitness of 31, e.g., F(D) : {1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0} = 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 1 = 31.
Modeling chaining. The chaining algorithm is illustrated schematically in
Figure 9. Chaining gives agents the opportunity to execute multi-step actions, thereby
increasing the potential diversity of actions and making the space of possible actions
open-ended. An agent can keep adding a new sub-action to its current action so long as
the most recently-added sub-action is both novel and successful.
Insert Figure 9 here.
A sub-action D is considered novel if at least one of its components is different
from that of the previous sub-action. This ensures that a multi-part action actually
consisted of multiple parts (rather than a drawn-out execution of the same sub-action).
It is considered successful if there exists a template T i such that Φ(T i, D) is one:
successf ul(D) =
( true
if ∃ T i : Φ(T i, D) = 1
f alse
otherwise
(8)
The "successful" constraint was added to mimic the fact that real human actions such
as gesturing and tool-making are generally highly constrained.
The fitness Fc of a multi-step action with n chained single-step actions (each with
fitness Fn) is calculated as follows:
nX
k=1
Fn
Fc =
(9)
Thus agents could execute multistep actions, and the optimal way of going about any
particular step depended on how one went about the previous step. So long as the
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
23
agent continued to invent acceptable new sub-actions, an action could be arbitrarily
long. In general, the more sub-actions the fitter the action. This is admittedly a simple
way of simulating the capacity for chaining, but we were not interested in the impact of
these actions per se. The goal here was simply to enable create a world in which
improvement is always possible.
Note that since multi-step actions tended to be fitter than single-step actions
there was a bias towards multi-step actions. This was necessary to test the hypothesis
that SR is only advantageous so long as it is possible to obtain fitter outputs than those
currently in use. This aspect of the model seems fairly realistic; new ideas do tend to
build on old ones, and often involve increasingly more steps to achieve their final form,
and these new multi-step ideas are often (though not always) fitter than what came
before.
Results and Discussion
With chaining turned on, cultural outputs became increasingly fit over the course
of a run, as shown in Figure 10. This is because a fit action could always be made fitter
by adding another sub-action. Thus the third hypothesis-that in order for the benefit
of this social regulation mechanism to be ongoing (as opposed to temporary), the space
of possible creative outputs must be open-ended, such that it is always possible for
superior possibilities to be found-was supported.
Insert Figure 10 here.
As was the case without chaining, the diversity of ideas with chaining exhibited an
increase as the space of possibilities was explored, followed by a decrease as agents
converged on fit actions, and once again the peak in diversity is earlier and more
pronounced with SR than without it, as shown in Figure 11. However SR diversity
remains higher than non-SR diversity throughout the run because the agents did not
converge on a static set of actions; their actions changed continuously as they found
new, fitter actions. Moreover, SR runs contain creators that are executing highly
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
24
complex actions, and there are more ways of executing a complex action than a simple
one.
Insert Figure 11 here.
Once again we know that the effects of SR on mean fitness and diversity were due
to the segregation of agents over time into distinct groups: those who almost exclusively
invented and those who almost exclusively imitated, as illustrated in Figure 12. Since
with SR there were increasingly pronounced individual differences in degree of creativity
over the course of a run, the differences between SR and non-SR societies can indeed be
attributed to the fact that the best creators were not wasting iterations trying to
imitate inferior neighbors, they could reach relatively remote and complex ideas more
quickly. Agents that generated superior cultural outputs had more opportunity to do
so, while agents that generated inferior cultural outputs became more likely to
propagate proven effective ideas.
Insert Figure 12 here.
Figure 12 shows that when some agents start to specialize in creating, others start
to specialize in imitating, such that across the society as a whole the balance between
creating and imitating is maintained. Bear in mind that since in all the simulations
reported here the agents are stationary and can only imitate immediate neighbors, it is
not the case that imitators are just imitating themselves. In other words, creators and
imitators are not segregated spatially, and there is transmission between them. Thus
the imitators' efforts are, indirectly, playing a role in the generation of novelty.
Thus, as the balance between creating and imitating gets tilted one way or the
other within individual agents, a new kind of between agents balancing act starts to
unfold, such that both the generation and proliferation of novelty are preserved. These
results support the hypothesis that it is algorithmically possible for social regulation of
individual creativity levels to be a means by which a society balances novelty with
continuity. To our knowledge, this hypothesis has never before been put forward, let
alone tested. The results suggest that it would be fruitful to investigate whether in real
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
25
human societies local exchange of social cues regarding the desirability of creative
efforts has the global effect of balancing novelty with continuity.
General Discussion
The experiments reported here were inspired in part by early work in evolutionary
theory showing that evolution entails a synthesis of processes such as mutation that
generate variants, and processes such as heredity that preserve fit variants (Haldane,
1932). Our results suggest that the generation of cultural novelty through creative
processes is tempered by social learning processes that preserve fit ideas, and that
achieving a delicate balance between the two has benefits for society at large. Although
EVOC agents are highly rudimentary, the model incorporates a drawback of creating: it
incurs costs in terms of time and foregone alternatives. When creative agents invest in
new ideas at the expense of imitating proven ideas they effectively rupture the fabric of
the artificial society by impeding the diffusion of tried-and-true solutions. Imitators, in
contrast, serve as a "cultural memory" that ensure that valuable ideas are preserved.
Experiment One tested the hypothesis that society as a whole can suffer if either
(1) the proportion of creative individuals is too high, or (2) creative individuals are too
creative, by carrying out a set of runs in an ABM that systematically varied the ratio of
creators to imitators, and how creative the creators were. We observed a trade-off
between these two variables, i.e., if there were few creators they could afford to be more
creative, and vice versa, if there were many, their creativity had to be restrained to
exert the same global benefit for society as a whole.
Experiment One has intriguing though speculative implications for hiring
practices in which individuals are expected to work in groups. It suggests that it may
be productive to consider prospective employees in the context of existing team
members and specifically where they stand on the creativity-conformity spectrum. If
there are many creatives, or if they are extremely creative, it may be beneficial to
balance the team with imitators, and vice-versa, to achieve the balance needed to
hasten the cultural evolution of fit outputs.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
26
The results of Experiment One are consistent with a recent study of 155 ceramic
tile companies in Spain, which found preliminary evidence of a saturation point beyond
which excessive creativity interferes with proliferation of valuable designs, and thus
decreases productivity (Vallet-Bellmunt & Molina-Morales, 2015). This study also
found that companies tended to do better if they focused on one of two alternative
strategies: focus on creativity, or focus on centrality, the later of which entails accessing
knowledge from other, related companies. They write, "as both are resource and
time-costly strategies, not only is a combination of them not synergic, but may in fact
become negative for firms' innovation performance." (p. 14) This provides preliminary
evidence that a segregation into creator and imitator strategies need not necessarily
occur at the level of individuals; it may occur at the level of companies, with adaptive
consequences in the real world.
Experiments Two and Three investigated another way in which creativity may be
tempered with conformity: over time, those whose creative efforts are successful might
increase their creativity while those whose creative efforts are unsuccessful might
decrease their creativity, and rely instead on social learning. Experiment Two tested the
hypothesis that a society as a whole can perform better if individuals are able to adjust
how creative they are over time in accordance with their perceived creative success.
When agents that were successful creators created more, and those that were
unsuccessful creators created less (SR), the mean fitness of outputs was higher and the
increase in diversity was more pronounced. Moreover, these results were due to the
segregation of agents over time into two groups-creators and imitators. Thus we
showed that it is possible to increase the mean fitness of ideas in a society by enabling
them to regulate how creative they are.
In Experiment Two the effect of SR on the pace of cultural evolution was
short-lived. Since the space of possibilities was closed, all agents eventually converged
on optimal outputs, and they could not find even better actions through chaining; there
was a ceiling effect. At this point there was no longer any social benefit to having some
members of society be dedicated creators. We hypothesized that this was because the
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
27
agents were limited to a finite set of simple ideas.
In Experiment Three, where the space of possible outputs was open-ended, and
agents could execute multi-step outputs, agents once again segregated into creators and
imitators. However, comparing Figure 6 with Figure 10, we see that there is no longer a
ceiling effect; the difference in fitness between societies with SR and societies without it
now increases throughout the run. Thus, the results support our third hypothesis that
it is possible for the benefit of this social regulation mechanism to be ongoing rather
than temporary, if the space of possible creative outputs is open-ended, such that it
remains possible for fitter possibilities to be found. These findings suggest that it can
be beneficial for a social group if individuals follow different developmental trajectories
in accordance with their demonstrated successes, but only if the space of possible ideas
is such that there are always avenues to explore for new creative ideas.
Although the simplicity of the model must be kept in mind before jumping to
conclusions, the results of Experiments Two and Three are consistent with empirical
findings concerning the value of imitation in collaborative groups, e.g., when people
have access to their peers' solutions, imitation facilitates not just scrounging but the
propagation of good solutions for further cumulative exploration (Wisdom, Song, &
Goldstone, 2013). These results fit in well with evidence compiled by Florida (2002) that
a natural distinction emerges in societies between the conventional workforce and the
creative class. Our results further suggest that this division of labor is adaptive; when
social regulation was in place the society as a whole benefited. The society was able to
capitalize on both the creative abilities of the best creators and the dissemination of fit
cultural outputs by the rest. This is in line with current thinking on the adaptive value
of individual differences in personality across group members (Nettle, 2006).
These results do not prove that in real societies successful creators invent more
and unsuccessful creators invent less; they merely show this kind of regulation of
creativity at the individual level is a feasible means of increasing the mean fitness of
creative outputs of the group as a whole. However, the fact that strong individual
differences in creativity exist (Kaufman, 2003; Wolfradt & Pretz, 2001) suggests that
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
28
this does indeed occur in real societies. The question of whether, and how, social groups
balance creativity with conformity would appear to be a promising area for future
research. Based on the results obtained here, it seems reasonable to hypothesize
that-whether the regulation is prompted by individuals themselves or mediated by
way of social cues-families, organizations, or societies spontaneously self-organize to
achieve a balance between creative processes that generate innovations and the
imitative processes that disseminate these innovations. In other words, they evolve
faster by tempering novelty with continuity.
A more complex version of this scheme is that individuals find a task at which they
excel, such that for each task domain there exists some individual in the social group
who comes to be best equipped to explore that space of possibilities. To explore this in
EVOC would have required an individualized or dynamically changing fitness function.
Elsewhere we have investigated the effect of individualized and dynamically changing
fitness functions on the fitness and diversity of cultural outputs (Gabora, 2008a;
Gabora, Chia, & Firouzi, 2013). Although for the present initial explorations the results
were most easily interpretable with a static fitness function, in future research it would
be interesting to investigate how individualized or dynamic fitness functions affect SR.
In real life, people are faced with numerous different tasks on a daily basis that
are evaluated according to different criteria. Actions that are fit or appropriate for one
purpose (e.g., for making a specific tool) are not necessarily fit for another purpose
(e.g., for expressing agreement). Accordingly, if one examines only one creative task at
a time, a society may appear to perform optimally when the creating is left to a subset
of individuals. However, when one examines multiple creative tasks, the situation may
be more complex; in the extreme, everyone would find a different specialized niche for
their creative output, and be an imitator with respect to other specialized niches.
Experiments with a model that is related to but very different from EVOC suggest that
the capacity for hybrid learning-wherein agents acquire knowledge pertaining to one
environmental dimension through individual learning and knowledge pertaining to
another environmental dimension through imitation-can foster specialization that
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
29
benefits society as a whole (Kharratzadeh, Montrey, Metz, & Shultz, 2015). Since
creative problem solving is a form of individual learning, it seems reasonable to suggest
there may be social benefits when individuals limit creative exploration to one or a few
domains and for other domains rely on social learning. The value of this arrangement
hangs on the extent to which creativity is domain-specific. The evidence here is mixed;
although the capacity for expert-level creative achievement may be predominantly
limited to a single domain (Baer, 1996; Ruscio, Whitney, & Amabile, 1998; Tardif &
Sternberg, 1988), many if not most individuals may be able to experience personally
meaningful and fulfilling creative engagement and express their personal creative style
through multiple domains (Gabora, O'Connor, & Ranjan, 2012; Hocevar, 1976; Plucker,
1998; Ranjan, 2014; Runco, 1987). The optimal distribution of creators and imitators
across different tasks may be therefore be complex, with different individuals tending to
specialize for different tasks, but some individuals exhibiting a generalized tendency
toward creativity and others exhibiting a generalized tendency toward imitation.
It has been suggested that the capacity to merge thoughts and ideas into chains of
association or 'streams of thought' initially emerged approximately 1.7 million years ago
due to increased cranial capacity accompanying the transition from Homo habilis to
Homo erectus (Donald, 1991). The increase in cranial capacity could have allowed for
more fleshed out representations, which in turn allowed for more associative pathways
amongst representations, and greater potential for streams of abstract thought.
Mathematical (Gabora & Aerts, 2009; Gabora & Kitto, 2013) and computational
(Gabora & DiPaola, 2012; Gabora, Chia, & Firouzi, 2013) models support the
feasibility of this scenario. The fact that in the experiments reported here social
regulation of creativity was found to be of lasting value only in societies composed of
agents capable of chaining suggests that there may have been insufficient selective
pressure for social regulation of creativity prior to onset of this capacity. Thus,
individual differences in creativity would be expected to have emerged after this time.
The social practice of discouraging creativity until the individual has proven him-
or herself may serve to ensure that creative efforts are not squandered. Individual
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
30
differences in responsiveness to social cues may ensure that some percentage of society
consists of individuals whose affiliative needs are low, and who therefore feel relatively
free to deviate from social norms and be creative. Those individuals who are most
tuned to social norms and expectations may over time become increasingly concerned
with imitating and cooperating with others in a manner that promotes cultural
continuity. Thus, their thoughts travel more well-worn routes, and they become
increasingly less likely to innovate. Others might be tuned to the demands of creative
tasks, less tethered to social norms and expectations, and therefore more likely to see
things from unconventional perspectives. Thus, they become more likely to come up
with solutions to problems or unexpected challenges, find new avenues for
self-expression, and contribute to the generation of cultural novelty. What Cropley et
al. (2010) refer to as the "dark side of creativity" may to some degree reflect that the
creative individual is tuned to task needs at the expense of human needs; ideas, not
people, are the objects of their nurturing. Although in the long run this benefits the
group as a whole because it results in creative outputs, in the short run the creative
individual may be less likely to obey social norms and live up to social expectations,
and to experience stigmatization or discrimination as a result, particularly in his/her
early years (Craft, 2005; Scott, 1999; Torrance, 1963). Once the merits of such
individuals' creative efforts become known, they may be supported or even idolized.
A limitation of this work is that EVOC in its current implementation does not
accommodate selective or partial imitation. In other words, EVOC does not allow an
agent to imitate some features of an idea and not others. An agent either copies exactly
what a neighbor is doing or ignores that neighbor entirely for that iteration; it cannot
choose bits and pieces that would augment or complement its own current action. Nor
can an agent selectively combine elements of multiple different neighbors' actions at
once. Consequently, imitation, while essential to the rapid spread of superior outputs,
exacerbates convergence on a small set of solutions, i.e., it has a destructive effect on
diversity. We expect that this effect would be reduced in investigations that incorporate
partial imitation. Partial imitation would also be useful for dealing with what in
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
31
biology is referred to as epistasis, wherein what is optimal with respect to one
component depends on what is going on with respect to another. Once both
components have been optimized in a mutually beneficial way (in EVOC, for example,
symmetrical movement of both arms), excess creativity risks breaking up co-adapted
partial solutions. Note that the goal of this paper was not to develop a realistic model
of creativity per se but to investigate social factors in creativity. Nonetheless, in future
studies we plan to increase the sophistication of the mechanisms by which agents create
by incorporating ideas from the psychology of creativity (e.g., Gabora, 2017; Ward,
Smith, & Vaid, 1997) and formal models of individual creativity (e.g., Costello &
Keane, 2000; Dantzig, Raffone, & Hommel, 2011; Thagard & Stewart, 2011).
There are other avenues for future investigation suggested by this work. One is to
study more thoroughly the extent to which these findings are affected by the nature of
the task, or neighborhood network structure (cf. Jacobs, 2000; Liu, Madhavan, &
Sudharshan, 2005). Another avenue for future research is to investigate the impact of
varying the extent to which the generation of novelty is goal-directed versus random.
An early experiment on a predecessor to EVOC (Gabora, 1995) investigated (1) the
effect of turning on or off the ability to learn trends that bias the generation of
subsequent novelty, and (2) the effect of varying the extent to which new ideas deviate
from previous ideas. Both the ability to learn trends and the tendency to use successful
known ideas as a basis for generating new ideas decrease the extent to which generation
is random. The ability to learn trends increased the speed of convergence and decreased
the diversity of ideas. Performance was optimal when, on average, new ideas deviated
from old ones with respect to one component (i.e., movement of one body part
changed). Either increasing or decreasing the extent to which new ideas deviated from
old ones affected the speed of convergence but not the overall pattern of results.
Yet another avenue for future research is to investigate the relative impact of
nature versus nurture. In Experiment Three, the observed individual differences were
completely due to 'nurture' rather than 'nature'. It would be interesting to see how
initializing a run with individual differences in creative ability amongst agents affects
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
32
the pattern of results. It would also be interesting to investigate the impact of
individual differences in agents' responses to assessments of their creative efforts, such
as variation in their responses to positively versus negatively valence assessments. This
would enable us to, for example, model the impact of possible gender differences in the
tendency to decrease creative output in response to negative assessments of one's
creative work, or increase creative output in response to positive assessments. If this is
the case then even if the creative potential of boys and girls is initially equal they may
exhibit gender differences in creativity by the time they reach adulthood.
As mentioned in the introduction, many supposed models of cultural evolution are
actually models of cultural transmission. To demonstrate cultural transmission, as few
as two cultural variants with error-prone copying is sufficient, whereas cultural
evolution entails cumulative, creative, open-ended, adaptive cultural change. This
confusion has led to misleading claims and analyses. Some of these are discussed
elsewhere (Gabora, 2011, 2013); one that has not been discussed concerns Rogers'
(1988) paradox: the finding that when social learning and individual learning strategies
are at equilibrium, social learning does not enhance average individual fitness.
Although much as been made of Rogers' result (see Enquist, Eriksson, & Ghirlanda,
2007; Kameda & Nakanishi, 2003; Kharratzadeh, Montrey, Metz, & Shultz, 2015;
Rendell, Fogarty, & Laland, 2010), his conclusions hinge on the assumption of a
temporally varying environment, for without this there is no benefit in the model to
individual learning. The value of individual learning here lies solely in that it facilitates
the tracking of environmental change because the model does not incorporate creativity.
The supposed paradox yielded by Rogers' model reflects an underlying lack of
understanding of the central role of creativity in individual learning. In the real world,
even if the environment remains basically unchanged, we benefit from finding creative
new ways of conceptualizing and responding to this world. Moreover, the distinction
between social learning and individual learning may not be as fundamental as Rogers'
model assumes to be; for example, it isn't obvious that imitating a peer is
fundamentally different from imitating a cartoon character, or from a beatboxer
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
33
imitating the sounds of instruments, or a dancer imitating the wind. The approach
taken here speaks to the new and important questions and perspectives that can be
addressed when creativity is incorporated into a model of cultural evolution.
Conclusions
While society seems to value creativity in the abstract, social institutions are
often perceived as wielding excessive social pressure to conform, and placing obstacles
to creative self-expression in the paths of creative individuals until they have proven
themselves. The results of the experiments reported here suggest that there is a logic to
these seemingly contradictory messages. Since a proportion of individuals benefit from
creativity without being creative themselves by imitating creators, the rate of cultural
evolution increases when the novelty-generating effects of creativity are tempered with
the novelty-preserving effects of imitation. If there were few creators they could afford
to be more creative, and vice versa; if there were many their creativity had to be
restrained to exert the same global benefit for the society. Excess creativity was
detrimental because creators invested in unproven ideas at the expense of propagating
proven ones.
We also obtained evidence that society can benefit by rewarding and punishing
creativity on the basis of creative success. When each agent regulated its
invention-to-imitation ratio as a function of the fitness of its cultural outputs, they
segregated into creators and imitators, and the mean fitness of cultural outputs was
higher. When the space of possible outputs was fixed, the beneficial effect of social
regulation was temporary. However, making the space of possible outputs open-ended
by enabling agents to chain simple outputs into complex ones, caused the social
regulation induced increase in mean fitness of cultural outputs to be sustained.
Although the model used here is vastly simpler than real societies it enabled us to
manipulate the ratio of creators to imitators and the degree to which creators are
creative in a controlled manner and observe the result. This led to the hypothesis
concerning how creativity is regulated that was explored in experiment two.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
34
Experiment two in turn led to the hypothesis explored in experiment three concerning
the conditions under which the benefits of social regulation of creativity are long term.
The fact that each experiment yielded insights that led to a new hypothesis speaks to
the value of the approach. Although further investigation is needed to establish the
relevance of these results to real societies, we believe they constitute an important step
forward to understand the underlying mechanisms that enable societies to balance
novelty with continuity.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
35
References
Adams, N. (2012). Walden Two: An anticipation of positive psychology? Review of
General Psychology, 16, 1-9.
Aljughaiman, A., & Mowrer-Reynolds, E. (2005). Teachers' conceptions of creativity
and creative students. Journal of Creative Behavior, 39, 17-34.
Amabile, T. (1998). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review, Sept.- Oct.,
77-87.
Anderson, M. L., Richardson, M. J. & Chemero, J. (2012). Eroding the boundaries of
cognition: Implications of embodiment. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4, 717-730.
Baer, J. (1996). The effects of task-specific divergent-thinking training. Journal of
Creative Behavior, 30, 183-187.
Bandura, A. (1965). Behavioral modification through modeling procedures. In L.
Krasner & L. P. Ulmann (Eds.), Research in behavior modification: new
development and implications (pp. 310-340). New York: Rinehart and Winston.
Basadur, M. (1995). The power of innovation. New York: Pitman.
Beghetto, R. A. (2007). Ideational code-switching: Walking the talk about supporting
student creativity in the classroom. Roeper Review, 29, 265-270.
Best, M. (1999). How culture can guide evolution: An inquiry into gene/meme
enhancement and opposition. Adaptive Behavior, 132, 289-293.
Bhattacharyya, S., & Ohlsson, S. (2010). Social creativity as a function of agent
cognition and network properties: A computer model. Social Networks, 32,
263-278.
Boyd, R. & Richerson, P. J. (1985). Culture and the evolutionary process. Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press.
Chan, J., & Schunn, C. (2015). The impact of analogies on creative concept
generation: Lessons from an in vivo study in engineering design. Cognitive
Science, 39, 126-155.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
36
Costello, F. J., & Keane, M. T. (2000). Efficient creativity: Constraint guided
conceptual combination, Cognitive Science, 24, 299-4349.
Craft, A. (2005). Creativity in schools: Tensions and dilemmas. London: Routledge.
Cropley, D., Cropley, A., Kaufman, J., & Runco, M. (2010). The dark side of
creativity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Dantzig, S. V., Raffone, A., & Hommel, B. (2011). Acquiring contextualized concepts:
A connectionist approach. Cognitive Science, 35, 1162-1189.
Dasgupta, S. (1994). Creativity in invention and design. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Donald, M. (1991). Origins of the modern mind: Three stages in the evolution of
culture and cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Dunbar, K. (2000). How scientists think in the real world: Implications for science
education. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 21, 49-58.
Enquist, M., Eriksson, K. & Ghirlanda, S. (2007). Critical social learning?: A solution
to Rogers' paradox of nonadaptive culture. American Anthropologist, 109,
727-734.
Feinstein, J. S. (2006). The nature of creative development. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.
Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class. London: Basic Books.
Forrest, S. & Mitchell, M. (1993). Relative building block fitness and the building
block hypothesis. In L. Whitley (Ed.), Foundations of genetic algorithms. San
Mateo: Morgan Kaufman.
Gabora, L. (1995). Meme and variations: A computational model of cultural
evolution. In L. Nadel & D. Stein (Eds.), 1993 lectures in complex systems.
Reading MA: Addison-Wesley.
Gabora, L. (2008a). EVOC: A computer model of the evolution of culture. In V.
Sloutsky, B. Love & K. McRae (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
37
the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1466-1471). North Salt Lake, UT: Sheridan
Publishing.
Gabora, L. (2008b). The cultural evolution of socially situated cognition. Cognitive
Systems Research, 9, 104-113.
Gabora, L. (2011). Five clarifications about cultural evolution. Journal of Cognition
and Culture, 11, 61-83.
Gabora, L. (2013). An evolutionary framework for culture: Selectionism versus
communal exchange. Physics of Life Reviews, 10, 117-145.
Gabora, L. (2017). Honing theory: A complex systems framework for creativity.
Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 21, 35-88.
Gabora, L. & Aerts, D. (2009). A mathematical model of the emergence of an
integrated worldview. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 53, 434-451.
Gabora, L., Chia, W., & Firouzi, H. (2013). A computational model of two cognitive
transitions underlying cultural evolution. In M. Knauff, N. Sebanz, Michael
Pauen, & I. Wachsmuth (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the
Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2344-2349). Austin TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Gabora, L., & DiPaola, S. (2012). How did humans become so creative? In M. L.
Maher, K. Hammond, A. Pease, R. Pèrez, D. Ventura & G. Wiggins (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Computational Creativity (pp.
203-210). Palo Alto, CA: Association for the Advancement of Artificial
Intelligence.
Gabora, L. & Kauffman, S. (2016). Toward an evolutionary-predictive foundation for
creativity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23, 632-639..
Gabora, L., & Kitto, K. (2013). Concept combination and the origins of complex
cognition. In L. Swan (Ed.), Origins of mind (pp. 361-382). Berlin: Springer.
Gabora, L., O'Connor, B., & Ranjan, A. (2012). The recognizability of individual
creative styles within and across domains. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity,
and the Arts, 6, 351-360.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
38
Goldstone, R. L., & Gureckis, T. M. (2009). Collective behavior. Topics in Cognitive
Science, 1, 412-438.
Guardiola, X., Diaz-Guilera, A., Perez, C., Arenas, A., Llas, M. (2002). Modeling
diffusion of innovations in a social network. Physical Review E, 66, 026121.
Haldane, J. B. S. (1932/1990). The causes of evolution. Princeton NJ: Princeton
Science Library.
Henrich, J., & Boyd, R. (2002). On modeling cognition and culture: Why replicators
are not necessary for cultural evolution. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 2,
87-112.
Higgs, P. (2000). The mimetic transition: a simulation study of the evolution of
learning by imitation. Proceedings of the Royal Society B – Biological Sciences,
267, 1355-1361.
Hills, T., Todd, P. M., Lazer, D., Redish, A. D., Couzin, I. D., & the Cognitive Search
Research Group (2015). Exploration versus exploitation in space, mind, and
society. Trends in Cognitive Science, 19, 46-54.
Hinton, G., & Nowlan, S. (1987). How learning can guide evolution. Complex Systems,
267, 495-502.
Hocevar, D. (1976). Dimensionality of creativity. Psychological Reports, 39, 869-870.
Holland, J. (1975). Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press.
Hunter, S. T., Thoroughgood, C. N., Myer, A. T., & Ligon, G. S. (2011). Paradoxes of
leading innovative endeavors: Summary, solutions, and future directions.
Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5, 54-66.
Hutchins, E., & Hazelhurst, B. (1991). Learning in the cultural process. In C.
Langton, J. Taylor, D. Farmer, & S. Rasmussen (Eds.), Artificial life II. Redwood
City: Addison-Wesley.
Iribarren J. L., & Moro, E. (2011). Affinity paths and information diffusion in social
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
39
networks. Social Networks 33, 134-142.
Jackson, M., Yariv, L., (2005). Diffusion on social networks. Economie Publique, 16,
3-16.
Jacobs, J. (2000). The nature of economies. New York: The Modern Library.
Kameda, T., & Nakanishi, D. (2003). Does social/cultural learning increase human
adaptability? Rogers' question revisited. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24,
242-260.
Kaufman, J. C. (2003). The cost of the muse: Poets die young. Death Studies, 27,
813-822.
Kaufman, J. C. & Beghetto, R. A. (2014). Creativity in schools: Renewed interest and
promising new directions. In Gilman, R., Huebner, E. S., & Furlong, M. J. (Eds.).
Handbook of positive psychology in schools (2nd Ed.) (pp. 165-175). New York:
Routledge.
Kharratzadeh, M., Montrey, M., Metz, A. & Shultz, T. (2015). Resolving Rogers'
paradox with specialized hybrid learners. In R. Dale, C. Jennings, P. Maglio, T.
Matlock, D. Noelle, A. Warlaumont & J. Yashimi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th
Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1069-1074). Austin TX:
Cognitive Science Society.
Legare, C. H., Wen, N. J., Herrmann, P. A., & Whitehouse, H. (2015). Imitative
flexibility and the development of cultural learning. Cognition, 142, 351-361.
Leijnen, S., & Gabora, L. (2009a). The artist loft effect in the clustering of creative
types: A computer simulation. In N. Bryans-Kins (Ed.), Proceedings of 7th
Conference on Creativity and Cognition (pp. 389-390). New York: Association for
Computing Machinery Press.
Leijnen, S. & Gabora, L. (2009b). The tradeoff between degree of creativity and
number of creators in a computational model of society. In B. Cooper & V. Danos
(Eds.), Proceedings of the First International Conference on Developments in
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
40
Computational Models from Nature (pp. 108-119). Sydney: Electronic
Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science.
Liu, B. S.C., Madhavan, R., & Sudharshan, D., (2005). Diffunet: The impact of
network structure on diffusion of innovation. European Journal of Innovation
Management 8, 240-262.
Ludwig, A. (1995). The price of greatness. New York: Guilford Press.
Maslow, A. (1959). Creativity in self-actualizing people. In H. Anderson (Ed.),
Creativity and its cultivation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
May, R. (1975). The courage to create. New York: Bantam.
McDonald, R., & Siegel, D. (1986). The value of waiting to invest. The Quarterly
Journal of Economics, 101, 707-727.
Mesoudi, A., Whiten, A. & Laland, K. N. (2006). Towards a unified science of cultural
evolution. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 29, 329-383.
Mithen S. 1998. Creativity in human evolution and prehistory. Abingdon-on-Thames:
Routledge.
Mumford, M. D., & Hunter, S. T. (2005). Innovation in organizations: A multi-level
perspective on creativity. In F. J. Yammarino & F. Dansereau (Eds.), Research in
multi-level issues (Vol. IV, pp. 11-74). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
Nettle, D. (2006). The evolution of personality variation in humans and other animals.
American Psychologist, 61, 622-631.
Niazi, M. & Hussain, A. (2011). Agent-based computing from multi-agent systems to
agent-based models: A visual survey. Scientometrics, 89, 479–499.
Nooteboom, B., W. Van Haverbeke, G. Duysters, V. Gilsing, & A. Van den Oord
(2007). Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 36,
1016-1034.
Plucker, J. A. (1998). Beware of simple conclusions: The case for the content
generality of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 11, 179-182.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
41
Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why is not creativity more
important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions
in creativity research.Educational Psychologist, 39, 83-96.
Ranjan, A. (2014).Understanding the creative process: Personal signatures and
cross-domain interpretations of ideas. (Doctoral dissertation). University of
British Columbia, Canada.
Reiter-Palmon, R., & Illies, J. J. (2004). Leadership and creativity: Understanding
leadership from a creative problem-solving perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 15,
55-77.
Rendell, L., Fogarty, L., & Laland, K. N. (2010). Rogers' paradox recast and resolved:
population structure and the evolution of social learning strategies. Evolution, 64,
534-48.
Robinson, K. (2001). Out of our minds: Learning to be creative. New York: Capstone.
Rogers, A. R. (1988). Does biology constrain culture? American Anthropologist, 90,
819-831.
Rogers, C. (1959). Toward a theory of creativity. In H. Anderson (Ed.) Creativity and
its cultivation. New York: Harper & Row.
Rule, E. G., & Irwin, D. W. (1988). Fostering intrapreneurship: The new competitive
edge. The Journal of Business Strategy 9, 44-47.
Runco, M. A. (1987). The generality of creative performance in gifted and nongifted
children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 331, 121-125.
Rumelhart, D.E., McClelland, J. L., and the PDP Research Group (Eds.). (1986).
Parallel distributed processing. Cambridge MA: Bradford/MIT Press.
Ruscio, J., Whitney, D. M., & Amabile, T. M (1998). The fishbowl of creativity.
Creativity Research Journal, 11, 243-263.
Scott, C. (1999). Teachers' biases toward creative children. Creativity Research
Journal, 12, 321-337.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
42
Simonton, D. K. (20002). Creativity. In D. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.) Handbook
of positive psychology (pp. 189-201). New York: Oxford University Press.
Snyder, H., Gregerson, M., & Kaufman, J. (Eds.). (2012). Teaching creatively. New
York: Springer.
Sosa, R., & Connor, A. M. (2015). A computational intuition pump to examine group
creativity: building on the ideas of others. Proceedings of the 2015 IASDR
Conference: Interplay 2015.
Spencer, G. M. (2012). Creative economies of scale: An agent-based model of
creativity and agglomeration. Journal of Economic Geography, 12(1), 247-271.
Stokols, D., Clitheroe, C., & Zmuidzinaz, M. (2002). Qualities of work environments
that promote perceived support for creativity. Creative Research Journal, 14(2),
137-147.
Sulloway, F. (1996). Born to rebel. New York: Pantheon.
Tardif, T. Z., & Sternberg, R. J. (1988). What do we know about creativity? In R. J.
Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity: contemporary psychological perspectives
(pp. 429-440). Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
Thagard, P., & Stewart, T. C. (2011). The AHA! experience: Creativity through
emergent binding in neural networks.Cognitive Science, 35(1), 1-33.
Tomasello, M., Kruger, A., & Ratner, H. (1993). Cultural learning. Behavioral and
Brain Sciences, 16(03), 495-552.
Tomlinson, R. (1980). A systems approach to planning in organizations: Developing a
collaborative research study. Cybernetics and Systems 11, 355-367.
Torrance, E. (1963). Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Vallet-Bellmunt, T. & Molina-Morales, F. (2015). Be creative but not so much.
Decreasing benefits of creativity in clustered firms. Entrepreneurship & Regional
Development,27, 1-27.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
43
Ward, T. B., Smith, S. M., & Vaid, J., (Eds.). (1997). Creative thought: An
investigation of conceptual structures and processes. Washington, DC: APA Books.
Watson-Jones, R. E., Legare, C. H., Whitehouse, H., & Clegg, J. M. (2014).
Task-specific effects of ostracism on imitative fidelity in early childhood. Evolution
& Human Behavior, 35, 204-210.
Watts, C., & Gilbert, N. (2014). Simulating innovation: Computer-based tools for
rethinking innovation. Cheltenham UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Weitzman, M. L. (1998). Recombinant growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113,
331-360.
Westby, E. L., & Dawson, V. L. (1995). Creativity: Asset of burden in the classroom?
Creativity Research Journal, 8, 1-11.
Wisdom, T. N., Song, X., & Goldstone, R. L. (2013). Social learning strategies in
networked groups. Cognitive Science, 37, 1383-1425.
Wolfradt, U., & Pretz, J. (2001). Individual differences in creativity: Personality, story
writing, and hobbies. European Journal of Personality, 15, 297-310.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
44
Appendix: Training the Network
To train the network, the activation of nodes is updated as follows. The relevant
variables are:
aj = activation of j
tj = jth component of input
wij = weight on link from i to j
β = 0.15
θ = 0.5
(1 + e−β[P wij ai+θ])
1
aj =
(10)
For the movement node, we use the absolute value of ai (since negative movement
is not possible; the least you can move is to not move at all). The comparison between
input and output involves computing an error term, which is used to modify the pattern
of connectivity in the network such that its responses become more correct. For
input/output units the error term is computed as follows:
δj = (tj − aj)aj(1 − aj)
For hidden units the error term is computed as follows:
δi = aj(1 − aj)X
δjwij
(11)
(12)
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
45
Table 1
Definitions used in the evaluation of chained actions.
Term
Body Part
Sub-action
Action
Template
Definition
Component of agent other
than neural network.
Set of six components that
indicates position of 6 body
parts. Each can be in a
neutral (0), up (1), or down
(-1) position.
One or more sequential
sub-actions.
Abstract or prototypical
format for a sub-action.
Position of a body part can
be unspecified (*).
Example
Left Arm (LA)
{HD:0, LA:1, RA:-1, LL:1,
RL:0, HP:-1; This
sub-action is abbreviated
01-110-1}
{{01001-1}, {-10-1-111}}
{HD:0, LA:*, RA:1, LL:*,
RL:1, HP:-1}
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
46
Table 2
A partial set of the templates used in the first fitness function
T 1 = {0,∗,∗,∗,∗,∗}
T 2 = {∗, 0,∗,∗,∗,∗}
T 3 = {∗,∗, 0,∗,∗,∗}
T 24 = {1,∗,∗, 1, 1,∗}
T 25 = {1,∗, 1,∗, 1,∗}
T 26 = {1,∗, 1, 1,∗,∗}
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
47
Figure 1. The core of an agent is an auto-associative neural network composed of six
input nodes and six corresponding output nodes that represent concepts of body parts
(LEFT ARM, RIGHT ARM, LEFT LEG, RIGHT LEG, HEAD, and HIPS), and seven
hidden nodes that represent more abstract concepts (LEFT, RIGHT, ARM, LEG,
SYMMETRY, MOVEMENT and OPPOSITE). Input nodes and output nodes are
connected to hidden nodes of which they are instances (e.g. RIGHT ARM is connected
to RIGHT.) The hidden nodes are used to bias invention using learned trends about
what constitutes a fit action.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
48
Figure 2. 3D graph of the log10 Time-to-Threshold (TTT) landscape of the average
mean fitness for different values of C and p, with τ = 9. The valley in the fitness
landscape indicates that the optimal values of C and p for the society as a whole are
less than their maximum values for most C, p settings.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
49
Figure 3. Top-view contour plot of the log10 Time-to-Threshold (TTT) landscape of the
average mean fitness for different values of C and p, with τ = 9. The line, obtained by
visually extrapolating over minimum values C and p, indicates the set of optima.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
50
Figure 4. 3D graph of the Present Innovation Value (PIV) landscape of the average
mean fitness for different values of C and p. Since the x axis has been inverted to aid
visibility of the adaptive landscape, the valley again indicates that the optimal values of
C and p for the society as a whole are less than their maximum values for most C, p
settings.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
51
Figure 5. Top-view contour plot of the Present Innovation Value (PIV) landscape of
average mean fitness for different values of C and p. The line, obtained by visually
extrapolating over maximum values C and p, indicates the set of optima.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
52
Figure 6. This graph plots the mean fitness of implemented actions across all agents
over the duration of the run, with and without social regulation.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
53
Figure 7. This graph plots the mean diversity of implemented actions across all agents
over the duration of the run, with and without social regulation.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
54
Figure 8. This graph plots the fitness of actions obtained through invention on the y
axis and through imitation on the x axis. Fitness values are given as a proportion of the
fitness of an optimally fit action. The curved line is a pareto frontier because it consists
of different optimal allocations of actions, ranging from always inventing optimally
(upper left end of curve), to always implementing an optimal action obtained through
imitation (bottom right end of curve), as well as strategies involving a mixture of
inventing and imitating (all other points along the curve). Points to the left of this
curve indicate strategies that involve the execution of suboptimal actions. Each small
red circle shows the mean fitness of an agent's actions obtained through invention and
imitation averaged across ten iterations: iterations 1 to 10 in the top graph, 25 to 35 in
the middle graph, and 90 to 100 in the bottom graph. Since by iteration 90 all values
were piled up in two spots-the upper left and the bottom right-they are indicated by
large red circles at these locations.
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
55
Figure 9. Schematic illustration of the process by which an agent determines what
action it will implement in the next iteration without chaining (above) and with
chaining (below).
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
56
Figure 10. This graph plots the mean fitness of actions across all agents over the course
of the run with chaining turned on, with and without social regulation (SR).
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
57
Figure 11. This graph plots the mean diversity of implemented actions across all agents
over the course of the run with chaining, with and without social regulation (SR).
SOCIAL BENEFITS BALANCING CREATIVITY IMITATION
58
Figure 12. At the beginning of the run (top) all agents created and imitated with equal
probability. Midway through the run their p(C) values were distributed along the range
of values from 0 to 1. By the end of the run (bottom) they had segregated into
imitators (with p(C) from 0 to 0.1) and creators (with p(C) from 0.9 to 1).
|
1211.6039 | 2 | 1211 | 2012-11-27T05:15:55 | Rendezvous of two robots with visible bits | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.CG",
"cs.RO"
] | We study the rendezvous problem for two robots moving in the plane (or on a line). Robots are autonomous, anonymous, oblivious, and carry colored lights that are visible to both. We consider deterministic distributed algorithms in which robots do not use distance information, but try to reduce (or increase) their distance by a constant factor, depending on their lights' colors.
We give a complete characterization of the number of colors that are necessary to solve the rendezvous problem in every possible model, ranging from fully synchronous to semi-synchronous to asynchronous, rigid and non-rigid, with preset or arbitrary initial configuration.
In particular, we show that three colors are sufficient in the non-rigid asynchronous model with arbitrary initial configuration. In contrast, two colors are insufficient in the rigid asynchronous model with arbitrary initial configuration and in the non-rigid asynchronous model with preset initial configuration.
Additionally, if the robots are able to distinguish between zero and non-zero distances, we show how they can solve rendezvous and detect termination using only three colors, even in the non-rigid asynchronous model with arbitrary initial configuration. | cs.MA | cs |
Rendezvous of two robots with visible bits
Giovanni Viglietta
[email protected]
November 7, 2018
Abstract
We study the rendezvous problem for two robots moving in the
plane (or on a line). Robots are autonomous, anonymous, oblivious,
and carry colored lights that are visible to both. We consider deter-
ministic distributed algorithms in which robots do not use distance
information, but try to reduce (or increase) their distance by a con-
stant factor, depending on their lights' colors.
We give a complete characterization of the number of colors that
are necessary to solve the rendezvous problem in every possible model,
ranging from fully synchronous to semi-synchronous to asynchronous,
rigid and non-rigid, with preset or arbitrary initial configuration.
In particular, we show that three colors are sufficient in the non-
rigid asynchronous model with arbitrary initial configuration. In con-
trast, two colors are insufficient in the rigid asynchronous model with
arbitrary initial configuration and in the non-rigid asynchronous model
with preset initial configuration.
Additionally, if the robots are able to distinguish between zero and
non-zero distances, we show how they can solve rendezvous and detect
termination using only three colors, even in the non-rigid asynchronous
model with arbitrary initial configuration.
1
Introduction
1.1 Models for mobile robots
The basic robot model we employ has been thoroughly described in [1, 2, 3,
4]. Robots are modeled as points freely moving in R2 (or R). Each robot
has its own coordinate system and its own unit distance, which may differ
from the others. Robots operate in cycles that consist of four phases: Wait,
Look, Compute, and Move.
In a Wait phase a robot is idle; in a Look phase it gets a snapshot of its
surroundings (including the positions of the other robots); in a Compute
phase it computes a destination point; in a Move phase it moves toward
the destination point it just computed, along a straight line. Then the cycle
repeats over and over.
1
Robots are anonymous and oblivious, meaning that they do not have
distinct identities, they all execute the same algorithm in each Compute
phase, and the only input to such algorithm is the snapshot coming from
the previous Look phase.
In a Move phase, a robot may actually reach its destination, or it may
be stopped before reaching it. If a robot always reaches its destination by
the end of each Move phase, then the model is said to be rigid. If a robot
can unpredictably be stopped before, the model is non-rigid. However, even
in non-rigid models, during a Move phase, a robot must always be found
on the line segment between its starting point and the destination point.
Moreover, there is a constant distance δ > 0 that a robot is guaranteed to
walk at each cycle. That is, if the destination point that a robot computes is
at most δ away (referred to some global coordinate system), then the robot
is guaranteed to reach it by the end of the next Move phase. On the other
hand, if the destination point is more than δ away, the robot is guaranteed
to approach it by at least δ.
In the basic model, robots cannot communicate in conventional ways or
store explicit information, but a later addition to this model allows each
robot to carry a "colored light" that is visible to every robot (refer to [2]).
There is a fixed amount of possible light colors, and a robot can compute
its destination and turn its own light to a different color during a Compute
phase, based on the light colors that it sees on other robots and on itself.
Usually, when robots start their execution, they have all their lights set to
a predetermined color. However, we are also interested in algorithms that
work regardless of the initial color configurations of the robots.
In the fully synchronous model (FSynch) all robots share a common
notion of time, and all their phases are executed synchronously. The semi-
synchronous model (SSynch) is similar, but not every robot may be active
at every cycle. That is, some robots are allowed to "skip" a cycle at unpre-
dictable times, by extending their Wait phase to the whole cycle. However,
the robots that are active at a certain cycle still execute it synchronously.
Also, no robot can remain inactive for infinitely many consecutive cycles.
Finally, in the asynchronous model (ASynch) there is no common notion of
time, and each robot's execution phase may last any amount of time, from
a minimum > 0 to an unboundedly long, but finite, time.
Figure 1 shows all the possible models arising from combining syn-
chronousness, rigidity, and arbitrarity of the initial light colors. The trivial
inclusions between models are also shown.
Without loss of generality, in this paper we will assume Look phases
in ASynch to be instantaneous, and we will assume that a robot's light's
color may change only at the very end of a Compute phase.
2
Figure 1: Robot models with their trivial inclusions. An asterisk means that
the initial color configuration may be arbitrary; no asterisk means that it is
fixed. The numbers indicate the minimum amounts of distinct colors that
are necessary to solve Rendezvous in each model (cf. Theorem 5.1).
1.2 Gathering mobile robots
Gathering is the problem of making a finite set of robots in the plane
reach the same location in a finite amount of time, and stay there forever,
regardless of their initial positions. Such location should not be given as
input to the robots, but they must implicitly determine it, agree on it, and
reach it, in a distribute manner. Note that this problem is different from
Convergence, in which robots only have to approach a common location,
but may never actually reach it.
For any set of more than two robots, Gathering has been solved in
non-rigid ASynch, without using colored lights (see [1]). The special case
with only two robots is also called Rendezvous, and it is easily seen to
be solvable in non-rigid FSynch but unsolvable in rigid SSynch, if colored
lights are not used (see [5]).
Proposition 1.1. If only one color is available, Rendezvous is solvable
in non-rigid FSynch and unsolvable in rigid SSynch.
Proof. In non-rigid FSynch, consider the algorithm that makes each robot
move to the midpoint of the current robots' positions. At each move, the
distance between the two robots is reduced by at least 2δ, until it becomes
less than 2δ, and the robots gather.
Suppose that an algorithm exists that solves Rendezvous in rigid SSynch
by using just one color. Let us assume that the two robots' axes are oriented
3
FSynchrigidSSynchrigidFSynchnon-rigidSSynchnon-rigidASynchrigidASynchnon-rigidFSynchrigidSSynchrigidFSynchnon-rigidSSynchnon-rigidASynchrigidASynchnon-rigid(1)(2)(2)(1)(2)(3)(1)(2)(3)(1)(2)(3)∗∗∗∗∗∗ symmetrically, in opposite directions. This implies that, if we activate both
robots at each cycle, they obtain isometric snapshots, and thus they make
moves that are symmetric with respect to their current midpoint. Therefore,
by doing so, the robots can never meet unless they compute the midpoint.
If they do it, we just activate one robot for that cycle (and each time this
happens, we pick a different robot, alternating). As a result, the robots
♥
never meet, regardless of the algorithm.
However, in [2] it was shown how Rendezvous can be solved even in
non-rigid ASynch using lights of four different colors, and starting from a
preset configuration of colors. Optimizing the amount of colors was left as
an open problem.
1.3 Our contribution
In this paper, we will determine the minimum number of colors required to
solve Rendezvous in all models shown in Figure 1, with some restrictions
on the class of available algorithms.
Recall that robots do not necessarily share a global coordinate system,
but each robot has its own. If the coordinate system of a robot is not even
self-consistent (i.e., it can unpredictably change from one cycle to another),
then the only reliable reference for each robot is the position of the other
robot(s) around it. In this case, the only type of move that is consistent
will all possible coordinate systems is moving to a linear combination of the
robots' positions, whose coefficients may depend on the colored lights. In
particular, when the robots are only two, we assume that each robot may
only compute a destination point of the form
(1 − λ) · me.position + λ · other.position,
for some λ ∈ R. In turns, λ is a function of me.light and other.light only.
This class of algorithms will be denoted by L.
In Section 2, we will prove that two colors are sufficient to solve Ren-
dezvous in non-rigid SSynch with arbitrary initial configuration and in
rigid ASynch with preset initial configuration, whereas three colors are
sufficient in non-rigid ASynch with arbitrary initial configuration. All the
algorithms presented are of class L.
On the other hand, in Section 3 we show that even termination detection
can be achieved in non-rigid ASynch with arbitrary initial configuration
using only three colors, although our algorithm is not of class L (indeed, no
algorithm of class L can detect termination in Rendezvous).
In contrast, in Section 4 we prove that no algorithm of class L using only
two colors can solve Rendezvous in rigid ASynch with arbitrary initial
configuration or in non-rigid ASynch with preset initial configuration.
4
Finally, in Section 5 we put all these results together and we conclude
with a complete characterization of the minimum amount of colors that are
needed to solve Rendezvous in every model (see Theorem 5.1).
2 Algorithms for rendezvous
2.1 Two colors for the non-rigid semi-synchronous model
For non-rigid SSynch, we propose Algorithm 1, also represented in Figure 2.
Labels on arrows indicate the color that is seen on the other robot, and the
destination of the next Move with respect to the position of the other robot.
"0" stands for "do not move", "1/2" means "move to the midpoint", and "1"
means "move to the other robot". The colors used are only two, namely A
and B.
Algorithm 1: Rendezvous for non-rigid SSynch and rigid ASynch
me.destination ←− me.position
if me.light = A then
me.light ←− B
me.destination ←− (me.position + other.position)/2
if other.light = A then
else
me.destination ←− other.position
else if other.light = B then
me.light ←− A
Figure 2: Illustration of Algorithm 1
Lemma 2.1. If the two robots start a cycle with their lights set to opposite
colors, they eventually gather.
Proof. Both robots retain their colors at every cycle, and the A-robot keeps
computing the other robot's location, while the B-robot keeps waiting.
Hence, their distance decreases by at least δ for every cycle in which the
5
ABA, / B, 1B, 0A, 012 A-robot is active, until the distance becomes smaller than δ, and the robots
♥
gather.
Theorem 2.2. Algorithm 1 solves Rendezvous in non-rigid SSynch, re-
gardless of the colors in the initial configuration.
Proof. If the robots start in opposite colors, they gather by Lemma 2.1. If
they start in the same color, they keep alternating colors until one robot is
active and one is not. If this happens, they gather by Lemma 2.1. Otherwise,
the two robots are either both active or both inactive at each cycle, and
they keep computing the midpoint every other active cycle. Their distance
decreases by at least 2δ each time they move, until it becomes smaller than
♥
2δ, and they finally gather.
2.2 Two colors for the rigid asynchronous model
We prove that Algorithm 1 solves Rendezvous in rigid ASynch as well,
provided that the initial color is A for both robots.
Lemma 2.3. If, at some time t, the two robots have opposite colors and
neither of them is in a Compute phase that will change its color, they will
eventually solve Rendezvous.
Proof. Each robot retains its color at every cycle after time t, because it
keeps seeing the other robot in the opposite color at every Look phase. As
soon as the A-robot performs its first Look after time t, it starts chasing
the other robot. On the other hand, as soon as the B-robot performs its first
Look after time t, it stops forever. Eventually, the two robots will gather
♥
and never move again.
Theorem 2.4. Algorithm 1 solves Rendezvous in rigid ASynch, provided
that both robots start with their lights set to A.
Proof. Let r be the first robot to perform a Look. Then r sees the other
robot s set to A, and hence it turns B and computes the midpoint m.
Then, as long as s does not perform its first Look, r stays B because it
keeps seeing s set to A. Hence, if s performs its first Look after r has turned
B, Lemma 2.3 applies, and the robots will solve Rendezvous.
On the other hand, if s performs its first Look when r is still set to A
(hence still in its starting location), s will turn B and compute the midpoint
m, as well. If some robot reaches m and performs a Look while the other
robot is still set to A, the first robot waits until the other turns B. Without
loss of generality, let r be the first robot to perform a Look while the other
robot is set to B. This must happen when r is in m and set to B, hence
it will turn A and stay in m. If r turns A before s has reached m, then
Lemma 2.3 applies. Otherwise, r turns A when s is already in m, and both
6
robots will stay in m forever, as they will see the other robot in m at every
♥
Look.
2.3 Three colors for the non-rigid asynchronous model
For non-rigid ASynch, we propose Algorithm 2, also represented in Fig-
ure 3. The colors used are three, namely A, B, and C.
Algorithm 2: Rendezvous for non-rigid ASynch
me.destination ←− me.position
if me.light = A then
me.light ←− B
me.destination ←− (me.position + other.position)/2
if other.light = A then
else if other.light = B then
me.destination ←− other.position
else if me.light = B then
if other.light = B then
me.light ←− C
else if other.light = C then
me.destination ←− other.position
else
if other.light = C then
me.light ←− A
else if other.light = A then
me.destination ←− other.position
Observation 2.5. A robot retains its color if and only if it sees the other
robot set to a different color.
Lemma 2.6. If, at some time t, the two robots are set to different colors,
and neither of them is in a Compute phase that will change its color, they
will eventually solve Rendezvous.
Proof. The two robots keep seeing each other set to different colors, and
hence they never change color, by Observation 2.5. One of the two robots
will eventually stay still, and the other robot will then approach it by at
least δ at every Move phase, until their distance is less than δ, and they
gather. As soon as they have gathered, they will stay in place forever. ♥
Theorem 2.7. Algorithm 2 solves Rendezvous in non-rigid ASynch,
regardless of the colors in the initial configuration.
7
Figure 3: Illustration of Algorithm 2
Proof. If the robots start the execution at different colors, they solve Ren-
dezvous by Lemma 2.6.
If they both start in A, then let r be the first robot to perform a Look.
r plans to turn B and move to the midpoint. If it turns B before the other
robot s has performed a Look, then Lemma 2.6 applies.
Otherwise, s plans to turn B and move to the midpoint, as well. If a
robot stops and sees the other robot still set to A, it waits. Without loss of
generality, let r be the first robot to perform a Look and see the other robot
set to B. r now plans to turn C, but if it does so before s has performed a
Look, Lemma 2.6 applies.
So, let us assume that both robots have seen each other in B and they
both plan to turn C. Once again, if a robot turns C and sees the other
robot still in B, it waits. Without loss of generality, let r be the first robot
to see the other robot in C. r plans to turn A, but if it does so before s has
performed a Look, Lemma 2.6 applies.
Assume that both robots see each other in C and they both plan to
turn A. If a robot turns A and sees the other robot still in C, it waits. At
some point, both robots are in A again, in a Wait phase, but they have
approached each other. They both moved toward the midpoint in their
first cycle, and then they just made null moves. As a consequence, if their
distance was smaller than 2δ, they have gathered. Otherwise, the distance
has decreased by at least 2δ. As the execution goes on and the same pattern
of transitions repeats, the distance keeps decreasing until the robots gather.
As soon as they have gathered, they never move again, hence Rendezvous
is solved.
The cases in which the robots start both in B or both in C are resolved
with the same reasoning. Note that all the states with both robots set to the
same color and in a Wait phase have been reached in the analysis above. ♥
8
ABCA, / B, 0B, 112C, 0C, 0A, 0C, 1B, 0A, 1 3 Termination detection
Suppose we wanted our robots to acknowledge that they have gathered, in
order to turn off, or "switch gears" and start performing a new task.
Observation 3.1. If the model is SSynch, termination detection is triv-
ially obtained by checking at each cycle if the robots' locations coincide.
Unfortunately, in ASynch, correct termination detection is harder to
obtain. Observe that both Algorithm 1 (for rigid ASynch) and Algorithm 2
(for non-rigid ASynch) fail to guarantee termination detection.
Indeed,
suppose that robot r is set to A and sees the other robot s set to B, and
that the two robots coincide. Then r cannot tell if s is still moving or not.
If s is not moving, it is safe for r to terminate, but if s is moving, then r
has still to "chase" s, and cannot terminate yet.
To guarantee correct termination detection in non-rigid ASynch, we
propose Algorithm 3, also represented in Figure 4. Note that different rules
may apply depending on the distance between the two robots, indicated by
d in the picture. However, robots need only distinguish between zero and
non-zero distances. The colors used are again three, namely A, B, and C.
Figure 4: Illustration of Algorithm 3
Observation 3.2. No robot can move while it is set to C.
Lemma 3.3. If some robot ever turns C from a different color, the two
robots will gather and their execution will terminate correctly.
Proof. A robot can turn C only if it performs a Look while the other robot
is in the same location. If robot r performs a Look at time t that makes it
turn C, then r stays C forever after, unless it sees the other robot s set to C
9
ABC(d>0) A, / B, 0(d>0) A, 0(d>0) C, 1B, 1(d>0) C, 1(d>0) C, 0(d=0) A, 0(d=0) C, 0(d=0) A, 0(d=0) C, 0A, 0B, 0(d=0) C, term.12 Algorithm 3: Rendezvous for non-rigid ASynch with termination
me.destination ←− me.position
if me.light = A then
if other.position (cid:54)= me.position then
if other.light = A then
me.light ←− B
me.destination ←− (other.position + me.position)/2
else
me.light ←− C
else if other.light = B then
me.destination ←− other.position
else if other.position (cid:54)= me.position then
me.destination ←− other.position
else
me.light ←− C
else if me.light = B then
if other.light = A and other.position = me.position then
me.light ←− C
else if other.light = B then
me.light ←− A
else if other.position (cid:54)= me.position then
me.destination ←− other.position
else
me.light ←− C
else if other.light = C then
if other.position (cid:54)= me.position then
me.light ←− A
else
terminate
10
as well, in a different location. Let t(cid:48) > t be the first time this happens. Due
to Observation 3.2, r does not move between t and t(cid:48). On the other hand,
s coincides with r at time t. Then s must turn some other color and move
away from r, and then turn C at some time t(cid:48)(cid:48) such that t < t(cid:48)(cid:48) (cid:54) t(cid:48). But, in
order to turn C, s would have to coincide with r, which is a contradiction.
Hence r will stay C and never move after time t. As soon as s sees r
set to C, it starts moving toward it (after turning A, if s is also set to C
and not coincident with r), covering at least δ at each Move phase, until
their distance becomes less than δ and s finally reaches r. Then s will turn
C as well, and both robots will terminate correctly after seeing each other
♥
again.
Lemma 3.4. If, at some time t, the two robots are set to A and B respec-
tively, and neither of them is in a Compute phase that will change its color,
they will eventually gather and terminate correctly.
Proof. If some robot ever turns C after time t, gathering and termination
are ensured by Lemma 3.3. Otherwise, the two robots keep seeing each other
set to opposite colors, and hence they never change color. The B-robot will
eventually stay still, and the A-robot will then approach it by at least δ at
every Move phase, until their distance is less than δ, and they gather. The
♥
B-robot then turns C, and Lemma 3.3 applies again.
Let r(t) denote the position of robot r at time t (cid:62) 0.
Lemma 3.5. Let t be a time instant at which both robots are set to A, and
neither of them is in a Compute phase. Let us assume that robot r will
stay still until the end of its current phase (even if it is a Move phase),
and that robot s will either stay still until the end of its current phase, or
its destination point is r's current location. Then r and s will eventually
gather and terminate correctly.
Proof. If s is not directed toward r at time t, let d be the distance between
r(t) and s(t). Otherwise, let t(cid:48) be the time at which s performed its last
Look, and let d be the distance between s(t(cid:48)) and r(t). Furthermore, let
k = (cid:100)d/δ(cid:101). We will prove our claim by well-founded induction on k, so let
us assume our claim to hold for every k(cid:48) such that 0 (cid:54) k(cid:48) < k.
The first robot to perform a Look after time t sees the other robot set
to A. If they coincide (i.e., if s has reached r or if k = 0), the first robot
turns C, and Lemma 3.3 applies. If they do not coincide, the first robot
turns B. If it turns B before the other robot has performed a Look, then
Lemma 3.4 applies. Otherwise, when the second robot performs its first
Look after time t, it sees the first robot still set to A. Once again, if they
coincide, the second robot turns C and Lemma 3.3 applies. At this point, if
k = 1 and s was directed toward r at time t, the robots have gathered and
terminated correctly.
11
Hence, if r and s perform their first Look at times tr and ts respectively,
we may assume that both will turn B, r computes the midpoint mr of r(tr)
and s(tr), and s computes the midpoint ms of r(ts) and s(ts). Observe that,
if s's destination was not r at time t, then mr = ms.
Without loss of generality, let r be the first robot to perform the second
Look. r sees s set to B, hence it turns A. If s performs the second Look
after r has already turned A, then s necessarily sees r in A (because r keeps
seeing s in B), and Lemma 3.4 applies.
Otherwise, both robots see each other in B, and both eventually turn
A. Without loss of generality, let s be the first robot to perform the third
Look. If k = 1 and s was not directed toward r at time t, the robots have
indeed gathered in mr = ms, so s turns C and Lemma 3.3 applies.
At this point we may assume that k (cid:62) 2, hence δ (cid:54) (k − 1)δ < d (cid:54) kδ.
We claim that the distance d(cid:48) between r and s is now at most (k − 1)δ.
Indeed, if s was not directed toward r at time t, then each robot has either
reached mr = ms, or has approached it by at least δ. In any case, d(cid:48) (cid:54)
d − δ (cid:54) (k − 1)δ. Otherwise, if s was directed toward r at time t, then
observe that both mr and ms lie between r(t) and m = (r(t) + s(t))/2.
Moreover, s has performed its first Look while at distance at most d − δ
from r(t), and subsequently it has further approached r(t). On the other
hand, r is found between r(t) and m, thus at distance not greater than d/2
from r(t). Hence, d(cid:48) (cid:54) max{d − δ, d/2} (cid:54) (k − 1)δ.
Now, s is the first robot to perform the third Look, and sees r either
already in A or still in B. In the first case, the inductive hypothesis applies,
because r is not in a Compute phase, and its destination is r itself. In the
second case, s computes r's location, and it keeps doing so until r turns A.
♥
When this happens, the inductive hypothesis applies again.
Corollary 3.6. If, at some time t, both robots are set to B and are both
in a Wait or in a Look phase, they will eventually gather and terminate
correctly.
Proof. The reasoning in the proof of Lemma 3.5 also implicitly addresses
this case. Indeed, the configuration in which both robots are set to B and
in a Wait or a Look phase is reached during the analysis, and is incidentally
♥
resolved, as well.
Theorem 3.7. Algorithm 3 solves Rendezvous in non-rigid ASynch and
terminates correctly, regardless of the colors in the initial configuration.
Proof. If both robots start in A, Lemma 3.5 applies. If they both start in
B, Corollary 3.6 applies. If one robot starts in A and the other one starts
in B, then Lemma 3.4 applies.
If exactly one robot starts in C, it will stay still forever, and the other
robot will eventually reach it, turn C as well, and both will terminate.
12
If both robots start in C and they are coincident, they will terminate.
If they are not coincident, let r be the first robot to perform a Look. r
will then turn A and move toward the other robot s. If s performs its first
Look when r has already turned A, it will wait, r will eventually reach it,
turn C, and both will terminate. Otherwise, s performs its Look when r is
still set to C, hence s will turn A as well, and move toward r.
Then, one robot will keep staying A and moving toward the other one,
until both have turned A. Without loss of generality, let r be the first
robot to see the other one set to A. If they are coincident, r turns C and
Lemma 3.3 applies. Otherwise, r turns B. If this happens before s has seen
r in A, then Lemma 3.4 applies. Otherwise, both robots will turn B. As
long as only one robot has turned B, it stays B and does not move. At some
♥
point, one robot sees the other in B and Corollary 3.6 applies.
4
Impossibility of rendezvous with two colors
Observe that Algorithms 1, 2 and 3 only produce moves of three types: stay
still, move to the midpoint, and move to the other robot. It turns out that,
regardless of the number of available colors, any algorithm for Rendezvous
must use those three moves under some circumstances.
Proposition 4.1. For any algorithm solving Rendezvous in rigid FSynch,
there exist a color X and a distance d > 0 such that any robot set to X that
sees the other robot at distance d and set to X moves to the midpoint.
Proof. Assume both robots start with the same color and in distinct po-
sitions. We may assume that both robots get isometric snapshots at each
cycle, so they both turn the same colors, and compute destination points
that are symmetric with respect to their midpoint. If they never compute
the midpoint and their execution is rigid and fully synchronous, they never
♥
gather.
Proposition 4.2. For any algorithm solving Rendezvous in rigid SSynch,
there exist two colors X and Y and a distance d > 0 such that any robot set
to X that sees the other robot at distance d and set to Y moves to the other
robot's position.
Proof. We activate one robot on even cycles, and the other robot on odd
cycles. If no robot ever computes the other robot's position and they perform
♥
rigid movements, they never gather.
Proposition 4.3. For any algorithm solving Rendezvous in rigid SSynch,
there exist two colors X and Y and a distance d > 0 such that any robot set
to X that sees the other robot at distance d and set to Y does not move.
13
Proof. We keep activating only one robot at each cycle (alternately), except
when one robot computes the other robot's position. Whenever this hap-
pens, we activate both robots for that cycle. If no robot ever performs a
♥
null move, they never gather.
The above observations partly justify the choice to restrict our attention
to a specific class of algorithms: from now on, every algorithm we consider
computes only destinations of the form
(1 − λ) · me.position + λ · other.position,
where the parameter λ ∈ R depends only on me.light and other.light. Sim-
ilarly, a robot's next light color depends only on the current colors of the
two robots' lights, and not on their distance. Recall from Section 1 that this
class of algorithms is denoted by L. Notice that Algorithms 1 and 2 both
belong to L, but Algorithm 3 does not, because it may output a different
color depending if the two robots coincide or not.
A statement of the form X(Y ) = (Z, λ) is shorthand for "if a robot is
set to X and sees the other robot set to Y , it turns Z and makes a move
with parameter λ", where {X, Y, Z} ⊆ {A, B} and λ ∈ R. The negation of
X(Y ) = (Z, λ) will be written as X(Y ) (cid:54)= (Z, λ), wheres a transition with
an unspecified move parameter will be denoted by X(Y ) = (Z, (cid:63)).
4.1 Preliminary results
Here we assume that the model is rigid ASynch, that only two colors are
available, namely A and B, and that the initial configuration is with both
robots set to A. All our impossibility results for this very special model are
then applicable to both non-rigid ASynch with preset initial configuration
and rigid ASynch with arbitrary initial configuration.
the algorithm belongs to class L, then the following statements hold.
Lemma 4.4. A(A) = (B, (cid:63)).
So, let an algorithm that solves Rendezvous in this model be given. If
Proof. If the execution starts with both robots in A, and A(A) = (A, (cid:63)),
then no robot ever transitions to B, and Rendezvous is not solvable, due
♥
to Proposition 1.1.
Lemma 4.5. If A(A) = (B, 1/2), then B(A) = (B, (cid:63)).
Proof. Let us assume by contradiction that B(A) = (A, (cid:63)). If B(A) = (A, λ)
with λ (cid:54)= 1, we let the two robots execute two cycles each, alternately. As
a result, each robot keeps seeing the other robot in A, and their distance is
multiplied by 1 − λ/2 (cid:54)= 0 at every turn. Hence the robots never gather.
If B(A) = (A, 1), we let robot r perform a whole cycle and the Look
and Compute phases of the next cycle, while the other robot s waits. At
14
this point, their distance has halved, r is set to A, and is about to move to
s's position. Now s performs two whole cycles, reaching r's position with
its light set to A. Finally, we let r finish its cycle. As a result, the distance
between the two robots has halved, both robots have performed at least a
cycle, they are in a Wait phase, and they are both set to A. Hence, by
♥
repeating the same pattern of moves, they never gather.
Lemma 4.6. If A(A) = (B, 1/2) and B(B) = (A, (cid:63)), then B(B) = (A, 0).
Proof. Assume by contradiction that A(A) = (B, 1/2) and B(B) = (A, λ)
with λ (cid:54)= 0. We let both robots perform a Look and a Compute phase
simultaneously. Both turn B and compute the midpoint m. Then we let
robot r finish the current cycle and perform a new Look. As a result, r
will turn A and will move away from m. Now let the other robot s finish its
first cycle and perform a whole new cycle. s reaches m, sees r still set to B
and still in m, hence s turns A and stays in m. Finally, we let r finish the
current cycle. At this point, both robots are set to A, they are in a Wait
phase, both have performed at least one cycle, and their distance has been
multiplied by λ/2 (cid:54)= 0. Therefore, by repeating the same pattern of moves,
♥
they never gather.
Lemma 4.7. If A(A) = (B, 1/2) and B(B) = (A, 0), then B(A) = (B, 0).
Proof. By Lemma 4.5, B(A) = (B, (cid:63)). Assume by contradiction that B(A) =
(B, λ) with λ (cid:54)= 0. We let both robots perform a Look simultaneously, so
both plan to turn B and move to the midpoint m. We let robot r finish the
cycle, while the other robot s waits. Then we let r perform a whole other
cycle. So r sees s still in A, and moves away from m, while staying B. Now
we let s finish its first cycle and move to m. Finally, we let both robots
perform a new cycle simultaneously. As a result, both robots are set to A
and are in a Wait phase, both have performed at least one cycle, and their
distance has been multiplied by λ/2 (cid:54)= 0. By repeating the same pattern
♥
of moves, they never gather.
Lemma 4.8. If A(A) = (B, 1/2) and B(B) = (A, 0), then A(B) = (A, 1).
Proof. Let us first assume that A(B) = (B, λ) with λ (cid:54)= 1. We let one robot
perform a whole cycle, thus turning B and moving to the midpoint. Then
we let the other robot perform a cycle, at the end of which both robots are
set to B. Finally, we let both robots perform a cycle simultaneously, after
which they are back to A and in a Wait phase. Because their distance has
been multiplied by 1 − λ/2 (cid:54)= 0, by repeating the same pattern of moves
they never gather.
Assume now that A(B) = (B, 1). We let robot r perform a Look and
a Compute phase, thus turning B and computing the midpoint. Now we
let the other robot s perform a whole cycle, at the end of which it is set to
15
B and has reached r. Then we let r finish its cycle, moving away from s.
Finally, we let both robots perform a new cycle simultaneously, which takes
them back to A. Their distance has now halved, and by repeating the same
pattern of moves they never gather.
Assume that A(B) = (A, (cid:63)), and let robot r perform an entire cycle, thus
turning B and moving to the midpoint. Due to Lemma 4.7, B(A) = (B, 0),
which means that, from now on, both robots will retain colors. Hence, r
♥
will always stay still, and s will never reach r unless A(B) = (A, 1).
4.2 Rigid asynchronous model with arbitrary initial config-
uration
Lemma 4.9. Algorithm 1 does not solve Rendezvous in rigid ASynch,
if both robots are set to B in the initial configuration.
Proof. Let both robots perform a Look phase, so that both will turn A.
We let robot r finish the current cycle and perform a new Look, while the
other robot s waits. Hence, r will stay A and move to s's position. Now we
let s finish the current cycle and perform a new Look. So s will turn B and
move to the midpoint m. We let r finish the current cycle, thus reaching s,
and perform a whole new cycle, thus turning B. Finally, we let s finish the
current cycle, thus turning B and moving to m. As a result, both robots are
again set to B, they are in a Wait phase, both have executed at least one
cycle, and their distance has halved. Thus, by repeating the same pattern
♥
of moves, they never gather.
Theorem 4.10. There is no algorithm of class L that solves Rendezvous
using two colors in rigid ASynch from all possible initial configurations.
Proof. Because robots may start both in A or both in B, the statement of
Lemma 4.4, holds also with A and B exchanged. Hence A(A) = (B, (cid:63)), but
also B(B) = (A, (cid:63)). Moreover, by Proposition 4.1, either A(A) = (B, 1/2) or
B(B) = (A, 1/2). By symmetry, we may assume without loss of generality
that A(A) = (B, 1/2). Now, by Lemma 4.6, B(B) = (A, 0). Additionally, by
Lemma 4.7 and Lemma 4.8, B(A) = (B, 0) and A(B) = (A, 1). These rules
define exactly Algorithm 1, which is not a solution, due to Lemma 4.9. ♥
4.3 Non-rigid asynchronous model with preset initial config-
uration
Theorem 4.11. There is no algorithm of class L that solves Rendezvous
using two colors in non-rigid ASynch, even assuming that both robots are
set to a predetermined color in the initial configuration.
Proof. Let both robots be set to A in the initial configuration, and let d (cid:62) 0
be given. By Lemma 4.4, A(A) = (B, λ), for some λ ∈ R. If λ (cid:54)= 1/2, we
16
place the two robots at distance d/1− 2λ from each other, and we let them
perform a whole cycle simultaneously. If λ = 1/2, we place the robots at
distance d + 2δ, and we let them perform a cycle simultaneously, but we
stop them as soon as they have moved by δ. As a result, both robots are
now set to B, and at distance d from each other. This means that any
algorithm solving Rendezvous with both robots set to A must also solve
it with both robots set to B, as well.
Similarly, we can place the two robots at distance d/1 − λ or d + δ,
depending if λ (cid:54)= 1 or λ = 1. Then we let only one robot perform a full
cycle, and we let it finish or we stop it after δ, in such a way that it ends up
at distance exactly d from the other robot. At this point, one robot is set
to A and the other is set to B.
It follows that any algorithm for Rendezvous must effectively solve
it from all possible initial configurations. But this is impossible, due to
♥
Theorem 4.10.
5 Conclusions
We considered deterministic distributed algorithms for Rendezvous for
mobile robots that cannot use distance information, but can only reduce (or
increase) their distance by a constant factor, depending on the color of the
lights that both robots are carrying. We called this class of algorithms L.
We gave several upper and lower bounds on the number of different colors
that are necessary to solve Rendezvous in different robot models. Based
on these results, we can now give a complete characterization of the number
of necessary colors in every possible model, ranging from fully synchronous
to semi-synchronous to asynchronous, rigid and non-rigid, with preset or
arbitrary initial configuration.
Theorem 5.1. To solve Rendezvous with an algorithm of class L from a
preset starting configuration,
• one color is sufficient for rigid and non-rigid FSynch;
• two colors are necessary and sufficient for rigid SSynch, non-rigid
SSynch, and rigid ASynch;
• three colors are necessary and sufficient for non-rigid ASynch.
To solve Rendezvous with an algorithm of class L from an arbitrary start-
ing configuration,
• one color is sufficient for rigid and non-rigid FSynch;
• two colors are necessary and sufficient for rigid and non-rigid SSynch;
• three colors are necessary and sufficient for rigid and non-rigid ASynch.
17
Proof. All the optimal color values derive either from previous theorems or
from the model inclusions summarized in Figure 1.
That just one color is (necessary and) sufficient for all FSynch models
follows from Proposition 1.1.
Proposition 1.1 also implies that, for all the other models, at least two
colors are necessary. Therefore, by Theorem 2.2, two colors are necessary
and sufficient for all SSynch models.
Similarly, Theorem 2.4 states that two colors are necessary and sufficient
for rigid ASynch with preset initial configuration. On the other hand, by
Theorem 4.10 and Theorem 4.11, three colors are necessary in the three
remaining models, and by Theorem 2.7 three colors are also sufficient. ♥
In the three models in which three colors are necessary and sufficient, it
remains an open problem to determine whether using distance information
to its full extent would make it possible to use only two colors.
An interesting variation on this model is when the light on a robot can
be seen only by the other robot(s). In this case, algorithms of class L are
inadequate to solve Rendezvous even in rigid ASynch with preset initial
configuration, regardless of the number of available colors. In contrast, three
colors are necessary and sufficient for all SSynch models.
On the other hand, if the light is visible only to the robot that is carry-
ing it (i.e., internal memory), then no algorithm of class L can solve Ren-
dezvous, even in rigid SSynch with preset initial configuration, regardless
of the number of colors.
References
[1] M. Cieliebak, P. Flocchini, G. Prencipe, and N. Santoro. Distributed
computing for mobile robots: gathering. SIAM Journal on Computing,
to appear.
[2] S. Das, P. Flocchini, G. Prencipe, N. Santoro, and M. Yamashita. The
power of lights: synchronizing asynchronous robots using visible bits. In
Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Distributed Com-
puting Systems, pp. 506 -- 515, 2012.
[3] P. Flocchini, G. Prencipe, and N. Santoro. Distributed computing by
oblivious mobile robots. Morgan & Claypool, 2012.
[4] G. Prencipe and N. Santoro. Distributed algorithms for mobile robots.
In Proceedings of the 5th IFIP International Conference on Theoretical
Computer Science, pp. 47 -- 62, 2006.
[5] I. Suzuki and M. Yamashita. Distributed anonymous mobile robots: for-
mation of geometric patterns. SIAM Journal on Computing, vol. 28,
pp. 1347 -- 1363, 1999.
18
|
cs/0412106 | 1 | 0412 | 2004-12-23T15:21:40 | Online Learning of Aggregate Knowledge about Non-linear Preferences Applied to Negotiating Prices and Bundles | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.GT",
"cs.LG"
] | In this paper, we consider a form of multi-issue negotiation where a shop negotiates both the contents and the price of bundles of goods with his customers. We present some key insights about, as well as a procedure for, locating mutually beneficial alternatives to the bundle currently under negotiation. The essence of our approach lies in combining aggregate (anonymous) knowledge of customer preferences with current data about the ongoing negotiation process. The developed procedure either works with already obtained aggregate knowledge or, in the absence of such knowledge, learns the relevant information online. We conduct computer experiments with simulated customers that have_nonlinear_ preferences. We show how, for various types of customers, with distinct negotiation heuristics, our procedure (with and without the necessary aggregate knowledge) increases the speed with which deals are reached, as well as the number and the Pareto efficiency of the deals reached compared to a benchmark. | cs.MA | cs |
Online Learning of Aggregate Knowledge about Non-linear
Preferences Applied to Negotiating Prices and Bundles
D.J.A. Somefun
Center for Mathematics and
Computer Science (CWI)
P.O. Box 94079, 1090 GB
Amsterdam,The Netherlands
T.B. Klos
Center for Mathematics and
Computer Science (CWI)
P.O. Box 94079, 1090 GB
Amsterdam,The Netherlands
[email protected]
[email protected]
Center for Mathematics and
Computer Science (CWI)
and Technical Univ. Eindhoven
School of Techn. Management
J.A. La Poutr´e
P.O. Box 513, 5600 MB
Eindhoven, The Netherlands
ABSTRACT
In this paper, we consider a form of multi-issue negotiation
where a shop negotiates both the contents and the price
of bundles of goods with his customers. We present some
key insights about, as well as a procedure for, locating mu-
tually beneficial alternatives to the bundle currently under
negotiation. The essence of our approach lies in combining
aggregate (anonymous) knowledge of customer preferences
with current data about the ongoing negotiation process.
The developed procedure either works with already obtained
aggregate knowledge or, in the absence of such knowledge,
learns the relevant information online. We conduct com-
puter experiments with simulated customers that have non-
linear preferences. We show how, for various types of cus-
tomers, with distinct negotiation heuristics, our procedure
(with and without the necessary aggregate knowledge) in-
creases the speed with which deals are reached, as well as
the number and the Pareto efficiency of the deals reached
compared to a benchmark.
INTRODUCTION
1.
Combining two or more items and selling them as one good,
a practice called bundling, can be a very effective strategy
for reducing the costs of producing, marketing, and selling
products [4].
In addition, and maybe more importantly,
bundling can stimulate demand for (other) goods or ser-
vices [16, 3]. To stimulate demand by offering bundles of
goods, requires knowledge of customer preferences. Tradi-
tionally, firms first acquire such aggregate knowledge about
customer preferences, for example through market research
or sales data, and then use this knowledge to determine
which bundle-price combinations they should offer. Espe-
cially for online shops, an appealing alternative approach
[email protected]
would be to negotiate bundle-price combinations with cus-
tomers:
in that case, aggregate knowledge can be used to
facilitate an interactive search for the desired bundle and
price. Due to the inherently interactive characteristics of
negotiation, such an approach can very effectively adapt the
configuration of a bundle to the preferences of a customer. A
high degree of bundle customization can increase customer
satisfaction, which may lead to an increase in the demand
for future goods or services.
In this paper, we present an approach that allows a shop
to make use of aggregate knowledge about customer prefer-
ences. Our procedure uses aggregate knowledge about many
customers in bilateral negotiations of bundle-price combina-
tions with individual customers. Negotiation concerns the
selection of a subset from a collection of goods or services,
viz. the bundle, together with a price for that bundle. Thus,
the bundle configuration -- an array of bits, representing the
presence or absence of each of the shop's goods and services
in the bundle -- together with a price for the bundle, form
the negotiation issues. In theory, this is just an instance of
multi-issue negotiation. Like the work of [11, 8, 7, 17], our
approach tries to benefit from the so-called win-win oppor-
tunities offered by multi-issue negotiation, by finding mutu-
ally beneficial alternative bundles during negotiations. The
novelty of the approach, however, lies in the use of aggre-
gate knowledge of customer preferences. We show that the
bundle that represents the highest 'gains from trade' Pareto-
dominates all other bundles within a certain collection of
bundles.1, 2 Based on this important insight, we develop a
procedure for combining aggregate knowledge of customer
preferences with data about an ongoing negotiation process
with 1 customer, to find alternative bundles that are likely
to lead to high Pareto improvements. Note that due to the
use of aggregate data only, our approach does not necessitate
infringement of customers' privacy.
1The gains from trade for a bundle are equal to the cus-
tomer's 'valuation' of the bundle minus the shop's valuation
of the bundle, which is his (minimum) price (cf. [12]).
2An offer constitutes a Pareto improvement over another
offer whenever it makes one bargainer better off without
making the other worse off. A bundle b′ 'Pareto-dominates'
another bundle b whenever switching from b to b′ results in
a Pareto improvement (cf. [12]).
The procedure we developed requires a process in the fore-
ground and one in the background. The foreground pro-
cess uses aggregate knowledge about customer preferences
to recommend promising alternative bundles during ongo-
ing negotiations with customers.
Intuitively, the idea for
the process in the foreground is that, whenever the shop de-
cides to stop bargaining about a bundle b and to switch to
an alternative bundle, he will choose from a 'neighborhood'
of b, the bundle that looks promising in the sense that it has
the highest conditionally expected gains from trade. The
background process obtains the necessary aggregate knowl-
edge about customer preferences. Based on this knowledge
it estimates for each bundle the expected gains from trade,
conditional on what the ongoing negotiation process reveals
about the current customer.
With respect to the background process we consider two
cases.
In the first case, we do not explicitly consider the
background process: the shop already possesses the neces-
sary aggregate knowledge. The shop may have obtained this
aggregate knowledge by having access to expert knowledge
or by collecting historical sales data and mining this data of-
fline. The main purpose of this case is to highlight the value
of the foreground process given sufficient aggregate knowl-
edge, and to provide an upper bound for the second case.
In the second case, we explicitly consider the background
process:
the shop does not have any a priori knowledge
of customer preferences. Instead he learns about customer
preferences online by interpreting individual customers' re-
sponses to the shop's proposals for negotiating about alter-
native bundles. This allows the shop to make progressively
better estimations of the expected gains from trade.
To ensure that bundling can stimulate demand for (other)
goods or services we conduct computer experiments with
simulated customers that have nonlinear preferences: i.e., a
customer's valuation for a bundle of goods may be higher
(or lower) than the sum of the customer's valuations for
the individual goods. In our experiments, we consider the
foreground process both with and without the aggregate
knowledge already being available.
In the absence of ag-
gregate knowledge, the background process will learn the
relevant information online. We show how, for various types
of customers -- with distinct negotiation heuristics -- the fore-
ground process (both with and without the necessary ag-
gregate knowledge) increases the speed with which deals are
reached, as well as the number and the Pareto efficiency
of the deals reached compared to a benchmark. Moreover,
through time, the performance of the foreground process
without a priori information approaches the procedure that
already possesses the necessary aggregate knowledge.
The subproblem of just finding a good (or better) bundle
configuration can be seen as a form of recommending [14],
if we do not consider the negotiation and pricing aspects.
The general subject of bundling has received a lot of atten-
tion recently, especially in the context of online information
goods [10, 19, 1, 3, 5]. The issue of finding the appropri-
ate bundles is, however, not limited to information goods.
It also occurs outside of the realm of information goods,
where a number of aspects of a complex product can be
selected, such as for a PC [6], a trip [20], or photography
equipment [13]. Until now, this has not been considered as
part of a negotiation process, to the best of our knowledge.
For numerous real word applications -- like the above exam-
ples of selecting aspects of a complex product -- the number
of individual goods to be bundled, n, is relatively small. In
this paper we will also only consider small values of n (say
n ≤ 10), for which aggregate knowledge still greatly facil-
itates the process of finding attractive alternative bundles
during a negotiation process. For example, with n = 10
there are 2n − 1 = 1023 possible bundle configurations, so
facilitating the search process among all those bundles is
highly valuable.
This paper builds on and significantly extends the idea, de-
veloped in a preceding paper [18], to negotiate over bundles
and prices using aggregate knowledge. The scope of the
earlier paper is limited to the foreground process; the nec-
essary aggregate knowledge is assumed to be already avail-
able. This approach is warranted because the paper focuses
on additively separable preferences (i.e., a customer's valua-
tion for a bundle is always equal to the sum of her valuations
for the individual goods comprising the bundle). With addi-
tive separability it suffices to learn the conditional expected
gains from trade for the individual goods (cf.
[18]), which
greatly simplifies the problem of learning the required aggre-
gate knowledge. In this paper we consider non-linear cus-
tomer preferences, for which learning the desired aggregate
knowledge can be very difficult. For example, it may be very
difficult to determine the conditionally expected gains from
trade by collecting historical sales data and mining those
data offline. It requires that the sales data reveals the cor-
relation between customers' valuations for the various bun-
dles. Such high quality data may not be readily available,
especially when at the same time customers' privacy should
be respected, as we assume in this paper. By interpreting
customers' online responses to the shop's proposals for ne-
gotiating about alternative bundles, our background process
circumvents these difficulties.
The next section provides a high-level overview of the inter-
action model. In Section 3 we introduce relatively mild con-
ditions on the customers' and the shop's preferences. Based
on these conditions, Section 4 develops a procedure for find-
ing the most promising alternative bundles. In order to test
the performance of our system, we used it in interactions
with simulated customers. In Section 5 we discuss how the
necessary aggregate knowledge of customer preferences is
learned online. Section 6 presents our computer experiments
and discusses the results. Conclusions follow in Section 7.
2. OVERVIEW
This section gives an overview of the interaction between the
shop and the customer, as they try to negotiate an agree-
ment about the price and the composition of a bundle of
goods. The shop sells a total of n goods, each of which may
be either absent or present in a bundle, so that there are
2n − 1 distinct bundle-configurations containing at least 1
good. In the current paper, we use n = 10. A negotiation
concerns a bundle (configuration), together with a price for
that bundle, and it is conducted in an alternating exchange
of offers and counter offers [15], typically initiated by the
customer. An example of such a practice may involve the
sales of bundles of news items in categories like politics, fi-
nance, economy, sports, arts, etc.
We develop a procedure that a shop can use to find mutually
beneficial alternative bundles during the negotiation about
a given bundle, so that alternative bundles may be recom-
mended whenever the negotiation about the given bundle
stalls. Specifically, the procedure finds Pareto improvements
by changing the bundle content.2 It uses information spe-
cific to the current negotiation process as well as aggregate
knowledge (obtained from the analysis of sales data, (anony-
mous) data on previous and current negotiations, market
research, or expert knowledge). The ongoing negotiation is
analyzed to determine when an alternative bundle is needed,
and both the ongoing negotiation process and the aggregate
knowledge are used to assess which bundle to recommend.
A customer can explicitly reject a suggested bundle by spec-
ifying a counter offer with a different bundle content (e.g.,
the previous one), and she can implicitly reject a suggested
bundle by offering a low price for it. In the current paper,
only implicit rejection is allowed: customers only specify the
bundle content for the opening offer, and thereafter only the
shop can change the bundle content of an offer. This is to
ease the description of our model and solutions. The possi-
bility for customers to explicitly reject or change the bundle
content can be easily incorporated in our model and solu-
tions, however.
Figure 1 provides a high-level overview of the interaction
between a shop and a customer. The shaded elements are
part of the actual negotiation -- the exchange of offers. The
process starts with the customer indicating her interests, by
specifying the bundle they will initially negotiate about. Af-
ter that, they enter into a loop (indicated by the dotted line)
which ends only when a deal is made, or with a 2% exoge-
nous probability. (We do not model bargainers' impatience
explicitly; therefore we need an exogenous stopping condi-
tion, which specifies the chance of bargaining breakdown.)
In the loop, the customer makes an offer for the current bun-
dle b, indicating the price she wants to pay for it. The shop
responds to this offer either by accepting it, or by consid-
ering a recommendation. In any case, conditional upon the
98% continuation probability, the shop also makes an offer,
either for the current bundle b or for a recommended bundle
b′ (which then becomes the current bundle).
In the model, the valuations of the customers and the shop
are expressed as monetary values. The utilities of deals are
expressed as strictly monotonic one-dimensional transforma-
tions of valuations. In the simplest form, this would be the
difference between the valuation of the bundle and the ne-
gotiated price. The agents are interested in obtaining a deal
with optimal utility ("net monetary value"). See Section 3
for details.
3. PREFERENCE MODEL
3.1 Informal Discussion
The essence of our model of valuations and preferences lies
in the assumption that customers and the shop order bun-
dles based on their net monetary value; the bundle with the
highest net monetary value is the most preferred bundle. A
customer's net monetary value of a bundle is equal to the
customer's valuation of the bundle (expressed in money) mi-
nus the bundle price and the shop's net monetary value is
equal to the bundle price minus the shop's bundle valuation
(also expressed in money).
Given the above assumption and the assumption that a cus-
tomer wants to buy at most one bundle (within a given time
period), Section 3.2 shows that any deal involving the bundle
with the highest gains from trade is Pareto efficient. We can
now specify which is the best bundle for the shop to advise:
faced with the problem of recommending one bundle out of
a collection of bundles, the "best" bundle to recommend is
the bundle with the highest expected gains from trade; this
bundle Pareto dominates all other bundles. (Section 3.2 can
be skipped upon first reading.)
3.2 Formal Discussion
Before being able to more formally state the results, some
notation is necessary. Let N ⊂ N, with n = N , de-
note the collection of n individual goods and 2N denote the
power set of N (i.e., the collection of all subsets of n), then
B = 2N \ {∅} denotes the collection of all possible bundles.
Furthermore, let P = R denote the collection of all possi-
ble bundle prices.3 The customer and the shop attach the
monetary values of vc(b) and vs(b), respectively, to a bundle
b ∈ B (with vc(b), vs(b) ∈ P ). The function xj : B × P 7→ R
with j ∈ {c, s} denotes the net monetary value for bundle
b at price p: xc(b, p) = vc(b) − p and xs(b, p) = p − vs(b)
denote the customer's and the shop's net monetary values,
respectively.
We assume that the customer's and the shop's utility for
consuming bundle b at price p, denoted by uj (b, p) with j ∈
{c, s}, can be expressed as the composition function gj ◦
xj(b, p) with gj : R 7→ R. For gj we assume that dgj (x)
dx >
0 for all x ∈ R. Thus we have that uj(b, p) = gj (xj(b, p))
and since gj is a strictly increasing function, we can assume
without loss of generality that uj (b, p) = xj (b, p) (cf. [12]).
Given the customer's and shop's monetary values, we define
a useful subset B ∗ of B as follows: B ∗ ≡ arg maxb∈B(vc(b)−
vs(b)), that is, B ∗ represents the collection of bundles with
the highest possible gains from trade (across all possible
bundles). We are now ready to introduce the following
proposition.
Proposition 1. A deal (b, p) with b ∈ B and p ∈ P is
Pareto efficient if and only if b ∈ B ∗.
Remark 1. A deal (b, p) is Pareto efficient if there is no
(b′, p′) such that uj(b, p) ≤ uj (b′, p′) for all j ∈ {c, s} and
the inequality is strict for at least one j.
Proposition 1 means that a deal is Pareto efficient if and
only if it entails a bundle with the highest possible gains
from trade. For the proof of this proposition the following
lemma is very useful.
3Negative prices may not be realistic, but we want to make
as few behavioral assumptions as possible. For the results
the possibility of negative prices is not problematic (see
Footnote 4).
start
customer picks
bundle: b
customer
makes offer
for bundle b
shop
accepts?
yes
no
deal
end
shop
recommends
bundle b' b
yes
is it time to
recommend?
yes
no
customer
accepts?
no
shop makes
offer for
bundle b
continue?
(p = 99%)
yes
no
Figure 1: A flowchart describing the integration of recommendation in a shop and a customer's alternating
exchange of offers and counter offers.
Lemma 1. For any two deals (b∗, p∗) and (b, p) with p∗, p ∈
P , b∗ ∈ B ∗, and b ∈ B \ B ∗ we have xc(b, p) < xc(b∗, p∗) or
xs(b, p) < xs(b∗, p∗).
Proof. We prove the above lemma by contradiction. Sup-
pose that for any b∗ ∈ B ∗ and b ∈ B \ B ∗ we have xc(b, p) ≥
xc(b∗, p∗) and xs(b, p) ≥ xs(b∗, p∗). A necessary condition
for this to hold is that vc(b) − vs(b) ≥ vc(b∗) − vs(b∗). How-
ever, b∗ ∈ B ∗ and b ∈ B \ B ∗ means, by definition of B ∗,
that vc(b) − vs(b) < vc(b∗) − vs(b∗).
We are now ready to prove Proposition 1.
Proof.
1. (If) Pick any j ∈ {c, s}. Suppose that j's
position improves by moving from any deal (b, p) with
b ∈ B ∗ to (b′, p′), that is, uj (b, p) < uj (b′, p′). It then
suffices to show that the opponent denoted by j ′ will
always be made worse off, that is, uj ′ (b, p) > uj ′ (b′, p′).
From the properties of gj and gj ′ it follows that a bar-
gainer's position improves/worsens whenever the net
monetary value increases/decreases. Since j's position
improves, it follows from Lemma 1 that j ′ is made
worse off whenever b ∈ B \ B ∗. Moreover, if b, b′ ∈ B ∗
then the gains from trade remain unchanged, hence j ′
is made worse off.
2. (Only if) We will prove this part by contradiction.
Suppose that b /∈ B ∗ with the price being any p ∈ P .
Pick any b′ ∈ B ∗ and set the bundle price to p′ =
p + vs(b′) − vs(b), so that p′ − vs(b′) = p − vs(b). It
follows from p ∈ P that p′ ∈ P (recall that P = R)4
and the properties of gs that the shop is indifferent
between the deals (b, p) and (b′, p′). Also, it follows
from Lemma 1 and the properties of gc that the cus-
tomer is made better off. That is, any b′ ∈ B ∗ Pareto
dominates b /∈ B ∗. Thus b /∈ B ∗ cannot be a Pareto
efficient solution.
4If we choose to a priori rule out p < 0 and vj (b) < 0 (for
j ∈ {c, s} and all b ∈ B), then p ≥ vs(b) should hold because
otherwise the shop will not be willing to sell the bundle in
the first place. Consequently, p′ ∈ P still holds.
4. THE FOREGROUND PROCESS
The idea is to develop a mechanism for a shop to find Pareto
improvements by changing the bundle content during a ne-
gotiation. The mechanism we propose contains two subpro-
cedures. The first procedure monitors the negotiation pro-
cess and tells the shop when to recommend, at which time
the second procedure tells the shop what to recommend, by
generating recommendations based on aggregate knowledge
and the ongoing negotiation process. Figure 1 shows the in-
teraction between these two procedures; they are discussed
in more detail in Sections 4.1 and 4.2, respectively.
4.1 Deciding When to Recommend
The shop needs a procedure for deciding when he should
recommend negotiating about a different bundle. The ob-
vious input for this decision is the progress of the current
negotiation process, which can be described as a sequence of
offers and counteroffers. An offer O contains a bundle defi-
nition and a price: O = (b, p) with b ∈ B and p ∈ P . (B and
P denote the collections of all possible bundles and prices,
respectively.) Let h = (O(1), O(2), . . . , O(k)) denote a finite
history of offers (k is a natural number), where O(i + 1) is
the counter offer for O(i), for all i < k. Furthermore, let
H denote the universe of all possible finite offer sequences
(thus h ∈ H). The problem of when to advise can now be
specified as the mapping f : H 7→ {now, not now}, where
"(not) now" means: (don't) recommend a new bundle now.
We construct a heuristic for f based on the assumption that
there is a probability of not reaching a deal with a customer
(e.g., a break off, endless repetition, or deadline): the longer
the negotiation is expected to take, the less likely a deal is
expected to become. Furthermore, as a deal becomes less
likely, the incentive for the shop to recommend negotiation
about an alternative deal should increase. Given the shop's
bargaining strategy, our heuristic then extrapolates the time
the current negotiation process will need to reach a deal,
from the pace with which the customer is currently giving
in. More precisely, if we let O = (b, p) and O′ = (b, p′)
denote the customer's current and previous offers for bundle
b, then ∆t, the predicted remaining number of negotiation
rounds necessary to reach a deal, is defined as follows:
advantage of advising bundles within the neighborhood of b
is that the advice is less likely to appear haphazard.
∆t =
vs(b) − p
p − p′
,
(1)
where vs(b) denotes the shop's monetary value for bundle
b. The higher ∆t, the higher the likelihood of a recommen-
dation. Specifically, the probability of a recommendation
depends on ∆t as follows:
prrecommendation = 1 − exp(−0.25∆t),
which means that the probability that the shop recommends
an alternative bundle approaches 1 as ∆t increases.
4.2 Deciding What to Recommend
Our mechanism combines aggregate knowledge (obtained
from the analysis of sales data, (anonymous) data on pre-
vious and current negotiations, market research, or expert
knowledge) with data about the ongoing bargain process,
to recommend bundles to customers while negotiating with
them. Suppose, for example, that a customer offers to buy
a bundle b at a price p. Whenever a recommendation is
needed (see Section 4.1) the idea is to select from within the
"neighborhood" of bundle b, the bundle b′ that maximizes
E[vc(b′) − vs(b′)vc(b) ≥ p]: the expected gains from trade
for bundle b′, given that the customer is willing to pay at
least p for bundle b.
(To simplify notation we will write
E[·b] instead of E[·vc(b) ≥ p].) Since the shop knows its
own monetary value for bundle b′, vs(b′), the aim is really
to maximize E[vc(b′)b] − vs(b′). The difficulty here lies in
estimating the customer's expected valuation of bundle b′:
E[vc(b′)b] = Xi∈P
i · pr(vc(b′) = ib),
(2)
where pr(vc(b′) = ib) denotes the probability that the cus-
tomer's valuation for bundle b′ is equal to i, given that she
is willing to pay at least p for bundle b.
In Section 5 we
propose an online learning mechanism for determining this
estimation (the background process mentioned in Section 1.
It is, however, instructive to first discuss the recommenda-
tion mechanism in some more detail (i.e., assuming that the
expectations are already known).
A customer initiates the negotiation process by proposing an
initial bundle and offering an opening price: let O(0) = (b, p)
denote the customer's opening offer (with b ∈ B and p ∈ P ).
The shop stores the bundle proposed by the customer as
(his assessment or estimation of) the customer's "interest
bundle," in the neighborhood of which the shop searches
for promising alternative bundles to recommend if, at any
time, the shop decides he should make a recommendation
(see Section 4.1). This neighborhood of bundle b, Ng(b), is
defined as follows.
Ng(b) ≡ {b′ ∈ B : b′ ⊂ b and b′ + 1 = b
or b′ ⊃ b and b′ − 1 = b},
(3)
In other words, Ng(b) contains the bundles which, in binary
representation, have a Hamming distance to b of 1.5 The
5Remember that each bundle can be represented as a string
containing n bits indicating the presence or absence in the
bundle, of each of the shop's n goods.
Having defined a bundle's neighborhood, let the ordered set
A denote the so-called "recommendation set," obtained by
ordering the neighborhood Ng(b) on the basis of the esti-
mated expected gains from trade of all the bundles b′ in
bundle b's neighborhood, E[vc(b′)b] − vs(b′), where E de-
notes the estimation of E.
To recommend a bundle bk (the kth recommendation, with
k ≥ 1), our mechanism removes the first bundle from A,
adds a price to it and proposes it as part of the shop's next
offer. Depending on the customer's counter offer for bundle
bk, the current advice set may be replaced: if the customer's
response is very promising (to be defined below) A will be
emptied, bundle bk will be taken as the customer's new in-
terest bundle (in the neighborhood of which the search con-
tinues), and the bundles in the neighborhood of bk are added
to A.
To specify this in more detail, let Oc
t denote the sequence
of offers placed by the customer up until time t, and let
max (Oc
t ) specify the customer's past offer with the high-
est net monetary value from the shop's perspective. Then
the shop will determine the impact of the kth recommenda-
tion by comparing the net monetary value of the customer's
current offer O(t + 1) with that of offer max (Oc
t ). For this
purpose, the shop uses the function signb,b ′ : R×R 7→ {0, 1}.
If we let max (Oc
t ) = (b, p) and the customer's current offer
O(t + 1) = (b′, p′), then
sign b,b′ (p, p′) = (cid:26) 1 if p′ − vs(b′) > p − vs(b)
0 otherwise
.
(4)
If sign b,b′ (p, p′) = 1, then the shop's assessment of the cus-
tomer's interest bundle is updated to be bk: the customer's
response is promising enough to divert the search towards
the neighborhood of bk. That is, the first element of A be-
comes the bundle b′ ∈ Ng(bk) with the maximum difference
E[vc(b′)bk] − vs(b′), the second element of A becomes the
bundle b′′ with the second highest difference E[vc(b′′)bk] −
vs(b′′), and so on.
In case sign b,b′ (p, p′) = 0, the shop will make the next
recommendation. Before the shop makes the next recom-
mendation however, he checks if the negotiation is currently
about the interest bundle. If this is not the case he will first
make an offer containing the interest bundle. Whenever this
offer is not accepted by the customer the shop will make the
next recommendation in the following round. Consequently
we have the property that a recommendation is always pre-
ceded by an offer containing the interest bundle. (We will
see in Section 5.1 that this is a very useful property.)
5. THE BACKGROUND PROCESS
The ordering of all bundles in the neighborhood of an inter-
est bundle b constitutes a crucial aspect of the recommen-
dation mechanism described in Section 4.2. Ideally, given
an interest bundle b, the first bundle in the ordering has
the highest expected gains from trade, the second bundle
in the ordering has the second highest expected gain from
trade, and so on so forth. So, as explained in Section 4.2,
we are interested in knowing E[vc(b′)b] − vs(b′) for all bun-
dles b′ within the neighborhood of bundle b, where the dif-
ficulty lies in estimating the customer's expected valuation
E[vc(b′)b]. Expert knowledge may provide the shop with
these estimations, but unfortunately such knowledge is of-
ten not available. We will therefore introduce an effective
approach for online learning to "correctly" order the bundles
in the neighborhood of the interest bundle.
5.1 Using Bargaining Data
To order the bundles, the shop uses data on the current and
past bargaining processes. More precisely, suppose the shop
advises b′ given an interest bundle b with the most recent
customer offer of O = (b, p) and that the customer responds
with the counter offer O′ = (b′, p′). The shop then feeds the
triples < b, b′, p′ − p > and < b′, b, p − p′ > as new training
examples to an online learning mechanism.
The recommendation mechanism described in Section 4.2
ensures that the customer's offers O = (b, p) and O = (b′, p)
are placed directly after one another; thus, as long as the
customer's strategic misrepresentation of the underlying bun-
dle values do not jump around too much from one trading
period to the next, the misrepresentation in p and p′ will
roughly cancel each other out. Consequently, p − p′ will be
a good indication of the difference in a customer's valuations
of bundles b and b′, vc(b) − vc(b′). (Similarly, p′ − p will be
good estimation of vc(b′) − vc(b).)
Based on these training examples the learning mechanism,
when given < b, b′ > combined with the shop's valuations
for the two bundles, vs(b) and vs(b′), predicts ∆gt(b′, b) ≡
E[p′ − vs(b′) − (p − vs(b))b]: the expected difference in gains
from trade, resulting from changing from bargaining about
bundle b to bargaining about bundle b′ (given that a cus-
tomer expressed an interest in bundle b, as assumed above).
To sort bundles in the vicinity of an interest bundle b ac-
cording to their expected gains from trade, it suffices to sort
the bundles according to ∆gt(b′, b).
5.2 Complexity Issues
Knowledge of the correlation between the values of the vari-
ous bundle pairs is essential for correctly learning to order all
bundles in the vicinity of an "interest" bundle b. Given that
the shop sells n individual goods, there are 2n − 1 possible
bundles containing at least 1 good. Learning the correlation
between all bundle pairs requires -- worst case -- comparing
an order of (2n)2 bundle pairs. Clearly, for particular in-
stances of the problem the complexity may be reduced sig-
nificantly. Take for instance the situation, where the cus-
tomer's valuation for a bundle is always equal to the sum of
her valuations for the individual goods comprising the bun-
dle. In that case it suffices to compare n individual goods
with 2n bundles, reducing the complexity -- worst case -- to
an order of n · 2n. In this paper we focus on the more gen-
eral case, where a customer's bundle valuation may not be
equal to the sum of her valuations for the individual goods
comprising the bundle.
For this more general customer preference setting, search-
ing in the neighborhood of the interest bundle has two ad-
vantages: besides making an advice less likely to appear
haphazard, it significantly reduces the number of bundle
pairs that need to be considered. Recall that we defined the
neighborhood of a bundle b as consisting of all bundles at
a Hamming distance of 1 from bundle b (see Section 4.2).
It then requires comparing n · (n − 1) bundles when the
interest bundle has size 1, (n
2 ) · (n − 2) additional bundle
((n
pairs when the interest bundle size is 2, and so on.
k )
Denotes the binomial coefficient.) Thus -- worst case -- there
k )·(n−k) < (n·2n) bundle comparisons necessary,
k=1(n
which is significantly less than (2n)2.
are Pn
5.3 Online Learning Mechanism
In this paper we consider only the situation where the num-
ber of individual goods to be bundled is relatively small:
i.e., n ≤ 10. (With n = 10 there are 2n − 1 = 1023 possi-
ble bundle configurations, so facilitating the search process
among all those bundles is still highly valuable.) Since we
only consider bundles within the neighborhood of an inter-
est bundle, it is tractable, for relatively small values of n,
to explicitly estimate the required conditional expectations
online. Moreover, bargaining with one customer generally
creates numerous training examples which can be used twice
(i.e., < b, b′, p′ − p > and < b′, b, p − p′ > are both stored
as separate training examples, see Section 5.1). For small
values of n therefore, the learning mechanism can improve
its estimation of the conditional expectations, even given
relatively few customers who provide training examples.
Given the k training examples << b, b′, p1 − p′
1 >, . . . , <
b, b′, pk − p′
k >>, the online learning algorithm simply esti-
mates ∆gt(b′, b), the expected difference in gains from trade,
resulting from changing from bargaining about bundle b to
bargaining about bundle b′ (given that a customer expressed
an interest in bundle b), as the average of the training ex-
amples, i.e.,
∆ gt(b′, b) =
1
k
k
Xi=1
(pi − p′
i).
(5)
The danger of using ∆ gt(b′, b) directly to sort the bundles
in the neighborhood of the interest bundle b, is that the
diversity of the trading example remains limited. Conse-
quently, learning the correct ordering of the bundles is not
possible. To allow for sufficient exploration the shop chooses
with a probability p(b, b′, M 0) (with M 0 = N g(b)) a bundle
b′ ∈ M 0 to be first in the ordering of N g(b); once the first
bundle in the ordering is determined, say b∗, with a proba-
bility p(b, b′, M 1) (with M 1 = N g(b)\{b∗}) the shop chooses
a bundle b ∈ M 1 to be second in the ordering, and so on.
The probability p(b, b′, M ) (with M ⊆ N g(b)) is computed
according to the softmax action selection rule (cf. [21]), i.e.,
p(b, b′, M ) =
.
(6)
eλ·∆ gt(b′ ,b)
Pb′′ ∈M eλ·∆ gt(b′′ ,b)
where λ determines the exploratory behavior of the mecha-
nism. The greater λ, the less exploration will take place, i.e.,
the higher the probability that the bundle with the highest
expected gains from trade will be picked first, the second
highest second, and so on. Initially λ is very small; it in-
creases over time.
6. NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS
In order to test the performance of our proposed mechanism,
we implemented it computationally, and tested it against
many simulated customers. Valuations for the shop and
the customers were drawn from random distributions. First
we describe customer preferences and how we implemented
negotiations in the simulation, and then we present our ex-
perimental design and simulation results.
6.1 Customer preferences
The goods may be complementary, in which case the valua-
tion of a bundle is higher than the sum of the valuations of
the individual goods in the bundle. We model the possibility
of complementarities by representing vc(b), the customer's
valuation for a bundle b, as a (cubic) polynomial. If we let
N denote the collection of n individual goods and the vector
x = (x(1), . . . , x(n)) the binary representation of a bundle b
(i.e., x(i) = 1 if and only if i ∈ b), then
vc(b) = a0 + Xi∈N
Xi,j,k∈N
ai · x(i) + Xi,j∈N
aij · x(i) · x(j) +
aijk · x(i) · x(j) · x(j),
(7)
where a0, ai, aij, and aijk (for i, j, k ∈ N ) denote the con-
stant, linear, quadratic, and cubic coefficients of the poly-
nomial, respectively. The quadratic and cubic coefficients
determine the extent to which complementarities exist be-
tween two and three goods. (Customers buy at most one
instance of an individual good, hence we can ignore the pos-
sibility of complementarities between identical goods:
i.e.,
aii = aiii = 0 for all i ∈ N .)
An individual customer's values for the various coefficients
are randomly distributed. If ~a denotes an arbitrary instance
of all these coefficients, then ~a gives rise to a multivari-
ate normal distribution, i.e., pr(~a) ∼ N [~µ, Σ], where the
vector ~µ and the matrix Σ = [σij ] denote the means and
(co)variances of the distribution.
From Equation 7 (and the fact that x(i) ∈ {0, 1}) it follows
that we can obtain all bundle valuations (vc(b1), . . . , vc(b2n−1))
by applying a linear transformation on ~a. Consequently, the
corresponding probabilities pr(vc(b1), . . . , vc(b2n−1)) also form
a multivariate normal distribution [9]. That is, we have
pr(vc(b1), . . . , vc(b2n−1)) ∼ N [T~µ, TΣT′],
(8)
where the matrix T specifies the linear transformation (the
jth element in the ith row of T specifies whether or not the
corresponding ith coefficient in ~a should contribute to the
valuation of the ith bundle).
6.2 Modeling Negotiations
6.2.1 Time-dependent Strategy
For the customer (shop), the time-dependent bidding strat-
egy is monotonically increasing (decreasing) in both the
number of bidding rounds (t) and her (his) valuation.
In
particular, a bidding strategy is characterized by the gap
the customer leaves between her initial offer and her valua-
tion, and by the speed with which she closes this gap. The
gap is specified as a fraction of the bundle valuation and it
decreases over time as gap(t) = gapinit · exp(−δt), so over
time, she approaches the valuation of the bundle she is cur-
rently negotiating about. Note that changes in the gap are
time-dependent, but not bundle-dependent! This strategy
is therefore called "time-dependent-fraction" (tdf). Almost
the same holds for the shop's bidding strategy, mutatis mu-
tandis. The initial gap, gapinit , is set at 0.5 for the customer
and at 1.5 for the shop, and we fix δ = 0.03 for the shop
as well as the customer, in order to reduce the number of
jointly fluctuating parameters somewhat. Summing up, the
customer (shop) starts her (his) bidding for a bundle at (one
and a) half her (his) valuation, and her (his) bids gradually
approach her (his) valuation.
6.2.2 Tit-for-Tat Strategy
The time-dependent strategy described above generates bids
irrespective of what the opponent does. As an example of
a strategy that responds to the opponent, we implemented
a variant of tit-for-tat (tft) [2]. The initial 'move' is al-
ready specified by gapinit like in the tdf-strategy. If in sub-
sequent moves the utility level of the opponent's offer im-
proves, then the same amount is conceded by the bargainer.
Note that it is the increment in the utility level perceived
by the bargainer (not the opponent). Furthermore, this per-
ceived utility improvement can also be negative. To make
the bidding behavior less chaotic, no negative concessions
are made. That is, we used a so-called monotone version
called tit-for-tat-monotone-fraction (tftm) which can never
generate a bid with a worse utility than the previous bid.
6.3 Experimental Setup
In the computer experiments reported in this paper, we
compare our new approach of having no a priori informa-
tion and learning customer preferences online (as discussed
in Section 5.1), to the one where -- for example because of
expert knowledge -- the shop already knows the underlying
joint probability distribution of all bundle valuations (see
Section 6.1). The latter approach is also the one discussed
and experimented with in more detail in [18]. In this ap-
proach, the shop directly derives the value of E[vc(b′)b] for
each bundle pair; based on these values the shop computes
the expected gains from trade and orders the bundles in the
neighborhood of b accordingly.
Besides comparing our new online procedure (referred to as
µ) with the previous method (called S), we also assess the
relative performance of the system by performing the same
series of experiments with a benchmark procedure (called
B), which simply recommends a random bundle from the
current bundle's neighborhood. That is, the benchmark
does not base the order in which it recommends the next
bundle on the estimated expected gains from trade like our
system does.
In the experiments, the shop's bundle valuations are de-
termined by applying a nonlinear bundle reduction. This
means that the bundle price is generally less than the sum
of the individual goods comprising the bundle. In order to
prevent the trivial problem of customers wanting to buy all
goods, the bundle reduction becomes 0 for bundles which
contain more than 3 goods.
There are 10 individual goods. We randomly generate the
underlying probability density function pr(~a). In order to
ensure sufficient difference in valuations between customers,
however, we fix the correlation matrix (but not the covari-
Table 1: Comparison of the different methods µ, S and the benchmark B. Figures are averages across 10 runs
with different random seeds, and 12000 customers per run. Standard deviations are given between brackets.
Performance
Indicator
max. gains
min. gains
gains binit
gains bint
gains bfinal
percentage
rel. percentage
rounds
deals
µ
Methods
S
B
tdf
tftm
tdf
tftm
tdf
tftm
1202.81(5.34)
−1023.61(54.77)
438.70(15.45)
763.55(15.75)
863.33(4.57)
0.85(0.00)
0.52(0.01)
8.24(0.60)
549.27(4.23)
797.45(4.40)
0.82(0.00)
0.43(0.01)
5.16(0.16)
826.18(16.30)
939.72(8.60)
0.88(0.00)
0.61(0.01)
8.01(0.65)
573.14(5.81)
875.98(7.57)
0.85(0.00)
0.54(0.01)
4.71(0.15)
10314.20(143)
11024.50(39)
10340.60(156)
11114.20(40)
697.74(14.19)
777.82(8.59)
0.81(0.00)
0.41(0.01)
13.71(0.93)
9171.80(181)
527.55(11.61)
727.81(5.96)
0.79(0.00)
0.34(0.01)
7.37(0.29)
10496.50(71)
e
c
n
a
m
r
o
f
r
e
p
e
v
i
t
a
l
e
r
0.6
0.55
0.5
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
TDF
TFTM
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
e
c
n
a
m
r
o
f
r
e
p
e
v
i
t
a
l
e
r
n
i
e
c
n
e
r
e
f
f
i
d
0
-0.05
-0.1
-0.15
-0.2
-0.25
TDF
TFTM
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
customer number
customer number
Figure 2: Relative performance of the µ-system (on the left), measured by calculating the difference in gains
from trade between the bundles bfinal and binit, as a percentage of the difference between the maximum and
the initial gains from trade. The shop uses the TDF strategy with δ = 0.03, and the customers use either the
TDF strategy (with δ = 0.03), or the TFTM strategy (with δ = 1), as described in section 6.2. The graph
on the right gives the difference in performance between µ and S. (Both graphs actually show the 100-step
moving averages.)
ance matrix). We randomly initialize the covariance matrix
such that we can partition N in 3 subsets (2 of size 3 and
1 of size 4). Selling a customer one of these 3 subsets will
often generate the highest gain from trade. (Roughly be-
tween 20 and 40% of the time this is the case, in the other
cases 1 or 2 and sometimes more goods need to be added or
removed.) To test the robustness of our procedure to quanti-
tative changes in the underlying distributions we conducted
a series of experiments with 10 different distributions. For
each of these settings we simulated negotiations between the
shop, with randomly drawn valuations, which were kept con-
stant across negotiations with 12, 000 customers, each with
her valuations drawn randomly from the particular distri-
bution used. To further test the robustness of our system,
each customer was simulated using 2 different negotiation
strategies, as described in Section 6.2.
(The shop always
uses the tdf strategy.)
To allow initiation of the negotiation process by the cus-
tomer, we assume that the customer starts negotiating about
an initial bundle binit . In order to give the shop some room
for improvement, we initialize the customer's initial bundle
by randomly selecting a bundle b which, in binary represen-
tation, has a Hamming distance of 3 to the bundle b∗ that
is associated with the highest gains from trade.
6.4 Results
The overall results of our experiments are listed in Table 1.
The numbers are averages over 12, 000 customers drawn
from each distribution of valuations, and over 10 differ-
ent randomly generated distributions; standard deviations
(across averages from the 10 distributions) are listed be-
tween brackets. The maximum and minimum attainable
gains from trade are determined by the current random
distribution of valuations; they do not depend on the cho-
sen strategy and method. Likewise, the bundle a customer
wants to start negotiating about does not depend on the
chosen strategy and method. Therefore, the average of these
figures represented in the first 3 rows are identical across all
experiments -- for each shop-customer interaction these fig-
ures are known even before the negotiation commences.
s
l
a
e
d
f
o
#
e
g
a
r
e
v
a
e
v
i
t
a
l
u
m
u
c
1
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
0.6
TDF
TFTM
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
l
a
e
d
a
h
c
a
e
r
o
t
s
d
n
u
o
r
f
o
r
e
b
m
u
n
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
TDF
TFTM
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
customer number
customer number
Figure 3: The cumulative average number of deals per customer, as attained by the µ-system (on the left)
and the 100-step moving average of the number of rounds required to reach those deals (on the right). As in
Figure 2, the shop uses the TDF strategy and the customers use either the TDF or the TFTM strategy. The
shop manages to reach deals with 11, 381 of the TDF-customers, and with 11, 554 of the TFTM-customers.
The remainder of the results is measured at the end of each
shop-customer interaction, and subsequently averaged over
all 10·12, 000 customers. The row for 'gains bint(erest)' shows
the gains from trade associated with the bundle of which
the shop, at the end of the negotiation with each customer,
thinks the customer is most interested in. This estimation
is most accurately performed by the S-system, which is not
surprising since it has direct access to the distribution un-
derlying the customer's preferences -- even though it does
not know each individual customer's actual preferences. But
the µ-system, that has to do without this a priori knowledge
altogether, and instead has to learn about its customers'
preferences online, does not do much worse, especially when
compared to the benchmark system, B, in the rightmost
columns.
The row labeled 'gains bfinal' gives the gains from trade as-
sociated with the bundle that the shop and the customer
were actually negotiating about at the end of the simula-
tion, irrespective of whether that end was caused by the
98% exogenous break-up probability, or by the fact that a
deal was reached in the negotiation. The rows for 'percent-
age' and 'rel(ative) percentage' present the same results in
a different way: 'percentage' shows the shop's performance
relative to the maximum attainable:
percentage =
(gains bfinal − min. gains)
(max. gains − min. gains)
,
whereas 'relative percentage' takes into account the starting
bundle binit:
relative percentage =
(gains bfinal − gains binit)
(max. gains − gains binit)
.
Again, in both these rows, as in all the rows more generally,
the S-system outperforms the µ-system, which beats the B-
system, but bear in mind the challenge for the µ-system,
as compared to the S-system, in terms of (dealing with the
lack of) available aggregate knowledge. The rows labeled
'rounds' and 'deals' give the average number of rounds it
took to reach a deal (whenever a deal was reached) and the
average number of deals reached. An observation that can
be made is that the shop seems to do better (in terms of
gains from trade) when the customers use the tdf-strategy
than when they use tftm, although in the former case the
shop requires a higher number of rounds to reach deals, and
reaches less deals, as compared to the latter case.
Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the shop's learning process when
using the µ-system. The graph on the left in Figure 2 shows
(the 100-step moving average of) the 'relative percentage'
from Table 1, measured at the end of the negotiation with
each of the 12, 000 customers, and averaged over the 10 dif-
ferent preference-distributions. The increase over time, of
the shop's aggregate knowledge of his customer's preferences
is clearly visible, for both strategies used by the customers.
The graph on the right in Figure 2 shows the difference
of these results between the µ- and the S-systems, respec-
tively; the S-system does better, but the µ-system closes the
gap as it learns more about its customers. Significantly, the
difference between the plots for tdf and tftm disappears,
indicating the robustness of the µ-system to changes in the
customers' negotiation strategies. So the µ-system is clearly
able to learn customers' preferences online, irrespective of
the negotiation strategy used by those customers. However,
the overall performance of the shop using the µ-system to-
gether with his own negotiation strategy, is dependent upon
the customer's negotiation strategy. More specifically there
is a trade-off in performance. Compared to tftm, interact-
ing with customers using tdf results in higher gains from
trade, less deals (see also Figure 3), and more rounds to
reach those deals. The explanation for these differences is
that with tftm customers will give in quicker; whenever
the shop suggests a good alternative the amount the cus-
tomer concedes equals the gains from trade plus the amount
conceded by the shop (perceived by the customer). Conse-
quently deals are reached more quickly. This also results
in more deals being reached but goes at the expense of the
gains from trade because the search process is shorter.
7. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
In this paper, we consider a form of multi-issue negotiation
where a shop negotiates both the contents and the price
of bundles of goods with his customers. To facilitate the
negotiations of a shop, we develop a procedure that uses
aggregate (anonymous) knowledge about many customers
in bilateral negotiations of bundle-price combinations with
individual customers. By online interpreting customers' re-
sponses to the shop's proposals for negotiating about alter-
native bundles, the procedure acquires the desired aggregate
knowledge online; it requires no a priori information while
respecting customers' privacy.
We conduct computer experiments with simulated customers
that have nonlinear preferences. We compare our new ap-
proach of having no a priori information and learning about
customer preferences online, to the one where -- for example
because of expert knowledge -- the shop already knows the
underlying joint probability distribution of all bundle valu-
ations. The latter approach is also the one discussed and
experimented with in more detail in [18]. Our experiments
show how, over time, the performance of our procedure ap-
proaches that of our previous procedure, which already pos-
sesses the necessary aggregate knowledge. Both procedures
significantly increase the speed with which deals are reached,
as well as the number and the Pareto efficiency of the deals
reached, as compared to a benchmark. Moreover, the ex-
periments show that the new procedure is able to learn the
necessary information online, irrespective of the negotiation
strategy used by the customers.
8. REFERENCES
[1] K. Altinkemer and J. Jaisingh. Pricing bundled
information goods. In Proceedings of
IEEE-WECWIS'02, 2002.
[2] R. Axelrod. The Evolution of Cooperation. Basic
Books, New York, 1984.
[3] Y. Bakos and E. Brynjolfsson. Bundling information
goods: Pricing, profits and efficiency. Management
Science, 45(12), December 1999.
[4] W. Baumol, R. Willig, and J. Panzar. Contestable
Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure. Dryden
Press, 1987.
[5] J. C.-I. Chuang and M. A. Sirbu. Optimal bundling
strategy for digital information goods. Information
Economics and Policy, 11(2):147 -- 176, 1999.
[6] R. Coster, A. Gustavsson, T. Olsson, and
A. Rudstrom. Enhancing web-based configuration
with recommendations and cluster-based help. In
Proceedings Workshop on Recommendation and
Personalization in eCommerce at AH2002, 2002.
[7] H. Ehtamo and R. Hamalainen. Interactive
multiple-criteria methods for reaching pareto optimal
agreements in negotiation. Group Decision and
Negotiation, 10:475 -- 491, 2001.
[8] P. Faratin, C. Sierra, and N. R. Jennings. Using
similarity criteria to make issue trade-offs. Journal of
Artificial Intelligence, 142(2):205 -- 237, 2003.
[9] W. H. Green. Econometric Analysis. Prentice Hall,
New Jersey, 1993.
[10] J. O. Kephart and S. A. Fay. Competitive bundling of
categorized information goods. In Proceedings of ACM
EC'00, 2000.
[11] M. Klein, P. Faratin, H. Sayama, and Y. Bar-Yam.
Negotiating complex contracts. Group Decision and
Negotiation, 12:111 -- 125, 2003.
[12] A. Mas-Collel, M. D. Whinston, and J. R. Green.
Mircoeconomic Theory. Oxford University Press, 1995.
[13] M. Molina. An intelligent sales assistant for
configurable products. In Zhong, N. (et al.), editor,
Proceedings Web Intelligence 2001, volume 2198 of
LNAI, pages 596 -- 600. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2001.
[14] P. Resnick and H. R. Varian. Recommender systems.
Communications of the ACM, 40(3):56 -- 58, 1997.
[15] A. Rubinstein. Perfect equilibrium in a bargaining
model. Econometrica, 50(1):97 -- 109, January 1982.
[16] R. L. Schmalensee. Gaussian demand and commodity
bundling. Journal of Business, 57(1):S211 -- S230,
January 1984.
[17] D. J. A. Somefun, E. Gerding, S. Bohte, and J. A.
La Poutr´e. Automated negotiation and bundling of
information goods. In J. A. Rodriguez-Aguilar (et al.),
editor, Proceedings of Agent Mediated Electronic
Commerce V, volume 3048 of LNAI. Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, 2004.
[18] D. J. A. Somefun, T. B. Klos, and J. A. La Poutr´e.
Negotiating over bundles and prices using aggregate
knowledge. In Proceedings 5th International
Conference on Electronic Commerce and Web
Technologies, volume (forthcoming) of LNCS.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004.
[19] D. J. A. Somefun and J. A. La Poutr´e. Bundling and
pricing for information brokerage: Customer
satisfaction as a means to profit optimization. In
Proceedings of Web Intelligence 2003, pages 182 -- 189.
IEEE Computer Society, 2003.
[20] V.-W. Soo and S.-H. Liang. Recommending a trip
plan by negotiating with a software travel agent. In
M. Klusch and F. Zambonelli, editors, Proceedings
CIA 2001, volume 2182 of LNAI, pages 32 -- 37.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2001.
[21] R. S. Sutton and A. G. Barto. Reinforcement
Learning: An Introduction. Adaptive Computation
and Machine Learning. The MIT Press, Cambridge
Massachusetts, 1998.
|
1901.04585 | 1 | 1901 | 2019-01-09T13:19:14 | Agent-Based Modelling Approach for Distributed Decision Support in an IoT Network | [
"cs.MA"
] | An increasing number of emerging applications, e.g., internet of things, vehicular communications, augmented reality, and the growing complexity due to the interoperability requirements of these systems, lead to the need to change the tools used for the modeling and analysis of those networks. Agent-Based Modeling (ABM) as a bottom-up modeling approach considers a network of autonomous agents interacting with each other, and therefore represents an ideal framework to comprehend the interactions of heterogeneous nodes in a complex environment. Here, we investigate the suitability of ABM to model the communication aspects of a road traffic management system, as an example of an Internet of Things (IoT) network. We model, analyze and compare various Medium Access Control (MAC) layer protocols for two different scenarios, namely uncoordinated and coordinated. Besides, we model the scheduling mechanisms for the coordinated scenario as a high level MAC protocol by using three different approaches: Centralized Decision Maker, DESYNC and decentralized learning MAC (L-MAC). The results clearly show the importance of coordination between multiple decision makers in order to improve the accuracy of information and spectrum utilization of the system. | cs.MA | cs | Agent-Based Modelling Approach for Distributed
Decision Support in an IoT Network
Merim Dzaferagic, M. Majid Butt, Senior Member, IEEE, Maria Murphy, Nicholas Kaminski,
and Nicola Marchetti, Senior Member, IEEE
1
9
1
0
2
n
a
J
9
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
5
8
5
4
0
.
1
0
9
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract -- An increasing number of emerging applications,
e.g., internet of things, vehicular communications, augmented
reality, and the growing complexity due to the interoperability
requirements of these systems, lead to the need to change the
tools used for the modeling and analysis of those networks.
Agent-Based Modeling (ABM) as a bottom-up modeling approach
considers a network of autonomous agents interacting with
each other, and therefore represents an ideal framework to
comprehend the interactions of heterogeneous nodes in a complex
environment. Here, we investigate the suitability of ABM to model
the communication aspects of a road traffic management system,
as an example of an Internet of Things (IoT) network. We model,
analyze and compare various Medium Access Control (MAC)
layer protocols for two different scenarios, namely uncoordinated
and coordinated. Besides, we model the scheduling mechanisms
for the coordinated scenario as a high level MAC protocol by
using three different approaches: Centralized Decision Maker,
DESYNC and decentralized learning MAC (L-MAC). The results
clearly show the importance of coordination between multiple
decision makers in order to improve the accuracy of information
and spectrum utilization of the system.
Index Terms -- Agent-Based Modelling (ABM), Internet of
Things (IoT), Complex Communications Systems (CCS)
I. INTRODUCTION
In the context of this study, a complex system is defined
as any system featuring a large number of interacting com-
ponents (agents, processes, etc.) whose aggregate activity is
nonlinear (not derivable from the summations of the activity of
individual components) and typically exhibits hierarchical self-
organization under selective pressures [1]. Considering this
definition of complex systems, the next generation of com-
munication networks (e.g., Internet of Things (IoT), cellular
networks, vehicular networks) can be regarded as a complex
system due to growing number of technologies and connected
devices. Complexity in decision making (scheduling, routing)
for a large IoT system requires new modeling and decision
making tools and methodologies, which motivates the study
of complex systems science (CCS) [2], [3]. The tools used
to model and analyze these networks must evolve in order
to optimally utilize the available resources (e.g., spectrum,
processing power) at affordable complexity.
Merim Dzaferagic Maria Murphy, Nicholas Kaminski and Nicola Marchetti
are with CONNECT center for future networks, Trinity College Dublin,
Ireland. Email:{dzaferam, nicola.marchetti}@tcd.ie.
M. Majid Butt is with School of Engineering, University of Glasgow, UK.
Email: [email protected].
This publication has emanated from research conducted with the financial
support of Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) and is co-funded under the
European Regional Development Fund under Grant Number 13/RC/2077.
Agent-Based Modeling (ABM) is a bottom-up method of
modeling that considers a network of autonomous agents. Each
agent has its own set of attributes and behaviors. These be-
haviors describe how the agents interact with other agents and
their environment. If needed, the agents can exhibit learning
capabilities that allow them to adapt to changes in the system,
altering the internal attributes and the behaviors towards other
agents. Therefore, ABM is suitable to model complex systems
[4] -- [6] that would require large computational complexity to
be modeled otherwise.
ABM has previously been used to model a wide range of
applications in sectors such as ecology, biology, telecommu-
nications and traffic management. Some examples include:
[7] where ABM is used to model
intra-cellular chemical
interactions, and [?] to analyze the parking behaviors in a city.
Recently, ABM has been used to solve various complex
problems in telecommunication networks. The authors of
[9] show that a cognitive agent-based computing modeling
approach, such as ABM, is an effective approach to model
complex problems in the domain of IoT. Our work examines
the use of ABM to model an IoT network that requires dis-
tributed decisions. The IoT network in question is a road traffic
management system that adjusts the timing of traffic lights
based on the amount of vehicles waiting at an intersection. Our
focus is on the modeling of the communication aspects of the
system and in particular we want to analyze the impact of the
Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol on the application
itself, i.e., the timing of traffic lights.
Many applications of ABM in the telecommunications in-
dustry have focused on economic and social aspects, such
as consumer behavior. In [10], the authors model the cus-
tomer behavior in a telecommunication network. Also,
in
[11], ABM is used to analyze the wireless cellular services
market. There have been quite a few applications of ABM that
model the network itself. In [12], the authors describe how
ABM can be applied to model spectrum sharing techniques
in future 5G networks. The authors model a system that
considers economical, technical and regulatory considerations
when leasing spectrum. The agents are able to remember
what spectrum sharing conditions were beneficial for them
previously and learn/adapt based on their previous choices.
The authors of [13] analyze the spectrum frequency trading
mechanism by modeling the heterogeneous nodes as agents in
an ABM framework. The motivation for ABM came from the
emergence of structures, patterns and unexpected properties.
ABM allowed them to model and understand market models
with dynamics that are beyond the scope of familiar analytical
formulations, such as differential equations.
Other applications of ABM to communication networks are
presented in [14] -- [16]. The authors of [14] analyze the effec-
tiveness of ABM to model self-organization in peer-to-peer
and ad-hoc networks. They also outline the limitations of using
current modeling and simulation software. Their work shows
that tools such as OMNET++, Opnet and specialized tools
such as the Tiny OS Simulator are limited as they tend to focus
solely on computer networks. Interactions with humans and
mobility cannot be modeled with enough flexibility. Network
parameters can be easily modified but other conditions are
difficult to be considered. The authors highlight the flexibility
of an ABM approach, showing how easily the system can
be updated and allow for powerful result abstraction. In
[15], the authors analyze a decentralized spectrum resource
access model as a complex system, modeling the decentralized
decision making and cooperation of distributed agents in a way
that allows them to partially observe the state of the system,
meaning that each agent has only the information about its
own local environment. The authors of [16] introduce an ABM
framework to formally define all necessary elements to model
and simulate a Wireless Sensor Network (WSN). As a proof
of concept, they demonstrate the application of the framework
to a model of self-organized flocking of animals monitored by
a random deployment of proximity sensors. By proving the
applicability of ABM to WSNs, this paper provides further
motivation to the current study.
Many studies have been carried out to try to optimize traffic
flow (specifically in urban areas) using WSN. For example, in
[17], [18] and [19], sensor networks for monitoring traffic are
proposed. The authors of [20] -- [22] use ABM for traffic opti-
mization and simulation. Reference [20] describes an ABM
solution to generate personalized real-time data to present
route information to travelers. The authors in [21] model the
effect of an increasing population on traffic congestion. In [22]
a detailed traffic simulator using NetLogo was designed. It
analyzes the effect on traffic congestion when various different
lanes of traffic are introduced. Though, the work presented in
those papers provide motivation to our work, their focus lies in
the functionality and optimization of the traffic light systems
and not on the modeling and analysis of the communication
aspects of the related sensor network.
Due to the suitability of the ABM approach to model large
systems composed of autonomous decision making entities, we
believe that ABM is a perfect match to model and analyze the
problem addressed by this paper, i.e., road traffic management
system. ABM allows us to model individual agents and the
effect that those agents have on their local environment, and as
a result we can observe the cumulative/system level behavior
that results from the agents interacting with each other and
with the environment. The beauty of this approach is that
by modeling the interactions and their effects locally, we
actually model a complex decision making system which is
decentralized in nature. It may not be optimal as compared
to centralized decision making entities, but it provides a low
complexity decision making framework.
Building on the preliminary work in [23], we have proposed
a comprehensive analysis of an ABM approach to model
2
Fig. 1: Each agent can interact with the environment or other
neighbors in its neighborhood. Agents also have a set of
static and dynamic attributes storing the properties of the
agent and its knowledge about the surrounding agents and the
environment. The simple rules that an agent is following are
encoded in the methods.
a traffic intersection system. The main contributions of this
article are summarized as:
• We demonstrate the use of ABM to model the commu-
nication aspects of IoT networks;
• We investigate the impact of different MAC protocols
on the accuracy of information gathered by the sensor
network;
• Using ABM, we evaluate the spectrum utilization of
different MAC protocols (i.e., TDMA, slotted Aloha and
CSMA/CA) in a multi-layered network configuration;
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section
II presents the description of the model, and outlines the
algorithms and MAC protocols that are implemented in the
Mesa framework. In Section III, we present the methodology
used for the analysis and discuss the results gathered from the
simulations. In Section IV, we elaborate on the main findings,
and draw the overall conclusions on the work.
II. DESCRIPTION OF MODEL
A. Agent Based Modeling Framework
We first define the fundamental terms used in ABM.
Definition 1 (Agent). An autonomous computational object
with particular properties and capable of particular actions
is called an agent.
Agents are completely autonomous entities in their decision
making. As shown in Figure 1, every agent has a set of
attributes and methods that define how and with whom it can
interact. This defines the topology of an ABM system. Not
all the agents are connected with each other; instead an agent
is connected with a particular set of agents, called neighbors,
who influence its localized decision making.
Definition 2 (Environment). A set of entities that influence the
behavior of an agent constitute the environment for an agent.
AgentAttributes: §Static:name, initial state, …§Dynamic:memory, resources, neighbors, environment state, …Methods:•Behaviors•Rules to update the behavior•Rules to update dynamic attributes•…Other AgentsEnvironment 3
Algorithm 1 Model
Tc ← Current Tick number
Tmax ← Tick number limit
repeat
Set tick number to 0
for each existing vehicle do
if no car in front and green light then
Move forward
if random number < probability of new vehicle then
Create new vehicle
while Tc < Tmax or Transmission not succ. do
Sensor attempt to transmit
Increment Tc
if Tc == Tmax then
DM make decision
do not focus on the optimization algorithms related to the
vehicle traveling time, we rather focus on the analysis of the
communication aspects of the sensor network that collects the
information about the traffic. In Figure 2, the traffic lights
appear red and green in colour. The red colour symbolises
that traffic should stop when it reaches the traffic light. The
green colour represents that the vehicles are free to move past
the traffic light.
The model description is outlined with the Algorithm 1.
The tick number limit (Tmax) is a user defined parameter,
that allows us to define the upper time limit for the sensor
transmission attempts and at
the same time the decision
making interval of the DM agent. One tick is equivalent to
a transmission time slot on the MAC layer. Since we dedicate
one tick to the movement and generation of the vehicles and
one additional tick for the DM decision making function, the
number of ticks that is dedicated for the transmission of the
measurements (Ttrans) is calculated as:
Ttrans = Tmax − 2
(1)
As shown in Algorithm 1, each car that is currently on the
grid will attempt to move one space forward in each simulation
iteration (one iteration takes Tmax ticks). For simplicity sake,
the vehicles will always travel in a straight line. If there is
already another vehicle in the space a certain car intends to
move to or the space in front of that, it will not be allowed
to move forward. This prevents vehicles from colliding with
each other or travelling too close to each other. Vehicles are
also prohibited from moving if they are close to a traffic light
in their trajectory and the traffic light is red.
Each simulation iteration involves the creation of new
vehicles on the grid. The number of vehicles added to the grid
depends on the user defined parameter (prob. of new vehicle).
Vehicles will only be initialized on the edges of the grid
either traveling north, south, east or west. The initial position
of the newly generated vehicles is chosen randomly (i.e.,
uniformly sampled from a list of all available positions). If
there is already a vehicle currently blocking the placement of
the newly generated vehicle, the newly generated vehicle will
be discarded. Once the vehicles are placed on the grid and
Fig. 2: The sensors are represented by the black dots surround-
ing the perimeter of the road. The green and red dots are traffic
lights. The vehicles are represented by yellow squares, and the
DM is represented by a blue square in the upper right section.
Figure 1 shows that agents interact not only with other
agents but also with the environment.
To model a problem using ABM, we have to define the
agents, the environment as well as associated methods and
interactions in a way that reflects the original problem. It
should be noted that the goal of our ABM approach is not
to optimize the system, but to model the system as accurately
as possible. The goal is to model the distributed optimization
mechanisms that would converge reasonably to optimized
solution by modeling the interactions of a decentralized system
such that the complexity remains manageable.
B. Road Traffic ABM Model
In order to explain the model (i.e.,
the agents and the
environment of the ABM model), we start with the single
intersection of roads. The visualization of this model is shown
in Figure 2. The environment of our model is represented by
the road. The agents in our model are:
• sensors
• traffic lights
• vehicles
• Decision Maker (DM)
This single intersection model contains 20 sensors. The sensors
are represented by the black dots surrounding the perimeter of
the roads. There are four traffic lights. These can be seen as the
red/green dots near the center of the image. The yellow squares
in Figure 2 symbolize vehicles traveling on the road.1 The
blue square in the upper right section of the image represents
a central DM that will be responsible for managing the timing
of the traffic lights in the model.
The interaction between the sensor agents and the envi-
ronment (the road) is modeled by the collection of traffic
measurements. Those measurements represent the number of
vehicles approaching the intersection. Once a sensor observes
a vehicle approaching the intersection it tries to transmit this
information to the DM.
The DM controls the timing of the four traffic lights with
the aim of optimizing the waiting time of the vehicles traveling
through the intersection. It is important to notice that we
1It should be noted that
the vehicles follow UK and Ireland driving
conventions and travel on the left-hand side of the road.
the existing vehicles move according to the above mentioned
rules, the sensors collect the vehicle position information and
attempt to convey those measurements to the DM. The sensors
detect stopped vehicles by remembering the grid space where
vehicles were detected in the previous cycle. If this grid space
is still occupied by the same vehicle in the current cycle, that
means that the vehicle has stopped moving. On the other hand,
if the grid space is no longer occupied, the vehicle has moved
on. We model the MAC layer protocols (i.e., TDMA, slotted
Aloha and CSMA/CA) for the communication between the
sensors and the DMs, and in the case of multiple intersections
we also model the communication between the DMs (TDMA
like scheduling). It is important to keep in mind that the
implemented model is discrete (the time is divided into slots of
equal duration). Each sensor can only transmit at the beginning
of a slot. The chosen MAC protocol defines how to deal
with potential collisions. A collision happens in case a sensor
attempts to transmit in the same slot as one of its neighbors.
A neighboring sensor is the one that is in the selected sensor's
Moore neighborhood. The Moore neighborhood represents the
8 grid spaces surrounding the selected sensor's grid space.
Hence, a sensor transmission is affected by the transmission
of sensors in all directions, including diagonals.
In our analysis we consider three MAC protocols for the
communication between the sensor nodes and the DMs, i.e.,
slotted Aloha, TDMA and CSMA/CA. Slotted Aloha deals
with collisions by introducing back-off time, meaning that
in case two neighboring sensors try to transmit at the same
time, both transmissions will be unsuccessful and the sensors
will choose a random back-off time to retry the transmission.
The Aloha protocol also introduces a timeout time, which in
case it is reached without a successful transmission implies
that the packet should be discarded. As opposed to the Aloha
protocol which does not involve any type of synchronization
between the nodes and therefore, potentially leads to packet
collisions, the TDMA protocol is implemented by allowing
the DM to assign each sensor a specific time slot for packet
transmissions. The centralized coordination, results in a colli-
sion free environment, if only one DM exists (i.e., the single
intersection of roads scenario). In case multiple DMs are
managing the communication of their sensors (i.e., Figure
4), we have to introduce some type of coordination between
the DMs to avoid potential packet collisions. The CSMA/CA
protocol, like Aloha, is an opportunistic approach. If a sensor
has information to send, it first checks if any of its neighbours
is currently using the spectrum resource. If the resource is
currently being used, a back-off time will be computed. If
the resource is not being used, the packet will be transmitted
collision free and the DM will send an acknowledgment packet
back to the sensor node to confirm the reception of the packet.
It should be noted that the model assumes that there are
no hidden nodes. Therefore, all potential collisions will be
successfully sensed before transmission.
As shown in Algorithm 1, the final time slot of each cycle
is reserved for the DM entity to make a decision. The DM
analyzes the information received from the sensors and based
on that controls the timing of the traffic lights. The traffic
lights follow a strict set of rules, that can be summarized with
4
T < 9
State 0
T < T1
State 1
State 2
T < T2
Fig. 3: Traffic Light Finite State Machine describes the tran-
sition of the traffic lights between the three predefined states.
the finite state machine shown in Figure 3. The traffic lights
can be configured to be in one of three different states - State
0, State 1 and State 2. Figure 2 shows the system in State
1, allowing cars traveling eastwards and westwards to pass.
In State 0, all traffic lights are red, and hence no vehicles
are allowed to pass through any traffic lights. State 2 allows
only vehicles traveling northbound or southbound to pass. The
DM determines how long the traffic lights stay in a certain
state, i.e., the DM based on the collected sensor information
calculates the values of T1 and T2 in Figure 3. Figure 3 also
shows that between each transition of State 1 and State 2, a
period of 9 cycles in State 0 takes place. This period allows
all traffic that has recently passed through the traffic lights to
safely clear the intersection, preventing collisions with vehicles
coming from other directions.
As previously mentioned, if we consider a more complex
scenario (i.e.,
the four neighboring intersections scenario),
we have to introduce coordination between the DMs. Again,
our focus is not
the coordination of the decision making
functionalities of the DMs in order to optimize the traffic
flow. Therefore, the states of the traffic lights are completely
independent from each other. We focus on the optimization of
the communication aspects of this scenario, meaning that the
DMs coordinate the transmission time slots for their sensors
in order to minimize the number of collisions. As shown in
Figure 4, each intersection has 20 sensors, 4 traffic lights and
one DM. The vehicles can now be generated in more locations
compared to the basic model (i.e., one intersection model).
We also define a neighbor radius set, that defines the distance
between two sensors within which their transmissions could
result in collisions.
In order to coordinate the transmissions for neighboring
intersections we introduce a higher MAC layer, that schedules
DMs in a TDMA like manner. Each DM gets its own dedicated
time slot for the communication with its own sensors. We also
introduce a relation between the higher and lower MAC layer
time slot lengths. One slot on the higher MAC layer is the
equivalent of 20 slots on the lower MAC layer. The lower
MAC layer protocols are described previously (i.e., slotted
Aloha, TDMA and CSMA/CA), whereas the higher MAC
layer uses one of the following three approaches to coordinate
the communication amongst multiple DMs: (1) Centralized
Decision Maker, (2) Decentralized L-MAC and (3) DESYNC.
equal to 10. However, using equation (2) it results in Tm = 5.
Therefore, if Tp or Tn is greater than the current firing slot
number, the following equation should be used:
(cid:106) Tp + Tn + Tr
(cid:107)
Tm =
2
5
(3)
Fig. 4: A four intersections model, showing all the sensors
(black), traffic lights (red and green), vehicles (yellow) and
decision makers (blue) that are part of our model.
C. Centralized Decision Maker
The approach that involves a Centralised Decision Maker
this centralized node has all
(CDM) entity assumes that
involved DMs. The
the information needed to control all
centralized node needs to know how many time slots should
be assigned to each DM and how to synchronize the activation
of all DMs. As mentioned previously, our approach schedules
20 time slots, using a selected protocol - either TDMA, slotted
Aloha or CSMA/CA, per DM in a round robin fashion.
D. Decentralized L-MAC
This approach allows us to coordinate the transmission
among multiple DMs by implementing a decentralized TDMA
schedule by using the L-MAC protocol outlined in [24]. Each
DM defines a probability vector of length C where C is the
available number of time slots in a round. Initially, each DM
chooses a transmission slot with equal probability. Based on
the success and failure rate of transmission for the chosen
transmission slot, the probability vector for each DM gets
updated to allow a more intelligent choice of slots in the next
round. The result of this is a collision-free schedule, provided
that the number of DMs is less than C.
E. DESYNC
The DESYNC algorithm is described in [25]. Each DM
initializes a slot for the communication with its sensor nodes.
Each DM also listens for messages that are transmitted by
other DMs and stores the timestamps of transmissions that
occurred before and after its own slot. This information is
used by the DMs to adjust their own slot, by computing the
midpoint between the previous and next slot. The method
described in [25] is concerned with a continuous model. We
had to adapt
this in order to fit our discrete model. The
midpoint (Tm) between the previous (Tp) and next (Tn) time
slot is computed as,
(cid:106) Tp + Tn
(cid:107)
2
Tm =
(2)
Equation (2) was further adapted to deal with the periodic
nature of our timestamps (i.e., time cycles). For example, let
us assume that the round time is Tr = 10, Tp = 8, and Tn = 2.
The midpoint slot (Tm) calculated for the next round should be
This ensures that each DM will position itself in the midpoint
slot between the DMs transmitting before and after it, resulting
in a collision free TDMA schedule.
III. SIMULATION STUDY
The model was built using the ABM Python library Mesa
[26]. Mesa is an open source framework that is built with
the functionality of popular ABM simulation software such as
NetLogo, Repast and Mason. Mesa's "DataCollector" module
allows us to easily collect data from the agents in the model
at specified intervals. Mesa enables us to visualize the entire
system at each simulation step, helping with the debugging
and verification of the traffic lights finite state machine.
In this section, we present the simulation results for both
scenarios: (1) uncoordinated and (2) coordinated. The results
are generated for a varying range of input parameters, such
as selection of MAC protocols, number of time slots available
for the DMs on the higher MAC layer and neighbor radius.
The results are evaluated using the accuracy of information
and the spectrum utilization as criteria.
The accuracy of the information received by the DMs is
important to the overall functionality of the system. The actual
number of vehicles waiting at a given moment at the traffic
lights is denoted by NW . The number of vehicles that has
been registered by the sensor nodes is denoted by NS, and
the number of vehicles that has been reported to the DM is
NDM . Since we focus on the communication aspects of the
system, we assume perfect sensing implying NS = NW . We
define accuracy of information as,
A = NDM − NS,
(4)
which implies that the accuracy of information is the difference
between the number of vehicles reported to the DM and
the actual number of vehicles waiting at the traffic lights.
A positive error (A > 0) means that the DM believes that
there are more vehicles waiting than the actual figure. A
negative error (A < 0) means that the DM believes that there
are less vehicles waiting than the actual ones. This data is
collected once every cycle before the DM action step outlined
in Algorithm 1. Since we assume perfect sensing (NS = NW ),
any discrepancies can be attributed to interference within the
system, i.e., collisions of packets transmitted from neighboring
nodes in the same tick.
The spectrum utilization is a metric that allows us to
understand what proportion of the available information in
the system is actually transferred to the DM in order to make
a more informed decision about the traffic light states. For
example, if there are 5 vehicles waiting, the total amount of
information/packets that should be available at the DM is 5.
If 2 sensors successfully utilize the spectrum, the utilization
is 40%. Therefore, if the number of successfully transmitted
6
Fig. 6: Spectrum Utilization - showing how much of the
available information in the system is actually transferred to
the DM in order to make a more informed decision about
traffic light system.
information about a significant number of vehicles waiting on
the lights (NDM << NS).
The model using the CSMA/CA protocol does not suffer
from any negative errors. As expected the number of positive
errors increases with the increasing level of traffic. The reason
for this stems from the increased number of sensors attempting
to transmit packets when there is a higher traffic level. When
the traffic lights change state, there is a sudden reduction in
the amount of packets competing for spectrum access as the
vehicles begin to move. This leads to an increased amount
of packets reaching the DM with inaccurate information
(NDM >> NS).
As previously mentioned, we also calculate the spectrum
utilization as shown in equation (5). The results in Figure 6
are obtained over 104 simulation steps on a two intersection
model. Considering the uncoordinated nature of the scenario
(2 DMs that are not aware of each others scheduling decisions)
40 ticks are assigned for the sensors to transmit the vehicle
detection information per cycle. We up-scaled the model (from
one to two intersections) in order to increase the range of
neighboring radii. We vary the neighbor radius from 5 to 25.
All the scenarios assume an intermediate traffic level, i.e., a
0.5 probability of a car being generated each cycle.
Figure 6, as expected, shows that TDMA exhibits the lowest
spectrum utilization. However, it is not affected as much by
neighbour radius. When the neighbour radius is large, there is
a low probability that two sensors from different intersections
within the same neighbour radius would be scheduled for
the same tick, both having vehicles waiting at them. Hence,
the spectrum utilisation for the TDMA protocol remains
fairly constant regardless of the neighbor radii. CSMA/CA
displays the greatest spectrum utilisation in all variations of
neighbor radii. This is due to the "sensing first - transmitting
if available" policy of the CSMA/CA protocol. This allows
sensors to avoid collisions of packets by sensing the collision
before it occurs and backing off for a random period of time.
In comparison to this, slotted Aloha demonstrates a relatively
high spectrum utilization when the neighbor radius is low. The
increase of the neighbor radius leads to the increasing number
of collisions (due to lack of coordination and sensing), which
Fig. 5: Accuracy of Information for the single intersection of
roads scenario. The neighbor radius is set to 15.
packets in a cycle is denoted with Nsucc and the actual number
of vehicles waiting at the traffic lights is NW , the spectrum
utilization is calculated as:
U =
Nsucc
NW
(5)
A. Uncoordinated Scenario
The uncoordinated scenario assumes that
the DMs are
not aware of each other's scheduling decision, meaning that
increasing the number of neighboring intersections will lead
to an increase in the number of collisions, due to the lack of
coordination between the neighboring DMs.
Figure 5 shows the average value of the accuracy of
information gathered over 104 simulation steps for the single
intersection of roads scenario. The neighbor radius is set to
15, meaning that sensors that are within 15 hops away can
potentially interfere with each other.
Figure 5 highlights that the choice of protocol and level
of traffic affect the accuracy of information received by the
DM. Regardless of traffic level, the model using the TDMA
protocol make transmissions with zero error, resulting in
highly accurate results. In a single intersection model, each
sensor is allocated its own time slot to send. Therefore, there
are no collisions of packets in a slot, resulting in highly
accurate data transmission to the DM. Thus, the DM is always
aware of exactly how many vehicles are currently waiting.
When there is low traffic,
the model using the slotted
Aloha protocol is seen to have a number of positive errors.
The positive errors are due to backed off sensor packets
being transmitted when they no longer reflect the state of
the system (i.e., a collision happens, all
involved sensors
decide to retransmit the packets and in the meantime, the
traffic lights change state and the number of vehicles waiting
changes). The DM is not aware that the received information
is stale and therefore continues to control the timing based
on inaccurate information. The accuracy of information for
the slotted Aloha protocol changes as the number of vehicles
waiting grows. This is due to the fact that with the increasing
number of waiting vehicles the number of sensors trying to
transmit their measurements increases. The increased number
of transmissions results in an increasing number of collisions,
leading to the case in which the DM does not have the
7
Fig. 8: DESYNC T=6
(a)
(b)
Fig. 9: L-MAC (a) C=4 (b) C=6
the DESYNC protocol. Initially, the DMs choose a random slot
in the schedule with equal probability. This is in contrast to the
DESYNC protocol where nodes are assigned a starting point.
If there is a collision in a slot, the DM will choose a slot
again in the next round with updated probabilities. If the DM
is successful in a slot, it will choose the same slot again in
the next round with a higher probability.
Figure 9a shows the convergence of the system to a colli-
sion free configuration. Each node that experiences collisions
continues to rearrange itself, until a collision free schedule is
reached. In Figure 9a, if we take a closer look at DM3, we
see that due to a collision free assignment in a previous slot,
the node decides to stick with the chosen slot even after it
experiences collisions.
As proven in [24], the system can converge with any round
time that is greater than the number of available DMs. For the
sake of comparison with the DESYNC protocol, in Figure 9b,
we show that the L-MAC protocol can converge with a round
time of 6. However, the L-MAC protocol does not consider
the spacing of the nodes around the ring.
Increasing the round time leads to an increasing number of
idle slots, which implies that the probability of a node initially
choosing slots without collisions increases as well. That results
in a shorter convergence time. Though very unlikely, it is
still possible that the DMs randomly choose a collision free
schedule on initial selection with any number of slots in a
round greater or equal to the number of DMs.
Similar to the approach adopted to analyze the uncoordi-
nated scenario, we will focus on the analysis of the accuracy
of information and the spectrum utilization for the coordinated
scenario. The coordinated scenario can be implemented by
using any of the abovementioned high layer MAC protocols.
The number of time slots available on the higher MAC layer
is set to four, meaning that all mentioned higher level MAC
protocols would converge to the same arrangement. We used
(a)
(b)
Fig. 7: DESYNC (a) T=4 (b) T=8
results in lower spectrum utilization.
B. Coordinated Scenario
The coordinated scenario assumes that the DMs are aware
of each other's scheduling. As previously explained, in order
to coordinate the scheduling mechanisms of the DMs, we
introduce a higher MAC layer. The coordination is achieved by
either a Centralised Decision Maker, DESYNC or the L-MAC
protocol. The operation of the Centralised Decision Maker
is obvious - manually configured time slots for each DM.
Therefore, we are going to explain in more detail how the
DESYNC and L-MAC protocols achieve the best time slot
assignment on the higher MAC layer.
1) Desync Algorithm: DESYNC algorithm relies on the fact
that each node in the system performs a task periodically.
Depending on the length of the cycle, the convergence of
the system can display different behavior. Figure 7a depicts a
simple scenario in which four DMs coordinate their commu-
nication periods. The ring represents the value of T , the total
time taken for a full round to be completed. A colored circle
with a number in the middle represents the DM, that assigned
a time slot. An empty circle represents a slot where no DM
is assigned and therefore remains idle. A round time of four
is chosen for this simulation. Each node is given a unique
starting point. The system executes the DESYNC algorithm.
However, since the nodes are already maximally spaced apart,
no further movement takes place.
A round time of 8 is chosen in the next example. Figure
7b shows that all the nodes representing the DMs start close
to each other in a round. The DESYNC algorithm allows the
nodes to rearrange themselves around the ring so that they are
maximally spaced apart, and that is when the system converges
(last image in Figure 7b).
The next example is configured with a round time of 6
(Figure 8). Theoretically, there is no possible configuration to
ensure maximal spacing between the DM time slots. There-
fore, the system never converges. Figure 8 shows that the
nodes continue to rearrange themselves in such a way that a
circular pattern emerges. The nodes rotate counter-clockwise
around the ring. This implies that a round time should be
chosen such that the number of DMs is a factor of the round
time.
2) L-MAC Protocol: The method used by the L-MAC pro-
tocol to implement a TDMA schedule is quite different from
8
Fig. 10: Absolute Error - the data is obtained from simulations
of the four intersection model; traffic level is set to medium;
the neighbor radius is set to 10.
L-MAC in our simulations. The higher-lower MAC level time
slot length has the ratio of 1:20, meaning that for every higher
level MAC time slot allocated to a DM, the equivalent of 20
lower MAC ticks for sensor transmissions is available. Figure
10 shows the absolute error (absolute value of the accuracy
of information). The data used in Figure 10 is obtained from
simulations of the four intersections model. The traffic level
is set to medium, i.e., a vehicle will be generated with the
probability 0.5 in each cycle. The neighbor radius is set to
10. Figure 10 depicts the average spread of the absolute error
observed over 10 simulations with 5000 simulation steps each.
The absolute error is used in this case as it is not our intention
to imply a median error close to zero. The TDMA results
are not shown in Figure 10, because TDMA results in an
average spread of zero for both uncoordinated and coordinated
scenarios. The data in Figure 10 is shown in the form of a box
plot. The upper extreme of the error bars show the average
maximum absolute error, the lower extreme of the error bar
shows the minimum average absolute error. The upper lines of
the boxes in the graph represent the upper quartiles, the lower
lines represents the lower quartiles. The lines in the centers of
each box represents the median values of the absolute error.
Figure 10 shows that the introduction of the higher MAC
layer can greatly reduce the average absolute error for both
CSMA/CA and slotted Aloha. The introduction of coordina-
tion reduced the average maximum absolute error from 3.9 to
1.1 for CSMA/CA and from 4 to 2.6 for slotted Aloha. The
average median absolute error was also reduced from 0.3 to 0
for CSMA/CA and from 0.5 to 0 for slotted Aloha. The reason
for the reduction in the absolute error lies in the influence of
the higher MAC layer scheduling procedures. Sensors can only
transmit data to the target DM when the target DM is selected
by the higher MAC layer. This decreases the problem of stale
data. Since the ABM approach allows us to analyze each time
step of the discrete simulation, the analysis of the log files
shows that the majority of stale data is received immediately
after a car moving step, mostly affecting the earliest ticks in
each cycle. When a higher MAC layer is introduced, stale data
primarily affects the first DM that is selected after a movement
step. Previously, all four DMs would be affected by this stale
information. The stale information will indeed only affect the
sensors' packets that are being sent to the first DM selected
Fig. 11: Spectrum Utilization - comparison between the co-
ordinated and uncoordinated scenario, showing how much of
the available information in the system is actually transferred
to the DM.
after a movement step, as the selected DM will reject all other
sensor packets being transmitted to other DMs. Because each
DM is allocated its own slot, the interference from sensors
transmitting to other DMs is decreased, and thus the accuracy
of information received by the DMs is improved.
Figure 11 shows the comparison between the spectrum
utilization for the coordinated and uncoordinated scenario.
The results are gathered from the simulations of the two
intersection model over 104 simulation steps. The traffic
level is again configured to be medium. This is the same
configuration that was used to obtain the spectrum utilization
of the uncoordinated model shown in Figure 6. The L-MAC
protocol is used with a round time of two, and a higher to
lower ratio of 1:20. Therefore, after convergence these should
be no idle slots in the higher MAC layer. This choice of
parameters ensures fairness between the uncoordinated and
coordinated scenarios. Two higher MAC layer ticks in the
coordinated scenario with the ratio of 1:20 results in a total
of 40 time slots for the communication between the sensors
and the DMs. In the uncoordinated scenario, 40 time slots are
assigned for sensor transmissions in each cycle.
The results obtained from these simulations are overlaid
with the results obtained from the uncoordinated model as
shown in Figure 11. It should be noted that Figure 11 is not a
stacked bar chart, meaning that the ratio between each scenario
and the total spectrum is being analyzed. As shown in Figure
11, the spectrum utilisation is reduced when coordination is
introduced. This is due to the limitation that only sensors
transmitting to the selected DM are able to send in each
slot. The neighbor radius has a similar effect on the slotted
ALOHA and CSMA/CA protocols in the uncoordinated and
coordinated scenarios (i.e., the spectrum utilization decreases
with increasing neighbor radius). Again TDMA is not af-
fected by the neighbor radius. As previously explained, in the
coordinated TDMA scenario, each DM is assigned its own
higher MAC TDMA slot to transmit where each sensor will
then be given its own lower level MAC tick to transmit. The
spectrum utilization of TDMA in the coordinated scenario is
approximately half the spectrum utilization achieved in the
uncoordinated scenario. This is due to the rejection of packets
00.511.522.533.544.5CSMA UncoordinatedCSMA CoordinatedAloha UncoordinatedAloha CoordinatedNumber of Steps with ErrorAbsolute Error over 10 Simulations0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Neighbour RadiusSpectrum Utilisation with Increasing Neighbour Radius5 10 15 2025 attempting to transmit to DMs that are not selected by the
higher MAC layer.
IV. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The increasing complexity of the next generation of com-
munication networks leads to a need to change the tools we
use to model and analyze them. The primary purpose of our
work is to investigate the possibility of using ABM as a
method of modeling an IoT network. We show that ABM is an
effective way to model the complex behavior of heterogeneous
nodes (e.g., simple sensors, traffic lights, and more powerful
decision making nodes). One of the main advantages of ABM
is its flexibility in modeling networks that does not scale
up exponentially with the size (e.g., from the simple one
intersection model, to the more complex two and four inter-
sections model). Besides, it provides opportunity to add new
features for decision coordination (e.g., the higher MAC layer
protocol to ensure coordination between the decision makers).
Human interactions (e.g. vehicles) are as easily configurable
as the network agents in the model (e.g. sensors). This feature
allowed the level of traffic and behavior of the vehicles to
be modeled as well as the operation of the network. Another
appealing quality of the ABM modeling approach is its ability
to model and collect information on a more granular level
(i.e., from all agents within the system in any time step of the
simulation).
In the models where CSMA/CA is used as the selected
MAC protocol, we assume there are no hidden nodes. If
hidden nodes were introduced, the behavior and performance
of the models using the CSMA/CA protocol could change.
Moreover, we assumed that the only interference in the model
is generated from the agents within the IoT network itself.
Although the results in Section III suggest TDMA to be
an extremely effective MAC protocol, the limitations of our
present model do not highlight the areas where TDMA can
fail. For example, if a sensor fails to transmit successfully
due to external source of interference, it has to wait for its
slot in the next cycle to transmit. As explained in Section
II, the DM uses a method of polling for a certain amount
of time before making timing decisions. If this was more
of a continuous decision making process, TDMA could be
found to be slower than the other protocols as each sensor
must wait for its time slot and for the polling phase to be
over, before transmitting. Therefore, more investigations are
necessary before concluding in a definite way that TDMA is
the best MAC protocol for the kind of application considered
in this paper and a subject of future research.
The motivation for this paper is to investigate ABM as a
tool for modeling the complexity of future networks. Building
on this work, we envision the future research to be about
modeling of complex networks where ABM can help to reduce
overhead and complexity of distributed decision making.
REFERENCES
[1] J. Grady, System Synthesis: Product and Process Design. CRC Press,
2010.
9
[2] I. Macaluso, H. Cornean, N. Marchetti, and L. Doyle, "Complex com-
munication systems achieving interference-free frequency allocation," in
Communications (ICC), 2014 IEEE International Conference on, June
2014, pp. 1447 -- 1452.
[3] I. Macaluso, C. Galiotto, N. Marchetti, and L. Doyle, "A Complex
Systems Science Perspective on Wireless Networks," Journal of Systems
Science and Complexity, no. 10, pp. 1 -- 27, 2016.
[4] C. M. Macal and M. J. North, "Tutorial on agent-based modeling and
simulation," in Proceedings of Conference on Winter Simulation, ser.
WSC '05. Winter Simulation Conference, 2005, pp. 2 -- 15.
[5] -- -- , "Tutorial on agent-based modeling and simulation part 2: How
to model with agents," in Proceedings of the 2006 Winter Simulation
Conference, Dec 2006, pp. 73 -- 83.
[6] U. Wilensky and W. Rand, An introduction to agent-based modeling:
modeling natural, social, and engineered complex systems with NetLogo.
MIT Press, 2015.
[7] M. Pogson, R. Smallwood, E. Qwarnstrom, and M. Holcombe, "Formal
agent-based modelling of intracellular chemical interactions," Biosys-
tems, vol. 85, no. 1, pp. 37 -- 45, 2006.
[8] I. Benenson, K. Martens, and S. Birfir, "Parkagent: An agent-based
model of parking in the city," Computers, Environment and Urban
Systems, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 431 -- 439, 2008, geoComputation: Modeling
with spatial agents.
[9] S. Laghari and M. A. Niazi, "Modeling the internet of things, self-
organizing and other complex adaptive communication networks: a
cognitive agent-based computing approach," PloS one, vol. 11, no. 1,
2016.
[10] P. Twomey and R. Cadman, "Agent-based modelling of customer be-
haviour in the telecoms and media markets," Digital Policy, Regulation
and Governance, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 56 -- 63, 2002.
[11] C. Douglas, H. Lee, and W. Lee, "A computational agent-based model-
ing approach for competitive wireless service market," Piscataway, NJ,
USA, 2011, p. 6 pp.
[12] A. Tonmukayakul and M. B. Weiss, "An agent-based model for sec-
ondary use of radio spectrum," New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum
Access Networks (DySPAN), 2005.
[13] D. Horv´ath, V. Gazda, and J. Gazda, "Agent-based modeling of the
cooperative spectrum management with insurance in cognitive radio
networks," EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Net-
working, vol. 2013, no. 1, p. 261, 2013.
[14] M. Niazi and A. Hussain, "Agent-based tools for modeling and simu-
lation of self-organization in peer-to-peer, ad hoc, and other complex
networks," Communications Magazine, IEEE, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 166 --
173, 2009.
[15] M. Liu, Y. Xu, and A.-W. Mohammed, "Decentralized opportunistic
spectrum resources access model and algorithm toward cooperative ad-
hoc networks," PloS one, vol. 11, no. 1, 2016.
[16] M. A. Niazi and A. Hussain, "A novel agent-based simulation framework
for sensing in complex adaptive environments," IEEE Sensors Journal,
vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 404 -- 412, 2011.
[17] S. Coleri, S. Y. Cheung, and P. Varaiya, "Sensor networks for moni-
toring traffic," in Allerton conference on communication, control and
computing, 2004, pp. 32 -- 40.
[18] M. Tubaishat, Y. Shang, and H. Shi, "Adaptive traffic light control
with wireless sensor networks," in Proceedings of IEEE consumer
communications and networking conference, 2007, pp. 187 -- 191.
[19] S. Y. Cheung, S. C. Ergen, and P. Varaiya, "Traffic surveillance with
the 12th ITS world
wireless magnetic sensors," in Proceedings of
congress, vol. 1917, 2005, pp. 173 -- 181.
[20] J. Ma, B. L. Smith, and X. Zhou, "Personalized real-time traffic
information provision: Agent-based optimization model and solution
framework," Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies,
vol. 64, pp. 164 -- 182, 2016.
[21] K. Hager, J. Rauh, and W. Rid, "Agent-based modeling of traffic behav-
ior in growing metropolitan areas," Transportation Research Procedia,
vol. 10, pp. 306 -- 315, 2015.
[22] A. Lansdowne, Traffic simulation using agent-based modelling. Uni-
versity of the West of England, 2006.
[23] N. J. Kaminski, M. Murphy, and N. Marchetti, "Agent-based modeling
of an iot network," in IEEE International Symposium on Systems
Engineering (ISSE), Oct 2016, pp. 1 -- 7.
[24] M. Fang, D. Malone, K. R. Duffy, and D. J. Leith, "Decentralised
learning MACs for collision-free access in WLANs," Wireless networks,
vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 83 -- 98, 2013.
[25] J. Degesys, I. Rose, A. Patel, and R. Nagpal, "DESYNC: self-organizing
desynchronization and tdma on wireless sensor networks," Proceedings
of international conference on Information processing in sensor net-
works, pp. 11 -- 20, 2007.
[26] D. Masad and J. Kazil, "Mesa: An agent-based modeling framework,"
14th PYTHON in Science Conference, 2015.
10
|
1311.3674 | 3 | 1311 | 2019-02-19T02:09:30 | Diversity and Social Network Structure in Collective Decision Making: Evolutionary Perspectives with Agent-Based Simulations | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.NE",
"cs.SI",
"physics.soc-ph"
] | Collective, especially group-based, managerial decision making is crucial in organizations. Using an evolutionary theoretic approach to collective decision making, agent-based simulations were conducted to investigate how human collective decision making would be affected by the agents' diversity in problem understanding and/or behavior in discussion, as well as by their social network structure. Simulation results indicated that groups with consistent problem understanding tended to produce higher utility values of ideas and displayed better decision convergence, but only if there was no group-level bias in collective problem understanding. Simulation results also indicated the importance of balance between selection-oriented (i.e., exploitative) and variation-oriented (i.e., explorative) behaviors in discussion to achieve quality final decisions. Expanding the group size and introducing non-trivial social network structure generally improved the quality of ideas at the cost of decision convergence. Simulations with different social network topologies revealed collective decision making on small-world networks with high local clustering tended to achieve highest decision quality more often than on random or scale-free networks. Implications of this evolutionary theory and simulation approach for future managerial research on collective, group, and multi-level decision making are discussed. | cs.MA | cs | Diversity and Social Network Structure in Collective Decision
Making: Evolutionary Perspectives with Agent-Based
Simulations
Shelley D. Dionne,1,2,3 Hiroki Sayama,1,2,4,5 and Francis J. Yammarino1,2,3
1 Bernard M. & Ruth R. Bass Center for Leadership Studies
2 Center for Collective Dynamics of Complex Systems
3 School of Management
4 Department of Systems Science and Industrial Engineering
Binghamton University, State University of New York, Binghamton, NY 13902-6000, USA.
5 School of Commerce, Waseda University, Shinjuku, Tokyo 169-8050, Japan.
Correspondence should be addressed to Hiroki Sayama; [email protected]
Abstract
Collective, especially group-based, managerial decision making is crucial in organizations.
Using an evolutionary theoretic approach to collective decision making, agent-based
simulations were conducted to investigate how human collective decision making would be
affected by the agents' diversity in problem understanding and/or behavior in discussion, as
well as by their social network structure. Simulation results indicated that groups with
consistent problem understanding tended to produce higher utility values of ideas and
displayed better decision convergence, but only if there was no group-level bias in collective
problem understanding. Simulation results also indicated the importance of balance between
selection-oriented (i.e., exploitative) and variation-oriented (i.e., explorative) behaviors in
discussion to achieve quality final decisions. Expanding the group size and introducing non-
trivial social network structure generally improved the quality of ideas at the cost of decision
convergence. Simulations with different social network topologies revealed collective
decision making on small-world networks with high local clustering tended to achieve
highest decision quality more often than on random or scale-free networks. Implications of
this evolutionary theory and simulation approach for future managerial research on
collective, group, and multi-level decision making are discussed.
Introduction
Collective decision making plays an increasingly important role in society and
organizations today (Mannes 2009, Kerr and Tindale 2004, Dionne et al. 2010, McHugh et al.
2016, Uitdewilligen and Waller 2018, Dionne et al. 2018). In high-tech industries, for
example, the number of engineers participating in the design of a single product can amount
to hundreds or even thousands due to the increase of the product's complexity far beyond
each individual engineer's capacity, which almost inevitably results in suboptimal outcomes
(Klein et al. 2003, Braha et al. 2006, ElMaraghy et al. 2012). Another example is the online
collective decision making among massive anonymous participants via large-scale computer
mediated communication networks, including collective website/product rating and common
knowledge base formation (O'Reilly 2005, Economist 2009). In these and related cases,
1
participants and their societal or organizational structure may influence the final outcome of
decision making processes. The complexity of the process is more pronounced when the
participants are heterogeneous and are embedded in a topologically non-uniform network
with differential distribution of power, as in most organizations and social systems (Dionne et
al. 2010). The dynamics of human collective decision making in such conditions are poorly
understood, and as such pose significant challenges for the social and organizational sciences.
Evidence of these challenges exist within the leadership, psychology and organizational
behavior/management disciplines where collective dynamics, using both experimental and
applied studies, generally emphasize linear statistical relationships between specific,
narrowly defined team- or individual-level variables (Kerr and Tindale 2004, Salas et al.
2004, Dionne et al. 2012, Humphrey and Aime 2014). Traditional studies seldom account for
nonlinear dynamical processes that take place in a high-dimensional problem space and/or
non-trivial social structure where interactions occur within a networked organizational
structure. Abbott (2001) highlights this problem within the social sciences by discussing a
"general linear reality," where mainstream social science theories and methods treat linear
models as actual representations of social systems.
Examples of recent research not necessarily following a "general linear reality" to model
inherent complexity in social systems are found within the complex systems research
community, where social processes are studied using a mathematical/computational modeling
approach (Bar-Yam 1997, 2004, Braha et al. 2006, Epstein 2006, Miller and Page 2007,
Castellano et al. 2009, Dionne et al. 2010, Couzin et al. 2011, Sayama et al. 2011, McHugh et
al. 2016, Giannoccaro et al. 2018, Page 2018). Because emphasis is on emergent dynamical
behavior of systems caused by nonlinear interactions among massive numbers of parts (a
pervasive phenomenon also found in fields such as physics, biology, sociology, psychology,
economics, engineering and computer science), advances in modeling complex systems may
be applied to benefit organizational research (Carroll and Burton 2000, Schneider and Somers
2006). However, many of these complex systems models were developed in non-human
contents such as physics and biology, and thus their model assumptions often would be too
simplistic to capture the complexity of collective human decision making.
The aim of this research is to reveal how we may be able to enhance performance of
groups and other entities involved in collective human decision making by expanding
computational models of social systems to complex problem domains and by applying them
to predict the effects of individual and collective variables upon decision making
performance. Collective decision making implies a larger clustering of individuals with
interdependency based on shared expectations or hierarchy. Collectives can be complicated
structures and include individuals, groups, and even much larger social networks (Dansereau
et al. 1984, Yammarino et al. 2005, McHugh et al. 2016, Yammarino and Dionne 2018). We
seek to improve our understanding of both the dynamic nature of the collective decision
process (Waller et al. 2016), as well as the influence of diversity and social connectivity
issues related to decision making among a number of participating group members. Our
unique contributions include employing evolutionary views in understanding decision
making (Sayama and Dionne 2015), which enables a straightforward, mechanistic
explanation of many empirical findings about the effects of group composition and dynamics
on group performance. Considering specific within-group level issues regarding the
collaborative process of decision making also may offer clarity regarding the influence of
group composition on performance.
2
We first explore how evolutionary theory can address complex changes over time by
providing an explanatory framework for collective decision processes, and then discuss how
specifying a targeted level of analysis can inform appropriate interpretation and limitations of
decision making in dynamic environments. Finally, a computational agent-based model
(Epstein 2006, Miller and Page 2007, Page 2018) with an evolutionary focus on collective
decision making in groups and social networks is developed and tested, with diversity of
problem understanding, behavioral patterns and social network structure manipulated as
experimental variables. This approach is similar to Kozlowski and colleagues' (2013)
recommendations for capturing multilevel dynamics of emergence through development of a
conceptual foundation and integration of agent-based modeling as part of a theory testing
process.
Specifically, this study adapts four recommendations from Meyer et al. (2005) to advance
our theoretical understanding of collective decision making in complex social systems: 1)
consider the impact of time by constructing a dynamical simulation model; 2) study situations
in flux by situating interacting agents in a continuously changing social environment; 3)
incorporate nonlinear concepts by utilizing evolutionary theory that naturally represents
nonlinearity in the exploration of a complex problem space; and 4) design multi-level
research by taking into account within- and between-group differences as well as complex
social network topologies. These guidelines provide a starting point for investigating the
complexity of collective decision making with an evolutionary and multi-level, network-
oriented framework. Prior dynamical modeling in organizational research may have
considered the impact of time and situations in flux; few if any, however, have included
specific evolutionary and multi-level, network-oriented concepts.
Backgrounds
Evolutionary Theory and Collective Decision Making
Evolutionary theory describes adaptive changes of populations primarily by combining
mechanisms of variation and selection (Futuyma 2005, Wilson 2005). The roles of these two
mechanisms are similar to "exploration" and "exploitation" in organizational learning
literature (Cheng and Van de Ven 1996, He and Wong 2004, March 1991). In biological
evolution, variation is caused primarily by internal genetic mechanisms (e.g., mutation and
recombination) and plays an exploratory role that could potentially lead to a novel possibility
of life form, but it usually reduces immediate competitiveness of a population. In contrast,
selection is caused primarily by external environment (e.g., natural and sexual selection) and
plays an exploitative role that enhances the presence of successful entities (genes,
individuals, or groups) and eliminates unsuccessful ones, reducing the number of possibilities
while potentially improving the overall competitiveness of the population. A dynamically
maintained balance of the two mechanisms is the key to a successful evolutionary adaptation
(Mitchell et al. 1991).
We propose human decision making processes within a collective (such as a group or an
organization) also may be viewed through a similar lens, by shifting the viewpoint from
individual members' personal properties (a more traditional psychological and decision
making approach) to dynamical changes of ideas being discussed within the collective, where
populations of potential ideas evolve via repetitive operations such as reproduction,
recombination, mutation, and selection of ideas, conducted by participating human individual
members acting as the environment for the ideas (Sayama and Dionne 2015). Table 1
3
provides a summary of the evolutionary framework we propose by illustrating how some key
evolutionary theoretic concepts can be linked to components of human decision making
processes. We take this approach because evolutionary theory provides a powerful theoretical
framework that can readily address complex changes of systems over time in extremely high-
dimensional problem space, while its explanatory mechanisms (heredity, variation, and
selection) are theoretically clean-cut and easily accessible (Wilson 2005). Moreover, by
shifting the viewpoint from individuals to ideas, a model could be liberated from the
commonly used but somewhat artificial assumption that each individual always has his/her
decision in mind. Rather, various ideas developed within and among participants are
collectively reflected in the idea population, to which diverse within-individual
cognitive/behavioral patterns can be easily applied as a set of multiple evolutionary operators
simultaneously acting on the same, shared idea population. Shifting a viewpoint away from
individuals has precedence in event-level literatures as well (Hoffman and Lord 2013,
Morgeson et al. 2015).
TABLE 1
Evolutionary Concepts Applied to Corresponding Decision Making Process
Components
Evolutionary Concept
Decision Making Component
Problem space (decision space)
Potential idea (a set of choices for all aspects of the problem)
Aspect of the problem
Genetic possibility space
Genome
Locus on a genome
Allele (specific gene) on a locus Specific choice made for an aspect
Population
Fitness
Adaptation
Selection
Replication
A set of potential ideas being discussed
Utility value of a potential idea (either perceived or real)
Increase of utility values achieved by an idea population
Narrowing of diversity of ideas based on their fitness
Increase of relative popularity of a potential idea in the
discussion
Production of a new potential idea by crossing multiple ideas
Point-like change in an idea (possibly coming up with a novel
idea); can be random (unpremeditated change) or intelligent
(premeditated change)
Recombination
Mutation
Note: Adapted from Sayama and Dionne (2015)
Evolutionary Operators and Collective Decision Processes
Various human behaviors in discussion and decision making processes may be mapped to
several evolutionary operators (Mitchell 1996, Sayama and Dionne 2015; also see Table 1).
For example, advocacy of a particular idea under discussion can be considered the replication
of an idea, a form of positive selection, where the popularity of an idea is increased within the
population of ideas. Another example is criticism against an idea. Giving a critical comment
on an idea can be considered a form of negative, subtractive selection, which reduces the
popularity of the criticized idea within the population of ideas. These positive and negative
forms of selection narrow decision possibilities based on utilities ("fitness") of ideas
perceived by participants. Other human behaviors can be understood as more variation-
oriented evolutionary operators. For example, asking "what if"-type random questions
4
corresponds to random point mutation in evolution, which makes random minor changes to
existing ideas. However, such mutations may occur in a non-random, more elaborate manner
in human decision making. Humans can mentally explore several different possibilities,
assessing different "what-if" scenarios, and then share the idea with the highest perceived
utility. This can be considered an intelligent, or hill-climbing, point mutation (Klein et al.
2003) in the evolutionary framework (which is not present in real biological evolution).
Finally, the creation of a new idea by crossing multiple existing ideas can be considered a
recombination of genomes in the evolutionary framework. These variation-oriented
evolutionary operators promote exploration of various possibilities, potentially at the cost of
the utilities (fitness) of ideas.
As summarized in Table 1, we define collective decision making as an evolution of
ecologies of ideas. Participating individuals in the collective decision process have
populations of ideas that evolve via continual applications of evolutionary operators such as
reproduction, recombination, mutation, selection, and migration of ideas. This definition can
naturally be extended to a social network setting (Sayama and Dionne, 2015), in which social
ties between humans are pathways through which ideas migrate. Thus, there appears to be an
intuitive parallel between an evolutionary framework and a collective decision process.
Applying an evolutionary theory to collective decision making seems consistent with the
spirit of the Meyer et al. (2005) suggestions regarding improvement of research techniques to
better reflect situations in flux and nonlinear concepts within an evolutionary framework.
Levels of Analysis and Evolution
Evolutionary biologists Wilson and Wilson (2008) reiterate the link between adaptation
and a specific regard for levels of analysis in reviewing the history of multi-level selection
theory. Their evolutionary perspective on multi-level selection challenges researchers to
evaluate the balance between levels of selection, specifically where within-group selection is
opposed by between-group selection. This deeper view of a multi-level evolutionary process
can be applied to organizational research as well (Yammarino and Dansereau 2011).
Research on both levels of analysis within organizational behavior (Dansereau et al. 1984,
Klein et al. 1994, Dionne et al. 2014) and on group collaborative processes (Chang and
Harrington 2005, 2007, van Ginkel and van Knippenberg 2008, Yammarino et al. 2012)
highlight the importance and value of explicitly viewing the heterogeneity and/or
homogeneity of the group and/or collective. This homogeneity and heterogeneity perspective
can be viewed as a within-level examination, where the entity of interest remains the group,
but there can be at least two valid views at the collective level: homogeneity or whole groups
(what evolutionary theory refers to as a between-group focus) and heterogeneity or group
parts (what evolutionary theory refers to as a within-group focus) (Dansereau et al. 1984,
Klein et al.1994, Yammarino et al. 2005, Yammarino and Dansereau 2011). Note that, in
both views, we consider the groups in a collective decision making context in which
individual participants collaborate toward a shared goal, there is a dependency among them,
and therefore, the heterogeneity or group parts view is quite different from studying a mere
collection of different individuals that do not form a collaborative group.
The concept of differing perspectives on an entity can provide more specific insights
regarding group processes, in that phenomena of interest may be more relevant when groups
are homogeneous regarding their membership, but differ in characteristics from other groups.
In this wholes condition, all members within a group possess the same (or at least very
similar) characteristic, while in the next group all members possess some other characteristics
5
that first group perhaps did not. Another view can be taken concerning amounts of a
characteristic present, where members of a group would possess the same amount of a
characteristic, while members of the next group also would possess the same characteristic,
but all members would have more of that characteristic, or all members would have less of
that characteristic.
From a contrasting perspective, phenomena of interest may be more relevant when groups
are heterogeneous regarding their memberships. In this case, members within a group would
have varying degrees of a characteristic, and the next group also would have members with
varying degrees of a characteristic, and the same applies for all groups.
Decision Research and Levels of Analysis
Precedent for a broadly applicable modeling approach has been established in the evolving
architecture of problem-solving networks (Chang and Harrington 2007). This research
enabled consideration of a generic problem-solving environment and assessment of
emergence regularity of connectors within the problem environment. Moreover, Chang and
Harrington's research related to the modeling of both homogenous agents (2005) and
heterogeneous agents (2007) is of interest to our work. Specifically, we use homogeneity and
heterogeneity of groups as means for examining levels of analysis issues related to collective
and/or group processes.
Although Chang and Harrington's (2005, 2007) modeling examines a more multi-level
relationship between agents (individuals) and the larger environment, we are concerned with
examining a within-group, collective or collaborative decision process, where individuals
would not be considered outside of the group. Our examination of a unique within-level
evolutionary process, employing both within-group and between-group perspectives, is a
novel view of collaborative decision making and advances the understanding of a collective
environment.
A critical distinction of our research is that we are interested in examining a type of
process occurring within the group over time, not necessarily the specific variables within the
process. Dansereau, Yammarino and Kholes (1999) highlighted the nature of such research
on differing perspectives of an entity and entity changes rather than on changes in specific
variables over time. Because we are interested in the type of process occurring within the
group during decision making, we agree with Dansereau and colleagues (1999) that the
variables that characterize the level may change or remain stable, but the level of interest
remains the same (in our case, the level of interest remains the group).
Related, diversity and/or homogeneity and heterogeneity of groups and information
sharing (Gigone and Hastie 1993, Grand et al. 2016, Stasser and Stewart 1992, Uitdewilligen
and Waller, 2018) present an additional layer to the decision process that requires
consideration. Nijstad and Kaps (2007) noted that homogeneity of preferences leads to a lack
of sharing of unique information within a group, whereas preference diversity prevented
premature consensus of the group and facilitated unbiased discussions of preferences.
Lightle, Kagel and Arkes (2009) indicated individual heterogeneity in information recall may
play a role in failure to identify hidden profiles within groups. Similarly, van Ginkel and van
Knippenberg (2008) found that groups in decision tasks performed better when task
representations emphasized information elaboration and the group acknowledged they shared
the view of the task representation. These findings reinforced that groups tend to focus on
6
finding common ground and reaching consensus, but highlighted the importance of
understanding, as a group, the task representation. This shared understanding could be critical
to group success and adaptation, and as such, we include an indicator of how well group
members share a view of what constitutes the problem.
Although advancements in decision research continue, many continue to focus on
individual-level aspects related to a decision maker, such as how they adopt practical
behavior rules (Maldonato 2007) or identification of performance moderator functions that
may affect individual behaviors in simulated environments (Silverman et al. 2006). While
multi-level implications exist in recent decision research (Kennedy and McComb 2014,
Nijstad and Kaps 2007, van Ginkel and van Knippenberg 2008), there is limited focus on
within-group level aspects of a decision process. Moreover, Maldonato (2007) notes there is
likely no best way to view the decision process. As such, there may be some benefit to
development of a preliminary model exploring the effect of membership similarity and
differences on group-based decision processes from evolutionary and levels of analysis-based
perspectives. Development of such a model advances understanding of collective decision
making in that it builds on prior key decision research (Chang and Harrington 2007, Kock
2004, Knudsen and Levinthal 2007, Nijstad and Kaps 2007), incorporates the suggestions of
improving organizational research offered by Meyer et al. (2005), and incrementally
increases the complexity yet fuller understanding of the phenomena represented in prior
collective decision models.
Modeling Dynamic Collective Decision Making
Building from the above notions, the application of computational modeling to dynamical
processes such as collective decision making may enable organizational researchers to more
appropriately represent the potential nonlinearity of a collective process. For example,
interdisciplinary exchange may have informed recent organizational research which includes
several dynamical models proposed for collective decision making over social networks that
consist of many interacting individuals (Battiston et al. 2003, Klein et al. 2003). These
models, primarily an extension of models developed in theoretical physics, provide a novel,
promising direction for research on group dynamics and collective decision making. A
limitation of this research and more specifically its ability to model complex social systems,
however, is the consideration of only simple problem spaces, typically made of binary or
continuous numerical choices between 0 and 1.
Increasingly complex nonlinear problem space has been modeled (Klein et al. 2003, Klein
et al. 2006, Rusmevichientong and Van Roy 2003) to consider interdependent networks of
multiple aspects of a complex problem. This research, however, was not modeled in a
collective, non-trivial societal context. This is not surprising because problems arise with
collective decision models in that they commonly assume every individual agent has or
makes his/her own decision. Following these assumptions, the collective decision making
dynamic is represented as a process of propagation, interaction and modification of individual
decisions. This is an over-simplified assumption compared to actual cognition processes and
behavior of individuals and collectives (Lipshitz et al. 2001, Salas and Klein 2001).
Individuals often keep multiple ideas in mind and may remain undecided during or even after
a collective-level decision emerges. The collective decision forms not just through the
interactions of individual decisions but also through the more active, dynamic exchanges of
incomplete ideas and mental models being developed by every individual (Dionne et al.
2010). Such within-individual mental and behavioral complexity has begun to be included in
7
computational models (c.f., Dionne and Dionne 2008, Knudsen and Levinthal 2007), and
should be taken into account to a greater extent in order to investigate the complexity of
collective human decision making.
Methods
In view of the contexts for computational models of social and organizational sciences
reviewed in the prior section, we had previously proposed a prototype agent-based model that
applied the evolutionary framework introduced above to model collective decision making
processes within a small-sized, well-connected social network structure (Sayama and Dionne
2015). This model was used to conduct a specific within-level analysis on how homogeneity
or heterogeneity of goals and decision utility functions among participants affect dynamics
and the final outcomes of their collective decision making, and the predictions made by this
model were also confirmed by human-subject experiments (Sayama and Dionne, 2015). This
model was still quite limited, however, since the size of the collective remained small, the
agents' evolutionary behaviors were designed in a rather unsystematic, ad hoc manner, and
the effect of social network structure was not taken into account. In this sense, it was not
developed enough to provide sufficient answers to key research questions on diversity and
network structure of the collective as discussed in the previous section.
In this paper, we present a new agent-based model that can directly address those key
research questions by implementing a systematic control of agents' behavioral balance
between selection-oriented and variation-oriented operators, together with much larger, non-
trivial social network structure on which agents exchange ideas locally. In our model, agents
collaboratively work on an abstract utility maximization task, without explicit knowledge of
the entire structure of their utility functions. Agents may have similar utility functions within
the group, but across groups there may exist different utility functions. Such a homogeneous
condition can represent a "group wholes" view, in which all members of each particular
group share a strong degree of similarity with their groups' unique utility function.
Conversely, agents may have different utility functions within the group. Such a
heterogeneous condition can represent a "group parts" view, in which unique and/or diverse
utility functions prevail within each group, but across groups, this pattern is not unique, as
group after group exhibits this same type of uniqueness among its members.
We believe that our approach to social dynamics research can move the social sciences
away from an oversimplified view in that it investigates nonlinear change in organizational
research (Meyer et al. 2005). Moreover, examining a new theoretical framework is consistent
with development of computational models, as Adner et al. (2009) recognize that simulation
is generally an exercise in theory building.
Model Assumptions
Groups or social networks. Our model assumes that N agents are connected to a finite
number of other agents via links through which ideas are exchanged. Each agent can
memorize or hold multiple ideas in its mind. Multiple copies of a single idea may be present,
which represents a form of relative popularity for that idea to the agent. Each agent is
initialized with a small number of randomly generated ideas in its mind at the beginning of a
simulation. The agents begin to perform a set of actions on the population of ideas in their
minds repeatedly for a fixed number of iterations. The order by which the agents take actions
is randomized every time, but it is guaranteed that every agent does take exactly one action
8
per iteration. This round-robin format is commonly used in idea sharing phases with decision
making techniques such as a nominal group technique and various brainstorm initiatives
(Paulus and Yang 2000, Van de Ven and Delbecq 1974). As such, the number of actions
performed in a simulation is a product of the number of agents N and the number of iterations
T.
While other group decision research has modeled hierarchical teams in decision models
(c.f., Dionne and Dionne 2008), we make no assumptions regarding predetermined leadership
and/or abilities within the team as several teams in organizations are self-led and share
leadership responsibilities (Salas and Klein 2001). We investigate the potential impact of
varying membership within the group (i.e., no assumption of identical abilities or uniform
connectivities in general) on the potential pool of ideas. Since no single person is powerful
enough to eliminate an idea from the group (i.e., shared leadership), we assumed that actions
were performed on single copies of an idea, not the equivalence set of all idea replicates
(described in detail below).
Utility functions. The use of utility functions in collective decision research is a natural
outgrowth of earlier research by Hollenbeck et al. (1995) noting team decision making theory
can be considered an adaptation of individual decision models and decision alternatives can
vary along a univariate continuum. This view supplies a multi-level (e.g., group parts and
group wholes) perspective and allows for adaptation of individual utility functions throughout
a collective decision process. Both factors can be represented and/or captured by collective
decision computer models (c.f., Dionne and Dionne 2008). As such, the use of utility
functions contributes to the development of this model as well.
We use a similar model setting for the problem space and the utility functions as proposed
by Sayama and Dionne (2015). The problem space is defined as an M-dimensional binary
space, within which there are a total of 2M possible ideas. For a simulation, each possible idea
has an inherent utility value given by a true utility function UT. None of the agents has direct
access to the true utility function. Instead, individual agents perceive idea utility values based
on their own individual utility functions Uj constructed by adding noise to the master utility
function UM. The master utility function UM may or may not be the same as UT, depending on
the possibility of group-level bias (explained below). This initialization reflects the notion
that today's organizational problems are too complex for a single individual to solve (i.e.,
true utility value not available to any of group members), and therefore groups or collectives
are assembled to solve problems and make decisions (Klein et al. 2003, Salas and Klein
2001). Ideally, collectives function by bringing unique information from members (i.e.,
individual utility functions) together in such a way as to produce ideas that exceed an
individual's idea development capability (Kerr and Tindale 2004).
Utility values are assigned to every point (idea) in the problem space as follows: First, n
random bit strings (zeros and ones) S = {vi} ( i = 1…n ) are generated as representative ideas,
where each vi represents one idea that consists of M bits. One of those generated ideas is
assigned the maximum utility value, 1, and another is assigned the minimum utility value, 0.
Each of the remaining n -- 2 ideas is assigned a random number sampled from a uniform
probability distribution between 0 and 1. This method guarantees that the entire range of
utility values is always from 0 to 1, which makes it easier to compare different simulation
results. The detailed shape of the distribution varies within this range for different simulation
runs.
9
The utility values of other possible ideas not included in the representative idea set S are
defined by interpolation. Specifically, the utility value of an idea v not present in S is
calculated as a weighted average of the utility values of the representative ideas as follows:
(1)
is the idea in question, UT(vi) is the utility of a representative idea vi in S, and
where
D(vi, v) is the Hamming distance between vi and v. The Hamming distance is a measure of
dissimilarity between two bit strings, which reflects the number of bits for which two strings
vary (Hamming 1950). The true utility function UT(v) obtained from Equation 1 has a
reasonably "smooth" structure in a high-dimensional problem space (i.e., similar ideas tend to
have similar utility values, in general). Such a smooth structure of the problem space is
necessary for intelligent decision making to outperform unintelligent random trial and error.
Note that the utility landscape construction method described above is different from that
of Kauffman's N-K fitness landscapes often used in management science (Kauffman 1993,
Levinthal 1997, Rivkin 2000). We chose this approach because our method makes it easier
and more straightforward to introduce group-level bias, i.e., discrepancy between the true and
master utility functions.
Group-level bias is simulated by adding random perturbation when the master utility
function UM is constructed from the true utility function UT, using a similar algorithm as
employed by Sayama and Dionne (2015). Specifically, with a bias parameter , each bit on
representative ideas in S is flipped with probability 0.25 per bit, and a random number
within the range [ -- , is added to the utility value of each representative idea. Their utility
values are then renormalized to the range [0, 1]. The master utility function UM is generated
from these perturbed representative ideas using Equation 1. In this setting, = 0 creates a
condition with perfect understanding of the problem (UM = UT) as a collective, while larger
values of represents the lack of understanding of the problem.
Moreover, each agent will unconsciously have a different individual utility function, Uj(v)
( j = 1…N ), which is generated by adding random noise to the master utility function UM so
that:
(2)
for all v, where is the parameter that determines the variations of utility functions among
agents. = 0 represents a perfectly homogeneous collective where every agent has exactly
the same utility function (Ui(v) = Uj(v) for all i and j), while larger values of represents a
heterogeneous collective made of diverse agents with very different individual utility
functions. Figure 1 shows an example of such individual utility functions in contrast to the
master utility function. Misunderstanding of the problem by the individual is evident in that
the perturbed individual utility function (gray dots) maintains some structures of the master
utility function (black dots), but they are not exactly the same. As bounded rational actors,
agents are not aware of the full set of alternatives available to them, nor can agents fully
specify potential action-potential outcome causal linkages (Gavetti and Levinthal 2000).
Therefore agents in our model are not aware of the entire structure of their own individual
10
=−=−=niiniiiTTvvDvvDvUvU1212),(),()()(Sv)]1,)(min(),0,)([max()(+−vUvUvUMMj
utility functions. They cannot tell what ideas would produce global maximum/minimum
utility values, though they can retrieve a utility value from the function when a specific idea
is given, which is a common assumption made in complex global optimization problems
(Horst et al. 2000).
FIGURE 1
Master and Individual Utility Functions
Note: The master utility function with M = 10, generated from a representative set of idea
utilities of size n = 10, is shown by black dots. An individual utility function by adding noise
with = 0.2 is shown by gray dots. The x-axis shows idea indices generated by interpreting
bit strings as binary notations of an integer, i.e., all of different ideas are lined up along the
horizontal axis and their utility values are plotted.
We recognize that a homogeneous group with no group-level bias would be unlikely in
actual groups and collectives. In reality, reduction of a group-level bias would be facilitated
by different perspectives, expertise and experiences (i.e., diversity). While varying diversity
on any number of dimensions (e.g., ethnic, gender, functional background, education, age)
within teams has been studied in the literature (c.f., Kooij-de Bode et al. 2008, O'Reilly et al.
1998, Pelled et al. 1999), research related to group performance has mixed reviews regarding
the benefit of diversity within teams. While some diversity is thought to produce a more
productive, functional conflict as opposed to an unproductive, relationship conflict (Jehn et
al. 1999), a meta-analysis on conflict (De Dreu and Weingart 2003) underscores that these
various forms of conflict are all negatively related to group performance. Thus, group-level
bias is included in our model to assess potential issues associated with homogeneity within
groups.
Evolutionary operators. Our model uses agent behaviors reflecting either selection or
variation as analogues for decision making behavior: replication, random point mutation,
intelligent point mutation, recombination, and subtractive selection. While these five
operators reflect common forms of action in evolution (except the intelligent point mutation
11
that does not exist in real biological evolution), they also align with actions commonly found
in brainstorming and normative decision making idea generation phases where the goal is to
build new ideas from individually generated suggestions (Paulus and Yang 2000) (i.e.
mutations and recombination) and idea evaluation phases where culling or supporting ideas
(i.e., replication and/or subtraction) leads to final group idea selection and decision. Among
those evolutionary operators, replication and subtractive selection use a preferential random
search algorithm (Solis and Wets 1981), by which an agent randomly samples rp ideas from
the idea population in its mind, and then the agent selects the best (or worst) idea among the
sampled ones for replication (or subtractive selection). Note that the designs of the
evolutionary operators used in this model are different from those used in earlier models
(Sayama and Dionne 2015), in order to make the variation and selection mechanisms more
clearly separable. They are also extended so that their outcomes affect not only the agent's
own idea population but also those of its local neighbors on a social network, which
represents the exchange of ideas through social ties. In other words, other agents can "hear"
the focal agent's opinion and update their own idea population according to it.
Of the five evolutionary operators, replication and subtractive selection are selection-
oriented operators, driving the exploitation in the discussion and decision making process.
The other three processes (random/intelligent point mutations and recombination) are
variation-oriented operators that increase the idea diversity and explore the problem space
further. To systematically control and sweep the balance between the two evolutionary
"forces" (selection/exploitation and variation/exploration), we introduced a global parameter
p, which determines the behavioral tendency of agents. Specifically, each agent chooses an
exploitative operator with probability p (or, an explorative operator with probability 1 - p; see
Table 2). Setting p = 1 makes the agents completely selection-oriented, while p = 0 makes
them fully exploratory.
Simulation settings. Table 2 summarizes the parameter values used in our computer
simulations. Most of those values were taken from earlier work (Sayama and Dionne 2015),
and were chosen so as to be reasonable in view of typical real collective decision making
settings. We tested several variations of parameter settings and confirmed that the results
were not substantially different from the ones reported below in this paper.
There are several experimental parameters that we varied in the three sets of
computational experiments presented below. The first set of computational experiments
manipulated group-level bias, and within-group noise. These two parameters were
varied to represent different levels of accuracy and consistency of individual utility functions
within a group. The second set of computational experiments varied p, the parameter that
determines the balance between selection-oriented and variation-oriented operators in agents'
behaviors. The third set of computational experiments varied the size and topology of the
group, by exponentially increasing the number of agents from N = 5, a small group whose
size is within the optimal range for decision making teams (Kerr and Tindale 2004, Salas et
al. 2004), to N = 640, which forms a non-trivial social network. In all cases, the average node
degree (i.e., average number of connections attached to a node) was always kept to four,
which is a typical number of people one could have meaningful conversations with
simultaneously. This assumption made the N = 5 case a fully connected network, while the
network became increasingly sparse as N increased. For each specific value of N, three
different network topologies were tested: random (RD), small-world (SW) (Watts and
Strogatz 1998) and scale-free (SF) (Barabási and Albert 1999). For small-world networks, the
link rewiring probability was set to 10%, which realizes the small-world property (Watts and
12
Strogatz 1998) for relatively small-sized networks like those used in this study. These
topological variations do not cause any effective differences for smaller N, but as N increases,
their influences on network topology and dynamics of idea evolution begin to differentiate.
TABLE 2
Parameters and Symbols
Parameter Value
Parameters Related to Evolutionary Decision Process
M
n
Meaning
10
10
rp
rm
pm
ps
p
5
5
0.2
0.4
0~1
p/2
p/2
(1-p)/3
(1-p)/3
(1-p)/3
Problem space dimensionality
Number of representative ideas to generate true/master utility
functions
Number of sample ideas in preferential search algorithm
Number of offspring generated in intelligent point mutation
Random mutation rate per bit
Probability of random switching in recombination
Probability for an agent to take selection-oriented actions
Probability of replication - advocacy
Probability of subtractive selection - criticism
Probability of random point mutation - minor modification of idea
Probability of intelligent point mutation - improvement of existing
idea
Probability of recombination - generating new ideas from crossing
multiple existing ideas
Parameters Related to Team Characteristics
N
Network
topology
d
k
T
Size of group/social network
RD: random network, SW: small-world network, SF: scale-free
network
Average degree (average number of links connected to each agent)
Number of initial randomly generated ideas in each agent's mind
Group-level bias
Within-group noise
Number of iterations
5~640
RD, SW,
SF
4
5
0~1
0~1
60
Note: Bold indicates experimental parameters varied
Metrics of group performance. Performance of a group is likely a multidimensional
construct, as different authors have tested differing dimensions of group-based adaptation
(c.f., LePine 2005, Kozlowski et al. 1999). For the purposes of collective decision making in
organizational settings, the ability to converge on a decision is critical, as a group that cannot
produce a decision likely fails in their task. In the meantime, convergence on a poor decision
may be equally detrimental to a group as well, as mistakes could be costly. As such, it would
seem that minimally the consideration of both convergence and decision quality would be
needed to assess group performance. As required by increasingly complex organizational
environments, groups and organizations need to converge quickly on decisions, and yet
ensure these decisions have high efficacy related to solving perceived problems.
13
We therefore used the two separate performance metrics originally proposed by Sayama
and Dionne (2015): one was the true utility value of the mode idea (the most supported idea)
in the final population of ideas collected from all the agents' minds, to measure the overall
quality of collective decisions. This was selected as it is most likely that the most supported
idea represents the group's preferred idea, and once selected, this supported idea will be
tested in the context of real-world problem solving.
The other performance metric was the diversity of ideas remaining in the final population
of ideas collected from all the agents' minds, to measure the failure of the group to converge.
This measurement is based on the classical definition of Shannon's information entropy
(Shannon 1948),
, (3)
where m represents the number of different types of ideas in the final idea population, and
p(xi) is the ratio of the number of the i-th type of idea to the total size of the final idea
population. The theoretical maximum of H would be M, which occurs when all of 2M possible
distinct ideas are equally represented. H decreases as the idea population becomes more
homogeneous, and it reaches the theoretical minimum 0 when the idea population is made of
only instances of the same idea (which would never occur in simulations). To rescale this
quantity to the range between 0 and 1, we used (M -- H) / M as a measurement of the
convergence of final collective decision.
Results
In this section, we describe our simulation results in three parts: (1) effects of within-group
noise and group-level bias (diversity of problem understanding), (2) effects of balance
between selection-oriented and variation-oriented behaviors (diversity of behaviors), and (3)
effects of group size and social network topology. The first part directly addresses the
knowledge/opinion diversity and multi-level issues of collective decision making. The second
part illustrates the implications of behavioral diversity of groups for their collective decision
performance. Finally, the third part extends our understanding to large-scale, networked
organizational settings.
Part 1: Effects of Within-group Noise and Group-level Bias
We first conducted a computational experiment to examine the effects of increasing (a)
within-group noise, i.e., heterogeneity of individual utility functions within a group, and
(b) group-level bias, i.e., discrepancy of the master utility function from the true utility
function at a group level, on the overall group performance. For this initial computational
experiment, the group was made of five agents with fully connected social network structure
(i.e., everyone could talk to everyone else; a small group setting). We assumed that the agents
were balanced in terms of their tendency between selection-oriented and variation-oriented
behaviors in the discussion (i.e., p = 1/2).
Figure 2 presents a summary of the results of simulations with within-group noise and
group-level bias systematically varied. Each of the two performance metrics (i.e., level of
convergence and utility of most supported idea, as described above) are visualized in a
14
=−=miiixpxpH12)(log)(
separate 3-D surface plot. We found that the level of convergence was affected significantly
by the within-group noise, while it was not affected at all by the group-level bias. On the
other hand, the true utility of collective decisions degraded significantly when either the
within-group noise or the group-level bias (or both) was increased. The true utility achieved
by the most heterogeneous groups ( ~ 1.0) or the most biased groups ( ~ 1.0) dropped to
about 0.5, which could be achieved just by random idea generation. This means that no net
improvement was achieved during the discussion by those groups.
FIGURE 2
Effects of Within-Group Noise and Group-Level Bias on Decision Convergence and
Quality
Note: Effects of within-group noise () and group-level bias () on the level of convergence
(left) and the true utility value of the most supported idea (right). Each dot represents an
average result of 500 independent simulation runs.
Part 2: Effects of Balance Between Selection-oriented and Variation-oriented Behaviors
The above computational experiment assumed that the agents' behaviors were well
balanced between selection-oriented and variation-oriented operators. We therefore ran
another computational experiment to investigate the effects of balance between selection-
oriented and variation-oriented behaviors patterns by systematically varying the parameter p.
Greater values of p represent groups with more selection-oriented behaviors (i.e., advocacy
and criticism), while smaller values of p represent groups with more variation-oriented
behaviors (i.e., mutations and recombination). The group-level bias, was also varied as
another experimental parameter, while the within-group noise, was fixed to 0.2 for this
experiment. The group size and their network topology were the same as those in the first
computational experiment.
Figure 3 shows a summary of the results of the second computational experiment
comparing group performances with different group behaviors, plotting two performance
metrics in separate 3-D plots as used for Figure 2 (note that one of the axes is now for p, not
for ) The effect of behavioral balance on the level of convergence is straightforward in that
greater p (more selection-oriented behaviors) tended to promote convergence more. The
15
effect of p on the utility of collective decisions, however, turned out not so trivial. While
purely variation-oriented behaviors (p ~ 0.0) did not help increase the decision quality,
neither did purely selection-oriented behaviors (p ~ 1.0). There was a range of optimal
balance (p = 0.7~0.9) where the groups achieved the highest decision quality. In the
meantime, the effect of group-level bias is similar to that seen in Figure 2, so that the utility
of collective decisions would be significantly lower if there was group-level bias.
FIGURE 3
Effects of Balance between Selection-Oriented and Variation-Oriented Behaviors and
Group-Level Bias on Decision Convergence and Decision Quality
Note: Effects of group-level balance between selection-oriented and variation-oriented
behaviors (p) and group-level bias () on the level of convergence (left) and the true utility
value of the most supported idea (right). Each dot represents an average result of 500
independent simulation runs.
Part 3: Effects of Group Size and Social Network Topology
The first computational experiment above assumed small, fully connected networks of
agents. While the results produced useful implications for collective decision making in small
group settings, they were not sufficient to generate insight into more general collective
decision making dynamics on a larger non-trivial social environment, such as in a complex
organization or on social media. We therefore conducted the third computational experiment
in which the size of groups was increased from 5 to 640 in an exponential manner. For each
size of the groups/networks, the average number of connections per agent (i.e., "degree" in
network science terminology) were always kept to four, which was the same value as in the
first two experiments above. The following values were used for other parameters: = 0.0,
= 0.2, p = 0.5.
In this computational experiment, larger groups were no longer considered a typical
"group", but rather they formed a more complex social/organizational network, perhaps more
indicative of a "collective" in the organizational sciences. For each network size, we used the
following three social network topologies. A new network topology was generated for each
independent simulation run:
16
• Random network (RD): A random network is a network in which connections are
randomly assigned, which can be used as a random control condition. For our
computational experiment, a total of 2N links were established between randomly
selected pairs of agents.
• Small-world network (SW) (Watts and Strogatz 1998): A small-world network is a
locally clustered (pseudo-)regular network, with a small number of global links
introduced to reduce the effective diameter of the network significantly (i.e., a "small-
world" effect). The small-world network may be considered a spatially extended
network made of mostly local connections but with a few global connections. For our
computational experiment, N agents were first arranged in a circle and each agent was
connected to its nearest and second nearest neighbors so that the degree would be four
for all. Then 10% of the links were randomly selected and either the origin or
destination of each of those links was rewired to a randomly selected agent.
• Scale-free network (SF) (Barabási and Albert 1999): A scale-free network is a
network in which the distribution of node degrees shows a power-law distribution. It
represents a heterogeneous network made of a large number of poorly connected
nodes and a few heavily connected "hubs". Many real-world networks, including
biological, engineered and social networks, were shown to be scale-free (Barabási
2009). While such networks show a small effective diameter like small-world
networks, they may not have high local clustering. For our experiment, a well-known
preferential attachment algorithm (Barabási and Albert 1999) was used, starting with
a fully connected network of five agents and then incrementally adding an agent by
connecting it with two links to two existing agents selected preferentially based on
their degrees, until the network size reached N.
Figure 4 shows the effects of size and topology of networks on the decision outcomes. The
larger the group (or network) becomes, the harder it achieves convergence. Apparently there
was no substantial difference between the three topological structures regarding their effects
on the level of convergence. On the other hand, increasing group size had positive effects on
the utility of the most supported idea within the group or on the social network.
FIGURE 4
Effects of Group Size and Social Network Topology on Decision Convergence and
Decision Quality
17
Note: Effects of group size (N) and social network topology (random, small-world or scale-
free) on the level of convergence (left) and the true utility value of the most supported idea
(right). Note the log scale for group size. Each dot represents an average result of 500
independent simulation runs.
One particularly interesting phenomenon seen in Figure 4 is the difference in the utility of
collective decisions between small-world networks and other two networks for larger N (N >
100). Figure 5 provides a more detailed view into this finding, showing the distributions of
utilities of most supported ideas for 500 independent simulation runs for N = 640 under each
of the three conditions. In each condition, the agents were able to find the best idea with
utility 1.0 most of the time, but small-world networks facilitated such optimal decision
making most frequently. The Mann-Whitney U test detected statistically significant
differences between small-world and random (p < 0.003) as well as small-world and scale-
free (p < 10-6) networks, while there was no significant difference between random and scale-
free (p = 0.107) networks. The key distinctive feature of small-world networks that are not
present in either random or scale-free networks is the local clustering.
FIGURE 5
Distributions of Utilities of Most Supported Ideas Between Different Social Network
Topologies
Note: Simulation results comparing the distributions of utilities of most supported ideas at the
end of simulation between the three social network topologies (random, small-world or scale-
free) for N = 640. The small-world network topology (middle) achieved the highest number
of the maximal utility value (1.0) compared to the other two topologies, random (left) and
scale-free (right).
Discussion
In this study, we developed an agent-based model and applied evolutionary operators as a
means of illustrating how individuals, groups and collectives may move through a decision
process based on ecologies of ideas over a social network habitat. We also considered various
compositions of group members ranging from homogeneity to heterogeneity and examined
the impact of group behaviors on the dynamic decision process as well. These explorations
move toward a more realistic view of collective decision making within complex social
systems, and answer calls (e.g., Meyer et al. 2005) for research that considers the impact of
time and situations in flux, along with nonlinear, multi-level concepts incorporating
evolutionary conceptual development. In what follows, we discuss our findings and their
implications for human collective decision making.
18
On Diversity of Problem Understanding and Multilevel Issues
Our exploration revealed that the composition of the team or group has implications for
decision making and likely considers the complex nature of asking several individuals to
come together and agree on a direction that is best suited for the group/collective, rather than
for each individual. Research on group diversity has found mixed results related to diversity
and group performance issues such as creativity and decision effectiveness (De Dreu and
West 2001, Harrison et al. 2002, Hoffman 1979, Jehn and Mannix 2001, Nemeth 1986, 1992,
O'Reilly et al. 1989, Wei et al. 2015). Our research, however, indicates an important trade-
off between reduction of within-group conflicts and mitigation of group-level bias, as they
are not independent from each other. Specifically, if a group is assembled by gathering
similar individuals with similar backgrounds, expertise and opinions, then the group tends to
have less within-group conflicts but may risk of having a greater group-level bias. On the
other hand, if a group is made of diverse individuals with different backgrounds, expertise
and opinions, the group may have greater within-group conflicts but it may successfully
reduce potential group-level bias and accomplish deeper discussion and better integration of
ideas, as the diverse perspectives may represent the actual nature of the problem more
correctly.
This means that what kind of strategies of group formation will be optimal to maximize
the true utility of collective decisions remains a non-trivial and problem-dependent question,
and the best team or group composition may depend greatly on specific problem settings. For
example, if a team is tasked to work on a time-critical mission, then the convergence speed is
key to their success and thus the emphasis should be placed more on the group homogeneity
to avoid within-group conflicts. Or, if a team is formed to seek a truly high-quality solution to
a problem, then minimizing the possibility of group-level bias is critical for the team's
success, which may require increasing within-group diversity.
On Diversity of Behaviors and Evolutionary Tendencies
Our results also imply that the balance between selection-oriented and variation-oriented
behaviors may play an important role in collective decision making. Exploration of such
behavioral balances was a meaningful step of research because, in realistic organizational
settings, some groups may be more prone to be critical, trying to purge bad ideas, while other
groups may tend to promote combinations of multiple ideas in discussion. Examples of such
behavioral patterns include organizational "cultures" shared by all group members, which is a
plausible view of a factor that may influence group dynamics (Salas et al. 2004).
Our results showed that selection-oriented behaviors greatly promoted convergence, yet
they were not sufficient to achieve the highest possible utility. To improve the decision
quality, the group needs a good mixture of exploratory (variation-oriented) and exploitative
(selection-oriented) behaviors. This also ties back to the diversity issue discussed above; a
group may not necessarily benefit from diversity of individual problem understanding, but it
can benefit from behavioral diversity of group members. In our simulations, the optimal
balance between selection and variation was attained at p ~ 0.8 (i.e., 80% selection, 20%
variation) but this particular balancing point may be problem dependent.
On Group Size and Social Network Structure
19
Finally, our results with social network structure illustrated intriguing effects of group size
and network topologies on decision quality, which were manifested particularly for larger
networks. Without surprise, the larger the group (or network) becomes, the more elusive
convergence on a decision becomes as well. However, group size did positively affect the
utility of the most supported idea because, in a large network, agents can conduct different
threads of discussions in parallel, which increases the chance for them to collectively find a
better idea in the complex problem space. It is important for the agents to remain connected
to each other so that the better ideas gradually spread over the network and are widely
accepted to become the more supported ideas. The same number of disconnected (non-
collaborative, non-interdependent) agents would not be able to achieve this kind of
information aggregation and selection task.
A more intriguing finding was obtained regarding the effects of non-trivial network
topology. While network topology did not seem to affect level of convergence, small-world
networks with spatially localized clusters tended to promote collective search of optimal
ideas more often than random or scale-free networks, despite that the network size and the
average degree were all identical. Such locally clustered social network structure helps agents
in different regions in a network maintain their respective focus areas and engage in different
local search, possibly enhancing the effective parallelism of collective decision making and
therefore resulting in a greater number of successful decisions. In contrast, random and scale-
free networks lack such local clustering, and the links in those networks are all "global",
mixing discussions prematurely and therefore reducing the effective parallelism of collective
decision making. These observations have an interesting contrast with the fact that random
and scale-free networks are highly efficient in information dissemination because of their
global connectedness. Our results indicate that such efficiency of information dissemination
may not necessarily imply the same for effective collective decision making.
This finding offers another implication for the diversity in collective decision making:
certain organizational structures may be more effective in generating and maintaining idea
diversity in discussion, while other structures would tend to reduce idea diversity and
promote premature convergence on suboptimal ideas more often. This is similar to the
biological fact that certain geographical habitat structures can maintain greater biodiversity in
evolutionary ecology. In the decision making context, this implies that not only within-group
diversity or behavioral balance but also social network topologies could influence the
dynamics of idea evolution in collective decision making processes.
Conclusions
In this work, we demonstrated that, using an evolutionary framework to model human
collective decision making processes, one can specifically examine the efficacy of a variety
of decision processes employed by groups and collectives. The framework we proposed
enables a means for direct comparison of various idea evolution paths within collective
decision making, and enables an exploration of how the make-up and structure of teams
could be critical depending on the overall requirements for decision making tasks.
Furthermore, the evolutionary framework and subsequent computational model enables
advancements in understanding collective decision making within a dynamic and complex
social system. By employing an evolutionary framework we can explore the impact of time
and situations in flux, and the modeling enables nonlinear exploration of processes. Finally,
the multi-level, network-oriented nature of this research more appropriately models the
potential differences in team composition and organizational topologies. It adds to our
20
understanding of the complex nature of collective decisions, and the potential pitfalls and
caveats of employing various decision processes and designing teams in a heterogeneous
and/or homogeneous manner.
Limitations and Future Directions
There are several limitations to our computational modeling study. For example, genetic
operators may not exist in groups as "cleanly" as modeled in our simulation. We used simple
parameterized settings to control the prevalence of operators, which may not be appropriate
to represent the real individual behavior in discussion. Also, our model considered only the
heterogeneity of the utility functions of agents. To conduct a more comprehensive, systematic
investigation of the homogeneity/heterogeneity issues, it would be critical to incorporate the
heterogeneity of the participants' domains of expertise, in addition to their utility functions.
Furthermore, we tested only three typical social network topologies, but they are by no means
an exhaustive list of possible organizational structures. Conducting computational and
human-subject experiments on more realistic social network topologies would add more
realistic dynamics to the results, which are among our future research plan.
Data Availability
The computational simulation data used to support the findings of this study are available
from the corresponding author upon request.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.
Funding Statement
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant
No. 1734147.
References
Abbot A (2001) Time matters. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Adner R, Polos L, Ryall M, Sorenson O (2009) Introduction to special topic forum: The case
for formal theory. Acad. of Manage. Rev. 34: 201-208.
Barabási AL, Albert R (1999) Emergence of scaling in random networks. Sci. 286: 509-512.
Barabási AL (2009) Scale-free networks: a decade and beyond. Sci. 325: 412-413.
Bar-Yam Y (1997) Dynamics of complex systems. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Bar-Yam Y (2004) Making things work: Solving complex problems in a complex world.
Cambridge, MA: NESCI Knowledge Press.
21
Battiston S, Bonabeau E, Weisbuch G (2003) Decision making dynamics in corporate boards.
Physica A 322: 567-582.
Braha D, Minai A, Bar-Yam Y, eds. (2006) Complex Engineered Systems: Science Meets
Technology. Springer.
Carroll T, Burton RM (2000) Organizations and complexity: Searching for the edge of chaos.
Comput. Math. Organ. Theory 6: 319-337.
Castellano C, Fortunato S, Loreto V (2009) Statistical physics of social dynamics. Reviews of
Modern Physics 81: 591.
Chang MH, Harrington JE (2005) Innovators, imitators and the evolving architecture of
problem-solving networks. Organ. Sci. 18(4): 648-666.
Chang MH, Harrington JE (2007) Discovery and diffusion of knowledge in an endogenous
social network. Amer. J. Sociol. 110(4): 937-976.
Cheng YT, Van de Ven AH (1996) Learning the innovation journey: Order out of chaos?
Organ. Sci. 7: 593 -- 614.
Couzin ID, Ioannou CC, Demirel G, Gross T, Torney CJ, Conradt L, Levin SA, Leonard NE
(2011) Uninformed individuals promote democratic consensus in animal groups. Science
334: 1578-1580.
Dansereau F, Alutto JA, Yammarino FJ (1984) Theory testing in organizational behavior:
The varient approach. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Dansereau F, Yammarino FJ, Kohles JC (1999) Multiple levels of analysis from a
longitudinal perspective: Some implications for theory building. Acad. Manage. Rev. 24,
346-357.
De Dreu CKW, Weingart LR (2003) Task and relationship conflict, team performance, and
team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psych. 88: 741 -- 749.
De Dreu CKW, West MA (2001) Minority dissent and team innovation: The importance of
participation in decision making. J. Appl. Psych. 86: 1191-1201.
Dionne SD, Akaishi J, Chen X, Gupta A, Sayama H, Yammarino FJ, Serban A, Hao C, Head
HJ, Bush BJ (2012) Retrospective Relatedness Reconstruction: Applications to Adaptive
Social Networks and Social Sentiment. Organ. Res. Methods 15(4): 663-692.
Dionne SD, Dionne PJ (2008) Levels-based leadership and hierarchical group decision
optimization: A simulation. Leadership Quart. 19: 212-234.
Dionne SD, Gooty J, Yammarino FJ, Sayama H (2018) Decision making in crisis: A
multilevel model of the interplay between cognitions and emotions. Organ. Psych. Rev. 8,
95-124.
22
Dionne SD, Gupta A, Sotak KL, Shirreffs K, Serban A, Hao C, Kim DH, Yammarino FJ
(2014) A 25-year perspective on levels of analysis in leadership research. Leadership
Quart. 25, 6-35. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.002
Dionne SD, Sayama H, Hao C, Bush BJ (2010) The role of leadership in shared mental
model convergence and team performance improvement: An agent-based computational
model. Leadership Quart. 21(6), 1035-1049.
Economist (September 17th 2009). InnoCentive: A market for ideas. The Economist.
Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/14460185.
ElMaraghy W, ElMaraghy H, Tomiyama T, Monostori L (2012) Complexity in engineering
design and manufacturing. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology 61(2), 793-814.
Epstein JM (2006) Generative social science: Studies in agent-based computational
modeling. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Futuyma DJ (2005) Evolution. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
Gavetti G, Levinthal DA (2000) Looking Forward and Looking Backward: Cognitive and
Experiential Search. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45: 113 -- 137.
Giannoccaro I, Massari G, Carbone G (2018) Team resilience in complex and turbulent
environments: The effect of size and density of social interactions. Complexity, 1923216.
Gigone D, Hastie R (1993) The common knowledge effect: Information sharing and group
judgment. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 65: 959-974.
Grand JA, Braun MT, Kuljanin G, Kozlowski SJ, Chao GT (2016) The dynamics of team
cognition: A process-oriented theory of knowledge emergence in teams. J. Appl. Psych.,
101(10), 1353-1385. doi:10.1037/apl0000136
Hamming RW (1950) Error detecting and error correcting codes. Bell System Tech. J. 26:
147-160.
Harrison DA, Price KH, Gavin JH, Florey AT (2002) Time, teams, and task performance:
Changing effects of surface-level and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Acad.
Manage. J. 45: 1029-1045.
He Z, Wong P (2004) Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity
hypothesis. Organ. Sci. 15(4): 481-494.
Hoffman LR (1979) Applying experimental research on group problem solving to
organizations. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 15: 375-391.
Hoffman EL, Lord RG (2013) A taxonomy of event-level dimensions: Implications for
understanding leadership processes, behavior, and performance. Leadership Quart. 24(4),
558-571.
23
Hollenbeck JR, Ilgen DR, Sego DJ, Hedlund J, Major DA, Phillips J (1995) Multilevel theory
of team decision making: Decision performance in teams incorporating distributed
expertise. J Appl. Psych. 80(2): 292-316.
Horst R, Pardalos PM, Thoai NV (2000) Introduction to global optimization (2nd ed.).
Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Humphrey SE, Aime F (2014) Team microdynamics: Toward an organizing approach to
teamwork. Acad. Manage. Ann., 8(1), 443-503. doi: 10.1080/19416520.2014.904140
Jehn KA, Mannix EA (2001) The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of
intragroup conflict and group performance. Acad. Manage. J. 44: 238-251.
Jehn KA, Northcraft GB, Neale MA (1999) Why differences make a difference: A field study
of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44: 741 -- 763.
Kauffman SA (1993) The origin of order. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Kennedy DM, McComb, SA (2014) When teams shift among processes: Insights from
simulation and optimization. J. Appl. Psyc., 99: 784-815.
Kerr NL, Tindale RS (2004) Group performance and decision making. Ann. Rev. Psych. 55:
623-655.
Klein M, Faratin P, Sayama H, Bar-Yam Y (2003) Protocols for negotiating complex
contracts. IEEE Intelligent Systems 18(6): 32-38.
Klein M, Faratin P, Sayama H, Bar-Yam Y (2006) An annealing protocol for negotiating
complex contracts. Rennard J, ed. Handbook of research on nature inspired computing for
economics and management (vol. 2) (Chapter XCVIII). Hershey, PA: Idea Group
Publishing,
Klein KJ, Dansereau F, Hall RJ (1994) Levels issues in theory development, data collection,
and analysis. Acad. Manage. Rev. 19: 195-229.
Knudsen T, Levinthal DA (2007) Two faces of search: Alternative generation and alternative
evaluation. Organ. Sci. 18(1): 39-54.
Kock N (2004) The psychobiological model: Towards a new theory of computer-mediated
communication based on Darwinian evolution. Organ. Sci. 15(3): 327-348.
Kooij-de Bode HJM, van Knippenberg D, van Ginkel WP (2008) Ethnic diversity and
distributed information in group decision making: The importance of information
elaboration. Group Dyn.- Theor. Res. 12: 307 -- 320.
Kozlowski SWJ, Chao GT, Grand JA, Braun MT, Kuljanin G (2013) Advancing multi-level
research design: Capturing the dynamics of emergence. Organ. Res. Methods 16: 581-615.
Kozlowski SWJ, Gully SM, Nason ER, Smith EM (1999) Developing adaptive teams: A
theory of compilation and performance across levels and time. Ilgen D, Pulakos E, eds.
24
The changing nature of performance: Implications for staffing, motivation and
development (pp. 240-292). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
LePine JA (2005) Adaptation of teams in response to unforeseen change: Effects of goal
difficulty and team composition in terms of cognitive ability and goal orientation. J. Appl.
Psych. 90: 1153-1167.
Levinthan DA (1997) Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Manage. Sci. 43(7): 934-950.
Lightle JP, Kagel JH, Arkes HR (2009) Information exchange in group decision making: The
hidden profile problem reconsidered. Manage. Sci. 55(4): 568-581.
Lipshitz R, Klein G, Orasanu J, Salas E (2001) Focus Article: Taking stock of naturalistic
decision making. J. Behav. Dec. Making 14: 331-352.
Maldonato M (2007) Undecidable decisions: Rationality limits and decision-making
heuristics. World Futures: J. Gen. Evolution 63(1): 28-37.
Mannes AE (2009) Are we wise about the wisdom of crowds? The use of group judgments in
belief revision. Manage. Sci. 55(8) 1267-1279.
March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ. Sci. 2: 71-
87.
McHugh KA, Yammarino FJ, Dionne SD, Serban A, Sayama H, Chatterjee S (2016)
Collective decision making, leadership, and collective intelligence: Tests with agent-based
simulations and a field study. Leadership Quart., 27, 218-241.
Meyer AD, Gaba V, Colwell KA (2005) Organizing far from equilibrium: Nonlinear change
in organizational fields. Organ. Sci. 16(5): 456-473.
Miller JH, Page SE (2007) Complex adaptive systems. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press.
Mitchell M (1996) An introduction to genetic algorithms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mitchell M, Forrest S, Holland JH (1991) The royal road for genetic algorithms: Fitness
landscapes and GA performance. F. J. Varela, P. Bourgine, eds. Toward a practice of
autonomous systems: Proceeds of the first European conference on artificial life (pp. 245-
254). Paris, France.
Morgeson F, Mitchell T, Liu D (2015) Event system theory; An event-oriented approach to
the organizational sciences. Acad. Manage. Rev. 40: 515-537.
Nemeth CJ (1986) Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psych. Rev.
93: 23-32.
Nemeth CJ (1992) Minority dissent as a stimulant to group performance. Worchel S, Wood
W, Simpson JA, eds. Group process and productivity (pp. 95-111). Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
25
Nijstad BA, Kaps SC (2007) Taking the easy way out: Preference diversity decision
strategies and decision refusals in groups. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 94(5): 860-870.
O'Reilly CA, Caldwell DF, Barnett WP (1989) Work group demography, social integration
and turnover. Admin. Sci. Quart. 34: 21-37.
O'Reilly CA, Williams KY, Barsade S, Gruenfeld DH (1998) Group demography and
innovation: Does diversity help? Neale MA, Mannix EA, Gruenfeld DH, eds. Research on
managing groups and teams (vol. 1) (pp. 183-207). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
O'Reilly T (2005) What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next
generation of software. IOP O'Reilly.
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html.
Accessed October 8, 2012
Page, SE (2018) The model thinker. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Paulus PB, Yang H (2000) Idea generation in groups: A basis for creativity in organizations.
Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec. 82: 76-87
Pelled LH, Eisenhardt KM, Xin KR (1999) Exploring the black box: An analysis of work
group diversity, conflict and performance. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44:1-28.
Rivkin JW (2000) Imitation of complex strategies. Manage. Sci. 46(6): 824-844.
Rusmevichientong P, Van Roy B (2003) Decentralizing decision making in a large team with
local information. Games Econ. Behav. 43: 266-295.
Salas E, Klein G (2001) Expertise and naturalistic decision making: An overview. In E. Salas
E, Klein G, eds. Linking expertise and naturalistic decision making (pp. 3-33).
Philadelphia, PA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Salas E, Stagl KC, Burke CS (2004) 25 years of team effectiveness in organizations:
Research themes and emerging needs. In: Cooper CL, Robertson IT (eds) International
Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology 19: 47-91
Sayama H, Dionne SD (2015) Studying collective human decision making and creativity with
evolutionary computation. Artif. Life 21(3): 379-393.
Sayama H, Farrell DL, Dionne SD (2011) The effects of mental model formation on group
decision making: An agent-based simulation. Complexity 16(3): 49-57.
Schneider M, Somers M (2006) Organizations as complex adaptive systems: Implications of
complexity theory for leadership research. Leadership Quart. 17(4), 351-365.
Shannon CE (1948) A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Tech. J. 27: 379-
423.
Silverman BG, Johns M, Corwell J, O'Brien K (2006) Human behavior models for agents in
simulation games: Part 1: Enabling science with PMFserv. Presence 15(2): 139-162.
26
Solis FJ, Wets R. (1981) Minimization by random search techniques. Math. Oper. Res. 6: 19-
30.
Stasser G, Stewart D (1992) Discovery of hidden profiles by decision making groups:
Solving a problem versus making a judgment. J. Pers. Soc. Psych. 57: 67-78.
Uitdewilligen S, Waller MJ (2018) Information sharing and decision‐making in
multidisciplinary crisis management teams. J. Organ Behavior, 39, 731-748.
doi:10.1002/job.2301
Van de Ven A, Delbecq AL (1974) The effectiveness of nominal, delphi, and interacting
group decision making processes. Acad. Manage. J. 117: 605-621.
van Ginkel WP, van Knippenberg D (2008) Group information elaboration and decision
making: The role of shared task representations. Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec. 105(1): 89-97.
Waller MJ, Okhuysen GA, Saghafian M (2016) Conceptualizing emergent states: A strategy
to advance the study of group dynamics. Acad. Manage. Ann. 10: 561-598.
Watts DJ, Strogatz SH (1998) Collective dynamics of 'small-world' networks. Nature 393:
440-442.
Wei X, Liu Y, Chen S. (2015) A meta-analysis of the relationship between team demographic
diversity and team performance. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 47: 1172-1187.
Wilson DS (2005) Evolution for everyone: How to increase acceptance of interest in, and
knowledge about evolution. Public Lib. Sci. Biol. 3(12): e364.
Wilson DS, Wilson EO (2008) Evolution for the "good of the group." Am. Sci. 96: 380-389.
Yammarino FJ, Dansereau F (2011) Multi-level issues in evolutionary theory, organization
science, and leadership. Leadership Quart. 22: 1042-1057.
Yammarino FJ, Dionne SD (2018) Leadership and levels of analysis: Clarifications and fixes
for what's wrong. In Riggio RE (Ed.), What's wrong with leadership? (And how to fix it)
(pp. 41-57). New York, NY: Routledge (Taylor & Francis Group).
Yammarino FJ, Dionne SD, Chun JU, Dansereau F (2005) Leadership and levels of analysis:
A state-of-the-science review. Leadership Quart. 16: 879-919.
Yammarino FJ, Salas E, Serban A, Shirreffs K, Shuffler ML (2012) Collectivistic leadership
approaches: Putting the "we" in leadership science and practice. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 5(4),
382-402.
27
|
0712.1609 | 3 | 0712 | 2009-09-28T18:49:42 | Distributed Consensus Algorithms in Sensor Networks: Quantized Data and Random Link Failures | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.IT",
"cs.IT"
] | The paper studies the problem of distributed average consensus in sensor networks with quantized data and random link failures. To achieve consensus, dither (small noise) is added to the sensor states before quantization. When the quantizer range is unbounded (countable number of quantizer levels), stochastic approximation shows that consensus is asymptotically achieved with probability one and in mean square to a finite random variable. We show that the meansquared error (m.s.e.) can be made arbitrarily small by tuning the link weight sequence, at a cost of the convergence rate of the algorithm. To study dithered consensus with random links when the range of the quantizer is bounded, we establish uniform boundedness of the sample paths of the unbounded quantizer. This requires characterization of the statistical properties of the supremum taken over the sample paths of the state of the quantizer. This is accomplished by splitting the state vector of the quantizer in two components: one along the consensus subspace and the other along the subspace orthogonal to the consensus subspace. The proofs use maximal inequalities for submartingale and supermartingale sequences. From these, we derive probability bounds on the excursions of the two subsequences, from which probability bounds on the excursions of the quantizer state vector follow. The paper shows how to use these probability bounds to design the quantizer parameters and to explore tradeoffs among the number of quantizer levels, the size of the quantization steps, the desired probability of saturation, and the desired level of accuracy $\epsilon$ away from consensus. Finally, the paper illustrates the quantizer design with a numerical study. | cs.MA | cs | Distributed Consensus Algorithms in Sensor
Networks: Quantized Data and Random Link
Failures
Soummya Kar and Jos ´e M. F. Moura ∗
Abstract
The paper studies the problem of distributed average consensus in sensor networks with quantized data and random
link failures. To achieve consensus, dither (small noise) is added to the sensor states before quantization. When the
quantizer range is unbounded (countable number of quantizer levels), stochastic approximation shows that consensus is
asymptotically achieved with probability one and in mean square to a finite random variable. We show that the mean-
squared error (m.s.e.) can be made arbitrarily small by tuning the link weight sequence, at a cost of the convergence
rate of the algorithm. To study dithered consensus with random links when the range of the quantizer is bounded, we
establish uniform boundedness of the sample paths of the unbounded quantizer. This requires characterization of the
statistical properties of the supremum taken over the sample paths of the state of the quantizer. This is accomplished
by splitting the state vector of the quantizer in two components: one along the consensus subspace and the other
along the subspace orthogonal to the consensus subspace. The proofs use maximal inequalities for submartingale and
supermartingale sequences. From these, we derive probability bounds on the excursions of the two subsequences,
from which probability bounds on the excursions of the quantizer state vector follow. The paper shows how to use
these probability bounds to design the quantizer parameters and to explore tradeoffs among the number of quantizer
levels, the size of the quantization steps, the desired probability of saturation, and the desired level of accuracy ǫ
away from consensus. Finally, the paper illustrates the quantizer design with a numerical study.
Keywords: Consensus, quantized, random link failures, stochastic approximation, convergence, bounded quan-
tizer, sample path behavior, quantizer saturation
9
0
0
2
p
e
S
8
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
3
v
9
0
6
1
.
2
1
7
0
:
v
i
X
r
a
The authors are with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA 15213 (e-mail:
[email protected], [email protected], ph: (412)268-6341, fax: (412)268-3890.)
Work supported by NSF under grants # ECS-0225449 and # CNS-0428404, by an IBM Faculty Award, and by the Office of Naval Resea rch
under MURI N000140710747.
Manuscript initially submitted on December 10, 2007; last revised on July 19, 2009.
2
I . INTRODUCT ION
This paper is concerned with consensus in networks, e.g., a sensor network, when the data exchanges among
nodes in the network (sensors, agents) are quantized. Before detailing our work, we brie fly overview the literature.
Literature review. Consensus is broadly understood as individuals in a community achieving a consistent view
of the World by interchanging information regarding their current state with their neighbors. Considered in the early
work of Tsitsiklis et. al. ([1], [2]), it has received considerable attention in recent years and arises in numerous
applications including: load balancing, [3], alignment, fl ocking, and multi-agent collaboration, e.g., [4], [5], vehicle
formation, [6], gossip algorithms, [7], tracking, data fusion, [8], and distributed inference, [9]. We refer the reader
to the recent overviews on consensus, which include [10], [11].
Consensus is a distributed iterative algorithm where the sensor states evolve on the basis of local interactions.
Reference [5] used spectral graph concepts like graph Laplacian and algebraic connectivity to prove convergence
for consensus under several network operating conditions (e.g., delays and switching networks, i.e., time varying).
Our own prior work has been concerned with designing topologies that optimize consensus with respect to the
convergence rate, [12], [9]. Topology design is concerned with two issues: 1) the de finition of the graph that specifies
the neighbors of each sensor—i.e., with whom should each sen
sor exchange data; and 2) the weights used by the
sensors when combining the information received from their neighbors to update their state. Reference [13] considers
the problem of weight design, when the topology is specified,
in the framework of semi-de finite programming.
References [14], [15] considered the impact of different topologies on the convergence rate of consensus, in
particular, regular, random, and small-world graphs, [16]. Reference [17] relates the convergence properties of
consensus algorithms to the effective resistance of the network, thus obtaining convergence rate scaling laws for
networks in up to 3-dimensional space. Convergence results for general problems in multi-vehicle formation has been
considered in [18], where convergence rate is related to the topological dimension of the network and stabilizability
issues in higher dimensions are addressed. Robustness issues in consensus algorithms in the presence of analog
communication noise and random data packet dropouts have been considered in [19].
Review of literature on quantized consensus. Distributed consensus with quantized transmission has been studied
recently in [20], [21], [22], [23] with respect to time-invariant ( fixed) topologies. Reference [24] considers quantiz ed
consensus for a certain class of time-varying topologies. The algorithm in [20] is restricted to integer-valued initial
sensor states, where at each iteration the sensors exchange integer-valued data. It is shown there that the sensor states
are asymptotically close (in their appropriate sense) to the desired average, but may not reach absolute consensus.
In [21], the noise in the consensus algorithm studied in [25] is interpreted as quantization noise and shown there by
simulation with a small network that the variance of the quantization noise is reduced as the algorithm iterates and the
sensors converge to a consensus. References [22], [26] study probabilistic quantized consensus. Each sensor updates
its state at each iteration by probabilistically quantizing its current state (which [27] claims equivalent to dithering)
and linearly combining it with the quantized versions of the states of the neighbors. They show that the sensor
states reach consensus a.s. to a quantized level. In [23] a worst case analysis is presented on the error propagation
of consensus algorithms with quantized communication for various classes of time-invariant network topologies,
while [28] addresses the impact of more involved encoding/decoding strategies, beyond the uniform quantizer. The
effect of communication noise in the consensus process may lead to several interesting phase transition phenomena
3
in global network behavior, see, for example, [29] in the context of a network of mobile agents with a non-
linear interaction model and [30], which rigorously establishes a phase transition behavior in a network of bipolar
agents when the communication noise exceeds a given threshold. Consensus algorithms with general imperfect
communication (including quantization) in a certain class of time-varying topologies has been addressed in [24],
which assumes that there exists a window of fixed length, such
that the union of the network graphs formed
within that window is strongly connected. From a distributed detection viewpoint, binary consensus algorithms
over networks of additive white Gaussian noise channels were addressed in [31], which proposed soft information
processing techniques to improve consensus convergence properties over such noisy channels. The impact of fading
on consensus is studied in [32].
Contributions of this paper. We consider consensus with quantized data and random inter-sensor link failures.
This is useful in applications where limited bandwidth and power for inter-sensor communications preclude ex-
changes of high precision (analog) data as in wireless sensor networks. Further, randomness in the environment
results in random data packet dropouts. To handle quantization, we modify standard consensus by adding a small
amount of noise, dither, to the data before quantization and by letting the consensus weights to be time varying,
satisfying a persistence condition –their sum over time diverges, while their square sum is finite. We will show that
dithered quantized consensus in networks with random links converges.
The randomness of the network topology is captured by assuming that the time-varying Laplacian sequence,
{L(i)}i≥0 , which characterizes the communication graph, is independent with mean L; further, to prove convergence,
we will need the mean graph algebraic connectivity ( first non zero eigenvalue of L) λ2 (L) > 0, i.e., the network to
be connected on the average. Our proofs do not require any distributional assumptions on the link failure model (in
space). During the same iteration, the link failures can be spatially dependent, i.e., correlated across different edges
of the network. The model we work with in this paper subsumes the erasure network model, where link failures
are independent both over space and time. Wireless sensor networks motivate us since interference among the
sensors communication correlates the link failures over space, while over time, it is still reasonable to assume that
the channels are memoryless or independent. Note that the assumption λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) > 0 does not require the individual
random instantiations of L(i) to be connected; in fact, it is possible to have all the instantiations to be disconnected.
This captures a broad class of asynchronous communication models, for example, the random asynchronous gossip
protocol in [33] satisfies λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) > 0 and hence falls under this framework.
The main contribution of this paper is the study of the convergence and the detailed analysis of the sample path
of this dithered distributed quantized consensus algorithm with random link failures. This distinguishes our work
from [20] that considers fixed topologies (no random links) a nd integer valued initial sensor states, while our initial
states are arbitrarily real valued. To our knowledge, the convergence and sample path analysis of dithered quantized
consensus with random links has not been carried out before. The sample path analysis of quantized consensus
algorithms is needed because in practice quantizers work with bounded ( finite) ranges. The literature usually pays
thrift attention or simply ignores the boundary effects induced by the bounded range of the quantizers; in other
words, although assuming finite range quantizers, the analy sis in the literature ignores the boundary effects. Our
paper studies carefully the sample path behavior of quantized consensus when the range of the quantizer is bounded.
It computes, under appropriate conditions, the probability of large excursion of the sample paths and shows that
4
the quantizer can be designed so that with probability as close to 1 as desired the sample path excursions remain
bounded, within an ǫ-distance of the desired consensus average. Neither our previous work [19], which deals with
consensus with noisy analog communications in a random network, nor references [22], [26], [27], which introduce
a probabilistic quantized consensus algorithm in fixed netw orks, nor [34], which studies consensus with analog
noisy communication and fixed network, study the sample path behavior of quantized consensus. Also, while the
probabilistic consensus in [22], [26], [27] converges almost surely to a quantized level, in our work, we show that
dithered consensus converges a.s. to a random variable which can be made arbitrarily close to the desired average.
To study the a.s. convergence and m.s.s. convergence of the dithered distributed quantizers with random links
and unbounded range, the stochastic approximation method we use in [19] is sufficient. In simple terms, we
associate, like in [19], with the quantized distributed consensus a Lyapounov function and study the behavior of
this Lyapounov function along the trajectories of the noisy consensus algorithm with random links. To show almost
sure convergence, we show that a functional of this process is a nonnegative supermartingale; convergence follows
from convergence results on nonnegative supermartingales. We do this in Section III where we term the unbounded
dithered distributed quantized consensus algorithm with random links simply Quantized Consensus, for short, or
QC algorithm. Although the general principles of the approach are similar to the ones in [19], the details are different
and not trivial–we minimize the overlap and refer the reader
to [19] for details. A second reason to go over this
analysis in the paper for the QC algorithm is that we derive in this Section for QC several specific bounds that are
used and needed as intermediate results for the sample path analysis that is carried out in Section IV when studying
dithered quantized consensus when the quantizer is bounded, i.e., Quantized Consensus with Finite quantizer, the
QCF quantizer. The QCF is a very simple algorithm: it is QC till the QC state reaches the quantizer bound, otherwise
an error is declared and the algorithm terminated. To study QCF, we establish uniform boundedness of the sample
paths of the QC algorithm. This requires establishing the statistical properties of the supremum taken over the
sample paths of the QC. This is accomplished by splitting the state vector of the quantizer in two components:
one along the consensus subspace and the other along the subspace orthogonal to the consensus subspace. These
proofs use maximal inequalities for submartingale and supermartingale sequences. From these, we are able to derive
probability bounds on the excursions of the two subsequences, which we use to derive probability bounds on the
excursions of the QC. We see that to carry out this sample path study requires new methods of analysis that go
well beyond the stochastic approximation methodology that we used in our paper [19], and also used by [34] to
study consensus with noise but fixed networks. The detailed s ample path analysis leads to bounds on the probability
of the sample path excursions of the QC algorithm. We then use these bounds to design the quantizer parameters
and to explore tradeoffs among these parameters. In particular, we derive a probability of ǫ-consensus expressed
in terms of the ( finite) number of quantizer levels, the size o f the quantization steps, the desired probability of
saturation, and the desired level of accuracy ǫ away from consensus.
For the QC algorithm, there exists an interesting trade-off between the m.s.e. (between the limiting random
variable and the desired initial average) and the convergence: by tuning the link weight sequence appropriately,
it is possible to make the m.s.e. arbitrarily small (irrespective of the quantization step-size), though penalizing
the convergence rate. To tune the QC-algorithm, we introduce a scalar control parameter s (associated with the
time-varying link weight sequence), which can make the m.s.e. as small as we want, irrespective of how large
5
the step-size ∆ is. This is significant in applications that rely on accuracy and may call for very small m.s.e. for
being useful. More specifically, if a cost structure is impos ed on the consensus problem, where the objective is a
function of the m.s.e. and the convergence rate, one may obtain the optimal scaling s by minimizing the cost from
the Pareto-optimal curve generated by varying s. These tradeoffs and vanishingly small m.s.e. contrasts with the
algorithms in [20], [21], [22], [23], [24] where the m.s.e. is proportional to ∆2 , the quantization step-size –if the
step-size is large, these algorithms lead to a large m.s.e.
Organization of the paper. We comment brie fly on the organization of the main sections of
summarizes relevant background, including spectral graph theory and average consensus, and presents the dithered
the paper. Section II
quantized consensus problem with the dither satisfying the Schuchman conditions. Sections III considers the
convergence of the QC algorithm. It shows a.s. convergence to a random variable, whose m.s.e. is fully characterized.
Section IV studies the sample path behavior of the QC algorithm through the QCF. It uses the expressions we derive
for the probability of large excursions of the sample paths of the quantizer to consider the tradeoffs among different
quantizer parameters, e.g., number of bits and quantization step, and the network topology to achieve optimal
performance under a constraint on the number of levels of the quantizer. These tradeoffs are illustrated with a
numerical study. Finally, Section V concludes the paper.
I I . CON S EN SU S W ITH QUANT IZ ED DATA : PROBL EM STAT EMENT
We present preliminaries needed for the analysis of the consensus algorithm with quantized data. The set-up of
the average consensus problem is standard, see the introductory sections of relevant recent papers.
A. Preliminaries: Notation and Average Consensus
The sensor network at time index i is represented by an undirected, simple, connected graph G(i) = (V , E (i)).
The vertex and edge sets V and E (i), with cardinalities V = N and E (i) = M (i), collect the sensors and
communication channels or links among sensors in the network at time i. The network topology at time i, i.e., with
which sensors does each sensor communicate with, is described by the N × N discrete Laplacian L(i) = LT (i) =
D(i) − A(i) ≥ 0. The matrix A(i) is the adjacency matrix of the connectivity graph at time i, a (0, 1) matrix
where Ank (i) = 1 signifies that there is a link between sensors n and k at time i. The diagonal entries of A(i) are
zero. The diagonal matrix D(i) is the degree matrix, whose diagonal Dnn (i) = dn (i) where dn (i) is the degree
of sensor n, i.e., the number of links of sensor n at time i. The neighbors of a sensor or node n, collected in the
neighborhood set Ωn (i), are those sensors k for which entries Ank (i) 6= 0. The Laplacian is positive semide finite;
in case the network is connected at time i, the corresponding algebraic connectivity or Fiedler value is positive, i.e.,
the second eigenvalue of the Laplacian λ2 (L(i)) > 0, where the eigenvalues of L(i) are ordered in increasing order.
For detailed treatment of graphs and their spectral theory see, for example, [35], [36], [37]. Throughout the paper
the symbols P[·] and E[·] denote the probability and expectation operators w.r.t. the probability space of interest.
Distributed Average Consensus. The sensors measure the data xn (0), n = 1, · · · , N , collected in the vector
x(0) = [x1 (0) · · · xN (0)]T ∈ RN ×1 . Distributed average consensus computes the average r of the data
NXn=1
r = xavg (0) =
1
N
(1)
xn (0) =
x(0)T 1
1
N
6
by local data exchanges among neighboring sensors. In (1), the column vector 1 has all entries equal to 1. Consensus
is an iterative algorithm where at iteration i each sensor updates its current state xn (i) by a weighted average of
its current state and the states of its neighbors. Standard consensus assumes a fixed connected network topology,
i.e., the links stay online permanently, the communication is noiseless, and the data exchanges are analog. Under
mild conditions, the states of all sensors reach consensus, converging to the desired average r, see [5], [13],
lim
i→∞
x(i) = r1
(2)
where x(i) = [x1 (i) · · · xN (i)]T is the state vector that stacks the state of the N sensors at iteration i. We consider
consensus with quantized data exchanges and random topology (links fail or become alive at random times), which
models packet dropouts. In [19], we studied consensus with random topologies and (analog) noisy communications.
B. Dithered Quantization: Schuchman Conditions
We write the sensor updating equations for consensus with quantized data and random link failures as
xn (i + 1) = [1 − α(i)dn (i)] xn (i) + α(i) Xl∈Ωn (i)
where: α(i) is the weight at iteration i; and {fnl,i}1≤n,l≤N , i≥0 is a sequence of functions (possibly random)
modeling the quantization effects. Note that in (3), the weights α(i) are the same across all links—the equal
weights consensus, see [13] —but the weights may change with
time. Also, the degree dn (i) and the neighborhood
Ωn (i) of each sensor n, n = 1, · · · , N are dependent on i emphasizing the topology may be random time-varying.
Quantizer. Each inter-sensor communication channel uses a uniform quantizer with quantization step ∆. We
model the communication channel by introducing the quantizing function, q(·) : R → Q,
fnl,i [xl (i)] , 1 ≤ n ≤ N
(3)
q(y ) = k∆,
(k −
1
2
)∆ ≤ y < (k +
1
2
)∆
where y ∈ R is the channel input. Writing
q(y ) = y + e(y )
where e(y ) is the quantization error. Conditioned on the input, the quantization error e(y ) is deterministic, and
−
∆
2
≤ e(y ) <
∆
2
, ∀y
We first consider quantized consensus (QC) with unbounded ra nge, i.e., the quantization alphabet
Q = {k∆ k ∈ Z}
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
is countably in finite. In Section IV. we consider what happen s when the range of the quantizer is finite –quantized
consensus with finite (QCF) alphabet. This study requires th at we detail the sample path behavior of the QC-
algorithm.
We discuss brie fly why a naive approach to consensus will fail
(see [27] for a similar discussion.) If we use
directly the quantized state information, the functions fnl,i (·) in eqn. (3) are
fnl,i (xl (i)) = q(xl (i))
= xl (i) + e(xl (i))
7
(8)
(9)
Equations (3) take then the form
xl (i) + α(i) Xl∈Ωn (i)
xn (i + 1) = (1 − α(i)dn (i))xn (i) + α(i) Xl∈Ωn (i)
The non-stochastic errors (the most right terms in (10)) lead to error accumulation. If the network topology remains
fixed (deterministic topology,) the update in eqn. (10) repr esents a sequence of iterations that, as observed above,
conditioned on the initial state, which then determines the input, are deterministic. If we choose the weights α(i)’s
to decrease to zero very quickly, then (10) may terminate before reaching the consensus set. On the other hand, if
the α(i)’s decay slowly, the quantization errors may accumulate, thus making the states unbounded.
In either case, the naive approach to consensus with quantized data fails to lead to a reasonable solution. This
e(xl (i))
(10)
failure is due to the fact that the error terms are not stochastic. To overcome these problems, we introduce in
a controlled way noise (dither) to randomize the sensor states prior to quantizing the perturbed stochastic state.
Under appropriate conditions, the resulting quantization errors possess nice statistical properties, leading to the
quantized states reaching consensus (in an appropriate sense to be de fined below.) Dither places consensus with
quantized data in the framework of distributed consensus with noisy communication links; when the range of the
quantizer is unbounded, we apply stochastic approximation to study the limiting behavior of QC, as we did in [19]
to study consensus with (analog) noise and random topology. Note that if instead of adding dither, we assumed that
the quantization errors are independent, uniformly distributed random variables, we would not need to add dither,
and our analysis would still apply.
Schuchman conditions. The dither added to randomize the quantization effects satisfies a special condition,
namely, as in subtractively dithered systems, see [38], [39]. Let {y (i)}i≥0 and {ν (i)}i≥0 be arbitrary sequences
of random variables, and q(·) be the quantization function (4). When dither is added before quantization, the
quantization error sequence, {ε(i)}i≥0 , is
ε(i) = q(y (i) + ν (i)) − (y (i) + ν (i))
(11)
If the dither sequence, {ν (i)}i≥0 , satisfies the Schuchman conditions, [40], then the quantiz ation error sequence,
{ε(i)}i≥0 , in (11) is i.i.d. uniformly distributed on [−∆/2, ∆/2) and independent of the input sequence {y (i)}i≥0
(see [41], [42], [38]). A sufficient condition for {ν (i)} to satisfy the Schuchman conditions is for it to be a sequence
of i.i.d. random variables uniformly distributed on [−∆/2, ∆/2) and independent of the input sequence {y (i)}i≥0 .
In the sequel, the dither {ν (i)}i≥0 satisfies the Schuchman conditions. Hence, the quantizatio n error sequence,
{ǫ(i)}, is i.i.d. uniformly distributed on [−∆/2, ∆/2) and independent of the input sequence {y (i)}i≥0 .
C. Dithered Quantized Consensus With Random Link Failures: Problem Statement
8
q [xl (i) + νnl (i)] , 1 ≤ n ≤ N
We now return to the problem formulation of consensus with quantized data with dither added. Introducing the
sequence, {νnl (i)}i≥0,1≤n,l≤N , of i.i.d. random variables, uniformly distributed on [−∆/2, ∆/2), the state update
equation for quantized consensus is:
xn (i + 1) = (1 − α(i)dn (i)) xn (i) + α(i) Xl∈Ωn (i)
This equation shows that, before transmitting its state xl (i) to the n-th sensor, the sensor l adds the dither νnl (i),
then the channel between the sensors n and l quantizes this corrupted state, and, finally, sensor n receives this
quantized output. Using eqn. (11), the state update is
xn (i + 1) = (1 − α(i)dn ) xn (i) + α(i) Xl∈Ωn (i)
The random variables νnl (i) are independent of the state x(j ), i.e., the states of all sensors at iteration j , for j ≤ i.
Hence, the collection {εnl (i)} consists of i.i.d. random variables uniformly distributed on [−∆/2, ∆/2), and the
random variable εnl (i) is also independent of the state x(j ), j ≤ i.
We rewrite (13) in vector form. De fine the random vectors, Υ(i) and Ψ(i) ∈ RN ×1 with components
Υn (i) = − Xl∈Ωn (i)
Ψn (i) = − Xl∈Ωn (i)
The the N state update equations in (13) become in vector form
[xl (i) + νnl (i) + εnl (i)]
νnl (i)
εnl (i)
(14)
(15)
(12)
(13)
x(i + 1) = x(i) − α(i) [L(i)x(i) + Υ(i) + Ψ(i)]
(16)
where Υ(i) and Ψ(i) are zero mean vectors, independent of the state x(i), and have i.i.d. components. Also, if M
is the number of realizable network links, eqns. (14) and (15) lead to
E (cid:2)kΥ(i)k2 (cid:3) = E (cid:2)kΨ(i)k2 (cid:3) ≤
Random Link Failures: We now state the assumption about the link failure model to be adopted throughout
the paper. The graph Laplacians are
M∆2
6
, i ≥ 0
(17)
L(i) = L + eL(i), ∀i ≥ 0
(18)
where {L(i)}i≥0 is a sequence of i.i.d. Laplacian matrices with mean L = E [L(i)], such that λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) > 0 (we just
require the network to be connected on the average.) We do not make any distributional assumptions on the link
failure model. During the same iteration, the link failures can be spatially dependent, i.e., correlated across different
edges of the network. This model subsumes the erasure network model, where the link failures are independent
both over space and time. Wireless sensor networks motivate this model since interference among the sensors
communication correlates the link failures over space, while over time, it is still reasonable to assume that the
channels are memoryless or independent. We also note that the above assumption λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) > 0 does not require the
9
individual random instantiations of L(i) to be connected; in fact, it is possible to have all the instantiations to be
disconnected. This enables us to capture a broad class of asynchronous communication models, for example, the
random asynchronous gossip protocol analyzed in [33] satisfies λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) > 0 and hence falls under this framework.
More generally, in the asynchronous set up, if the sensors nodes are equipped with independent clocks whose ticks
follow a regular random point process (the ticking instants do not have an accumulation point, which is true for
all renewal processes, in particular, the Poisson clock in [33]), and at each tick a random network is realized with
λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) > 0 independent of the the networks realized in previous ticks (this is the case with the link formation
process assumed in [33]) our algorithm applies.1
We denote the number of network edges at time i as M (i), where M (i) is a random subset of the set of all
possible edges E with E = N (N − 1)/2. Let M denote the set of realizable edges. We then have the inclusion
M (i) ⊂ M ⊂ E , ∀i
(19)
It is important to note that the value of M (i) depends on the link usage protocol. For example, in the asynchronous
gossip protocol considered in [33], at each iteration only one link is active, and hence M (i) = 1.
Independence Assumptions: We assume that the Laplacian sequence {L(i)}i≥0 is independent of the dither
sequence {εnl (i)}.
Persistence condition: To obtain convergence, we assume that the gains α(i) satisfy the following.
α(i) > 0, Xi≥0
α(i) = ∞, Xi≥0
Condition (20) assures that the gains decay to zero, but not too fast. It is standard in stochastic adaptive signal
processing and control; it is also used in consensus with noisy communications in [34], [19].
i (cid:9)i≥0
Markov property. Denote the natural filtration of the process X = {x(i)}i≥0 by (cid:8)F X
. Because the dither
random variables νnl (i), 1 ≤ n, l ≤ N , are independent of F X
i at any time i ≥ 0, and, correspondingly, the noises
Υ(i) and Ψ(i) are independent of x(i), the process X is Markov.
α2 (i) < ∞
(20)
I I I . CON S EN SU S W ITH QUANT IZ ED DATA : UNBOUNDED QUANT IZ ED STAT E S
We consider that the dynamic range of the initial sensor data, whose average we wish to compute, is not known.
To avoid quantizer saturation, the quantizer output takes values in the countable alphabet (7), and so the channel
quantizer has unrestricted dynamic range. This is the quantizer consensus (QC) with unbounded range algorithm.
Section IV studies quantization with unbounded range, i.e., the quantized consensus finite-bit (QCF) algorithm
where the channel quantizers take only a finite number of outp ut values ( finite-bit quantizers).
We comment brie fly on the organization of the remaining of thi s section. Subsection III-A proves the a.s. con-
vergence of the QC algorithm. We characterize the performance of the QC algorithm and derive expressions
for the mean-squared error in Subsection III-B. The tradeoff between m.s.e. and convergence rate is studied in
Subsection III-C. Finally, we present generalizations to the approach in Subsection III-D.
1 In case the network is static, i.e., the connectivity graph is time-invariant, all the results in the paper apply with L(i) ≡ L, ∀i.
A. QC Algorithm: Convergence
We start with the de finition of the consensus subspace C given as
C = (cid:8)x ∈ RN ×1 (cid:12)(cid:12) x = a1, a ∈ R(cid:9)
We note that any vector x ∈ RN can be uniquely decomposed as
x = xC + xC⊥
and
kxk2 = kxC k2 + kxC⊥ k2
10
(21)
(22)
(23)
where xC ∈ C and xC⊥ belongs to C ⊥ , the orthogonal subspace of C . We show that (16), under the model in
Subsection II-C, converges a.s. to a finite point in C .
De fine the component-wise average as
xavg (i) =
1
N
1T x(i)
(24)
We prove the a.s. convergence of the QC algorithm in two stages. Theorem 2 proves that the state vector sequence
{x(i)}i≥0 converges a.s. to the consensus subspace C . Theorem 3 then completes the proof by showing that the
sequence of component-wise averages, {xavg (i)}i≥0 converges a.s. to a finite random variable
θ. The proof of
Theorem 3 needs a basic result on convergence of Markov processes and follows the same theme as in [19].
Stochastic approximation: Convergence of Markov processes. We state a slightly modified form , suitable to
our needs, of a result from [43]. We start by introducing notation, following [43], see also [19].
Let X = {x(i)}i≥0 be Markov in RN ×1 . The generating operator L is
LV (i, x) = E [V (i + 1, x(i + 1)) x(i) = x] − V (i, x) a.s.
(25)
for functions V (i, x), i ≥ 0, x ∈ RN ×1 , provided the conditional expectation exists. We say that V (i, x) ∈ DL
(i, x) ∈ A.
in a domain A, if LV (i, x) is finite for all
Let the Euclidean metric be ρ(·). De fine the
ǫ-neighborhood of B ⊂ RN ×1 and its complementary set
Uǫ (B ) = (cid:26)x (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) inf
ρ(x, y ) < ǫ (cid:27)
y∈B
Vǫ (B ) = RN ×1\Uǫ (B )
Theorem 1 (Convergence of Markov Processes) Let: X be a Markov process with generating operator L; V (i, x) ∈
DL a non-negative function in the domain i ≥ 0, x ∈ RN ×1 , and B ⊂ RN ×1 . Assume:
(27)
(26)
1) Potential function:
inf
i≥0,x∈Vǫ (B )
V (i, x) > 0, ∀ǫ > 0
V (i, x) ≡ 0, x ∈ B
lim
x→B
sup
i≥0
V (i, x) = 0
2) Generating operator:
LV (i, x) ≤ g (i)(1 + V (i, x)) − α(i)ϕ(i, x)
(28)
(29)
(30)
(31)
where ϕ(i, x), i ≥ 0, x ∈ RN ×1 is a non-negative function such that
inf
i,x∈Vǫ (B )
ϕ(i, x) > 0, ∀ǫ > 0
α(i) > 0, Xi≥0
g (i) > 0, Xi≥0
Then, the Markov process X = {x(i)}i≥0 with arbitrary initial distribution converges a.s. to B as i → ∞
ρ (x(i), B ) = 0(cid:17) = 1
P (cid:16) lim
i→∞
Proof: For proof, see [43], [19].
α(i) = ∞
g (i) < ∞
11
(32)
(33)
(34)
(35)
Theorem 2 (a.s. convergence to consensus subspace) Consider the quantized distributed averaging algorithm given
in eqns. (16). Then, for arbitrary initial condition, x(0), we have
ρ(x(i), C ) = 0i = 1
P h lim
i→∞
Proof: The proof uses similar arguments as that of Theorem 3 in [19]. So we provide the main steps here
and only those details which are required for later development of the paper.
(36)
The key idea shows that the quantized iterations satisfy the assumptions of Theorem 1. De fine the potential
function, V (i, x), for the Markov process X as
Then, using the properties of L and the continuity of V (i, x),
V (i, x) = xT Lx
V (i, x) ≡ 0, x ∈ C and lim
x→C
sup
i≥0
V (i, x) = 0
For x ∈ RN ×1 , we clearly have ρ(x, C ) = kxC⊥ k. Using the fact that xT Lx ≥ λ2 (L)kxC⊥ k2 it then follows
λ2 (L)kxC⊥ k2 ≥ λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) ǫ2 > 0
inf
V (i, x) ≥
inf
i≥0,x∈Vǫ (C )
i≥0,x∈Vǫ (C )
since λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) > 0. This shows, together with (38), that V (i, x) satisfies (28) –(30).
Now consider LV (i, x). We have using the fact that eL(i)x = eL(i)xC⊥ and the independence assumptions
LV (i, x) = E (cid:20)(cid:16)x(i) − α(i)Lx(i) − α(i) eL(i)x(i) − α(i)Υ(i) − α(i)Ψ(i)(cid:17)T
L (cid:16)x(i) − α(i)Lx(i)
− α(i) eL(i)x(i) − α(i)Υ(i) − α(i)Ψ(i)(cid:17)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) x(i) = xi − xT Lx
max (cid:16) eL(i)(cid:17)i kxC⊥ k2
N (L)kxC⊥ k2 + α2 (i)λN (L)E hλ2
2
≤ −2α(i)xT L
x + α2 (i)λ3
+2α2 (i)λN (L)(cid:0)E (cid:2)kΥ(i)k2(cid:3)(cid:1)1/2 (cid:0)E (cid:2)kΨ(i)k2 (cid:3)(cid:1)1/2
+ α2 (i)λN (L)E (cid:2)kΥ(i)k2 (cid:3)
+α2 (i)λN (L)E (cid:2)kΨ(i)k2 (cid:3)
(37)
(38)
(39)
(40)
Since xT Lx ≥ λ2 (L)kxC⊥ k2 , the eigenvalues of eL(i) are not greater than 2N in magnitude, and from (17) get
(cid:19) xT Lx +
x + (cid:18) α2 (i)λ3
4α2 (i)N 2λN (L)
2α2 (i)M∆2λN (L)
N (L)
2
LV (i, x) ≤ −2α(i)xT L
+
3
λ2 (L)
λ2 (L)
(41)
≤ −α(i)ϕ(i, x) + g (i) [1 + V (i, x)]
12
where
+
,
2
ϕ(i, x) = 2xT L
x, g (i) = α2 (i) max (cid:18) λ3
(cid:19)
N (L)
λ2 (L)
Clearly, LV (i, x) and ϕ(i, x), g (i) satisfy the remaining assumptions (31) –(34) of Theorem 1; h ence,
ρ(x(i), C ) = 0i = 1
P h lim
i→∞
The convergence proof for QC will now be completed in the next Theorem.
2M∆2λN (L)
3
4N 2λN (L)
λ2 (L)
(42)
(43)
Theorem 3 (Consensus to finite random variable) Consider (16), with arbitrary initial condition x(0) ∈ RN ×1 and
the state sequence {x(i)}i≥0 . Then, there exists a finite random variable θ such that
P h lim
x(i) = θ1i = 1
i→∞
{Fi}i≥0 as
Proof: De fine the filtration
Fi = σ nx(0), {L(j )}0≤j<i , {Υ(j )}0≤j<i , {Ψ(j )}0≤j<io
We will now show that the sequence {xavg (i)}i≥0 is an L2 -bounded martingale w.r.t. {Fi}i≥0 . In fact,
(44)
(45)
xavg (i + 1) = xavg (i) − α(i)Υ(i) − α(i)Ψ(i)
where Υ(i) and Ψ(i) are the component-wise averages given by
Υ(i) =
1
N
1T Υ(i), Ψ(i) =
1
N
1T Ψ(i)
Then,
E [ xavg (i + 1) Fi ] = xavg (i) − α(i)E (cid:2) Υ(i)(cid:12)(cid:12) Fi (cid:3) − α(i)E (cid:2) Ψ(i)(cid:12)(cid:12) Fi (cid:3)
= xavg (i) − α(i)E (cid:2)Υ(i)(cid:3) − α(i)E (cid:2)Ψ(i)(cid:3)
= xavg (i)
where the last step follows from the fact that Υ(i) is independent of Fi , and
E (cid:2)Ψ(i) Fi (cid:3) = E (cid:2)Ψ(i) x(i)(cid:3)
= 0
because Ψ(i) is independent of x(i) as argued in Section II-B.
(46)
(47)
(48)
(49)
13
2
(50)
2
2
Thus, the sequence {xavg (i)}i≥0 is a martingale. For proving L2 boundedness, note
E (cid:2)x2
avg (i + 1)(cid:3) = E (cid:2)xavg (i) − α(i)Υ(i) − α(i)Ψ(i)(cid:3)2
avg (i)(cid:3) + α2 (i)E hΥ
(i)i + 2α2 (i)E (cid:2)Υ(i)Ψ(i)(cid:3)
(i)i + α2 (i)E hΨ
= E (cid:2)x2
2
avg (i)(cid:3) + α2 (i)E hΥ
(i)i
≤ E (cid:2)x2
2
+α2 (i)E hΨ
(i)i(cid:17)1/2
(i)i(cid:17)1/2 (cid:16)E hΨ
(i)i + 2α2 (i) (cid:16)E hΥ
2
2
2
Again, it can be shown by using the independence properties and (17) that
(i)i ≤
(i)i = E hΨ
E hΥ
where M is the number of realizable edges in the network (eqn. (19)). It then follows from eqn. (50) that
2α2 (i)M∆2
E (cid:2)x2
avg (i + 1)(cid:3) ≤ E (cid:2)x2
avg (i)(cid:3) +
3N 2
3N 2 Xj≥0
2M∆2
E (cid:2)x2
avg (i)(cid:3) ≤ x2
avg (0) +
Note that in this equation, x2
avg (0) is bounded since it is the average of the initial conditions, i.e., at time 0. Thus
{xavg (i)}i≥0 is an L2 -bounded martingale; hence, it converges a.s. and in L2 to a finite random variable θ ([44]).
In other words,
xavg (i) = θi = 1
P h lim
i→∞
Again, Theorem 2 implies that as i → ∞ we have x(i) → xavg (i)1 a.s. This and (54) prove the Theorem.
We extend Theorems 2,3 to derive the mean squared (m.s.s.) consensus of the sensor states to the random variable
θ under additional assumptions on the weight sequence {α(i)}i≥0 .
Finally, the recursion leads to
M∆2
6N 2
α2 (j )
(51)
(52)
(53)
(54)
Lemma 4 Let the weight sequence {α(i)}i≥0 be of the form:
α(i) =
a
(i + 1)τ
where a > 0 and .5 < τ ≤ 1. Then the a.s. convergence in Theorem 3 holds in m.s.s. also, i.e.,
E h(xn (i) − θ)2 i = 0,
Proof: The proof is provided in Appendix I.
lim
i→∞
∀n
(55)
(56)
B. QC Algorithm: Mean-Squared Error
Theorem 3 shows that the sensors reach consensus asymptotically and in fact converge a.s. to a finite random
variable θ. Viewing θ as an estimate of the initial average r (see eqn. (1)), we characterize its desirable statistical
properties in the following Lemma.
Lemma 5 Let θ be as given in Theorem 3 and r, the initial average, as given in eqn. (1). De fine
to be the m.s.e. Then, we have:
ζ = E [θ − r]2
14
(57)
1) Unbiasedness:
2) M.S.E. Bound:
E [θ] = r
3N 2 Pj≥0 α2 (j )
ζ ≤ 2M∆2
Proof: The proof follows from the arguments presented in the proof of Theorem 3 and is omitted.
We note that the m.s.e. bound in Lemma 5 is conservative. Recalling the de finition of M (i), as the number of
active links at time i (see eqn. (19)), we have (by revisiting the arguments in the proof of Theorem 3)
3N 2 Xj≥0
2∆2
α2 (j ) E (cid:2)M (i)2 (cid:3)
(58)
ζ ≤
(Note that the term Pj≥0 α2 (j ) E (cid:2)M (i)2 (cid:3) is well-de fined as E (cid:2)M (i)2 (cid:3) ≤ M2 , ∀i.) In case, we have a fixed
(non-random) topology, M (i) = M, ∀i and the bound in eqn. (58) reduces to the one in Lemma 5. For the
asynchronous gossip protocol in [33], M (i) = 1, ∀i, and hence
3N 2 Xj≥0
2∆2
Lemma 5 shows that, for a given ∆, ζ can be made arbitrarily small by properly scaling the weight sequence,
{α(i)}i≥0 . We formalize this. Given an arbitrary weight sequence, {α(i)}i≥0 , which satisfies the persistence
condition (20), de fine the scaled weight sequence, {αs (i)}i≥0 , as
ζgossip ≤
α2 (j )
(59)
αs (i) = sα(i), ∀i ≥ 0
(60)
where, s > 0, is a constant scaling factor. Clearly, such a scaled weight sequence satisfies the persistence condi-
tion (20), and the m.s.e. ζs obtained by using this scaled weight sequence is given by
3N 2 Xj≥0
2M∆2 s2
showing that, by proper scaling of the weight sequence, the m.s.e. can be made arbitrarily small.
However, reducing the m.s.e. by scaling the weights in this way will reduce the convergence rate of the algorithm.
α2 (j )
ζs ≤
(61)
This tradeoff is considered in the next subsection.
C. QC Algorithm: Convergence Rate
A detailed pathwise convergence rate analysis can be carried out for the QC algorithm using strong approximations
like laws of iterated logarithms etc., as is the case with a large class of stochastic approximation algorithms. More
generally, we can study formally some moderate deviations asymptotics ([45],[46]) or take recourse to concentration
inequalities ([47]) to characterize convergence rate. Due to space limitations we do not pursue such analysis in this
paper; rather, we present convergence rate analysis for the state sequence {x(i)}i≥0 in the m.s.s. and that of the
mean state vector sequence. We start by studying the convergence of the mean state vectors, which is simple, yet
15
illustrates an interesting trade-off between the achievable convergence rate and the mean-squared error ζ through
design of the weight sequence {α(i)}i≥0 .
From the asymptotic unbiasedness of θ we have
Our objective is to determine the rate at which the sequence {E [x(i)]}i≥0 converges to r1.
lim
i→∞
E [x(i)] = r1
(62)
, ∀i
α(i) ≤
Lemma 6 Without loss of generality, make the assumption
2
λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) + λN (L)
(We note that this holds eventually, as the α(i) decrease to zero.) Then,
kE [x(i)] − r1k ≤ (cid:16)e−λ2 (L)(P0≤j≤i−1 α(j))(cid:17) kE [x(0)] − r1k
Proof: We note that the mean state propagates as
E [x(i + 1)] = (cid:0)I − α(i)L(cid:1) E [x(i)] , ∀i
The proof then follows from [19] and is omitted.
It follows from Lemma 6 that the rate at which the sequence {E [x(i)]}i≥0 converges to r1 is closely related to
the rate at which the weight sequence, α(i), sums to in finity. On the other hand, to achieve a small bound ζ on the
m.s.e, see lemma 57 in Subsection III-B, we need to make the weights small, which reduces the convergence rate
of the algorithm. The parameter s introduced in eqn. (60) can then be viewed as a scalar control parameter, which
can be used to trade-off between precision (m.s.e.) and convergence rate. More specifically, if a cost structure is
(63)
(64)
(65)
imposed on the consensus problem, where the objective is a function of the m.s.e. and the convergence rate, one
may obtain the optimal scaling s minimizing the cost from the pareto-optimal curve generated by varying s. This
is significant, because the algorithm allows one to trade off m.s.e. vs. convergence rate, and in particular, if the
application requires precision (low m.s.e.), one can make the m.s.e. arbitrarily small irrespective of the quantization
step-size ∆. It is important to note in this context, that though the algorithms in [22], [20] lead to finite m.s.e., the
resulting m.s.e. is proportional to ∆2 , which may become large if the step-size ∆ is chosen to be large.
Note that this tradeoff is established between the convergence rate of the mean state vectors and the m.s.e. of
the limiting consensus variable θ. But, in general, even for more appropriate measures of the convergence rate, we
expect that, intuitively, the same tradeoff will be exhibited, in the sense that the rate of convergence will be closely
related to the rate at which the weight sequence, α(i), sums to in finity. We end this subsection by studying the
m.s.s. convergence rate of the state sequence {x(i)}i≥0 which is shown to exhibit a similar trade-off.
Lemma 7 Let the weight sequence {α(i)}i≥0 be of the form:
where a > 0 and .5 < τ ≤ 1. Then the m.s.s. error evolves as follows: For every 0 < ε < 2λ2
2 (L)
λN (L) , there exists
α(i) =
a
(i + 1)τ
(66)
−ε« Pi−1
j=iε
α(j)
iε ≥ 0, such that, for all i ≥ iε we have
E hkx(i) − r1k2 i ≤
+
1
λ2 (L)
λ2
−„2
2 (L)
λN (L)
e
i−1Xj=iε " e
i−1Xj=0
Proof: The proof is provided in Appendix I.
From the above we note that slowing up the sequence {α(i)}i≥0 decreases the polynomial terms on the R.H.S. of
eqn. (67), but increases the exponential terms and since the effect of exponentials dominate that of the polynomials
E hkxC⊥ (iε )k2 i
l=j+1 α(l)! g (j )# +
−ε« Pi−1
2M∆2
3
−„2
λ2
2 (L)
λN (L)
1
λ2 (L)
16
(67)
α2 (j )
we see a similar trade-off between m.s.e. and convergence rate (m.s.s.) as observed when studying the mean state
vector sequence above.
D. QC Algorithm: Generalizations
The QC algorithm can be extended to handle more complex situations of imperfect communication. For instance,
we may incorporate Markovian link failures (as in [19]) and time-varying quantization step-size with the same type
of analysis.
Markovian packet dropouts can be an issue in some practical wireless sensor network scenarios, where random
environmental phenomena like scattering may lead to temporal dependence in the link quality. Another situation
arises in networks of mobile agents, where physical aspects of the transmission like channel coherence time, channel
fading effects are related to the mobility of the dynamic network. A general analysis of all such scenarios is beyond
the scope of the current paper. However, when temporal dependence is manifested through a state dependent
Laplacian (this occurs in mobile networks, formation control problems in multi-vehicle systems), under fairly
general conditions, the link quality can be modeled as a temporal Markov process as in [19] (see Assumption 1.2
in [19].) Due to space limitations of the current paper, we do not present a detailed analysis in this context and
refer the interested reader to [19], where such temporally Markov link failures were addressed in detail, though in
the context of unquantized analog transmission.
The current paper focuses on quantized transmission of data and neglects the effect of additive analog noise.
Even in such a situation of digital transmission, the message decoding process at the receiver may lead to analog
noise. Our approach can take into account such generalized distortions and the main results will continue to hold.
For analysis purposes, temporally independent zero mean analog noise can be incorporated as an additional term
on the R.H.S. of eqn. (16) and subsequently absorbed into the zero mean vectors Ψ(i), Υ(i). Digital transmission
where bits can get flipped due to noise would be more challengi ng to address.
The case of time-varying quantization may be relevant in many practical communication networks, where because
of a bit-budget, as time progresses the quantization may become coarser (the step-size increases). It may also arise
if one considers a rate allocation protocol with vanishing rates as time progresses (see [48]). In that case, the
quantization step-size sequence, {∆(i)}i≥0 is time-varying with possibly
lim sup
i→∞
∆(i) = ∞
(68)
17
Also, as suggested in [27], one may consider a rate allocation scheme, in which the quantizer becomes finer as
time progresses. In that way, the quantization step-size sequence, {∆(i)}i≥0 may be a decreasing sequence.
Generally, in a situation like this to attain consensus the link weight sequence {α(i)}i≥0 needs to satisfy a
generalized persistence condition of the form
Xi≥0
α(i) = ∞, Xi≥0
Note, when the quantization step-size is bounded, this reduces to the persistence condition assumed earlier. We
state without proof the following result for time-varying quantization case.
α2 (i)∆2 (i) < ∞
(69)
Theorem 8 Consider the QC algorithm with time-varying quantization step size sequence {∆(i)}i≥0 and let the
link weight sequence {α(i)}i≥0 satisfy the generalized persistence condition in eqn. (69). Then the sensors reach
consensus to an a.s. finite random variable. In other words, t here exists an a.s. finite random variable θ, such that,
P h lim
xn (i) = θ, ∀ni = 1
i→∞
E h(θ − r)2 i ≤
3N 2 Xi≥0
2M
It is clear that in this case also, we can trade-off m.s.e. with convergence rate by tuning a scalar gain parameter s
associated with the link weight sequence.
Also, if r is the initial average, then
α2 (i)∆2 (i)
(70)
(71)
IV. CON S EN SU S W ITH QUANT IZ ED DATA : BOUNDED IN IT IAL SEN SOR STAT E
We consider consensus with quantized data and bounded range quantizers when the initial sensor states are
bounded, and this bound is known a priori. We show that finite bit quantizers (whose outputs take only a
finite
number of values) suffice. The algorithm QCF that we consider
is a simple modification of the QC algorithm
of Section III. The good performance of the QCF algorithm relies on the fact that, if the initial sensor states
are bounded, the state sequence, {x(i)}i≥0 generated by the QC algorithm remains uniformly bounded with high
probability, as we prove here. In this case, channel quantizers with finite dynamic range perform well with high
probability.
We brie fly state the QCF problem in Subsection IV-A. Then, Sub section IV-B shows that with high probability
the sample paths generated by the QC algorithm are uniformly bounded, when the initial sensor states are bounded.
Subsection IV-C proves that QCF achieves asymptotic consensus. Finally, Subsections IV-D and IV-E analyze its
statistical properties, performance, and tradeoffs.
A. QCF Algorithm: Statement
The QCF algorithm modifies the QC algorithm by restricting th e alphabet of the quantizer to be finite. It assumes
that the initial sensor state x(0), whose average we wish to compute, is known to be bounded. Of course, even if the
initial state is bounded, the states of QC can become unbounded. The good performance of QCF is a consequence
18
of the fact that, as our analysis will show, the states {x(i)}i≥0 generated by the QC algorithm when started with
a bounded initial state x(0) remain uniformly bounded with high probability.
The following are the assumptions underlying QCF. We let the the state sequence for QCF be represented by
{ex(i)}i≥0 .
1) Bounded initial state. Let b > 0. The QCF initial state ex(0) = xn (0) is bounded to the set B known `a priori
B = (cid:8)y ∈ RN ×1 yn ≤ b < +∞(cid:9)
(72)
2) Uniform quantizers and finite alphabet. Each inter-senso r communication channel in the network uses a uniform
⌈log2 (2p + 1)⌉ bit quantizer with step-size ∆, where p > 0 is an integer. In other words, the quantizer output
takes only 2p + 1 values, and the quantization alphabet is given by
eQ = {l∆ l = 0, ±1, · · · , ±p}
Clearly, such a quantizer will not saturate if the input falls in the range [(−p − 1/2)∆, (p + 1/2)∆); if the
input goes out of that range, the quantizer saturates.
3) Uniform i.i.d. noise. Like with QC, the {νnl (i)}i≥0,1≤n,l≤N are a sequence of i.i.d. random variables uniformly
distributed on [−∆/2, ∆/2).
4) The link failure model is the same as used in QC.
(73)
Given this setup, we present the distributed QCF algorithm, assuming that the sensor network is connected. The
state sequence, {ex(i)}i≥0 is given by the following Algorithm.
Algorithm 1: QCF
Initialize
exn (0) = xn (0), ∀n;
i = 0;
begin
while sup1≤n≤N supl∈Ωn (i) (exl (i) + νnl (i)) < (p + 1/2)∆ do
;
exn (i + 1) = (1 − α(i)dn (i))exn (i) + α(i) Pl∈Ωn (i) q(exl (i) + νnl (i)), ∀n;
i = i + 1;
end
Stop the algorithm and reset all the sensor states to zero
The last step of the algorithm can be distributed, since the network is connected.
B. Probability Bounds on Uniform Boundedness of Sample Paths of QC
The analysis of the QCF algorithm requires uniformity properties of the sample paths generated by the QC
algorithm. This is necessary, because the QCF algorithm follows the QC algorithm till one of the quantizers gets
overloaded. The uniformity properties require establishing statistical properties of the supremum taken over the
sample paths, which is carried out in this subsection. We show that the state vector sequence, {x(i)}i≥0 , generated
by the QC algorithm is uniformly bounded with high probability. The proof follows by splitting the sequence
19
{x(i)}i≥0 as the sum of the sequences {xavg (i)}i≥0 and {xC⊥ (i)}i≥0 for which we establish uniformity results.
The proof is lengthy and uses mainly maximal inequalities for submartingale and supermartingale sequences.
Recall that the state vector at any time i can be decomposed orthogonally as
x(i) = xavg (i)1 + xC⊥ (i)
(74)
where the consensus subspace, C , is given in eqn. (21). We provide probability bounds on the sequences {xavg (i)}i≥0
and {xC⊥ (i)}i≥0 and then use an union bound to get the final result.
The rest of the subsection concerns the proof of Theorem 12 which involves several intermediate lemmas as
stated below, whose proofs are provided in Appendix II.
We need the following result.
Lemma 9 Consider the QC algorithm stated in Section II and let {x(i)}i≥0 be the state it sequence generates.
De fine the function W (i, x), i ≥ 0, x ∈ RN ×1 , as
W (i, x) = (1 + V (i, x)) Yj≥i
where V (i, x) = xT Lx and {g (j )}j≥0 is de fined in eqn. (42). 2 Then, the process {W (i, x(i)}i≥0 is a non-negative
supermartingale with respect to the filtration {Fi}i≥0 de fined in eqn. (45).
[1 + g (j )]
(75)
The next Lemma bounds the sequence {xC⊥ (i)}i≥0 .
Lemma 10 Let {x(i)}i≥0 be the state vector sequence generated by the QC algorithm, with the initial state x(0) ∈
RN ×1 . Consider the orthogonal decomposition:
x(i) = xavg (i)1 + xC⊥ (i), ∀i
Then, for any a > 0, we have
kxC⊥ (j )k2 > a(cid:21) ≤ (cid:0)1 + x(0)T Lx(0)(cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
P (cid:20)sup
1 + aλ2 (L)
j≥0
where {g (j )}j≥0 is de fined in eqn. (42).
Next, we provide probability bounds on the uniform boundedness of {xavg (i)}i≥0 .
(76)
(77)
Lemma 11 Let {xavg (i)}i≥0 be the average sequence generated by the QC algorithm, with an initial state x(0) ∈
RN ×1 . Then, for any a > 0,
3N 2 Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
xavg (j ) > a(cid:21) ≤ hx2
avg (0) + 2M∆2
P (cid:20)sup
a
j≥0
(78)
2 The above function is well-defined because the term Qj≥i [1 + g(j )] is finite for any j , by the persistence condition on the weight sequence.
20
Theorem 12 Let {x(i)}i≥0 be the state vector sequence generated by the QC algorithm, with an initial state x(0) ∈
RN ×1 . Then, for any a > 0,
kx(j )k > a(cid:21) ≤ h2N x2
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
avg (0) + 4M∆2
P (cid:20)sup
a
j≥0
where {g (j )}j≥0 is de fined in eqn. (42).
+ (cid:0)1 + x(0)T Lx(0)(cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
1 + a2
2 λ2 (L)
(79)
We now state as a Corollary the result on the boundedness of the sensor states, which will be used in analyzing
the performance of the QCF algorithm.
Corollary 13 Assume that the initial sensor state, x(0) ∈ B , where B is given in eqn. (72). Then, if {x(i)}i≥0 is
the state sequence generated by the QC algorithm starting from the initial state, x(0), we have, for any a > 0,
xn (j ) > a(cid:21) ≤ h2N b2 + 4M∆2
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
+ (cid:0)1 + N λN (L)b2 (cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
P (cid:20)
1 + a2
a
2 λ2 (L)
where {g (j )}j≥0 is de fined in eqn. (42).
sup
1≤n≤N ,j≥0
(80)
C. Algorithm QCF: Asymptotic Consensus
We show that the QCF algorithm, given in Subsection IV-A, converges a.s. to a finite random variable and the
sensors reach consensus asymptotically.
Theorem 14 (QCF: a.s. asymptotic consensus) Let {ex(i)}i≥0 be the state vector sequence generated by the QCF
algorithm, starting from an initial state ex(0) = x(0) ∈ B . Then, the sensors reach consensus asymptotically a.s. In
other words, there exists an a.s. finite random variable eθ such that
i→∞ ex(i) = eθ1i = 1
P h lim
(81)
Proof: For the proof, consider the sequence {x(i)}i≥0 generated by the QC algorithm, with the same initial
state x(0). Let θ be the a.s. finite random variable (see eqn. 43) such that
P h lim
x(i) = θ1i = 1
i→∞
on nsupi≥0 sup1≤n≤N supl∈Ωn (i) xl (i) + νnl (i) < (p + 1
2 )∆o
0 otherwise
)∆!
eθ = θI sup
1
(84)
sup
sup
xl (i) + νnl (i) < (p +
2
i≥0
1≤n≤N
l∈Ωn (i)
where I(·) is the indicator function. Since nsupi≥0 sup1≤n≤N supl∈Ωn (i) xl (i) + νnl (i) < (p + 1/2)∆o is a mea-
surable set, it follows that eθ is a random variable.
eθ =
In other words, we have
It is clear that
θ
(82)
(83)
21
D. QCF: ǫ-Consensus
algorithm using finite bit quantizers with finite alphabet
Recall the QCF algorithm in Subsection IV-A and the assumptions 1) –4). A key step is that, if we run the QC
eQ as in eqn. (73), the only way for an error to occur is
for one of the quantizers to saturate. This is the intuition behind the design of the QCF algorithm.
Theorem 14 shows that the QCF sensor states asymptotically reach consensus, converging a.s. to a finite random
variable eθ . The next series of results address the question of how close is this consensus to the desired average r
in (1). Clearly, this depends on the QCF design: 1) the quantizer parameters (like the number of levels 2p + 1 or
the quantization step ∆); 2) the random network topology ; and 3) the gains α.
We de fine the following performance metrics which character ize the performance of the QCF algorithm.
De finition 15 (Probability of
ǫ-consensus and consensus-consistent) The probability of ǫ-consensus is de fined as
exn (i) − r < ǫ(cid:21)
T (G, b, α, ǫ, p, ∆) = P (cid:20) lim
i→∞
Note that the argument G in the de finition of T (·) emphasizes the in fluence of the network con figuration, where
b is given in eqn. (72).
The QCF algorithm is consensus-consistent3 iff for every G, b, ǫ > 0 and 0 < δ < 1, there exists quantizer
parameters p, ∆ and weights {α(i)}i≥0 , such that
sup
1≤n≤N
(85)
as
T (G, b, α, ǫ, p, ∆) > 1 − δ
(86)
Theorem 17 characterizes the probability of ǫ-consensus, while Proposition 18 considers several tradeoffs between
the probability of achieving consensus and the quantizer parameters and network topology, and, in particular, shows
that the QCF algorithm is consensus-consistent. We need the following Lemma to prove Theorem 17.
Lemma 16 Let eθ be de fined as in Theorem 14, with the initial state ex(0) = x(0) ∈ B . The desired average, r, is
given in (1). Then, for any ǫ > 0, we have
α2 (j ) + h2N b2 + 4M∆2
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
P heθ − r ≥ ǫi ≤
3N 2 ǫ2 Xj≥0
2M∆2
(87)
p∆
+ (cid:0)1 + N λN (L)b2 (cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
1 + p2∆2
2 λ2 (L)
(88)
where {g (j )}j≥0 is de fined in eqn. (42).
Proof: The proof is provided in Appendix III.
We now state the main result of this Section, which provides a performance guarantee for QCF.
3Consensus-consistent means for arbitrary ǫ > 0, the QCF quantizers can be designed so that the QCF states get within an ǫ-ball of r with
arbitrary high probability. Thus, a consensus-consistent algorithm trades off accuracy with bit-rate.
22
Theorem 17 (QCF: Probability of ǫ-consensus) For any ǫ > 0, the probability of ǫ-consensus T (G, b, α, ǫ, p, ∆) is
bounded below
α2 (j ) − h2N b2 + 4M∆2
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
exn (i) − r < ǫ(cid:21) > 1 −
P (cid:20) lim
3N 2ǫ2 Xj≥0
2M∆2
p∆
i→∞
− (cid:0)1 + N λN (L)b2 (cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
1 + p2∆2
2 λ2 (L)
sup
1≤n≤N
(89)
where {g (j )}j≥0 is de fined in eqn. (42).
Proof:
It follows from Theorem 14 that
i→∞ exn (i) = eθ a.s., ∀1 ≤ n ≤ N
lim
The proof then follows from Lemma 16.
The lower bound on T (·), given by (89), is uniform, in the sense that it is applicable for all initial states x(0) ∈ B .
Recall the scaled weight sequence αs , given by eqn. (60). We introduce the zero-rate probability of ǫ-consensus,
T z (G, b, ǫ, p, ∆) by
(90)
T z (G, b, ǫ, p, ∆) = lim
s→0
T (G, b, αs , ǫ, p, ∆)
(91)
The next proposition studies the dependence of the ǫ-consensus probability T (·) and of the zero-rate probability
T z ((·) on the network and algorithm parameters.
Proposition 18 (QCF: Tradeoffs) 1) Limiting quantizer. For fixed G, b, α, ǫ, we have
lim
∆→0, p∆→∞
T (G, b, α, ǫ, p, ∆) = 1
(92)
Since, this holds for arbitrary ǫ > 0, we note that, as ∆ → 0, p∆ → ∞,
P (cid:20) lim
exn (i) − r < ǫ(cid:21)
i→∞ ex(i) = r1i = lim
P h lim
sup
ǫ→0
i→∞
1≤n≤N
T (G, b, α, ǫ, p, ∆)(cid:21) = 1
ǫ→0 (cid:20)
lim
= lim
∆→0, p∆→∞
In other words, the QCF algorithm leads to a.s. consensus to the desired average r, as ∆ → 0, p∆ → ∞. In
particular, it shows that the QCF algorithm is consensus-consistent.
2) zero-rate ǫ-consensus probability. Then, for fixed G, b, ǫ, p, ∆, we have
T z (G, b, ǫ, p, ∆) ≥ 1 − (cid:0)2N b2(cid:1)1/2
1 + N λN (L)b2
1 + p2∆2
p∆
2 λ2 (L)
3) Optimum quantization step-size ∆. For fixed G, b, ǫ, p, the optimum quantization step-size ∆, which maximizes
(93)
−
the probability of ǫ-consensus, T (G, b, α, ǫ, p, ∆), is given by
∆≥0
α2 (j ) + h2N b2 + 4M ∆2
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
3N 2 ǫ2 Xj≥0
2M∆2
∆∗ (G, b, α, ǫ, p) = arg inf
p∆
+ (cid:0)1 + N λN (L)b2 (cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
1 + p2∆2
2 λ2 (L)
where {g (j )}j≥0 is de fined in eqn. (42).
23
(94)
(1 + gs (j )) → 1
Proof: For item 2), we note that, as s → 0,
Xj≥0
s (j ) → 0, Yj≥0
α2
The rest follows by simple inspection of eqn. (89).
We comment on Proposition 18. Item 1) shows that the algorithm QCF is consensus-consistent, in the sense that
we can achieve arbitrarily good performance by decreasing the step-size ∆ and the number of quantization levels,
2p + 1, appropriately. Indeed, decreasing the step-size increases the precision of the quantized output and increasing
p increases the dynamic range of the quantizer. However, the fact that ∆ → 0 but p∆ → ∞ implies that the rate
of growth of the number of levels 2p + 1 should be higher than the rate of decay of ∆, guaranteeing that in the
limit we have asymptotic consensus with probability one.
For interpreting item 2), we recall the m.s.e. versus convergence rate tradeoff for the QC algorithm, studied in
Subsection III-B. There, we considered a quantizer with a countably in finite number of output levels (as opposed
to the finite number of output levels in the QCF) and observed t hat the m.s.e. can be made arbitrarily small by
rescaling the weight sequence. By Chebyshev’s inequality, this would imply, that, for arbitrary ǫ > 0, the probability
of ǫ-consensus, i.e., that we get within an ǫ-ball of the desired average, can be made as close to 1 as we want.
However, this occurs at a cost of the convergence rate, which decreases as the scaling factor s decreases. Thus,
for the QC algorithm, in the limiting case, as s → 0, the probability of ǫ-consensus (for arbitrary ǫ > 0) goes
to 1; we call “limiting probability ” the zero-rate probabil
ity of ǫ-consensus, justifying the m.s.e. vs convergence
rate tradeoff.4 Item 2) shows, that, similar to the QC algorithm, the QCF algorithm exhibits a tradeoff between
probability of ǫ-consensus vs. the convergence rate, in the sense that, by scaling (decreasing s), the probability of
ǫ-consensus can be increased. However, contrary to the QC case, scaling will not lead to probability of ǫ-consensus
arbitrarily close to 1, and, in fact, the zero-rate probability of ǫ-consensus is strictly less than one, as given by
eqn. (93). In other words, by scaling, we can make T (G, b, αs , ǫ, p, ∆) as high as T z (G, b, ǫ, p, ∆), but no higher.
We now interpret the lower bound on the zero-rate probability of ǫ-consensus, T z (G, b, ǫ, p, ∆), and show that
the network topology plays an important role in this context. We note, that, for a fixed number, N , of sensor nodes,
the only way the topology enters into the expression of the lower bound is through the third term on the R.H.S.
4Note that, for both the algorithms, QC and QCF, we can take the scaling factor, s, arbitrarily close to 0, but not zero, so that, these limiting
performance values are not achievable, but we may get arbitrarily close to them.
Then, assuming that,
24
(95)
N λN (L)b2 ≫ 1,
λ2 (L) ≫ 1
we may use the approximation
1 + N λN (L)b2
1 + p2∆2
2 λ2 (L)
p2∆2
2
p2∆2 (cid:19) λN (L)
≈ (cid:18) 2N b2
λ2 (L)
Let us interpret eqn. (95) in the case, where the topology is fi xed (non-random). Then for all i, L(i) = L = L.
Thus, for a fixed number, N , of sensor nodes, topologies with smaller λN (L)/λ2 (L), will lead to higher zero-rate
probability of ǫ-consensus and, hence, are preferable. We note that, in this context, for fixed N , the class of non-
bipartite Ramanujan graphs give the smallest λN (L)/λ2 (L) ratio, given a constraint on the number, M , of network
edges (see [9].)
Item 3) shows that, for given graph topology G, initial sensor data, b, the link weight sequence α, tolerance ǫ,
and the number of levels in the quantizer p, the step-size ∆ plays a significant role in determining the performance.
This gives insight into the design of quantizers to achieve optimal performance, given a constraint on the number
of quantization levels, or, equivalently, given a bit budget on the communication.
In the next Subsection, we present some numerical studies on the QCF algorithm, which demonstrate practical
implications of the results just discussed.
E. QCF: Numerical Studies
We present a set of numerical studies on the quantizer step-size optimization problem, considered in Item 3) of
Proposition 18. We consider a fixed (non-random) sensor netw ork of N = 230 nodes, with communication topology
given by an LPS-II Ramanujan graph (see [9]), of degree 6.5 We fix ǫ at .05, and take the initial sensor data bound,
b, to be 30. We numerically solve the step-size optimization problem given in (94) for varying number of levels,
2p + 1. Specifically, we consider two instances of the optimizatio n problem: In the first instance, we consider the
weight sequence, α(i) = .01/(i + 1), (s = .01), and numerically solve the optimization problem for varying number
of levels. In the second instance, we repeat the same experiment, with the weight sequence, α(i) = .001/(i + 1),
(s = .001). As in eqn. (94), ∆∗ (G, b, αs , ǫ, p) denotes the optimal step-size. Also, let T ∗(G, b, αs , ǫ, p) be the
corresponding optimum probability of ǫ-consensus. Fig. 1 on the left plots T ∗ (G, b, αs , ǫ, p) for varying 2p + 1 on
the vertical axis, while on the horizontal axis, we plot the corresponding quantizer bit-rate BR = log2 (2p + 1).
The two plots correspond to two different scalings, namely, s = .01 and s = .001 respectively. The result is in
strict agreement with Item 2) of Proposition 18, and shows that, as the scaling factor decreases, the probability of
ǫ-consensus increases, till it reaches the zero-rate probability of ǫ-consensus.
Fig. 1 on the right plots ∆∗ (G, b, αs , ǫ, p) for varying 2p + 1 on the vertical axis, while on the horizontal axis, we
plot the corresponding quantizer bit-rate BR = log2 (2p + 1). The two plots correspond to two different scalings,
namely, s = .01 and s = .001 respectively. The results are again in strict agreement to Proposition 18 and further
show that optimizing the step-size is an important quantizer design problem, because the optimal step-size value is
sensitive to the number of quantization levels, 2p + 1.
5 This is a 6-regular graph, i.e., all the nodes have degree 6.
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
)
p
,
ǫ
,
b
,
G
(
∗
T
0
5
10
15
BR
s = .01
s = .001
20
25
)
p
,
ǫ
,
b
,
G
(
∗
∆
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
5
25
s = .01
s = .001
10
15
BR
20
25
Fig. 1. Left: T ∗ (G, b, αs , ǫ, p) vs. 2p + 1 (BR = log2 (2p + 1).) Right: ∆∗ (G, b, αs , ǫ, p) vs. 2p + 1 (BR = log2 (2p + 1).)
V. CONCLU S ION
The paper considers distributed average consensus with quantized information exchange and random inter-sensor
link failures. We add dither to the sensor states before quantization. We show by stochastic approximation that,
when the range of the quantizer is unbounded, the QC-algorithm, the sensor states achieve a.s. and m.s.s. consensus
to a random variable whose mean is the desired average. The variance of this random variable can be made small
by tuning parameters of the algorithm (rate of decay of the gains), the network topology, and quantizers parameters.
When the range of the quantizer is bounded, the QCF-algorithm, a sample path analysis shows that the state vector of
the QC-algorithm can be made to remain uniformly bounded with probability arbitrarily close to 1. This means that
the QCF algorithm achieves ǫ-consensus. We use the bounds that we derive for the probability of large excursions of
the sample paths to formulate a quantizer design problem that trades between several quantizer parameters: number
of bits (or levels), step size, probability of saturation, and error margin to consensus. A numerical study illustrates
this design problem and several interesting tradeoffs among the design parameters.
A P P END IX I
PROO F S O F L EMMA S 4 AND 7
Before deriving Lemmas 4 and 7, we present a result from [49] on a property of real number sequences to be
used later, see proof in [49].
,
r2 (t) =
r1 (t) =
Lemma 19 (Lemma 18 in [49]) Let the sequences {r1 (t)}t≥0 and {r2 (t)}t≥0 be given by
a2
a1
(t + 1)δ1
(t + 1)δ2
where a1 , a2 , δ2 ≥ 0 and 0 ≤ δ1 ≤ 1. Then, if δ1 = δ2 there exists K > 0 such that, for non-negative integers, s < t,
t−1Xk=s " t−1Yl=k+1
(1 − r1 (l))# r2 (k) ≤ K
Moreover, the constant K can be chosen independently of s, t. Also, if δ1 < δ2 , then, for arbitrary fixed s,
t−1Xk=s " t−1Yl=k+1
(1 − r1 (l))# r2 (k) = 0
lim
t→∞
0 ≤
(96)
(97)
(98)
Proof: [Proof of Lemma 4] Taking expectations (unconditional) on both sides of eqn. (41) we have
E [V (i + 1, x(i + 1))] ≤ E [V (i, x(i))] − α(i)E [ϕ(i, x(i))]
+ g (i) [1 + E [V (i, x(i))]]
We also have the following inequalities for all i:
λ2 (L) kxC⊥ k2 ≤ V (i, x(i)) = xT
C⊥ LxC⊥ ≤ λN (L) kxC⊥ k2
2
2 (L) kxC⊥ k2 ≤ ϕ(i, x(i)) = xT
λ2
C⊥ L
N (L) kxC⊥ k2
xC⊥ ≤ λ2
26
(99)
(100)
E [V (i, x(i))] ≤
+
(101)
(103)
i ≥ iε
(102)
λ2
2 (L)
λN (L)
From eqns. (99,99,100) we have
+ g (i)(cid:19) E [V (i, x(i))] + g (i)
E [V (i + 1, x(i + 1))] ≤ (cid:18)1 − 2α(i)
Choose 0 < ε < 2λ2
2 (L)
λN (L) and note that, the form of g (i) in eqn. (42) and the fact that α(i) → 0 as i → ∞ suggests
that there exists iε ≥ 0, such that, εα(i) ≥ g (i),
i ≥ iε . We then have
E [V (i + 1, x(i + 1))] ≤ (cid:18)1 − (cid:18)2
− ε(cid:19) α(i)(cid:19) E [V (i, x(i))] + g (i),
λ2
2 (L)
λN (L)
Continuing the recursion we have for i > iε ,
− ε(cid:19) α(j )(cid:19) E [V (i, x(iε ))]
i−1Yj=iε (cid:18)1 − (cid:18)2
λ2
2 (L)
λN (L)
− ε(cid:19) α(l)(cid:19) g (j )
i−1Yl=j+1 (cid:18)1 − (cid:18)2
i−1Xj=iε
λ2
2 (L)
λN (L)
i−1Yl=j+1 (cid:18)1 − (cid:18)2
λ2
−ε« Pi−1
−„2
i−1Xj=iε
2 (L)
α(j)
j=iε
λN (L)
E [V (i, x(iε ))] +
≤ e
where we use 1 − a ≤ e−a for a ≥ 0. Since the α(i)s sum to in finity, we have
−ε« Pi−1
−„2
α(j)
j=iε
= 0
The second term on the R.H.S. of (103) falls under Lemma 19 whose second part (eqn. (98)) implies
− ε(cid:19) α(l)(cid:19) g (j ) = 0
i−1Yl=j+1 (cid:18)1 − (cid:18)2
i−1Xj=iε
λ2
2 (L)
(105)
lim
λN (L)
i→∞
We conclude from eqn. (103) that limi→∞ E [V (i, x(i))] = 0. This with (99) implies limi→∞ E hkxC⊥ (i)k2 i = 0.
From the orthogonality arguments we have for all i
E hkx(i) − θ1k2 i = E hkxC (i) − θ1k2 i + E hkxC⊥ (i)k2 i
(106)
The second term in eqn. (106) goes to zero by the above, whereas the first term goes to zero by the L2 convergence
of the sequence {xavg (i)}i≥0 to θ and the desired m.s.s. convergence follows.
− ε(cid:19) α(l)(cid:19) g (j )
(104)
λ2
2 (L)
λN (L)
λ2
2 (L)
λN (L)
lim
i→∞
e
1
λ2 (L)
E [V (i, x(i))] ≤
Proof: [Proof of Lemma 7] From (99,103), using repeatedly 1 − a ≤ e−a for a ≥ 0, we have for i > iε
E hkxC⊥ k2 i ≤
λ2
−„2
−ε« Pi−1
2 (L)
j=iε
λN (L)
e
i−1Xj=iε " e
From the development in the proof of Theorem 3 we note that
E hkxC (i) − r1k2 i = N 2E hkxavg (i) − rk2 i ≤
We then arrive at the result by using the equality
E [V (iε , x(iε ))] +
l=j+1 α(l)! g (j )#
−ε« Pi−1
2M∆2
3
−„2
λ2
2 (L)
λN (L)
1
λ2 (L)
1
λ2 (L)
α(j)
α2 (j )
i−1Xj=0
kx(i) − r1k2 = kxC⊥ (i)k2 + kxC (i) − r1k2 ,
A P P END IX I I
PROO F S O F RE SULT S IN SUB S ECT ION IV-B
∀i
Proof: [Proof of Lemma 9] From eqn. (41) we have
E [V (i + 1, x(i + 1))x(i)] ≤ −α(i)ϕ(i, x(i))
27
(107)
(108)
(109)
+ g (i) [1 + V (i, x(i))] + V (i, x(i))
We then have
[1 + g (j )](cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
E [ W (i + 1, x(i + 1)) Fi ] = E (1 + V (i + 1, x(i + 1))) Yj≥i+1
x(i)
[1 + g (j )] (cid:16)1 + E h V (i + 1, x(i + 1))(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) x(i)i(cid:17)
= Yj≥i+1
[1 + g (j )] (cid:16)1 − α(i)ϕ(i, x(i)) + g (i) [1 + V (i, x(i))] + V (i, x(i))(cid:17)
≤ Yj≥i+1
= −α(i)ϕ(i, x(i)) Yj≥i+1
[1 + g (j )] + [1 + V (i, x(i))] Yj≥i
[1 + g (j )]
= −α(i)ϕ(i, x(i)) Yj≥i+1
[1 + g (j )] + W (i, x(i))
Hence E [W (i + 1, x(i + 1)) Fi ] ≤ W (i, x(i)) and the result follows.
Proof: [Proof of Lemma 10] For any a > 0 and i ≥ 0, we have
(110)
kxC⊥ (i)k2 > a =⇒ x(i)T Lx(i) ≥ aλ2 (L)
(111)
De fine the potential function V (i, x) as in Theorem 2 and eqn. (37) and the W (i, x) as in (75) in Lemma 9. It
then follows from eqn. (111) that
kxC⊥ (i)k2 > a =⇒ W (i, x(i)) > 1 + aλ2 (L)
(112)
By Lemma 9, the process (W (i, x(i)), Fi ) is a non-negative supermartingale. Then by a maximal inequality for
non-negative supermartingales (see [50]) we have for a > 0 and i ≥ 0,
W (j, x(j )) ≥ a(cid:21) ≤
P (cid:20) max
0≤j≤i
E [W (0, x(0))]
a
(113)
Also, we note that
(114)
≤ lim
i→∞
Thus, we have
W (j, x(j )) > a(cid:27) ⇐⇒ ∪i≥0 (cid:26) max
W (j, x(j )) > a(cid:27)
(cid:26)sup
0≤j≤i
j≥0
Since {max0≤j≤i W (j, x(j )) > a} is a non-decreasing sequence of sets in i, it follows from the continuity of
probability measures and eqn. (112)
P (cid:20) max
kxC⊥ (j )k2 > a(cid:21)
kxC⊥ (j )k2 > a(cid:21) = lim
P (cid:20)sup
i→∞
0≤j≤i
j≥0
P (cid:20) max
W (j, x(j )) > 1 + aλ2 (L)(cid:21)
≤ lim
i→∞
0≤j≤i
= (cid:0)1 + x(0)T Lx(0)(cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
E [W (0, x(0))]
1 + aλ2 (L)
1 + aλ2 (L)
Proof: [Proof of Lemma 11] It was shown in Theorem 3 that the sequence {xavg (i)}i≥0 is a martingale. It
then follows that the sequence, {xavg (i)}i≥0 , is a non-negative submartingale (see [44]).
The submartingale inequality then states that for a > 0
xavg (j ) ≥ a(cid:21) ≤
P (cid:20) max
E [xavg (i)]
a
0≤j≤i
Clearly, from the continuity of probability measures,
xavg (j ) > a(cid:21)
P (cid:20) max
xavg (j ) > a(cid:21) = lim
P (cid:20)sup
i→∞
0≥j≥i
j≥0
xavg (j ) > a(cid:21) ≤ lim
P (cid:20)sup
E [xavg (i)]
a
i→∞
j≥0
(the limit on the right exists because xavg (i) converges in L1 .) Also, we have from eqn. (53), for all i,
≤ x2
α2 (j )
1/2
E [xavg (i)] ≤ ≤ hE hxavg (i)2 ii1/2
3N 2 Xj≥0
2M∆2
avg (0) +
Combining eqns. (118,119), we have
3N 2 Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
xavg (j ) > a(cid:21) ≤ hx2
avg (0) + 2M∆2
P (cid:20)sup
a
j≥0
avg (i) + kxC⊥ (j )k2 , we have
Proof: [Proof of Theorem 12] Since, kx(j )k2 = N x2
kx(j )k2 > a(cid:21) ≤ P (cid:20)sup
P (cid:20)sup
2 (cid:21) + P (cid:20)sup
a
N xavg (j )2 >
kxC⊥ (j )k2 >
j≥0
j≥0
j≥0
= P (cid:20)sup
2 (cid:21)
2N (cid:17)1/2(cid:21) + P (cid:20)sup
xavg (j ) > (cid:16) a
a
j≥0
j≥0
We thus have from Lemmas 10 and 11,
3N 2 Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
kx(j )k2 > a(cid:21) ≤ hx2
+ (cid:0)1 + x(0)T Lx(0)(cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
avg (0) + 2M∆2
P (cid:20)sup
1 + (cid:0) a
2 (cid:1) λ2 (L)
(cid:0) a
2N (cid:1)1/2
j≥0
2 (cid:21)
a
kxC⊥ (i)k2 >
(121)
(116)
(117)
(118)
(119)
(120)
28
(115)
(122)
Proof: [Proof of Corollary 13] We note that, for x(0) ∈ B ,
x2
avg (0) ≤ b2 , x(0)T Lx(0) ≤ N λN (L)b2
29
(123)
sup
1≤n≤N ,j≥0
From Theorem 12, we then get,
xn (j ) > a(cid:21) ≤ P (cid:20)sup
P (cid:20)
kx(j )k > a(cid:21)
j≥0
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
≤ h2N x2
+ (cid:0)1 + x(0)T Lx(0)(cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
avg(0) + 4M∆2
1 + a2
a
2 λ2 (L)
≤ h2N b2 + 4M∆2
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
+ (cid:0)1 + N λN (L)b2 (cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
1 + a2
a
2 λ2 (L)
A P P END IX I I I
PROO F S O F L EMMA 1 6
We note that
Proof: [Proof of Lemma 16] For the proof, consider the sequence {x(i)}i≥0 generated by the QC algorithm,
with the same initial state x(0). Let θ be the a.s. finite random variable (see eqn. 43) such that
x(i) = θ1i = 1
P h lim
i→∞
P h(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)eθ − r(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≥ ǫi = P h(cid:16)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)eθ − r(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≥ ǫ(cid:17) ∩ (cid:16)eθ = θ(cid:17)i + P h(cid:16)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)eθ − r(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≥ ǫ(cid:17) ∩ (cid:16)eθ 6= θ(cid:17)i
= P h(θ − r ≥ ǫ) ∩ (cid:16)eθ = θ(cid:17)i + P h(cid:16)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)eθ − r(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≥ ǫ(cid:17) ∩ (cid:16)eθ 6= θ(cid:17)i
≤ P [θ − r ≥ ǫ] + P h eθ 6= θi
From Chebyshev’s inequality, we have
E hθ − r2 i
≤
P [θ − r ≥ ǫ] ≤
ǫ2
Next, we bound P h eθ 6= θi. To this end, we note that
sup
sup
sup
xl (i) + νnl (i) ≤ sup
i≥0
1≤n≤N
i≥0
l∈Ωn (i)
≤ sup
i≥0
sup
l∈Ωn (i)
xn (i) + sup
i≥0
3N 2ǫ2 Xj≥0
2M∆2
xl (i) + sup
i≥0
sup
1≤n≤N
sup
l∈Ωn (i)
νnl (i)
sup
1≤n≤N
sup
1≤n≤N
(124)
(125)
α2 (j )
νnl (i)
sup
1≤n≤N
sup
l∈Ωn (i)
≤ sup
i≥0
sup
1≤n≤N
xn (i) +
∆
2
(126)
sup
1≤n≤N
sup
1≤n≤N
sup
l∈Ωn (i)
2 (cid:19) ∆#
1
Then, for any δ > 0,
P h eθ 6= θi = P "sup
xl (i) + νnl (i) ≥ (cid:18)p +
i≥0
2 (cid:19) ∆(cid:21)
≤ P (cid:20)sup
≥ (cid:18)p +
∆
1
xn (i) +
2
i≥0
= P (cid:20)sup
xn (i) > p∆ − δ(cid:21)
xn (i) ≥ p∆(cid:21) ≤ P (cid:20)sup
sup
sup
i≥0
1≤n≤N
1≤n≤N
i≥0
≤ h2N b2 + 4M∆2
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
+ (cid:0)1 + N λN (L)b2 (cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
1 + (p∆−δ)2
p∆ − δ
λ2 (L)
2
where, in the last step, we use eqn. (124.) Since the above holds for arbitrary δ > 0, we have
δ↓0
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
h2N b2 + 4M∆2
+ (cid:0)1 + N λN (L)b2 (cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
P h eθ 6= θi ≤ lim
1 + (p∆−δ)2
p∆ − δ
λ2 (L)
2
= h2N b2 + 4M∆2
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
+ (cid:0)1 + N λN (L)b2 (cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
1 + p2∆2
p∆
2 λ2 (L)
Combining eqns. (125,126,128), we get the result.
30
(127)
(128)
IEEE Trans.
IEEE Trans.
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,
IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 52, pp.
RE F ERENCE S
[1] J. N. Tsitsiklis, “Problems in decentralized decision m aking and computation,” Ph.D., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge,
MA, 1984.
[2] J. N. Tsitsiklis, D. P. Bertsekas, and M. Athans, “Distri buted asynchronous deterministic and stochastic gradient optimization algorithms,”
IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., vol. AC-31, no. 9, pp. 803–812, september 1986.
[3] G. V. Cybenko, “Dynamic load balancing for distributed m emory multiprocessors,” Journal on Parallel and Distributed Computing, vol. 7,
pp. 279–301, 1989.
[4] A. Jadbabaie, J. Lin, and A. S. Morse, “Coordination of gr oups of mobile autonomous agents using nearest neighbor rules,”
Automat. Contr., vol. AC-48, no. 6, pp. 988–1001, June 2003.
[5] R. Olfati-Saber and R. M. Murray, “Consensus problems in networks of agents with switching topology and time-delays,”
Automat. Contr., vol. 49, no. 9, pp. 1520–1533, Sept. 2004.
[6] J. A. Fax and R. M. Murray, “Information flow and cooperati ve control of vehicle formations,”
vol. 49, no. 9, pp. 1465–1476, Sep. 2004.
[7] S. Boyd, A. Ghosh, B. Prabhakar, and D. Shah, “Randomized gossip algorithms,”
2508 – 2530, June 2006.
[8] V. Saligrama and D. Castanon, “Reliable distributed est imation with intermittent communications,” in 45th IEEE Conference on Decision
and Control, San Diego, CA, Dec. 2006, pp. 6763–6768.
[9] S. Kar, S. A. Aldosari, and J. M. F. Moura, “Topology for di stributed inference on graphs,”
vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 2609–2613, June 2008.
[10] R. Olfati-Saber, J. A. Fax, and R. M. Murray, “Consensus and cooperation in networked multi-agent systems,”
no. 1, pp. 215–233, January 2007.
[11] W. Ren, R. W. Beard, and E. M. Atkins, “Information conse nsus in multivehicle cooperative control,”
vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 71–82, April 2007.
[12] S. Kar and J. M. F. Moura, “Ramanujan topologies for deci sion making in sensor networks,” in 44th Allerton Conference on Communication,
Control, and Computing, Monticello, IL, Sept. 2006.
[13] L. Xiao and S. Boyd, “Fast linear iterations for distrib uted averaging,” Syst. Contr. Lett., vol. 53, pp. 65–78, 2004.
[14] R. Olfati-Saber, “Ultrafast consensus in small-world networks,” in 2005 American Control Conference, vol. 4, June 2005, pp. 2371 – 2378.
[15] S. Aldosari and J. Moura, “Distributed detection in sen sor networks: Connectivity graph and small world networks,” in 39th Asilomar
Conference on Signals, Systems, and Computers, Pacific Grove, CA, Nov. 2005, pp. 230–234.
[16] D. J. Watts and S. H. Strogatz, “Collective dynamics of s mall-world networks,” Nature, vol. 393, pp. 440–442, 1998.
[17] P. Barooah and J. P. Hespanha, “Graph effective resoist ance and distributed control: spectral properties and applications,” in 45th IEEE
Conference on Decision and Control, San Diego, CA, December 2006, pp. 3479–3485.
[18] B. Bamieh, M. Jovanovic, P. Mitra, and S. Patterson, “Ef fect of topological dimension on rigidity of vehicle formations: Fundamental
limitations of local feedback,” in 47th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Cancun, Mexico, December 2008, pp. 369–374.
[19] S. Kar and J. M. F. Moura, “Distributed consensus algori thms in sensor networks with imperfect communication: Link failures and channel
noise,”
IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 355–369, January 2009.
[20] A. Kashyap, T. Basar, and R. Srikant, “Quantized consen sus,” Automatica, vol. 43, pp. 1192–1203, July 2007.
[21] M. E. Yildiz and A. Scaglione, “Differential nested lat tice encoding for consensus problems,” in ACM/IEEE Information Processing in
Sensor Networks, Cambridge, MA, April 2007.
IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing,
IEEE Control Systems Magazine,
IEEE Proceedings, vol. 95,
31
[22] T. C. Aysal, M. Coates, and M. Rabbat, “Distributed aver age consensus using probabilistic quantization,” in IEEE/SP 14th Workshop on
Statistical Signal Processing Workshop, Maddison, Wisconsin, USA, August 2007, pp. 640–644.
[23] P. Frasca, R. Carli, F. Fagnani, and S. Zampieri, “Avera ge consensus on networks with quantized communication,” Submitted to the Int.
J. Robust and Nonlinear Control, 2008.
[24] A. Nedic, A. Olshevsky, A. Ozdaglar, and J. N. Tsitsiklis, “On distributed averaging algorithms and quantization e ffects,” Technical Report
2778, LIDS-MIT, Nov. 2007.
[25] L. Xiao, S. Boyd, and S.-J. Kim, “Distributed average co nsensus with least-mean-square deviation,” Journal of Parallel and Distributed
Computing, vol. 67, pp. 33–46, 2007.
[26] T. C. Aysal, M. J. Coates, and M. G. Rabbat, “Rates of conv ergence of distributed average consensus using probabilistic quantization,” in
Forty-Fifth Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing, Allerton, IL, USA, September 26-28 2007.
[27] —
IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 56, no. 10, pp. 4905–4918,
tization,”
—, “Distributed average consensus with dithered quan
October 2008.
[28] R. Carli, F. Fagnani, P. Frasca, and S. Zampieri, “Effici
ent quantized techniques for consensus algorithms,” in NeCST07, Nancy, 2007.
[29] A. Czirok, A. L. Barabasi, and T. Vicsek, “Collective mo tion of self propelled particles: Kinetic phase transition in one dimension,”
Physical Review Letters, vol. 82, pp. 209–212, 1999.
[30] J. Liu, V. Yadav, H. Sehgal, J. Olson, H. Liu, and N. Elia, “Phase transitions on fixed connected graphs and random grap hs in the presence
of noise,” in 44th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Seville, Spain, 12-15 Dec. 2005, pp. 734–739.
[31] Y. Ruan and Y. Mostofi, “Binary consensus with soft infor mation processing in cooperative networks,” in 47th IEEE Conference on
Decision and Control, 2008. CDC 2008., 9-11 Dec. 2008, pp. 3613–3619.
[32] M. Malmirchegini, Y. Ruan, and Y. Mostofi,
“Binary conse nsus over fading channels: A best affine estimation approach ,” in IEEE
Globecom., 2008.
[33] S. Boyd, A. Ghosh, B. Prabhakar, and D. Shah, “Randomize d gossip algorithms,”
2006.
[34] Y. Hatano, A. K. Das, and M. Mesbahi, “Agreement in prese nce of noise: pseudogradients on random geometric networks,” in 44th IEEE
Conference on Decision and Control, 2005 and 2005 European Control Conference. CDC-ECC ’05, Seville, Spain, December 2005.
[35] F. R. K. Chung, Spectral Graph Theory. Providence, RI : American Mathematical Society, 1997.
[36] B. Mohar, “The Laplacian spectrum of graphs,” in Graph theory, Combinatorics, and Applications, Y. Alavi, G. Chartrand, O. R. Oellermann,
and A. J. Schwenk, Eds. New York: J. Wiley & Sons, 1991, vol. 2, pp. 871–898.
[37] B. Bollob ´as, Modern Graph Theory. New York, NY: Springer Verlag, 1998.
[38] S. P. Lipshitz, R. A. Wannamaker, and J. Vanderkooy, “Qu antization and dither: A theoretical survey,” J. Audio Eng. Soc., vol. 40, pp.
355–375, May 1992.
[39] R. Wannamaker, S. Lipshitz, J. Vanderkooy, and J. Wright, “A theory of nonsubtractive dither,”
vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 499–516, February 2000.
[40] L. Schuchman, “Dither signals and their effect on quant ization noise,”
December 1964.
[41] A. B. Sripad and D. L. Snyder, “A necessary and sufficient
condition for quantization errors to be uniform and white,”
Speech, Signal Processing, vol. ASSP-25, pp. 442–448, October 1977.
[42] R. M. Gray and T. G. Stockham, “Dithered quantizers,”
IEEE Trans. Information Theory, vol. 39, pp. 805–811, May 1993.
[43] M. Nevel’son and R. Has’minskii, Stochastic Approximation and Recursive Estimation. Providence, Rhode Island: American Mathematical
Society, 1973.
[44] D. Williams, Probability with Martingales. Cambridge University Press, 1991.
[45] P. Dupuis and H. J. Kushner, “Stochastic approximation s via large deviations: Asymptotic properties,” SIAM J. Control Optim., vol. 23,
no. 5, pp. 675–696, September 1985.
[46] H. Kushner and G. Yin, Stochastic Approximation and Recursive Algorithms and Applications. Springer, 2003.
[47] V. S. Borkar, Stochastic Approximation: A Dynamical Systems Viewpoint. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
[48] M. E. Yildiz and A. Scaglione,
“Limiting rate behavior a nd rate allocation strategies for average consensus problems with bounded
convergence,” in 33rd International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, March
31 - April 4 2008.
“Distributed para meter estimation in sensor networks: Nonlinear observation models and
[49] S. Kar, J. M. F. Moura, and K. Ramanan,
imperfect communication,” Aug. 2008, submitted for public ation. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/0809.0009
[50] H. Kushner, Introduction to Stochastic Control. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1971.
IEEE Trans. Commun. Technol., vol. COMM-12, pp. 162–165,
IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw., vol. 14, no. SI, pp. 2508–2530,
IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing,
IEEE Trans. Acoust.,
9
0
0
2
p
e
S
8
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
3
v
9
0
6
1
.
2
1
7
0
:
v
i
X
r
a
Distributed Consensus Algorithms in Sensor
Networks: Quantized Data and Random Link
Failures
Soummya Kar and Jos ´e M. F. Moura ∗
quantizer parameters and to explore tradeoffs among the
number of quantizer levels, the size of the quantization
steps, the desired probability of saturation, and the desired
level of accuracy ǫ away from consensus. Finally, the paper
illustrates the quantizer design with a numerical study.
Keywords: Consensus, quantized, random link
failures, stochastic approximation, convergence, bounded
quantizer, sample path behavior, quantizer saturation
Abstract — The paper studies the problem of distributed
average consensus in sensor networks with quantized
data and random link failures. To achieve consensus,
dither (small noise) is added to the sensor states before
quantization. When the quantizer range is unbounded
(countable number of quantizer levels), stochastic approx-
imation shows that consensus is asymptotically achieved
with probability one and in mean square to a finite
random variable. We show that the mean-squared error
(m.s.e.) can be made arbitrarily small by tuning the link
weight sequence, at a cost of the convergence rate of
the algorithm. To study dithered consensus with random
links when the range of the quantizer is bounded, we
establish uniform boundedness of the sample paths of
the unbounded quantizer. This requires characterization
of the statistical properties of the supremum taken over
the sample paths of the state of the quantizer. This is
accomplished by splitting the state vector of the quantizer
in two components: one along the consensus subspace and
the other along the subspace orthogonal to the consensus
subspace. The proofs use maximal
inequalities for sub-
martingale and supermartingale sequences. From these,
we derive probability bounds on the excursions of the
two subsequences, from which probability bounds on the
excursions of the quantizer state vector follow. The paper
shows how to use these probability bounds to design the
The authors are with the Department of Electrical and Com-
puter Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
15213 (e-mail: [email protected], [email protected],
ph: (412)268-6341, fax: (412)268-3890.)
Work supported by NSF under grants # ECS-0225449 and # CNS-
0428404, by an IBM Faculty Award, and by the Office of Naval
Research under MURI N000140710747.
Manuscript initially submitted on December 10, 2007; last revised
on July 19, 2009.
2
I . INTRODUCT ION
the convergence properties of consensus algorithms to
This paper is concerned with consensus in networks,
e.g., a sensor network, when the data exchanges among
nodes in the network (sensors, agents) are quantized.
Before detailing our work, we brie fly overview the
literature.
the effective resistance of the network, thus obtaining
convergence rate scaling laws for networks in up to
3-dimensional space. Convergence results for general
problems in multi-vehicle formation has been consid-
ered in [?], where convergence rate is related to the
topological dimension of the network and stabilizability
Literature review. Consensus is broadly understood
as individuals in a community achieving a consistent
issues in higher dimensions are addressed. Robustness
issues in consensus algorithms in the presence of analog
view of the World by interchanging information regard-
ing their current state with their neighbors. Considered
in the early work of Tsitsiklis et. al. ([?], [?]), it has
received considerable attention in recent years and arises
in numerous applications including: load balancing, [?],
alignment, flocking, and multi-agent collaboration, e.g.,
[?], [?], vehicle formation, [?], gossip algorithms, [?],
tracking, data fusion, [?], and distributed inference, [?].
We refer the reader to the recent overviews on consensus,
which include [?], [?].
communication noise and random data packet dropouts
have been considered in [?].
literature on quantized consensus. Dis-
Review of
tributed consensus with quantized transmission has been
studied recently in [?], [?], [?], [?] with respect
to
time-invariant ( fixed) topologies. Reference [ ?] consid-
ers quantized consensus for a certain class of time-
varying topologies. The algorithm in [?] is restricted
to integer-valued initial sensor states, where at each
iteration the sensors exchange integer-valued data. It is
Consensus is a distributed iterative algorithm where
shown there that the sensor states are asymptotically
the sensor states evolve on the basis of local interactions.
Reference [?] used spectral graph concepts like graph
Laplacian and algebraic connectivity to prove conver-
gence for consensus under several network operating
close (in their appropriate sense) to the desired average,
but may not reach absolute consensus. In [?], the noise
in the consensus algorithm studied in [?] is interpreted as
quantization noise and shown there by simulation with
conditions (e.g., delays and switching networks,
i.e.,
a small network that the variance of the quantization
time varying). Our own prior work has been concerned
with designing topologies that optimize consensus with
respect to the convergence rate, [?], [?]. Topology design
is concerned with two issues: 1) the de finition of the
graph that specifies the neighbors of each sensor—
i.e., with whom should each sensor exchange data; and
2) the weights used by the sensors when combining the
information received from their neighbors to update their
state. Reference [?] considers the problem of weight
design, when the topology is specified, in the frame-
work of semi-de finite programming. References [ ?], [?]
considered the impact of different topologies on the
convergence rate of consensus, in particular, regular, ran-
dom, and small-world graphs, [?]. Reference [?] relates
noise is reduced as the algorithm iterates and the sen-
sors converge to a consensus. References [?], [?] study
probabilistic quantized consensus. Each sensor updates
its state at each iteration by probabilistically quantizing
its current state (which [?] claims equivalent to dithering)
and linearly combining it with the quantized versions of
the states of the neighbors. They show that the sensor
states reach consensus a.s. to a quantized level. In [?] a
worst case analysis is presented on the error propagation
of consensus algorithms with quantized communication
for various classes of time-invariant network topologies,
while [?] addresses the impact of more involved encod-
ing/decoding strategies, beyond the uniform quantizer.
The effect of communication noise in the consensus
3
process may lead to several interesting phase transition
proofs do not require any distributional assumptions
phenomena in global network behavior, see, for example,
[?] in the context of a network of mobile agents with a
non-linear interaction model and [?], which rigorously
establishes a phase transition behavior in a network of
on the link failure model (in space). During the same
iteration, the link failures can be spatially dependent,
i.e., correlated across different edges of the network. The
model we work with in this paper subsumes the erasure
bipolar agents when the communication noise exceeds
network model, where link failures are independent both
a given threshold. Consensus algorithms with general
over space and time. Wireless sensor networks motivate
imperfect communication (including quantization) in a
us since interference among the sensors communication
certain class of time-varying topologies has been ad-
dressed in [?], which assumes that there exists a window
of fixed length, such that the union of the network graphs
formed within that window is strongly connected. From
a distributed detection viewpoint, binary consensus algo-
rithms over networks of additive white Gaussian noise
channels were addressed in [?], which proposed soft
information processing techniques to improve consensus
convergence properties over such noisy channels. The
impact of fading on consensus is studied in [?].
Contributions of this paper. We consider consen-
sus with quantized data and random inter-sensor link
correlates the link failures over space, while over time,
it is still reasonable to assume that the channels are
memoryless or independent. Note that the assumption
λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) > 0 does not require the individual random in-
stantiations of L(i) to be connected; in fact, it is possible
to have all the instantiations to be disconnected. This
captures a broad class of asynchronous communication
models, for example, the random asynchronous gossip
protocol in [?] satisfies λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) > 0 and hence falls under
this framework.
The main contribution of this paper is the study of
the convergence and the detailed analysis of the sample
failures. This is useful in applications where limited
path of this dithered distributed quantized consensus
bandwidth and power for inter-sensor communications
preclude exchanges of high precision (analog) data as
in wireless sensor networks. Further, randomness in the
algorithm with random link failures. This distinguishes
our work from [?] that considers fixed topologies (no
random links) and integer valued initial sensor states,
environment results in random data packet dropouts. To
while our initial states are arbitrarily real valued. To our
handle quantization, we modify standard consensus by
knowledge, the convergence and sample path analysis
adding a small amount of noise, dither,
to the data
of dithered quantized consensus with random links has
before quantization and by letting the consensus weights
not been carried out before. The sample path analysis
to be time varying, satisfying a persistence condition –
of quantized consensus algorithms is needed because in
their sum over time diverges, while their square sum is
practice quantizers work with bounded ( finite) ranges.
finite. We will show that dithered quantized consensus
The literature usually pays thrift attention or simply
in networks with random links converges.
ignores the boundary effects induced by the bounded
The randomness of the network topology is cap-
range of the quantizers; in other words, although assum-
tured by assuming that the time-varying Laplacian se-
quence, {L(i)}i≥0 , which characterizes the communica-
tion graph, is independent with mean L; further, to prove
convergence, we will need the mean graph algebraic
connectivity ( first nonzero eigenvalue of L) λ2 (L) > 0,
i.e., the network to be connected on the average. Our
ing finite range quantizers, the analysis in the literature
ignores the boundary effects. Our paper studies carefully
the sample path behavior of quantized consensus when
the range of the quantizer is bounded. It computes, under
appropriate conditions, the probability of large excursion
of the sample paths and shows that the quantizer can be
4
designed so that with probability as close to 1 as desired
the sample path excursions remain bounded, within an
ǫ-distance of the desired consensus average. Neither our
previous work [?], which deals with consensus with
noisy analog communications in a random network, nor
references [?], [?], [?], which introduce a probabilistic
quantized consensus algorithm in fixed networks, nor [ ?],
which studies consensus with analog noisy communica-
QCF is a very simple algorithm: it is QC till the QC
state reaches the quantizer bound, otherwise an error is
declared and the algorithm terminated. To study QCF,
we establish uniform boundedness of the sample paths
of the QC algorithm. This requires establishing the sta-
tistical properties of the supremum taken over the sample
paths of the QC. This is accomplished by splitting the
state vector of the quantizer in two components: one
tion and fixed network, study the sample path behavior
along the consensus subspace and the other along the
of quantized consensus. Also, while the probabilistic
consensus in [?], [?], [?] converges almost surely to
a quantized level, in our work, we show that dithered
subspace orthogonal to the consensus subspace. These
proofs use maximal inequalities for submartingale and
supermartingale sequences. From these, we are able to
consensus converges a.s. to a random variable which can
derive probability bounds on the excursions of the two
be made arbitrarily close to the desired average.
subsequences, which we use to derive probability bounds
To study the a.s. convergence and m.s.s. conver-
on the excursions of the QC. We see that to carry out
gence of the dithered distributed quantizers with random
this sample path study requires new methods of anal-
links and unbounded range, the stochastic approximation
method we use in [?] is sufficient. In simple terms,
we associate, like in [?], with the quantized distributed
consensus a Lyapounov function and study the behavior
ysis that go well beyond the stochastic approximation
methodology that we used in our paper [?], and also
used by [?] to study consensus with noise but fixed
networks. The detailed sample path analysis leads to
of this Lyapounov function along the trajectories of the
bounds on the probability of the sample path excursions
noisy consensus algorithm with random links. To show
of the QC algorithm. We then use these bounds to design
almost sure convergence, we show that a functional of
the quantizer parameters and to explore tradeoffs among
this process is a nonnegative supermartingale; conver-
gence follows from convergence results on nonnegative
supermartingales. We do this in Section III where we
term the unbounded dithered distributed quantized con-
sensus algorithm with random links simply Quantized
Consensus, for short, or QC algorithm. Although the
general principles of the approach are similar to the ones
in [?], the details are different and not trivial–we mini-
mize the overlap and refer the reader to [?] for details.
A second reason to go over this analysis in the paper for
these parameters. In particular, we derive a probability
of ǫ-consensus expressed in terms of the ( finite) number
of quantizer levels, the size of the quantization steps, the
desired probability of saturation, and the desired level of
accuracy ǫ away from consensus.
For the QC algorithm, there exists an interesting trade-
off between the m.s.e. (between the limiting random
variable and the desired initial average) and the conver-
gence: by tuning the link weight sequence appropriately,
it is possible to make the m.s.e. arbitrarily small (irre-
the QC algorithm is that we derive in this Section for QC
spective of the quantization step-size), though penalizing
several specific bounds that are used and needed as inter-
mediate results for the sample path analysis that is car-
ried out in Section IV when studying dithered quantized
consensus when the quantizer is bounded, i.e., Quantized
Consensus with Finite quantizer, the QCF quantizer. The
the convergence rate. To tune the QC-algorithm, we
introduce a scalar control parameter s (associated with
the time-varying link weight sequence), which can make
the m.s.e. as small as we want, irrespective of how large
the step-size ∆ is. This is significant in applications
5
that rely on accuracy and may call for very small m.s.e.
A. Preliminaries: Notation and Average Consensus
for being useful. More specifically, if a cost structure is
imposed on the consensus problem, where the objective
is a function of the m.s.e. and the convergence rate, one
may obtain the optimal scaling s by minimizing the cost
from the Pareto-optimal curve generated by varying s.
These tradeoffs and vanishingly small m.s.e. contrasts
with the algorithms in [?], [?], [?], [?], [?] where the
m.s.e. is proportional to ∆2 , the quantization step-size –
if the step-size is large, these algorithms lead to a large
m.s.e.
Organization of the paper. We comment brie fly on
the organization of the main sections of the paper. Sec-
tion II summarizes relevant background, including spec-
tral graph theory and average consensus, and presents
the dithered quantized consensus problem with the dither
satisfying the Schuchman conditions. Sections III con-
siders the convergence of the QC algorithm. It shows
a.s. convergence to a random variable, whose m.s.e. is
fully characterized. Section IV studies the sample path
behavior of the QC algorithm through the QCF. It uses
the expressions we derive for the probability of large
excursions of the sample paths of the quantizer to con-
sider the tradeoffs among different quantizer parameters,
e.g., number of bits and quantization step, and the
network topology to achieve optimal performance under
a constraint on the number of levels of the quantizer.
These tradeoffs are illustrated with a numerical study.
Finally, Section V concludes the paper.
The sensor network at time index i is represented
by an undirected, simple, connected graph G(i) =
(V , E (i)). The vertex and edge sets V and E (i), with
cardinalities V = N and E (i) = M (i), collect the
sensors and communication channels or links among
sensors in the network at time i. The network topology
at time i, i.e., with which sensors does each sensor
communicate with, is described by the N × N discrete
Laplacian L(i) = LT (i) = D(i) − A(i) ≥ 0. The
matrix A(i) is the adjacency matrix of the connectivity
graph at time i, a (0, 1) matrix where Ank (i) = 1
signifies that
there is a link between sensors n and
k at
time i. The diagonal entries of A(i) are zero.
The diagonal matrix D(i) is the degree matrix, whose
diagonal Dnn (i) = dn (i) where dn (i) is the degree
of sensor n, i.e., the number of links of sensor n at
time i. The neighbors of a sensor or node n, collected
in the neighborhood set Ωn (i), are those sensors k for
which entries Ank (i) 6= 0. The Laplacian is positive
semide finite; in case the network is connected at time
i, the corresponding algebraic connectivity or Fiedler
value is positive,
i.e.,
the second eigenvalue of the
Laplacian λ2 (L(i)) > 0, where the eigenvalues of L(i)
are ordered in increasing order. For detailed treatment
of graphs and their spectral theory see, for example, [?],
[?], [?]. Throughout the paper the symbols P[·] and E[·]
denote the probability and expectation operators w.r.t.
the probability space of interest.
I I . CON S EN SU S W ITH QUANT IZ ED DATA : PROBL EM
STAT EMENT
We present preliminaries needed for the analysis of
the consensus algorithm with quantized data. The set-up
of the average consensus problem is standard, see the
introductory sections of relevant recent papers.
Distributed Average Consensus. The sensors mea-
sure the data xn (0), n = 1, · · · , N , collected in the
vector x(0) = [x1 (0) · · · xN (0)]T ∈ RN ×1 . Distributed
average consensus computes the average r of the data
NXn=1
by local data exchanges among neighboring sensors.
In (1), the column vector 1 has all entries equal to 1.
Consensus is an iterative algorithm where at iteration i
r = xavg (0) =
1
N
xn (0) =
x(0)T 1 (1)
1
N
each sensor updates its current state xn (i) by a weighted
average of its current state and the states of its neighbors.
Standard consensus assumes a fixed connected network
topology, i.e.,
the links stay online permanently, the
communication is noiseless, and the data exchanges are
analog. Under mild conditions, the states of all sensors
reach consensus, converging to the desired average r, see
[?], [?],
where y ∈ R is the channel input. Writing
q(y ) = y + e(y )
6
(5)
where e(y ) is the quantization error. Conditioned on the
input, the quantization error e(y ) is deterministic, and
−
∆
2
≤ e(y ) <
∆
2
, ∀y
(6)
We first consider quantized consensus (QC) with un-
lim
i→∞
x(i) = r1
(2)
bounded range, i.e., the quantization alphabet
where x(i) = [x1 (i) · · · xN (i)]T is the state vector that
stacks the state of the N sensors at iteration i. We
consider consensus with quantized data exchanges and
random topology (links fail or become alive at random
times), which models packet dropouts. In [?], we studied
consensus with random topologies and (analog) noisy
communications.
B. Dithered Quantization: Schuchman Conditions
We write the sensor updating equations for consensus
Q = {k∆ k ∈ Z}
(7)
is countably in finite. In Section IV. we consider what
happens when the range of the quantizer is finite –
quantized consensus with finite (QCF) alphabet. This
study requires that we detail the sample path behavior
of the QC-algorithm.
We discuss brie fly why a naive approach to consensus
will fail (see [?] for a similar discussion.) If we use
directly the quantized state information, the functions
fnl,i (·) in eqn. (3) are
fnl,i (xl (i)) = q(xl (i))
fnl,i [xl (i)] , 1 ≤ n ≤ N
= xl (i) + e(xl (i))
(8)
(9)
(3)
with quantized data and random link failures as
xn (i+1) = [1 − α(i)dn (i)] xn (i)+α(i) Xl∈Ωn (i)
where: α(i)
iteration i;
at
the weight
is
and
{fnl,i}1≤n,l≤N , i≥0 is a sequence of functions (possibly
random) modeling the quantization effects. Note that
in (3), the weights α(i) are the same across all links—
the equal weights consensus, see [?] —but the weights
may change with time. Also, the degree dn (i) and the
neighborhood Ωn (i) of each sensor n, n = 1, · · · , N
are dependent on i emphasizing the topology may be
random time-varying.
Quantizer. Each inter-sensor communication channel
uses a uniform quantizer with quantization step ∆. We
model the communication channel by introducing the
quantizing function, q(·) : R → Q,
Equations (3) take then the form
xl (i)+α(i) Xl∈Ωn (i)
xn (i+1) = (1 − α(i)dn (i))xn (i) + α(i) Xl∈Ωn (i)
(10)
The non-stochastic errors (the most right terms in (10))
lead to error accumulation. If the network topology
e(xl (
remains fixed (deterministic topology,) the update in
eqn. (10) represents a sequence of iterations that, as
observed above, conditioned on the initial state, which
then determines the input, are deterministic. If we choose
the weights α(i)’s to decrease to zero very quickly,
then (10) may terminate before reaching the consensus
set. On the other hand, if the α(i)’s decay slowly, the
quantization errors may accumulate, thus making the
q(y ) = k∆,
(k −
1
2
)∆ ≤ y < (k +
1
2
)∆
(4)
states unbounded.
In either case, the naive approach to consensus with
quantized data fails to lead to a reasonable solution. This
failure is due to the fact that the error terms are not
stochastic. To overcome these problems, we introduce
satisfies the Schuchman conditions. Hence, the quantiza-
tion error sequence, {ǫ(i)}, is i.i.d. uniformly distributed
on [−∆/2, ∆/2) and independent of the input sequence
{y (i)}i≥0 .
7
in
a controlled way noise (dither) to randomize the sensor
states prior to quantizing the perturbed stochastic state.
Under appropriate conditions, the resulting quantization
errors possess nice statistical properties, leading to the
quantized states reaching consensus (in an appropriate
sense to be de fined below.) Dither places consensus
with quantized data in the framework of distributed
consensus with noisy communication links; when the
range of the quantizer is unbounded, we apply stochastic
approximation to study the limiting behavior of QC, as
we did in [?] to study consensus with (analog) noise and
random topology. Note that if instead of adding dither,
we assumed that the quantization errors are independent,
uniformly distributed random variables, we would not
need to add dither, and our analysis would still apply.
Schuchman conditions. The dither added to random-
ize the quantization effects satisfies a special condition,
namely, as in subtractively dithered systems, see [?],
[?]. Let {y (i)}i≥0 and {ν (i)}i≥0 be arbitrary sequences
of random variables, and q(·) be the quantization func-
tion (4). When dither is added before quantization, the
quantization error sequence, {ε(i)}i≥0 , is
ε(i) = q(y (i) + ν (i)) − (y (i) + ν (i))
(11)
If the dither sequence, {ν (i)}i≥0 , satisfies the Schuch-
man conditions, [?],
then the quantization error se-
quence, {ε(i)}i≥0 , in (11) is i.i.d. uniformly distributed
on [−∆/2, ∆/2) and independent of the input sequence
{y (i)}i≥0 (see [?], [?], [?]). A sufficient condition for
{ν (i)} to satisfy the Schuchman conditions is for it
to be a sequence of i.i.d. random variables uniformly
distributed on [−∆/2, ∆/2) and independent of the input
sequence {y (i)}i≥0 . In the sequel, the dither {ν (i)}i≥0
C. Dithered Quantized Consensus With Random Link
Failures: Problem Statement
We now return to the problem formulation of consen-
sus with quantized data with dither added. Introducing
the sequence, {νnl (i)}i≥0,1≤n,l≤N , of i.i.d. random vari-
ables, uniformly distributed on [−∆/2, ∆/2), the state
update equation for quantized consensus is:
xn (i+1) = (1 − α(i)dn (i)) xn (i)+α(i) Xl∈Ωn (i)
This equation shows that, before transmitting its state
xl (i) to the n-th sensor, the sensor l adds the dither
νnl (i), then the channel between the sensors n and l
quantizes this corrupted state, and,
finally, sensor n
receives this quantized output. Using eqn. (11), the state
(12)
q [xl (i) + νnl (i)] , 1 ≤ n ≤
[xl (i) + νnl (i) + εnl (i)]
update is
xn (i+1) = (1 − α(i)dn ) xn (i)+α(i) Xl∈Ωn (i)
(13)
The random variables νnl (i) are independent of the state
x(j ), i.e., the states of all sensors at iteration j , for j ≤ i.
Hence, the collection {εnl (i)} consists of i.i.d. random
variables uniformly distributed on [−∆/2, ∆/2), and the
random variable εnl (i) is also independent of the state
x(j ), j ≤ i.
We rewrite (13) in vector form. De fine the random
vectors, Υ(i) and Ψ(i) ∈ RN ×1 with components
Υn (i) = − Xl∈Ωn (i)
Ψn (i) = − Xl∈Ωn (i)
The the N state update equations in (13) become in
νnl (i)
εnl (i)
(14)
(15)
vector form
x(i + 1) = x(i) − α(i) [L(i)x(i) + Υ(i) + Ψ(i)] (16)
where Υ(i) and Ψ(i) are zero mean vectors, independent
of the state x(i), and have i.i.d. components. Also, if M
is the number of realizable network links, eqns. (14) and
(15) lead to
E (cid:2)kΥ(i)k2 (cid:3) = E (cid:2)kΨ(i)k2(cid:3) ≤
Random Link Failures: We now state the assumption
about the link failure model to be adopted throughout the
M∆2
6
, i ≥ 0
(17)
paper. The graph Laplacians are
L(i) = L + eL(i), ∀i ≥ 0
where {L(i)}i≥0 is a sequence of i.i.d. Laplacian matri-
ces with mean L = E [L(i)], such that λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) > 0 (we
just require the network to be connected on the average.)
We do not make any distributional assumptions on the
(18)
link failure model. During the same iteration, the link
failures can be spatially dependent, i.e., correlated across
different edges of the network. This model subsumes
the erasure network model, where the link failures are
independent both over space and time. Wireless sensor
networks motivate this model since interference among
the sensors communication correlates the link failures
over space, while over time, it is still reasonable to
assume that the channels are memoryless or independent.
We also note that the above assumption λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) > 0
does not require the individual random instantiations of
L(i) to be connected; in fact, it is possible to have all
the instantiations to be disconnected. This enables us to
capture a broad class of asynchronous communication
models, for example, the random asynchronous gossip
λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) > 0 and
protocol analyzed in [?] satisfies
hence falls under this framework. More generally, in the
asynchronous set up, if the sensors nodes are equipped
with independent clocks whose ticks follow a regular
random point process (the ticking instants do not have
8
an accumulation point, which is true for all renewal
processes, in particular, the Poisson clock in [?]), and at
each tick a random network is realized with λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) > 0
independent of the the networks realized in previous
ticks (this is the case with the link formation process
assumed in [?]) our algorithm applies.1
We denote the number of network edges at time i as
M (i), where M (i) is a random subset of the set of all
possible edges E with E = N (N − 1)/2. Let M denote
the set of realizable edges. We then have the inclusion
M (i) ⊂ M ⊂ E , ∀i
(19)
It
is important
to note that
the value of M (i) de-
pends on the link usage protocol. For example, in the
asynchronous gossip protocol considered in [?], at each
iteration only one link is active, and hence M (i) = 1.
Independence Assumptions: We assume that
the
Laplacian sequence {L(i)}i≥0 is independent of the
dither sequence {εnl (i)}.
Persistence condition: To obtain convergence, we
assume that the gains α(i) satisfy the following.
α(i) > 0, Xi≥0
α(i) = ∞, Xi≥0
Condition (20) assures that the gains decay to zero, but
not too fast. It is standard in stochastic adaptive signal
α2 (i) < ∞ (20)
processing and control; it is also used in consensus with
noisy communications in [?], [?].
Markov property. Denote the natural filtration of the
i (cid:9)i≥0
process X = {x(i)}i≥0 by (cid:8)F X
. Because the dither
random variables νnl (i), 1 ≤ n, l ≤ N , are independent
of F X
at any time i ≥ 0, and, correspondingly, the
i
noises Υ(i) and Ψ(i) are independent of x(i),
the
process X is Markov.
1 In case the network is static, i.e., the connectivity graph is time-
invariant, all the results in the paper apply with L(i) ≡ L, ∀i.
I I I . CON S EN SU S W ITH QUANT IZ ED DATA :
We prove the a.s. convergence of the QC algorithm
9
UNBOUNDED QUANT IZ ED STAT E S
We consider that the dynamic range of the initial
sensor data, whose average we wish to compute,
is
not known. To avoid quantizer saturation, the quantizer
output takes values in the countable alphabet (7), and so
the channel quantizer has unrestricted dynamic range.
This is the quantizer consensus (QC) with unbounded
range algorithm. Section IV studies quantization with
unbounded range, i.e., the quantized consensus finite-
bit (QCF) algorithm where the channel quantizers take
only a finite number of output values ( finite-bit quantiz-
ers).
We comment brie fly on the organization of the re-
maining of this section. Subsection III-A proves the
a.s. convergence of the QC algorithm. We characterize
the performance of the QC algorithm and derive expres-
sions for the mean-squared error in Subsection III-B. The
tradeoff between m.s.e. and convergence rate is studied
in Subsection III-C. Finally, we present generalizations
to the approach in Subsection III-D.
A. QC Algorithm: Convergence
We start with the de finition of the consensus subspace
C given as
C = (cid:8)x ∈ RN ×1 (cid:12)(cid:12) x = a1, a ∈ R(cid:9)
We note that any vector x ∈ RN can be uniquely
decomposed as
(21)
x = xC + xC⊥
and
kxk2 = kxC k2 + kxC⊥ k2
(22)
(23)
where xC ∈ C and xC⊥ belongs to C ⊥ , the orthogonal
subspace of C . We show that (16), under the model in
Subsection II-C, converges a.s. to a finite point in C .
De fine the component-wise average as
in two stages. Theorem 2 proves that the state vector
sequence {x(i)}i≥0 converges a.s.
to the consensus
subspace C . Theorem 3 then completes the proof by
showing that the sequence of component-wise averages,
{xavg (i)}i≥0 converges a.s. to a finite random variable
θ. The proof of Theorem 3 needs a basic result on
convergence of Markov processes and follows the same
theme as in [?].
Stochastic approximation: Convergence of Markov
processes. We state a slightly modified form , suitable to
our needs, of a result from [?]. We start by introducing
notation, following [?], see also [?].
Let X = {x(i)}i≥0 be Markov in RN ×1 . The gener-
ating operator L is
LV (i, x) = E [V (i + 1, x(i + 1)) x(i) = x] − V (i, x) a.s.
(25)
for functions V (i, x), i ≥ 0, x ∈ RN ×1 , provided the
conditional expectation exists. We say that V (i, x) ∈ DL
in a domain A, if LV (i, x) is finite for all
(i, x) ∈ A.
Let
the Euclidean metric be ρ(·). De fine the
ǫ-
neighborhood of B ⊂ RN ×1 and its complementary set
Uǫ (B ) = (cid:26)x (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) inf
ρ(x, y ) < ǫ (cid:27)
y∈B
Vǫ (B ) = RN ×1\Uǫ (B )
(27)
(26)
Theorem 1 (Convergence of Markov Processes) Let: X
be a Markov process with generating operator L;
V (i, x) ∈ DL a non-negative function in the domain
i ≥ 0, x ∈ RN ×1 , and B ⊂ RN ×1 . Assume:
1) Potential function:
2) Generating operator:
inf
i≥0,x∈Vǫ (B )
V (i, x) > 0, ∀ǫ > 0
V (i, x) ≡ 0, x ∈ B
lim
x→B
V (i, x) = 0
sup
i≥0
LV (i, x) ≤ g (i)(1 + V (i, x))
xavg (i) =
1
N
1T x(i)
(24)
where ϕ(i, x), i ≥ 0, x ∈ RN ×1 is a non-negative
function such that
(32)
inf
i,x∈Vǫ (B )
α(i) = ∞ (33)
ϕ(i, x) > 0, ∀ǫ > 0
α(i) > 0, Xi≥0
g (i) > 0, Xi≥0
Then, the Markov process X = {x(i)}i≥0 with arbitrary
initial distribution converges a.s. to B as i → ∞
ρ (x(i), B ) = 0(cid:17) = 1
P (cid:16) lim
i→∞
Proof: For proof, see [?], [?].
g (i) < ∞ (34)
(35)
Theorem 2 (a.s. convergence to consensus subspace)
Consider the quantized distributed averaging algorithm
given in eqns. (16). Then, for arbitrary initial condition,
x(0), we have
ρ(x(i), C ) = 0i = 1
P h lim
i→∞
Proof: The proof uses similar arguments as that
of Theorem 3 in [?]. So we provide the main steps
here and only those details which are required for later
(36)
development of the paper.
The key idea shows that the quantized iterations sat-
isfy the assumptions of Theorem 1. De fine the potential
function, V (i, x), for the Markov process X as
V (i, x) = xT Lx
(37)
10
Now consider LV (i, x). We have using the fact that
eL(i)x = eL(i)xC⊥ and the independence assumptions
LV (i, x) = E (cid:20)(cid:16)x(i) − α(i)Lx(i) − α(i) eL(i)x(i) − α(i)Υ(i) − α(i)Ψ
− α(i) eL(i)x(i) − α(i)Υ(i) − α(i)Ψ(i)(cid:17)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) x(i) =
N (L)kxC⊥ k2 + α2 (i)λN (L)E hλ2
2
≤ −2α(i)xT L
x + α2 (i)λ3
max
+2α2 (i)λN (L)(cid:0)E (cid:2)kΥ(i)k2 (cid:3)(cid:1)1/2 (cid:0)E (cid:2)kΨ(i)k2(cid:3)(cid:1)1/2
+ α2 (i
+α2 (i)λN (L)E (cid:2)kΨ(i)k2(cid:3)
Since xT Lx ≥ λ2 (L)kxC⊥ k2 , the eigenvalues of eL(i)
are not greater than 2N in magnitude, and from (17) get
x + (cid:18) α2 (i)λ3
4α2 (i)N 2λN (L)
N (L)
2
LV (i, x) ≤ −2α(i)xT L
+
λ2 (L)
λ2 (L)
≤ −α(i)ϕ(i, x) + g (i) [1 + V (i, x)]
(cid:19) xT
where
2
+
ϕ(i, x) = 2xT L
x, g (i) = α2 (i) max (cid:18) λ3
4N 2λN (L)
N (L)
λ2 (L)
λ2 (L)
(42)
Clearly, LV (i, x) and ϕ(i, x), g (i) satisfy the remaining
assumptions (31) –(34) of Theorem 1; hence,
ρ(x(i), C ) = 0i = 1
P h lim
i→∞
(43)
,
2M∆2λ
3
The convergence proof for QC will now be completed
in the next Theorem.
Theorem 3 (Consensus to finite random variable)
Then, using the properties of L and the continuity of
V (i, x),
(38)
sup
i≥0
V (i, x) = 0
V (i, x) ≡ 0, x ∈ C and lim
x→C
Consider
(16), with
arbitrary
initial
condition
x(0) ∈ RN ×1 and the state sequence {x(i)}i≥0 .
Then, there exists a finite random variable θ such that
x(i) = θ1i = 1
P h lim
For x ∈ RN ×1 , we clearly have ρ(x, C ) = kxC⊥ k. Using
i→∞
the fact that xT Lx ≥ λ2 (L)kxC⊥ k2 it then follows
Proof: De fine the filtration
{Fi }i≥0 as
λ2 (L)kxC⊥ k2 ≥ λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) ǫ2 > 0
inf
V (i, x) ≥
inf
Fi = σ nx(0), {L(j )}0≤j<i , {Υ(j )}0≤j<i , {Ψ(j )}0≤j<io
i≥0,x∈Vǫ (C )
i≥0,x∈Vǫ (C )
(39)
since λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) > 0. This shows, together with (38), that
(45)
We will now show that the sequence {xavg (i)}i≥0 is an
V (i, x) satisfies (28) –(30).
(44)
11
(53)
(46)
(47)
1
N
1
N
α2 (j )
Υ(i) =
1T Ψ(i)
1T Υ(i), Ψ(i) =
xavg (i + 1) = xavg (i) − α(i)Υ(i) − α(i)Ψ(i)
L2 -bounded martingale w.r.t. {Fi}i≥0 . In fact,
where Υ(i) and Ψ(i) are the component-wise averages
given by
Finally, the recursion leads to
3N 2 Xj≥0
2M∆2
E (cid:2)x2
avg (i)(cid:3) ≤ x2
avg (0) +
Note that in this equation, x2
avg (0) is bounded since it
is the average of the initial conditions, i.e., at time 0.
Thus {xavg (i)}i≥0 is an L2 -bounded martingale; hence,
it converges a.s. and in L2 to a finite random variable θ
Then,
([?]). In other words,
E [ xavg (i + 1) Fi ] = xavg (i) − α(i)E (cid:2) Υ(i)(cid:12)(cid:12) Fi (cid:3) − α(i)E (cid:2) Ψ(i)(cid:12)(cid:12) Fi (cid:3)(48)
xavg (i) = θi = 1
P h lim
= xavg (i) − α(i)E (cid:2)Υ(i)(cid:3) − α(i)E (cid:2)Ψ(i)(cid:3)
i→∞
Again, Theorem 2 implies that as i → ∞ we have
= xavg (i)
x(i) → xavg (i)1 a.s. This and (54) prove the Theorem.
where the last step follows from the fact that Υ(i) is
independent of Fi , and
E (cid:2)Ψ(i) Fi (cid:3) = E (cid:2)Ψ(i) x(i)(cid:3)
= 0
because Ψ(i) is independent of x(i) as argued in Sec-
tion II-B.
(m.s.s.) consensus of the sensor states to the random
variable θ under additional assumptions on the weight
sequence {α(i)}i≥0 .
Lemma 4 Let the weight sequence {α(i)}i≥0 be of the
form:
We extend Theorems 2,3 to derive the mean squared
(54)
(49)
α(i) =
a
(i + 1)τ
(55)
∀n
(56)
where a > 0 and .5 < τ ≤ 1. Then the a.s. convergence
in Theorem 3 holds in m.s.s. also, i.e.,
Thus, the sequence {xavg (i)}i≥0 is a martingale. For
E h(xn (i) − θ)2 i = 0,
proving L2 boundedness, note
lim
i→∞
avg (i + 1)(cid:3) = E (cid:2)xavg (i) − α(i)Υ(i) − α(i)Ψ(i)(cid:3)2
E (cid:2)x2
(50)
Proof: The proof is provided in Appendix I.
(i)i + α2 (i)E hΨ
(i)i + 2α2 (i)E (cid:2)Υ(i)Ψ(i)(cid:3)
avg (i)(cid:3) + α2 (i)E hΥ
= E (cid:2)x2
2
2
(i)i
avg (i)(cid:3) + α2 (i)E hΥ
≤ E (cid:2)x2
2
B. QC Algorithm: Mean-Squared Error
+α2 (i)E hΨ
(i)i(cid:17)1/2 (cid:16)E hΨ
(i)i(cid:17)1/2
(i)i + 2α2 (i) (cid:16)E hΥ
2
2
2
Theorem 3 shows that the sensors reach consensus
asymptotically and in fact converge a.s.
to a finite
it can be shown by using the independence
random variable θ. Viewing θ as an estimate of the initial
properties and (17) that
average r (see eqn. (1)), we characterize its desirable
(i)i = E hΨ
(i)i ≤
E hΥ
statistical properties in the following Lemma.
where M is the number of realizable edges in the
network (eqn. (19)). It then follows from eqn. (50) that
avg (i + 1)(cid:3) ≤ E (cid:2)x2
E (cid:2)x2
avg (i)(cid:3) +
Lemma 5 Let θ be as given in Theorem 3 and r, the
initial average, as given in eqn. (1). De fine
2α2 (i)M∆2
3N 2
M∆2
6N 2
ζ = E [θ − r]2
Again,
(57)
(51)
(52)
2
2
to be the m.s.e. Then, we have:
However, reducing the m.s.e. by scaling the weights
1) Unbiasedness:
E [θ] = r
in this way will reduce the convergence rate of the algo-
rithm. This tradeoff is considered in the next subsection.
12
2) M.S.E. Bound:
3N 2 Pj≥0 α2 (j )
2M∆2
Proof: The proof follows from the arguments
ζ ≤
presented in the proof of Theorem 3 and is omitted.
We note that the m.s.e. bound in Lemma 5 is conser-
vative. Recalling the de finition of M (i), as the number
of active links at time i (see eqn. (19)), we have (by
revisiting the arguments in the proof of Theorem 3)
3N 2 Xj≥0
2∆2
α2 (j ) E (cid:2)M (i)2 (cid:3)
(58)
ζ ≤
(Note that the term Pj≥0 α2 (j ) E (cid:2)M (i)2 (cid:3) is well-
de fined as E (cid:2)M (i)2 (cid:3) ≤ M2 , ∀i.) In case, we have
a fixed (non-random) topology, M (i) = M, ∀i and the
bound in eqn. (58) reduces to the one in Lemma 5. For
the asynchronous gossip protocol in [?], M (i) = 1, ∀i,
and hence
3N 2 Xj≥0
2∆2
Lemma 5 shows that, for a given ∆, ζ can be made
arbitrarily small by properly scaling the weight se-
quence, {α(i)}i≥0 . We formalize this. Given an arbitrary
weight sequence, {α(i)}i≥0 , which satisfies the persis-
tence condition (20), de fine the scaled weight sequence,
{αs (i)}i≥0 , as
ζgossip ≤
α2 (j )
(59)
αs (i) = sα(i), ∀i ≥ 0
(60)
is a constant scaling factor. Clearly,
where, s > 0,
such a scaled weight sequence satisfies the persistence
condition (20), and the m.s.e. ζs obtained by using this
scaled weight sequence is given by
3N 2 Xj≥0
2M∆2s2
showing that, by proper scaling of the weight sequence,
the m.s.e. can be made arbitrarily small.
α2 (j )
ζs ≤
(61)
C. QC Algorithm: Convergence Rate
A detailed pathwise convergence rate analysis can
be carried out for the QC algorithm using strong ap-
proximations like laws of iterated logarithms etc., as
is the case with a large class of stochastic approxima-
tion algorithms. More generally, we can study formally
some moderate deviations asymptotics ([?],[?]) or take
recourse to concentration inequalities ([?]) to charac-
terize convergence rate. Due to space limitations we
do not pursue such analysis in this paper; rather, we
present convergence rate analysis for the state sequence
{x(i)}i≥0 in the m.s.s. and that of the mean state vector
sequence. We start by studying the convergence of the
mean state vectors, which is simple, yet illustrates an
interesting trade-off between the achievable convergence
rate and the mean-squared error ζ through design of the
weight sequence {α(i)}i≥0 .
From the asymptotic unbiasedness of θ we have
lim
i→∞
E [x(i)] = r1
(62)
Our objective is to determine the rate at which the
sequence {E [x(i)]}i≥0 converges to r1.
Lemma 6 Without loss of generality, make the assump-
tion
, ∀i
(63)
α(i) ≤
2
λ2 (cid:0)L(cid:1) + λN (L)
(We note that this holds eventually, as the α(i) decrease
to zero.) Then,
kE [x(i)] − r1k ≤ (cid:16)e−λ2 (L)(P0≤j≤i−1 α(j)) (cid:17) kE [x(0)] − r1k
(64)
Proof: We note that the mean state propagates as
E [x(i + 1)] = (cid:0)I − α(i)L(cid:1) E [x(i)] , ∀i
(65)
The proof then follows from [?] and is omitted.
It follows from Lemma 6 that the rate at which the
sequence {E [x(i)]}i≥0 converges to r1 is closely related
to the rate at which the weight sequence, α(i), sums to
in finity. On the other hand, to achieve a small bound
ζ on the m.s.e, see lemma 57 in Subsection III-B,
we need to make the weights small, which reduces
the convergence rate of the algorithm. The parameter
s introduced in eqn. (60) can then be viewed as a
scalar control parameter, which can be used to trade-
off between precision (m.s.e.) and convergence rate.
More specifically, if a cost structure is imposed on the
consensus problem, where the objective is a function of
the m.s.e. and the convergence rate, one may obtain the
optimal scaling s minimizing the cost from the pareto-
optimal curve generated by varying s. This is significant,
because the algorithm allows one to trade off m.s.e. vs.
convergence rate, and in particular, if the application
13
α(j)
1
λ2 (L)
where a > 0 and .5 < τ ≤ 1. Then the m.s.s. error
evolves as follows: For every 0 < ε < 2λ2
2 (L)
λN (L) , there
exists iε ≥ 0, such that, for all i ≥ iε we have
E hkxC⊥ (iε )k2 i
E hkx(i) − r1k2 i ≤
λ2
−ε« Pi−1
−„2
2 (L)
j=iε
λN (L)
e
i−1Xj=iε " e
l=j+1 α(l)! g (j )# +
λ2
−„2
−ε« Pi−1
2 (L)
λN (L)
+
Proof: The proof is provided in Appendix I.
From the above we note that slowing up the sequence
{α(i)}i≥0 decreases the polynomial terms on the R.H.S.
of eqn. (67), but increases the exponential terms and
1
λ2 (L)
since the effect of exponentials dominate that of the
polynomials we see a similar trade-off between m.s.e.
and convergence rate (m.s.s.) as observed when studying
the mean state vector sequence above.
D. QC Algorithm: Generalizations
requires precision (low m.s.e.), one can make the m.s.e.
The QC algorithm can be extended to handle more
arbitrarily small irrespective of the quantization step-size
∆. It is important to note in this context, that though the
algorithms in [?], [?] lead to finite m.s.e., the resulting
m.s.e. is proportional to ∆2 , which may become large if
the step-size ∆ is chosen to be large.
Note that this tradeoff is established between the con-
vergence rate of the mean state vectors and the m.s.e. of
the limiting consensus variable θ. But, in general, even
for more appropriate measures of the convergence rate,
complex situations of imperfect communication. For
instance, we may incorporate Markovian link failures (as
in [?]) and time-varying quantization step-size with the
same type of analysis.
Markovian packet dropouts can be an issue in some
practical wireless sensor network scenarios, where ran-
dom environmental phenomena like scattering may lead
to temporal dependence in the link quality. Another situ-
ation arises in networks of mobile agents, where physical
we expect that, intuitively, the same tradeoff will be
aspects of the transmission like channel coherence time,
exhibited,
in the sense that
the rate of convergence
channel fading effects are related to the mobility of the
will be closely related to the rate at which the weight
sequence, α(i), sums to in finity. We end this subsection
by studying the m.s.s. convergence rate of the state
sequence {x(i)}i≥0 which is shown to exhibit a similar
trade-off.
Lemma 7 Let the weight sequence {α(i)}i≥0 be of the
form:
α(i) =
a
(i + 1)τ
(66)
dynamic network. A general analysis of all such scenar-
ios is beyond the scope of the current paper. However,
when temporal dependence is manifested through a state
dependent Laplacian (this occurs in mobile networks,
formation control problems in multi-vehicle systems),
under fairly general conditions, the link quality can be
modeled as a temporal Markov process as in [?] (see
Assumption 1.2 in [?].) Due to space limitations of the
current paper, we do not present a detailed analysis in
this context and refer the interested reader to [?], where
such temporally Markov link failures were addressed
in detail, though in the context of unquantized analog
transmission.
The current paper focuses on quantized transmission
of data and neglects the effect of additive analog noise.
Even in such a situation of digital transmission, the
message decoding process at the receiver may lead to
analog noise. Our approach can take into account such
generalized distortions and the main results will continue
to hold. For analysis purposes, temporally independent
zero mean analog noise can be incorporated as an addi-
tional term on the R.H.S. of eqn. (16) and subsequently
absorbed into the zero mean vectors Ψ(i), Υ(i). Digital
transmission where bits can get flipped due to noise
would be more challenging to address.
The case of time-varying quantization may be relevant
in many practical communication networks, where be-
cause of a bit-budget, as time progresses the quantization
may become coarser (the step-size increases). It may
also arise if one considers a rate allocation protocol with
vanishing rates as time progresses (see [?]). In that case,
the quantization step-size sequence, {∆(i)}i≥0 is time-
varying with possibly
14
quantization case.
Theorem 8 Consider
the QC algorithm with time-
varying quantization step size sequence {∆(i)}i≥0 and
let the link weight sequence {α(i)}i≥0 satisfy the gen-
eralized persistence condition in eqn. (69). Then the
sensors reach consensus to an a.s. finite random variable.
In other words, there exists an a.s. finite random variable
θ, such that,
P h lim
xn (i) = θ, ∀ni = 1
i→∞
Also, if r is the initial average, then
E h(θ − r)2 i ≤
3N 2 Xi≥0
2M
It is clear that in this case also, we can trade-off m.s.e.
α2 (i)∆2 (i)
(70)
(71)
with convergence rate by tuning a scalar gain parameter
s associated with the link weight sequence.
IV. CON S EN SU S W ITH QUANT IZ ED DATA : BOUNDED
IN IT IAL SEN SOR STAT E
We consider consensus with quantized data and
bounded range quantizers when the initial sensor states
are bounded, and this bound is known a priori. We show
that finite bit quantizers (whose outputs take only a finite
lim sup
i→∞
∆(i) = ∞
(68)
number of values) suffice. The algorithm QCF that we
Also, as suggested in [?], one may consider a rate
allocation scheme, in which the quantizer becomes finer
as time progresses. In that way, the quantization step-size
sequence, {∆(i)}i≥0 may be a decreasing sequence.
Generally, in a situation like this to attain consensus
the link weight sequence {α(i)}i≥0 needs to satisfy a
generalized persistence condition of the form
Xi≥0
α(i) = ∞, Xi≥0
Note, when the quantization step-size is bounded, this
reduces to the persistence condition assumed earlier. We
α2 (i)∆2 (i) < ∞ (69)
consider is a simple modification of the QC algorithm of
Section III. The good performance of the QCF algorithm
relies on the fact that, if the initial sensor states are
bounded, the state sequence, {x(i)}i≥0 generated by
the QC algorithm remains uniformly bounded with high
probability, as we prove here. In this case, channel
quantizers with finite dynamic range perform well with
high probability.
We brie fly state the QCF problem in Subsection IV-A.
Then, Subsection IV-B shows that with high probability
the sample paths generated by the QC algorithm are
uniformly bounded, when the initial sensor states are
state without proof the following result for time-varying
bounded. Subsection IV-C proves that QCF achieves
15
asymptotic consensus. Finally, Subsections IV-D and IV-
4) The link failure model is the same as used in QC.
E analyze its statistical properties, performance, and
Given this setup, we present the distributed QCF algo-
tradeoffs.
A. QCF Algorithm: Statement
The QCF algorithm modifies the QC algorithm by
restricting the alphabet of the quantizer to be finite. It
assumes that the initial sensor state x(0), whose average
we wish to compute, is known to be bounded. Of course,
even if the initial state is bounded, the states of QC can
become unbounded. The good performance of QCF is a
consequence of the fact that, as our analysis will show,
the states {x(i)}i≥0 generated by the QC algorithm
when started with a bounded initial state x(0) remain
uniformly bounded with high probability.
The following are the assumptions underlying QCF.
We let the the state sequence for QCF be represented by
{ex(i)}i≥0 .
1) Bounded initial state. Let b > 0. The QCF initial
state ex(0) = xn (0) is bounded to the set B known
`a priori
B = (cid:8)y ∈ RN ×1 yn ≤ b < +∞(cid:9)
(72)
2) Uniform quantizers and finite alphabet. Each inter-
sensor communication channel in the network uses
a uniform ⌈log2 (2p + 1)⌉ bit quantizer with step-
size ∆, where p > 0 is an integer. In other words,
the quantizer output takes only 2p + 1 values, and
the quantization alphabet is given by
eQ = {l∆ l = 0, ±1, · · · , ±p}
Clearly, such a quantizer will not saturate if the in-
put falls in the range [(−p − 1/2)∆, (p + 1/2)∆);
if the input goes out of that range, the quantizer
(73)
saturates.
3) Uniform i.i.d.
noise. Like with QC,
the
{νnl (i)}i≥0,1≤n,l≤N are a sequence of i.i.d. random
variables uniformly distributed on [−∆/2, ∆/2).
rithm, assuming that the sensor network is connected.
The state sequence, {ex(i)}i≥0 is given by the following
Algorithm.
Algorithm 1: QCF
Initialize
exn (0) = xn (0), ∀n;
i = 0;
begin
while sup1≤n≤N supl∈Ωn (i) (exl (i) + νnl (i)) <
(p + 1/2)∆ do
;
exn (i + 1) = (1 − α(i)dn (i))exn (i) +
α(i) Pl∈Ωn (i) q(exl (i) + νnl (i)), ∀n;
i = i + 1;
end
Stop the algorithm and reset all the sensor states to
zero
The last step of the algorithm can be distributed, since
the network is connected.
B. Probability Bounds on Uniform Boundedness of Sam-
ple Paths of QC
The analysis of the QCF algorithm requires uniformity
properties of the sample paths generated by the QC
algorithm. This is necessary, because the QCF algorithm
follows the QC algorithm till one of the quantizers gets
overloaded. The uniformity properties require establish-
ing statistical properties of the supremum taken over the
sample paths, which is carried out in this subsection. We
show that the state vector sequence, {x(i)}i≥0 , generated
by the QC algorithm is uniformly bounded with high
probability. The proof follows by splitting the sequence
{x(i)}i≥0 as the sum of the sequences {xavg (i)}i≥0 and
{xC⊥ (i)}i≥0 for which we establish uniformity results.
The proof is lengthy and uses mainly maximal inequal-
ities for submartingale and supermartingale sequences.
the state vector at any time i can be
that
Recall
decomposed orthogonally as
x(i) = xavg (i)1 + xC⊥ (i)
(74)
where the consensus subspace, C , is given in eqn. (21).
We provide probability bounds on the sequences
{xavg (i)}i≥0 and {xC⊥ (i)}i≥0 and then use an union
bound to get the final result.
The rest of the subsection concerns the proof of The-
orem 12 which involves several intermediate lemmas as
stated below, whose proofs are provided in Appendix II.
We need the following result.
Lemma 9 Consider the QC algorithm stated in Section II
and let {x(i)}i≥0 be the state it sequence generates.
De fine the function W (i, x), i ≥ 0, x ∈ RN ×1 , as
W (i, x) = (1 + V (i, x)) Yj≥i
where V (i, x) = xT Lx and {g (j )}j≥0 is de fined in
eqn. (42).2 Then, the process {W (i, x(i)}i≥0 is a non-
negative supermartingale with respect to the filtration
{Fi}i≥0 de fined in eqn. (45).
[1 + g (j )]
(75)
The next Lemma bounds the sequence {xC⊥ (i)}i≥0 .
Lemma 10 Let {x(i)}i≥0 be the state vector sequence
generated by the QC algorithm, with the initial state
x(0) ∈ RN ×1 . Consider the orthogonal decomposition:
x(i) = xavg (i)1 + xC⊥ (i), ∀i
(76)
16
x(0) ∈ RN ×1 . Then, for any a > 0,
xavg (j ) > a(cid:21) ≤ hx2
3N 2 Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
avg (0) + 2M∆2
P (cid:20)sup
a
j≥0
(78)
Theorem 12 Let {x(i)}i≥0 be the state vector sequence
generated by the QC algorithm, with an initial state
x(0) ∈ RN ×1 . Then, for any a > 0,
kx(j )k > a(cid:21) ≤ h2N x2
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
avg (0) + 4M∆2
P (cid:20)sup
a
j≥0
(79)
where {g (j )}j≥0 is de fined in eqn. (42).
We now state as a Corollary the result on the bounded-
ness of the sensor states, which will be used in analyzing
the performance of the QCF algorithm.
+ (cid:0)1 + x(0)
Corollary 13 Assume that the initial sensor state, x(0) ∈
B , where B is given in eqn. (72). Then, if {x(i)}i≥0
is the state sequence generated by the QC algorithm
starting from the initial state, x(0), we have, for any
a > 0,
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
xn (j ) > a(cid:21) ≤ h2N b2 + 4M∆2
P (cid:20)
sup
a
1≤n≤N ,j≥0
(80)
where {g (j )}j≥0 is de fined in eqn. (42).
+ (cid:0)1 + N
Then, for any a > 0, we have
C. Algorithm QCF: Asymptotic Consensus
kxC⊥ (j )k2 > a(cid:21) ≤ (cid:0)1 + x(0)T Lx(0)(cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
P (cid:20)sup
We show that the QCF algorithm, given in Subsec-
1 + aλ2 (L)
tion IV-A, converges a.s. to a finite random variable and
j≥0
(77)
the sensors reach consensus asymptotically.
where {g (j )}j≥0 is de fined in eqn. (42).
Next, we provide probability bounds on the uniform
boundedness of {xavg (i)}i≥0 .
Lemma 11 Let {xavg (i)}i≥0 be the average sequence
generated by the QC algorithm, with an initial state
2 The
term
the
because
is well-defined
function
above
Qj≥i [1 + g(j )] is finite for any j , by the persistence condition on
the weight sequence.
Theorem 14 (QCF: a.s. asymptotic consensus) Let
{ex(i)}i≥0 be the state vector sequence generated
by the QCF algorithm, starting from an initial state
ex(0) = x(0) ∈ B . Then, the sensors reach consensus
asymptotically a.s. In other words, there exists an a.s.
finite random variable eθ such that
i→∞ ex(i) = eθ1i = 1
P h lim
(81)
(82)
θ
0
sup
1≤n≤N
The probability of ǫ-consensus is de fined as
For
the proof, consider
the sequence
Proof:
exn (i) − r < ǫ(cid:21)(85)
T (G, b, α, ǫ, p, ∆) = P (cid:20) lim
{x(i)}i≥0 generated by the QC algorithm, with the same
initial state x(0). Let θ be the a.s. finite random variable
i→∞
(see eqn. 43) such that
the argument G in the de finition of T (·)
Note that
P h lim
x(i) = θ1i = 1
emphasizes the in fluence of the network con figuration,
i→∞
whereas b is given in eqn. (72).
It is clear that
The QCF algorithm is consensus-consistent3 iff for
eθ =
on nsupi≥0 sup1≤n≤N supl∈Ωn (i) xl (i) + νnl (i) < (p + 1
2 )∆o
every G, b, ǫ > 0 and 0 < δ < 1, there exists quantizer
otherwise
parameters p, ∆ and weights {α(i)}i≥0 , such that
(83)
In other words, we have
)∆!
eθ = θI sup
1
Theorem 17 characterizes the probability of ǫ-consensus,
2
i≥0
while Proposition 18 considers several tradeoffs between
(84)
the probability of achieving consensus and the quantizer
Since
function.
indicator
the
is
where
I(·)
nsupi≥0 sup1≤n≤N supl∈Ωn (i) xl (i) + νnl (i) < (p + 1/2)∆o
parameters and network topology, and,
shows that the QCF algorithm is consensus-consistent.
is a measurable set, it follows that eθ is a random variable.
We need the following Lemma to prove Theorem 17.
T (G, b, α, ǫ, p, ∆) > 1 − δ
xl (i) + νnl (i) < (p +
in particular,
sup
1≤n≤N
sup
l∈Ωn (i)
17
(86)
D. QCF: ǫ-Consensus
Recall the QCF algorithm in Subsection IV-A and the
assumptions 1) –4). A key step is that, if we run the QC
algorithm using finite bit quantizers with finite alphabet
eQ as in eqn. (73), the only way for an error to occur is
for one of the quantizers to saturate. This is the intuition
behind the design of the QCF algorithm.
Theorem 14 shows that the QCF sensor states asymp-
to a finite
totically reach consensus, converging a.s.
random variable eθ. The next series of results address the
question of how close is this consensus to the desired
average r in (1). Clearly,
this depends on the QCF
design: 1) the quantizer parameters (like the number of
levels 2p + 1 or the quantization step ∆); 2) the random
network topology ; and 3) the gains α.
We de fine the following performance metrics which
Lemma 16 Let eθ be de fined as in Theorem 14, with the
initial state ex(0) = x(0) ∈ B . The desired average, r, is
given in (1). Then, for any ǫ > 0, we have
α2 (j ) + h2N b2 + 4M∆2
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )
P heθ − r ≥ ǫi ≤
3N 2ǫ2 Xj≥0
2M∆2
p∆
+ (cid:0)1 + N λN (L)b2 (cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
1 + p2∆2
2 λ2 (L)
where {g (j )}j≥0 is de fined in eqn. (42).
Proof: The proof is provided in Appendix III.
We now state the main result of this Section, which
provides a performance guarantee for QCF.
Theorem 17 (QCF: Probability of ǫ-consensus) For any
ǫ > 0, the probability of ǫ-consensus T (G, b, α, ǫ, p, ∆)
characterize the performance of the QCF algorithm.
De finition 15 (Probability of
3Consensus-consistent means for arbitrary ǫ > 0, the QCF quantiz-
ers can be designed so that the QCF states get within an ǫ-ball of r
with arbitrary high probability. Thus, a consensus-consistent algorithm
ǫ-consensus and consensus-consistent)
trades off accuracy with bit-rate.
18
sup
1≤n≤N
is bounded below
G, b, ǫ, p, ∆, we have
α2 (j ) − h2N b2 + 4M∆2
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
T z (G, b, ǫ, p, ∆) ≥ 1 − (cid:0)2N b2(cid:1)1/2
exn (i) − r < ǫ(cid:21) > 1 −
P (cid:20) lim
1 + N λN (L)b2
3N 2ǫ2 Xj≥0
2M∆2
−
1 + p2∆2
p∆
2 λ2 (L)
p∆
i→∞
(93)
− (cid:0)1 + N λN (L)b2 (cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
3) Optimum quantization step-size ∆. For
fixed
(89)
1 + p2∆2
2 λ2 (L)
G, b, ǫ, p,
the optimum quantization step-size ∆,
where {g (j )}j≥0 is de fined in eqn. (42).
which maximizes
the probability of ǫ-consensus,
T (G, b, α, ǫ, p, ∆), is given by
∆≥0
∆∗ (G, b, α, ǫ, p) = arg inf
3N 2ǫ2 Xj≥0
2M∆2
α2 (j ) + h2N b2 + 4M ∆2
3N Pp∆
+ (cid:0)1 + N λN (
1 +
(90)
It follows from Theorem 14 that
Proof:
i→∞ exn (i) = eθ a.s., ∀1 ≤ n ≤ N
lim
The proof then follows from Lemma 16.
The lower bound on T (·), given by (89), is uniform,
in the sense that it is applicable for all initial states
x(0) ∈ B . Recall the scaled weight sequence αs , given
by eqn. (60). We introduce the zero-rate probability of
ǫ-consensus, T z (G, b, ǫ, p, ∆) by
T z (G, b, ǫ, p, ∆) = lim
s→0
T (G, b, αs , ǫ, p, ∆)
(91)
The next proposition studies the dependence of the ǫ-
consensus probability T (·) and of the zero-rate proba-
bility T z ((·) on the network and algorithm parameters.
where {g (j )}j≥0 is de fined in eqn. (42).
Proof: For item 2), we note that, as s → 0,
Xj≥0
s (j ) → 0, Yj≥0
α2
The rest follows by simple inspection of eqn. (89).
We comment on Proposition 18. Item 1) shows that
the algorithm QCF is consensus-consistent, in the sense
(1 + gs (j )) → 1
T (G, b, α, ǫ, p, ∆) = 1
(92)
lim
∆→0, p∆→∞
Proposition 18 (QCF: Tradeoffs) 1) Limiting quan-
tizer. For fixed G, b, α, ǫ, we have
that we can achieve arbitrarily good performance by
decreasing the step-size ∆ and the number of quanti-
zation levels, 2p + 1, appropriately. Indeed, decreasing
the step-size increases the precision of the quantized
output and increasing p increases the dynamic range
of the quantizer. However, the fact that ∆ → 0 but
p∆ → ∞ implies that the rate of growth of the number
Since, this holds for arbitrary ǫ > 0, we note that, as
of levels 2p + 1 should be higher than the rate of decay
∆ → 0, p∆ → ∞,
exn (i) − r < ǫ(cid:21)
P (cid:20) lim
of ∆, guaranteeing that in the limit we have asymptotic
i→∞ ex(i) = r1i = lim
P h lim
sup
consensus with probability one.
ǫ→0
i→∞
1≤n≤N
T (G, b, α, ǫ, p, ∆)(cid:21) = 1
ǫ→0 (cid:20)
For interpreting item 2), we recall the m.s.e. versus
lim
= lim
∆→0, p∆→∞
convergence rate tradeoff for the QC algorithm, studied
In other words, the QCF algorithm leads to a.s. con-
in Subsection III-B. There, we considered a quantizer
sensus to the desired average r, as ∆ → 0, p∆ →
∞. In particular, it shows that the QCF algorithm is
consensus-consistent.
with a countably in finite number of output levels (as
opposed to the finite number of output levels in the QCF)
and observed that the m.s.e. can be made arbitrarily
2) zero-rate ǫ-consensus probability. Then, for fixed
small by rescaling the weight sequence. By Chebyshev’s
inequality, this would imply, that, for arbitrary ǫ > 0,
the probability of ǫ-consensus, i.e., that we get within
an ǫ-ball of the desired average, can be made as close
to 1 as we want. However, this occurs at a cost of the
convergence rate, which decreases as the scaling factor
s decreases. Thus, for the QC algorithm, in the limiting
case, as s → 0, the probability of ǫ-consensus (for
arbitrary ǫ > 0) goes to 1; we call “limiting probability ”
the zero-rate probability of ǫ-consensus, justifying the
m.s.e. vs convergence rate tradeoff.4 Item 2) shows,
that, similar to the QC algorithm, the QCF algorithm
exhibits a tradeoff between probability of ǫ-consensus
vs. the convergence rate, in the sense that, by scaling
(decreasing s), the probability of ǫ-consensus can be
increased. However, contrary to the QC case, scaling will
not lead to probability of ǫ-consensus arbitrarily close to
1, and, in fact, the zero-rate probability of ǫ-consensus
is strictly less than one, as given by eqn. (93). In other
words, by scaling, we can make T (G, b, αs , ǫ, p, ∆) as
high as T z (G, b, ǫ, p, ∆), but no higher.
We now interpret the lower bound on the zero-rate
probability of ǫ-consensus, T z (G, b, ǫ, p, ∆), and show
that the network topology plays an important role in
this context. We note, that, for a fixed number, N , of
sensor nodes, the only way the topology enters into the
expression of the lower bound is through the third term
on the R.H.S. Then, assuming that,
N λN (L)b2 ≫ 1,
p2∆2
2
λ2 (L) ≫ 1
we may use the approximation
p2∆2 (cid:19) λN (L)
≈ (cid:18) 2N b2
1 + N λN (L)b2
1 + p2∆2
λ2 (L)
2 λ2 (L)
Let us interpret eqn. (95) in the case, where the topology
is fixed (non-random). Then for all
i, L(i) = L = L.
Thus, for a fixed number, N , of sensor nodes, topologies
(95)
4Note that, for both the algorithms, QC and QCF, we can take
the scaling factor, s, arbitrarily close to 0, but not zero, so that,
these limiting performance values are not achievable, but we may get
arbitrarily close to them.
19
with smaller λN (L)/λ2 (L), will lead to higher zero-rate
probability of ǫ-consensus and, hence, are preferable.
We note that, in this context, for fixed N , the class
of non-bipartite Ramanujan graphs give the smallest
λN (L)/λ2 (L) ratio, given a constraint on the number,
M , of network edges (see [?].)
Item 3) shows that, for given graph topology G, initial
sensor data, b, the link weight sequence α, tolerance ǫ,
and the number of levels in the quantizer p, the step-
size ∆ plays a significant role in determining the perfor-
mance. This gives insight into the design of quantizers to
achieve optimal performance, given a constraint on the
number of quantization levels, or, equivalently, given a
bit budget on the communication.
In the next Subsection, we present some numerical
studies on the QCF algorithm, which demonstrate prac-
tical implications of the results just discussed.
E. QCF: Numerical Studies
We present a set of numerical studies on the quantizer
step-size optimization problem, considered in Item 3)
of Proposition 18. We consider a fixed (non-random)
sensor network of N = 230 nodes, with communi-
cation topology given by an LPS-II Ramanujan graph
(see [?]), of degree 6.5 We fix
ǫ at .05, and take the
initial sensor data bound, b, to be 30. We numerically
solve the step-size optimization problem given in (94)
for varying number of levels, 2p + 1. Specifically, we
consider two instances of the optimization problem: In
the first
instance, we consider the weight sequence,
α(i) = .01/(i + 1), (s = .01), and numerically solve the
optimization problem for varying number of levels. In
the second instance, we repeat the same experiment, with
the weight sequence, α(i) = .001/(i+1), (s = .001). As
in eqn. (94), ∆∗ (G, b, αs , ǫ, p) denotes the optimal step-
size. Also, let T ∗(G, b, αs , ǫ, p) be the corresponding op-
timum probability of ǫ-consensus. Fig. 1 on the left plots
T ∗(G, b, αs , ǫ, p) for varying 2p + 1 on the vertical axis,
5 This is a 6-regular graph, i.e., all the nodes have degree 6.
while on the horizontal axis, we plot the corresponding
quantizer bit-rate BR = log2 (2p + 1). The two plots
correspond to two different scalings, namely, s = .01 and
s = .001 respectively. The result is in strict agreement
with Item 2) of Proposition 18, and shows that, as the
scaling factor decreases, the probability of ǫ-consensus
increases, till it reaches the zero-rate probability of ǫ-
consensus.
Fig. 1 on the right plots ∆∗ (G, b, αs , ǫ, p) for varying
2p + 1 on the vertical axis, while on the horizontal
axis, we plot the corresponding quantizer bit-rate BR =
log2 (2p + 1). The two plots correspond to two different
scalings, namely, s = .01 and s = .001 respectively. The
results are again in strict agreement to Proposition 18 and
further show that optimizing the step-size is an important
quantizer design problem, because the optimal step-size
value is sensitive to the number of quantization levels,
2p + 1.
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
)
p
,
ǫ
,
b
,
G
(
∗
T
0
5
10
15
BR
20
25
s = .01
s = .001
s = .01
s = .001
20
V. CONCLU S ION
The paper considers distributed average consensus
with quantized information exchange and random inter-
sensor link failures. We add dither to the sensor states
before quantization. We show by stochastic approxima-
tion that, when the range of the quantizer is unbounded,
the QC-algorithm, the sensor states achieve a.s. and
m.s.s. consensus to a random variable whose mean is
the desired average. The variance of this random variable
can be made small by tuning parameters of the algorithm
(rate of decay of the gains), the network topology, and
quantizers parameters. When the range of the quantizer
is bounded, the QCF-algorithm, a sample path analysis
shows that the state vector of the QC-algorithm can
be made to remain uniformly bounded with probability
arbitrarily close to 1. This means that the QCF algorithm
achieves ǫ-consensus. We use the bounds that we derive
for the probability of large excursions of the sample
paths to formulate a quantizer design problem that trades
between several quantizer parameters: number of bits
(or levels), step size, probability of saturation, and error
margin to consensus. A numerical study illustrates this
design problem and several interesting tradeoffs among
the design parameters.
A P P END IX I
PROO F S O F L EMMA S 4 AND 7
Before deriving Lemmas 4 and 7, we present a result
from [?] on a property of real number sequences to be
used later, see proof in [?].
,
r2 (t) =
r1 (t) =
Lemma 19 (Lemma 18 in [?]) Let
the
quences {r1 (t)}t≥0 and {r2 (t)}t≥0 be given by
a1
a2
(t + 1)δ1
(t + 1)δ2
where a1 , a2 , δ2 ≥ 0 and 0 ≤ δ1 ≤ 1. Then, if δ1 =
δ2 there exists K > 0 such that, for non-negative
integers, s < t,
t−1Xk=s " t−1Yl=k+1
(1 − r1 (l))# r2 (k) ≤ K
Moreover, the constant K can be chosen independently
(96)
se-
(97)
)
p
,
ǫ
,
b
,
G
(
∗
∆
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
5
10
15
BR
20
25
0 ≤
Fig. 1. Left: T ∗ (G, b, αs , ǫ, p) vs. 2p + 1 (BR = log2 (2p + 1).)
Right: ∆∗ (G, b, αs , ǫ, p) vs. 2p + 1 (BR = log2 (2p + 1).)
21
α(j)
−ε« Pi−1
j=iε
λ2
−„2
−ε« P
2 (L)
λN (L)
α2 (j )
lim
i→∞
e
−ε« Pi−1
j=iε
α(j)
= 0
(104)
+ g (i) [1 + V (i, x(i))] + V (i, x(i))
lim
t→∞
λ2
2 (L)
λN (L)
(98)
lim
i→∞
+ g (i) [1 + E [V (i, x(i))]]
2 (L) kxC⊥ k2 ≤ ϕ(i, x(i)) = xT
λ2
C⊥ L
2
We also have the following inequalities for all i:
Proof: [Proof of Lemma 4] Taking expectations
(unconditional) on both sides of eqn. (41) we have
of s, t. Also, if δ1 < δ2 , then, for arbitrary fixed s,
t−1Xk=s " t−1Yl=k+1
(1 − r1 (l))# r2 (k) = 0
The second term on the R.H.S. of (103) falls under
Lemma 19 whose second part (eqn. (98)) implies
− ε(cid:19) α(l)(cid:19) g (j ) = 0
i−1Yl=j+1 (cid:18)1 − (cid:18)2
i−1Xj=iε
(105)
eqn.
from
conclude
(103)
that
We
limi→∞ E [V (i, x(i))] = 0. This with (99) implies
limi→∞ E hkxC⊥ (i)k2 i = 0. From the orthogonality
arguments we have for all i
E hkx(i) − θ1k2 i = E hkxC (i) − θ1k2 i+E hkxC⊥ (i)k2 i
E [V (i + 1, x(i + 1))] ≤ E [V (i, x(i))] − α(i)E [ϕ(i, x(i))]
(106)
The second term in eqn. (106) goes to zero by the above,
whereas the first term goes to zero by the L2 convergence
C⊥ LxC⊥ ≤ λN (L) kxC⊥ k2
λ2 (L) kxC⊥ k2 ≤ V (i, x(i)) = xT
of the sequence {xavg (i)}i≥0 to θ and the desired m.s.s.
(99)
convergence follows.
N (L) kxC⊥ k2
xC⊥ ≤ λ2
Proof: [Proof of Lemma 7] From (99,103), using
(100)
repeatedly 1 − a ≤ e−a for a ≥ 0, we have for i > iε
From eqns. (99,99,100) we have
E hkxC⊥ k2 i ≤
λ2
−„2
2 (L)
+ g (i)(cid:19) E [V (i, x(i))]+g (i)
E [V (i + 1, x(i + 1))] ≤ (cid:18)1 − 2α(i)
λN (L)
e
i−1Xj=iε " e
(101)
Choose 0 < ε < 2λ2
2 (L)
λN (L) and note that, the form of g (i) in
From the development in the proof of Theorem 3 we
eqn. (42) and the fact that α(i) → 0 as i → ∞ suggests
note that
that there exists iε ≥ 0, such that, εα(i) ≥ g (i),
i ≥ iε .
E hkxC (i) − r1k2 i = N 2E hkxavg (i) − rk2 i ≤
We then have
− ε(cid:19) α(i)(cid:19) E [V (i, x(i))]+g (i),
E [V (i + 1, x(i + 1))] ≤ (cid:18)1 − (cid:18)2
i ≥ iε
(102)
We then arrive at the result by using the equality
Continuing the recursion we have for i > iε ,
kx(i) − r1k2 = kxC⊥ (i)k2 + kxC (i) − r1k2 ,
i−1Yj=iε (cid:18)1 − (cid:18)2
− ε(cid:19) α(j )(cid:19) E [V (i, x(iε ))]
λ2
2 (L)
λN (L)
− ε(cid:19) α(l)(cid:19) g (j )
i−1Yl=j+1 (cid:18)1 − (cid:18)2
i−1Xj=iε
λ2
2 (L)
A P P END IX I I
λN (L)
PROO F S O F RE SULT S IN SUB S ECT ION IV-B
− ε(cid:19) α(l)(cid:19) g (j )
i−1Yl=j+1 (cid:18)1 − (cid:18)2
λ2
−ε« Pi−1
−„2
i−1Xj=iε
2 (L)
λ2
2 (L)
α(j)
j=iε
λN (L)
E [V (i, x(iε ))] +
≤ e
λN (L)
Proof: [Proof of Lemma 9] From eqn. (41) we
have
E [V (i + 1, x(i + 1))x(i)] ≤ −α(i)ϕ(i, x(i))
where we use 1 − a ≤ e−a for a ≥ 0. Since the α(i)s
sum to in finity, we have
−„2
λ2
2 (L)
λN (L)
1
λ2 (L)
1
λ2 (L)
2M∆2
3
(108)
i−1Xj=0
λ2
2 (L)
λN (L)
λ2
2 (L)
λN (L)
1
λ2 (L)
E [V (i, x(i))] ≤
E [V (i, x(i))] ≤
+
∀i
(103)
(109)
22
(116)
(118)
α2 (j )(119)
(111)
We then have
[1 + g (j )](cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
E [ W (i + 1, x(i + 1)) Fi ] = E (1 + V (i + 1, x(i + 1))) Yj≥i+1
x(i)
Proof: [Proof of Lemma 11] It was shown in The-
orem 3 that the sequence {xavg (i)}i≥0 is a martingale. It
[1 + g (j )] (cid:16)1 + E h V (i + 1, x(i + 1))(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) x(i)i(cid:17)
= Yj≥i+1
then follows that the sequence, {xavg (i)}i≥0 , is a non-
negative submartingale (see [?]).
[1 + g (j )] (cid:16)1 − α(i)ϕ(i, x(i)) + g (i) [1 + V (i, x(i))] + V (i, x(i))(cid:17)
≤ Yj≥i+1
The submartingale inequality then states that for a > 0
P (cid:20) max
xavg (j ) ≥ a(cid:21) ≤
= −α(i)ϕ(i, x(i)) Yj≥i+1
[1 + g (j )] + [1 + V (i, x(i))] Yj≥i
E [xavg (i)]
[1 + g (j )]
a
0≤j≤i
= −α(i)ϕ(i, x(i)) Yj≥i+1
Clearly, from the continuity of probability measures,
(110)
[1 + g (j )] + W (i, x(i))
xavg (j ) > a(cid:21)(117)
P (cid:20) max
xavg (j ) > a(cid:21) = lim
P (cid:20)sup
Hence E [W (i + 1, x(i + 1)) Fi ] ≤ W (i, x(i)) and the
i→∞
0≥j≥i
j≥0
result follows.
Thus, we have
xavg (j ) > a(cid:21) ≤ lim
P (cid:20)sup
i→∞
j≥0
(the limit on the right exists because xavg (i) converges
in L1 .) Also, we have from eqn. (53), for all i,
≤ x2
E [xavg (i)] ≤ ≤ hE hxavg (i)2 ii1/2
3N 2 Xj≥0
2M∆2
avg (0) +
Combining eqns. (118,119), we have
xavg (j ) > a(cid:21) ≤ hx2
3N 2 Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
avg (0) + 2M∆2
P (cid:20)sup
a
j≥0
(120)
De fine the potential function V (i, x) as in Theorem 2
and eqn. (37) and the W (i, x) as in (75) in Lemma 9.
It then follows from eqn. (111) that
Proof: [Proof of Lemma 10] For any a > 0 and
i ≥ 0, we have
kxC⊥ (i)k2 > a =⇒ W (i, x(i)) > 1 + aλ2 (L) (112)
kxC⊥ (i)k2 > a =⇒ x(i)T Lx(i) ≥ aλ2 (L)
E [xavg (i)]
a
(113)
By Lemma 9, the process (W (i, x(i)), Fi ) is a non-
negative supermartingale. Then by a maximal inequality
for non-negative supermartingales (see [?]) we have for
Proof: [Proof of Theorem 12] Since, kx(j )k2 =
a > 0 and i ≥ 0,
P (cid:20) max
W (j, x(j )) ≥ a(cid:21) ≤
avg (i) + kxC⊥ (j )k2 , we have
N x2
E [W (0, x(0))]
2 (cid:21) + P (cid:20)sup
kx(j )k2 > a(cid:21) ≤ P (cid:20)sup
P (cid:20)sup
a
0≤j≤i
a
kxC⊥ (j )k2
N xavg (j )2 >
Also, we note that
j≥0
j≥0
j≥0
W (j, x(j )) > a(cid:27)
W (j, x(j )) > a(cid:27) ⇐⇒ ∪i≥0 (cid:26) max
= P (cid:20)sup
(cid:26)sup
2N (cid:17)1/2 (cid:21) + P (cid:20)sup
xavg (j ) > (cid:16) a
0≤j≤i
j≥0
j≥0
j≥0
(114)
We thus have from Lemmas 10 and 11,
Since {max0≤j≤i W (j, x(j )) > a} is a non-decreasing
kx(j )k2 > a(cid:21) ≤ hx2
3N 2 Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
+ (cid:0)1 + x(0)T
avg (0) + 2M∆2
P (cid:20)sup
sequence of sets in i, it follows from the continuity of
2N (cid:1)1/2
(cid:0) a
1
probability measures and eqn. (112)
j≥0
(122)
kxC⊥ (j )k2 > a(cid:21)
P (cid:20) max
kxC⊥ (j )k2 > a(cid:21) = lim
P (cid:20)sup
(115)
i→∞
0≤j≤i
j≥0
W (j, x(j )) > 1 + aλ2 (L)(cid:21)
P (cid:20) max
Proof: [Proof of Corollary 13] We note that, for
≤ lim
i→∞
0≤j≤i
x(0) ∈ B ,
= (cid:0)1 + x(0)T Lx(0)(cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
E [W (0, x(0))]
x2
avg (0) ≤ b2 , x(0)T Lx(0) ≤ N λN (L)b2
1 + aλ2 (L)
1 + aλ2 (L)
≤ lim
i→∞
(123)
kxC⊥ (
23
2 (cid:19) ∆#
1
Then, for any δ > 0,
From Theorem 12, we then get,
P heθ 6= θi = P "sup
xn (j ) > a(cid:21) ≤ P (cid:20)sup
P (cid:20)
kx(j )k > a(cid:21)
xl (i) + νnl (i) ≥ (cid:18)p +
sup
sup
sup
1≤n≤N ,j≥0
j≥0
i≥0
1≤n≤N
l∈Ωn (i)
≤ h2N x2
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
2 (cid:19) ∆(cid:21)
≥ (cid:18)p +
≤ P (cid:20)sup
+ (cid:0)1 + x(0)T Lx(0)(cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
avg (0) + 4M∆2
1
∆
sup
xn (i) +
2
i≥0
1≤n≤N
1 + a2
a
2 λ2 (L)
xn (i) ≥ p∆(cid:21) ≤ P (cid:20)sup
= P (cid:20)sup
≤ h2N b2 + 4M∆2
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
sup
sup
xn (i) >
+ (cid:0)1 + N λN (L)b2 (cid:1) Qj≥0 (1 + g (j ))
i≥0
1≤n≤N
i≥0
1≤n≤N
≤ h2N b2 + 4M∆2
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
+ (cid:0)1 + N λN (L)b2 (cid:1) Q
1 + a2
a
2 λ2 (L)
1 + (p∆−δ)2
p∆ − δ
2
where, in the last step, we use eqn. (124.) Since the
above holds for arbitrary δ > 0, we have
δ↓0
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
h2N b2 + 4M∆2
+ (cid:0)1 + N λN (L)
P heθ 6= θi ≤ lim
p∆ − δ
1 + (p
3N Pj≥0 α2 (j )i1/2
= h2N b2 + 4M∆2
+ (cid:0)1 + N λN (L)b2 (cid:1) Q
1 + p2∆2
p∆
2 λ
Combining eqns. (125,126,128), we get the result.
A P P END IX I I I
PROO F S O F L EMMA 1 6
(124)
Proof: [Proof of Lemma 16] For the proof, con-
sider the sequence {x(i)}i≥0 generated by the QC
algorithm, with the same initial state x(0). Let θ be the
a.s. finite random variable (see eqn. 43) such that
x(i) = θ1i = 1
P h lim
i→∞
We note that
P h(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)eθ − r(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≥ ǫi = P h(cid:16)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)eθ − r(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≥ ǫ(cid:17) ∩ (cid:16)eθ = θ(cid:17)i + P h(cid:16)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)eθ − r(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≥ ǫ(cid:17) ∩ (cid:16)eθ 6= θ(cid:17)i
= P h(θ − r ≥ ǫ) ∩ (cid:16) eθ = θ(cid:17)i + P h(cid:16)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)eθ − r(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≥ ǫ(cid:17) ∩ (cid:16)eθ 6= θ(cid:17)i
≤ P [θ − r ≥ ǫ] + P heθ 6= θi
(125)
From Chebyshev’s inequality, we have
E hθ − r2 i
3N 2ǫ2 Xj≥0
2M∆2
α2 (j )
≤
P [θ − r ≥ ǫ] ≤
ǫ2
Next, we bound P h eθ 6= θi. To this end, we note that
sup
sup
sup
sup
xl (i) + νnl (i) ≤ sup
sup
i≥0
1≤n≤N
i≥0
1≤n≤N
l∈Ωn (i)
l∈Ωn (i)
xn (i) + sup
sup
≤ sup
i≥0
i≥0
1≤n≤N
∆
2
xl (i) + sup
i≥0
sup
1≤n≤N
sup
1≤n≤N
sup
l∈Ωn (i)
≤ sup
i≥0
sup
1≤n≤N
xn (i) +
νnl (i)
sup
l∈Ωn (i)
νnl (i)
(126)
|
1906.04656 | 1 | 1906 | 2019-06-11T15:36:18 | Deep learning control of artificial avatars in group coordination tasks | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.LG"
] | In many joint-action scenarios, humans and robots have to coordinate their movements to accomplish a given shared task. Lifting an object together, sawing a wood log, transferring objects from a point to another are all examples where motor coordination between humans and machines is a crucial requirement. While the dyadic coordination between a human and a robot has been studied in previous investigations, the multi-agent scenario in which a robot has to be integrated into a human group still remains a less explored field of research. In this paper we discuss how to synthesise an artificial agent able to coordinate its motion in human ensembles. Driven by a control architecture based on deep reinforcement learning, such an artificial agent will be able to autonomously move itself in order to synchronise its motion with that of the group while exhibiting human-like kinematic features. As a paradigmatic coordination task we take a group version of the so-called mirror-game which is highlighted as a good benchmark in the human movement literature. | cs.MA | cs |
Deep learning control of artificial avatars in group coordination tasks
Maria Lombardi1, Davide Liuzza2 and Mario di Bernardo3
Abstract -- In many joint-action scenarios, humans and robots
have to coordinate their movements to accomplish a given
shared task. Lifting an object together, sawing a wood log,
transferring objects from a point to another are all examples
where motor coordination between humans and machines is a
crucial requirement. While the dyadic coordination between a
human and a robot has been studied in previous investigations,
the multi-agent scenario in which a robot has to be integrated
into a human group still remains a less explored field of research.
In this paper we discuss how to synthesise an artificial agent
able to coordinate its motion in human ensembles. Driven by a
control architecture based on deep reinforcement learning, such
an artificial agent will be able to autonomously move itself in
order to synchronise its motion with that of the group while
exhibiting human-like kinematic features. As a paradigmatic
coordination task we take a group version of the so-called mirror-
game which is highlighted as a good benchmark in the human
movement literature.
I. INTRODUCTION
Interest in using robots and artificial avatars in joint tasks
with humans to reach a common goal is growing rapidly.
Indeed, it is possible to find numerous applications that span
from industrial
tasks to entertainment, from navigation to
orientation and so on, in which artificial agents are required
to interact cooperatively with people. Examples of human-
robot interaction include the problem of jointly handling an
object [1], sawing a log of wood [2], managing a common
work-piece in a production system [3], or performing a "pick
and place" coordination task [4]. While dyadic coordination
between humans and robots is the subject of much ongoing
research, the problem of having robots or avatars interacting
with a human team remains a seldom investigated field. This is
probably due to the complex mechanisms underlying interper-
sonal coordination, the different ways in which coordination
can emerge in human groups, and the potentially large amount
of data to be collected and processed in real-time.
From a control viewpoint, the emergence of multi-agent
synchronisation while performing a joint task is a phenomenon
characterised by non-linear dynamics in which an individual
has to predict what others are going to do and adjust his/her
movements in order to complement the movements of the
others in order to achieve precise and accurate temporal
correspondence [5].
In this context, an open question is to investigate whether it
is possible to influence the emergent group behaviour via the
introduction of artificial agents able be accepted in a natural
way by the group and help it achieving a collective control
goal. To reach such a goal, the artificial agent has to be able
to integrate its motion with that of the others exhibiting at the
same time typical human-like kinematic features. In this way,
the artificial agent can merge with the rest of the group and
enhance, rather disrupt, social attachment between its members
and group cohesiveness.
The problem is crucial in social robotics, where new ad-
vancements in human-robot
interaction can promote novel
diagnostic and rehabilitation strategies for patient suffering
from social and motor disorders [6].
In this work we define a "human-like" motion by using
the concept of "Individual Motor Signature" (IMS), proposed
in [7] as a valid biomarker able to capture the peculiarity of
the human motion. Specifically, the IMS has been defined in
terms of the probability density function (PDF) of the velocity
profiles characterising a specific joint task.
The aim of this paper is to present a control architecture
based on deep learning to drive an artificial agent able in
performing a joint task in a multi-agent scenario while ex-
hibiting a desired IMS. As a scenario of interest, we take a
multiplayer version of the mirror game proposed in [8] as
a paradigmatic task of interpersonal motor coordination. In
our version of the mirror game, first proposed in [7], a group
of players is asked to oscillate a finger sideways performing
some interesting motion and synchronising theirs with that of
the others (see [9] for further details).
The approach we follow is an extension to groups of the
strategy we presented in [10], [11], [12] in the case of dyadic
interactions. Specifically, in [12] we designed an autonomous
cyber player able to play dyadic leader-follower sessions of the
mirror game with different human players. Such a cyber player
was driven by a Q-learning algorithm aiming at exhibiting the
kinematic features of a target human player in order to emulate
hers/his way of moving when engaged in a dyadic interaction.
Extending the Q-learning approach to multi-agent systems is
cumbersome as the approach is unscalable with the growth of
the system state space due to the addition of other players. To
overcome this limitation, we use "deep reinforcement learn-
ing" [13], [14], [15], combining the reinforcement learning
strategy with the powerful generalization capabilities of neural
networks. To design the control architecture of the cyber
player, we collect motor measurements signals of four different
players involved in a joint oscillatory task and then train
the CP to mimic the way of moving of one of them. The
validation is done replacing the target player with the cyber
player and comparing the group performance in order to prove
the effectiveness of the proposed control approach.
II. PRELIMINARIES
A group of people interacting with each other can be de-
scribed as a complex network system in which each individual
is represented as a node (or agent) with its own dynamics
while the visual coupling with the other members of the
group as edges in a graph describing the network of their
interactions. The structure of the interconnections established
among the groups' members is formalised by the adjacency
matrix A := aij, in which the element aij = 1 only if the node
j is linked with the node i, or in other terms if the individual
j is visually coupled with the individual i.
Four different topologies are considered in this work as
shown in Fig. 1. As described in [9] these different topologies
can be implemented experimentally by changing the way in
which participants sit with respect to each other and by asking
them to wear appropriate goggles restricting their field-of-
view.
Fig. 1: Network topologies. (a) Complete graph. (b) Ring
graph. (c) Path graph. (d) Star graph.
(cid:80)N
Let θk (t) be the phase of the kth agent estimated by
taking the Hilbert transform of its position signal, say xk (t).
The cluster phase of N agents is defined as q(t)
:=
1
k=1 ejθk(t) , which represents the average phase of the
N
group at time t. The term φk (t) := θk(t)− q(t) is the relative
phase between the kth agent and the group phase at time t.
The level of coordination reached by a human group per-
forming an oscillatory task can be investigated by evaluating
the group synchronisation index ρg(t) introduced in [9], [16]
and defined as follows:
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ∈ [0, 1] ,
(1)
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N(cid:88)
k=1
ρg(t) :=
1
N
ej(φk(t)− ¯φk)
where ¯φk is φk(t) averaged over time. Closer the synchroni-
sation index is to 1, higher is the level of synchronisation in
the group.
III. DEEP REINFORCEMENT LEARNING
APPROACH
A. Brief overview
Reinforcement learning is a machine learning technique in
which an agent tries to learn how to behave in an unknown
environment taking, in any situation, the best action that it can
perform. The problem is formalized by considering a set X
of all possible states in which the environment can be (state-
space), a set U of all possible actions that the agent can take
(action-space) and an auxiliary function, named action-value
function (or Q-function), that quantifies the expected return
(reward) starting from a specific state and taking a specific
action. Through the action-value function, the goal of the
learning agent is to iteratively refine its policy in order to
maximise the expected reward. Solving a problem with the
classical Q-learning approach [17] means to iteratively explore
all possible combinations between the set X and the set U in
order to evaluate them in terms of action-value functions in a
tabular form. As this is unfeasible in our group scenario, we
use the deep learning control approach shown in Fig. 2 where:
• the state space is x := [x, x, ¯x, ¯x] where [x, x] are
position and velocity of the CP, while [¯x, ¯x] are mean
position and mean velocity of the players connected to
the target players;
• the action space is made up of 9 different values of
acceleration in [−4, 4], empirically chosen looking at the
typical human accelerations while performing the same
joint tasks;
• the reward function is selected as ρ := − (x − xt)2 −
0.1 ( x − xt)2 − ηu2 where [xt, xt] are position and ve-
locity of the target player, while the constant parameter
η tunes the control effort. Maximising a reward function
so designed means to minimise the squared error both in
position and in velocity between the CP and the target
player;
• the policy π according to which the CP chooses the action
to take in a specific state is an -greedy policy [13].
Following that policy, the CP takes the best known action
with (1 − ) probability (exploitation), whereas with
probability it takes a random action (exploration). The
value follows a monotonic decreasing function, since
as time increases the exploration phase is replaced by
the exploitation phase.
In particular, we exploit the Deep Q-network (DQN) strat-
egy where an artificial neural network (ANN) is used to
approximate the optimal action-value function Q∗ defined as:
Q∗ (x, u) = max
π
(cid:34) ∞(cid:88)
m=0
E
(cid:35)
γmrk+m+1xk = x, u
,
(2)
which maximises the expected value of the sum of the rewards
r discounted by a positive factor γ < 1, obtained taking the
action u in the state x following the policy π at any time
instant k.
Training an ANN in order to approximate a desired function
(Q-function) means to find the vector of network weights θ
of the connections between the neurons, iteratively evaluated
by back-propagation algorithms in order to minimise a loss
function. The loss function is used to measure the error
between the actual and the predicted output of the neural
network (e.g. mean squared error) (see [18] for further details).
Contrary to what is done in traditional supervised learning
with ANN where the predicted output is well defined, in
the Deep Q-network approach the loss function is iteratively
changed because the predicted output itself depends on the
network parameters θk at every instant k. Namely, the loss
Fig. 2: Block scheme of the deep Q network algorithm. At each iteration, the RL controller chooses the control u according
to the current neural network and the system's state. The process evolves in a new state generating the reward r. The reward,
previous and current state are then used as a new sample to train the neural network.
(cid:34)(cid:32)
function is chosen as:
Lk (θk) = E
rk + γ max
uk+1
Q (xk+1, uk+1, θk−1)−
(cid:33)2(cid:35)
Q (xk, uk, θk)
,
(3)
which represents the mean squared error between the current
estimated Q function and the approximate optimal action-
value function.
It has been proved that an ANN with a single hidden
layer containing a large enough number of sigmoid units
can approximate any continuous function, while a second
layer is added to improve accuracy [19]. Relying on that, the
neural network we considered to approximate the action-value
function Q in (2) is designed as a feedforward network with
(Fig. 2):
• an input layer with 4 different nodes, one for each state
variable [x, x, ¯x, ¯x];
• two hidden layers, empirically found, made up of 64
and 32 nodes each implementing a sigmoidal activation
function;
• an output layer with 9 different nodes, one for each
action available in the set U. In the DQN, the network
output returns the estimated action-value qu for each
possible action u ∈ U in a single shot reducing in this
way the time needed for the training. Then, the action
corresponding to the maximum q-value (neuron's output)
is chosen as the next control input.
Reinforcement learning is known to be unstable or even
to diverge when a nonlinear function approximator, such
as an ANN, is used to estimate the Q-function [13], [14].
According to the existing literature, this instability is caused
by: (i) the presence of correlation in the sequence of observed
states and (ii) the presence of correlation between the current
estimated Q and the target network, resulting in the loss of the
Markov property. The correlation in the observation sequence
is removed by introducing the experience replay mechanism,
where the observed states used to train the ANN are not
taken sequentially but are sampled randomly from a circular
buffer. Also, the correlation between the current estimate of the
function Q and the target optimal one Q∗ is reduced updating
the latter at a slower rate.
B. CP Implementation
According to the reinforcement learning strategy with the
Deep Q-network described above, the CP refines its policy
according to the system states and the reward received so as
NN trainingProcessPolicyRewardrk+1=ρ(xk,uk,xk+1)xk+1rk+1z−1uk1234Hidden layer 1 x 64Hidden layer 2 x 32xkxk¯xk¯xkQk+1(θk+1)=g(Qk(θk),xk,uk,xk+1,rk+1)qu1k+1qu2k+1qu3k+1qu4k+1qu5k+1qu6k+1qu7k+1qu8k+1qu9k+1θ1,2kθ2,3kθ3,4kqkuk=π(qk,xk)qk+1:=!qu1k+1,qu2k+1,...,qu9k+1"Txk:=[xk,xk,¯xk,¯xk] to take the best action it can to mimic the target player(s).
To implement the DQN as a first step, a feedforward neural
network needs to be initialized with random values. The
experience replay mechanism is implemented instantiating an
empty circular buffer in order to store the system's state at
each iteration.
Then at each iteration we have (Fig. 2):
1) the CP observes the process's state xk at time instant
k and performs an action uk according to the policy π,
that is an -greedy policy;
2) the process evolves to a new state xk+1 and the CP
receives the reward rk+1 that measures how good taking
the action u in the state xk has been;
3) the new sample (cid:104)xk, uk, xk+1, rk+1(cid:105) is added to the
circular buffer and a random batch taken from it is
used to train the NN. The training is done through
the gradient descend back-propagation algorithm with
momentum [13] so as to tune the network's weights θ
in order to minimize the loss function (3). We denote
the network's weights between the layer n and n + 1 at
instant k as θn,n+1
.
k
The steps above are repeated until convergence is achieved
according to the "termination criterion":
(cid:107)RM ST P,¯x − RM SCP,¯x(cid:107) ≤
(4)
where RM Si,¯x is the root mean square error between the
position of the player i ∈ [T P, CP ] and the mean position
of the group, while is a non-negative parameter.
IV. TRAINING AND VALIDATION
A. Training
Ideally, data used to train the CP are extracted from real
human players playing the mirror game. In our case, due to
the lack of a large enough dataset, the data needed to feed
the CP during the training are generated synthetically making
artificial agents modelling human players perform sessions of
the mirror game against each other. We refer to these other
artificial agents as Virtual Players (VP) to distinguish them
from the CP since they are driven by a completely different
architecture which is not based on AI and was presented in
[10] and improved in [11]. The use of virtual players for
training AI based CPs was first proposed in [12] for dyadic
interaction and is applied here for the first time to the multi-
player version of the game.
Specifically, the motion of the virtual player used to generate
synthetic data is that of a controlled nonlinear HKB oscillator
[20] of the form:
x +(cid:0)αx2 + β x2 − γ(cid:1) x + ω2x = u,
(5)
where x, x and x are position, velocity and acceleration of the
VP end effector, respectively, α, β, γ are positive empirically
tuned damping parameters while ω is the oscillation frequency.
M(cid:88)
j=1
M(cid:88)
j=1
The control input u is chosen following an optimal control
strategy aiming at minimising the following cost function [21]:
min
u
J (tk) =
(cid:90) tk+1
tk
θv
2
θp
2
(cid:90) tk+1
(x (tk+1) − rp (tk+1))2 +
( x (τ ) − rσ (τ ))2 dτ +
θσ
2
( x (τ ) − rp (τ ))2 dτ +
tk
(cid:90) tk+1
η
2
tk
u (τ )2 dτ,
(6)
where rp, rp is the position and the velocity time series of
the partner player,
rσ is the reference signal modelling the
desired human motor signature, η tunes the control effort, tk
and tk+1 represent the current and the next optimization time
instant. θp, θs, θv are positive control parameters satisfying
the constraint θp + θs + θv = 1. By tuning appropriately
these parameters, it is possible to change the VP configuration
making it act as a leader, follower or joint improviser (more
details are in [10], [21]). In the case of a multi-player scenario,
rp and rp are taken as the mean value of the position and the
velocity of the target player's neighbours, that is:
rp :=
1
M
xj;
rp :=
1
M
xj,
(7)
where M is the number of neighbours and xj and xj are the
position and the velocity of the jth neighbour.
The reference signal rσ captures in some way the desired
human kinematic features that the VP has to exhibit during
the game. In [11] we developed a methodology based on the
theory of stochastic processes and observational learning to
generate human-like trajectories in real time. In particular,
a Markov Chain (MC) was derived to capture the peculiar
internal description model of the motion of a human player
simply observing him/her playing sessions of the mirror game
in isolation.
To train the CP to coordinate its movements in the group
like the virtual player target does, a group of 4 different virtual
players interconnected in a complete graph were used (Fig. 3).
In particular we selected four Markov models (one for each
player) of different human players which were parametrized in
[11]. Without loss of generality, VP 4 was taken as the target
player the Deep Learning driven CP has to mimic.
The parameters proposed for the control architecture of the
VPs were tuned experimentally as follows: α = 1, β = 2, γ =
−1, ω = 1 for the inner dynamics, θp = 0.8, θσ = 0.15, θv =
0.05, η = 10−4 and T = 0.03s for the control law. The
experience replay in the CP algorithm was implemented with a
buffer of 200, 000 elements, batches of 32 sampled states were
used to train the feedforward neural network at each iteration.
A target network updated every 150 time steps was considered
in the Q-function, with a discount factor γ = 0.95.
The training stage was carried out on a Desktop computer
having an Intel Core i7-6700 CPU, 16 GB of RAM and 64-
bit Windows operative system. It took 1, 500 trials of 500
observations each to converge (around 8.5 hours) according
to the criterion (4). In Fig. 4 the training curve is reported
graph, star graph (described in Sec. II) with node 3 as center.
For the sake of brevity, in Fig. 5 only the validation for the
complete and the path graph are reported. The performance of
the CP has been evaluated by comparing its behaviour with
that of the target virtual player it was trained to mimic. The
CP (in red) successfully tracks the mean position of the group
(dashed line in black) being able to mimic the target player it
has been trained to imitate (in blue) [panel (a)]. The relative
position error (RPE) defined as
(cid:0)¯x(t) − xV P/CP (t)(cid:1) sgn ( ¯x(t))
if sgn ( ¯x(t)) = sgn(cid:0)xV P/CP (t)(cid:1) (cid:54)= 0
(cid:12)(cid:12)¯x(t) − xV P/CP (t)(cid:12)(cid:12) ,
otherwise
RP E =
(8)
has been also evaluated between the VP target and the mean
position of the neighbours and compared with the relative
position error between the CP and the same mean position
[panel (c)]. Both the errors are very small and with comparable
mean values.
Similar considerations can be done for behaviour of the CP
when the group topology is a path graph as shown in panels
(b) and (d).
The key features of the motion of the CP and the VP it
has been trained upon are captured by the following metrics:
1) relative phase error defined as ∆Φ = Φ¯x − ΦCP/V P , 2)
the RMS error between the position of the CP (or VP) and
that of the group mean position, and 3) the time lag which
describes the amount of time shift that achieves the maximum
cross-covariance between the two position time series. This
can be interpreted as the average reaction time of the player
in the mirror game [9].
The metrics described above were evaluated performing 20
trials and reporting both the mean value and the standard
deviation for both the complete graph (Tab. Ia) and the path
graph (Tab. Ib). It is possible to notice that all indexes show
a remarkable degree of similarity between the motion of the
CP and that of the target VP.
TABLE I: Metrics are reported for 20 trials of the multiplayer
mirror game both in complete graph (a) and in path graph (b).
The relative phase, the RMS and the time lag are evaluated
between the mean of the neighbours with the CP (first column)
and with the VP target (second column).
Metric
Relative phase
RMS
Time lag
Metric
Relative phase
RMS
Time lag
CP
VP target
−0.1680 ± 0.0513 −0.0498 ± 0.0948
0.0556 ± 0.0037
0.0443 ± 0.0054
−0.1140 ± 0.0157 −0.0165 ± 0.0357
(a) Complete Graph
VP target
−0.2296 ± 0.0788 −0.1589 ± 0.0982
0.0597 ± 0.0035
0.0555 ± 0.0047
−0.1035 ± 0.0153 −0.0675 ± 0.0236
CP
(b) Path Graph
For further evidence, in Fig. 6 the group level synchro-
nization is reported for each tested topology. Despite the
Fig. 3: Architecture used to train the CP to mimic the target
player (ball in green). The group is simulated by 4 VPs playing
the mirror game in joint improvisation and driven by the
cognitive architecture based on optimal control and Markov
chains. The CP, driven by a deep reinforcement
learning
approach, receives in real time the data from the group and
learns how to interact in order to replace the player target.
Fig. 4: Training curve showing the convergence of the al-
gorithm. The root mean square error in position (y-axis) is
reported for each trial (x-axis) both for the VP (in blue) and
the CP (in red). ¯x represents the mean position of the target
player's neighbours.
showing for each trial the RMS between the VP and the
group (in blue), and between the CP and the group (in red).
Convergence is reached in about 1, 000 trials on.
B. Validation
To show that the CP is effectively able to emulate the VP
target when engaged in a group, training was carried out by
considering a group described by a complete graph, we then
validated the performance of the CP when interacting over
different topologies. Specifically we used the ring graph, path
Fig. 5: Position time series of group sessions. (a)-(b) The position trajectories of the VP target (in blue) and of the CP (in
red) are reported together with the mean position of the neighbours (in dashed back). (c)-(d) Relative position error evaluated
between the mean position and the position of the VP target (in blue) and the CP respectively. Two different topologies are
depicted: (a)-(c) the complete graph and (b)-(d) the path graph.
different topologies, the presence of the CP does not alter the
group dynamics when the CP is substituted to the VP it was
trained upon. We notice that the level of coordination varies
with the topology, confirming what found in [9]. Specifically,
in [9] as confirmed by Fig. 6, the complete and the star
graph were found to be associated with the highest level of
synchronization.
V. CONCLUSIONS
In this work we addressed the problem of synthesizing
an autonomous artificial agent able to coordinate its move-
ments and perform a joint motor task in a group setting.
In particular, a multiplayer version of the mirror game was
used as a paradigmatic task where different individuals have
to synchronize their oscillatory motion. To achieve our goal
and overcome the limitations of previous approaches, we
introduced a deep reinforcement learning control algorithm in
which a feedforward neural network is used to approximate
the nonlinear action-value function. The DQN allowed us to
overcome the limitations of the Q-learning approach presented
in [12] which is impractical when the state space becomes too
large, as in the case of multiplayer coordination tasks. The
effectiveness of the cyber player trained upon a target group
member was shown by comparing its performance when play-
ing in groups with different interconnection topologies. The
numerical validations show the effectiveness of our approach.
Ongoing work is being carried out to validate the behaviour of
the CP when interacting with a real group of people through
the experimental platform Chronos we presented in [22].
REFERENCES
[1] A. Edsinger and C. C. Kemp, "Human-Robot Interaction for Cooperative
Manipulation : Handing Objects to One Another," in IEEE International
Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2007, p.
e9825497.
[2] L. Peternel, T. Petric, E. Oztop, and J. Babic, "Teaching robots to
cooperate with humans in dynamic manipulation tasks based on multi-
modal human-in-the-loop approach," Autonomous Robots, vol. 36, no.
1-2, pp. 123 -- 136, 2014.
[3] M. Faber, J. Butzler, and C. M. Schlick, "Human-robot Cooperation in
Future Production Systems: Analysis of Requirements for Designing an
Ergonomic Work System," Procedia Manufacturing, vol. 3, pp. 510 -- 517,
2015.
[4] M. Lamb, T. Lorenz, S. J. Harrison, R. W. Kallen, A. Minai, and
M. J. Richardson, "PAPAc: A Pick and Place Agent Based on Human
Behavioral Dynamics," Proceedings of the 5th International Conference
on Human Agent Interaction - HAI '17, pp. 131 -- 141, 2017.
[5] C. Vesper, S. Butterfill, G. Knoblich, and N. Sebanz, "A minimal
architecture for joint action," Neural Networks, vol. 23, no. 8-9, pp.
998 -- 1003, 2010.
[6] I. Amado, L. Br´enugat-Hern´e, E. Orriols, C. Desombre, M. Dos Santos,
Z. Prost, M. O. Krebs, and P. Piolino, "A serious game to improve cog-
nitive functions in schizophrenia: A pilot study," Frontiers in Psychiatry,
vol. 7, pp. 1 -- 11, 2016.
(a)(b)Complete GraphPath Graph0102030405060-0.500.5Mean GroupVP target0102030405060-0.500.5Mean GroupCP0102030405060-0.500.5Mean GroupVP target0102030405060-0.500.5Mean GroupCP(c)(d)010203040506000.20.4010203040506000.20.4 Cybernetics, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 1018 -- 1029, 2018.
[11] M. Lombardi, D. Liuzza, and M. di Bernardo, "Generation and clas-
sification of individual behaviours for virtual players control in motor
coordination tasks," in European Control Conference (ECC), Limassol
(Cyprus), 2018, pp. 2374 -- 2379.
[12] -- -- , "Using learning to control artificial avatars in human motor
coordination tasks," pp. 1 -- 12, 2018.
[13] R. S. Sutton and A. G. Barto, Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction,
2nd ed. MIT press, 2018.
[14] V. Mnih, K. Kavukcuoglu, D. Silver, A. A. Rusu, J. Veness, M. G.
Bellemare, A. Graves, M. Riedmiller, and A. K. Fidjeland, "Human-
level control through deep reinforcement learning," Nature Letter, vol.
518, pp. 529 -- 533, 2015.
[15] Y. Li, "Deep Reinforcement Learning," pp. 1 -- 150, 2018.
[16] M. J. Richardson, R. L. Garcia, T. D. Frank, M. Gergor, and K. L. Marsh,
"Measuring group synchrony: A cluster-phase method for analyzing
multivariate movement time-series," Frontiers in Physiology, vol. 3 OCT,
no. October, pp. 1 -- 10, 2012.
[17] C. J. C. H. Watkins and P. Dayan, "Q-learning," Machine Learning,
vol. 8, no. 3-4, pp. 279 -- 292, 1992.
[18] S. Russel and P. Norvig, Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach,
3rd ed. Prentice hall, 2003.
[19] G. Cybenko, "Approximation by superpositions of a sigmoidal function,"
Mathematics of Control, Signals and Systems, vol. 2, pp. 303 -- 314, 1989.
[20] H. Haken, J. A. S. Kelso, and H. Bunz, "A Theoretical Model of
Phase Transitions in Human Hand Movements," Biological Cybernetics,
vol. 51, pp. 347 -- 356, 1985.
[21] C. Zhai, F. Alderisio, P. Slowinski, K. Tsaneva-Atanasova, and
M. di Bernardo, "Design of a Virtual Player for Joint Improvisation with
Humans in the Mirror Game," PLoS ONE, vol. 11, no. 4, p. e0154361,
2016.
[22] F. Alderisio, M. Lombardi, G. Fiore, and M. di Bernardo, "A novel
computer-based set-up to study movement coordination in human en-
sembles," Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 8, p. 967, 2017.
Fig. 6: Histogram reporting the group synchronization level
reached by the group both with the VP target (blue bars) and
with the CP (red bars). Different topologies were implemented
during the validation: complete graph (CG), path graph (PG),
ring graph (RG) and star graph (SG) with player 3 as center
node.
[7] P. Słowi´nski, C. Zhai, F. Alderisio, R. Salesse, M. Gueugnon, L. Marin,
B. G. Bardy, M. di Bernardo, and K. Tsaneva-Atanasova, "Dynamic
similarity promotes interpersonal coordination in joint action," Journal
of The Royal Society Interface, vol. 13, no. 116, p. 20151093, 2016.
[8] L. Noy, E. Dekel, and U. Alon, "The mirror game as a paradigm for
studying the dynamics of two people improvising motion together,"
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 108, no. 52,
pp. 20 947 -- 20 952, 2011.
[9] F. Alderisio, G. Fiore, R. N. Salesse, B. G. Bardy, and M. D. Bernardo,
"Interaction patterns and individual dynamics shape the way we move
in synchrony," Scientific Reports, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 6846, 2017.
[10] C. Zhai, F. Alderisio, P. Slowinski, K. Tsaneva-Atanasova, and M. Di
Bernardo, "Design and Validation of a Virtual Player for Studying
Interpersonal Coordination in the Mirror Game," IEEE Transactions on
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91CPVP targetGroup SynchronizationCG PG RG SG |
1802.01207 | 2 | 1802 | 2018-12-28T17:34:19 | A Sharp Bound on the $s$-Energy and Its Applications to Averaging Systems | [
"cs.MA",
"math.OC"
] | The {\em $s$-energy} is a generating function of wide applicability in network-based dynamics. We derive an (essentially) optimal bound of $(3/\rho s)^{n-1}$ on the $s$-energy of an $n$-agent symmetric averaging system, for any positive real $s\leq 1$, where~$\rho$ is a lower bound on the nonzero weights. This is done by introducing the new dynamics of {\em twist systems}. We show how to use the new bound on the $s$-energy to tighten the convergence rate of systems in opinion dynamics, flocking, and synchronization. | cs.MA | cs |
A Sharp Bound on the s-Energy and Its Applications to
Averaging Systems ∗
Bernard Chazelle †
Abstract
The s-energy is a generating function of wide applicability in network-based dynam-
ics. We derive an (essentially) optimal bound of (3/ρs)n−1 on the s-energy of an n-agent
symmetric averaging system, for any positive real s ≤ 1, where ρ is a lower bound on the
nonzero weights. This is done by introducing the new dynamics of twist systems. We show
how to use the new bound on the s-energy to tighten the convergence rates of systems in
opinion dynamics, flocking, and synchronization.
1 Introduction
Averaging dynamics over time-varying networks is a process commonly observed in many well-
studied multiagent systems. It has been used to model swarming, polarization, synchronization,
gossip processes, and consensus formation in distributed systems [1, 8, 9]. Because of a dearth
of general convergence techniques, results in the area often rely on network connectivity as-
sumptions. The s-energy is a powerful analytical tool that allows us to overcome these restric-
tions [3]. It provides a global parametrized measure of the "footprint" of the system over an
infinite horizon. This stands in sharp contrast with the local arguments (spectral or Lyapunov-
based) typically used to prove fixed-point attraction.
The main result of this paper is an optimal bound on the s-energy of symmetric averaging
systems. The new bound is used to tighten the convergence rates of various multiagent systems
in opinion dynamics, flocking, and self-synchronization of coupled oscillators [1,3,7,10,11,13 --
15, 17, 19 -- 21].
∗The Research was sponsored by the Army Research Office and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
and was accomplished under Grant Number W911NF-17-1-0078. The views and conclusions contained in this
document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed
or implied, of the Army Research Office, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or the U.S. Government.
The U.S. Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Government purposes notwithstanding
any copyright notation herein.
†Department of Computer Science, Princeton University, [email protected]
1
Before moving to the technical discussion, we illustrate the role of the s-energy with a toy
system. Fix ρ ∈ (0, 1/2] and place n agents at x1, . . . , xn in [0, 1]. Given any ε > 0, for any
integer t > 0, pick two agents i, j such that x j − xi ≥ ε (if any) and move them anywhere in the
interval [xi + δ, x j − δ], where δ = ρ(x j − xi). Repeat this process as long as possible. Note the
high nondeterminism of the dynamics: not only can we choose the pair of agents at each step,
but we can move them anywhere we please within the specified interval. Despite this freedom,
(cid:1)n−1 steps, for any small enough ε > 0, and the
the process always terminates in O(cid:0) 1
ρn log 1
ε
bound is tight.1 This result is a direct consequence of our new bound on the s-energy. The proof
relies on a reduction to twist systems, a new type of multiagent dynamics that we define in the
next section.
t=1 be an infinite sequence of graphs over a fixed vertex set {1, . . . , n}.
The s-energy. Let (gt)∞
Each gt is embedded in [0, 1], meaning that its vertices (the "agents") are represented by n real
numbers between 0 and 1. Let µ1, . . . , µk denote the lengths of the intervals formed by the union
k, for real or complex s.2 The s-energy E(s)
of the embedded edges of gt, and put (cid:96)t = µs
1
t>0 (cid:96)t. Because the s-energy follows an obvious
of the system is defined as the infinite sum(cid:80)
+··· + µs
scaling law, we note that embedding the graphs in the unit interval is not restrictive.
Averaging systems.
In a (symmetric) averaging system, gt is undirected and supplied with
self-loops at the vertices. To simplify the notation, we fix t ∈ Z+ and denote by xi and yi the
positions of vertex i at times t and t + 1, respectively. Vertices are labeled so that x1 ≤ ··· ≤ xn.
For each i ∈ {1, . . . , n}, write r(i) = max{ j (i, j) ∈ gt} and l(i) = min{ j (i, j) ∈ gt}.3 Fix
ρ ∈ (0, 1/2]. The move of vertex i from xi to yi is subject to
xl(i) + δi ≤ yi ≤ xr(i) − δi,
(1)
where δi = ρ(xr(i) − xl(i)).
In other words, vertex i can move anywhere within the interval
covered by its incident edges, but not too close to the endpoints. If ρ = 0, convergence is clearly
impossible to ensure since i can easily oscillate periodically between two fixed vertices. We
emphasize the high nondeterminism of the process: gt is arbitrary and so is the motion of i
within its allotted interval.
The results. Although the 0-energy is typically unbounded, it may come as a surprise that
E(s) is always finite for any s > 0 [3]. In particular, the case s = 1 shows that it takes only a
finite amount of ink to draw the infinite sequence of graphs gt. We state the main result of this
article,4 and prove it in §3:
Theorem 1.1. The s-energy satisfies E(s) ≤ (3/ρs)n−1, for any 0 < ρ ≤ 1/2 and 0 < s ≤ 1.
then the union of the edges forms the three intervals [0, 0.3], [0.5, 0.5], [0.7, 0.9] and (cid:96)t = (0.3)s + (0.2)s.
1All logarithms are to the base 2.
2For example, if gt consists of three edges embedded as [0, 0.2], [0.1, 0.3], [0.7, 0.9], and one self-loop at 0.5,
3Because gt is undirected and has self-loops, l(i) ≤ i ≤ r(i), (l ◦ r)(i) ≤ i ≤ (r ◦ l)(i). The notation l, r should not
4We actually prove the slightly stronger bound of 2(2/ρs)n−1 for n > 2.
obscure the fact that both functions can be chosen differently for each graph gt and its embedding (xi)n
i=1.
2
We prove in §5.A that the bound O(1/ρs)n−1 is optimal for s = O(cid:0)1/ log 1
(cid:1) and ρ ≤ 1/3.
These are the conditions we encounter in practice, which is why we are able to provide tight
bounds for all the applications discussed in this work. For s = 1, a quasi-optimal lower
bound of Ω(1/ρ)(cid:98)n/2(cid:99) is already known [3]. Theorem 1.1 lowers the previous upper bound of
(1/s)n−1(1/ρ)n2+O(1) [3].
ρ
The s-energy helps us bound the convergence rates of averaging network systems in full
generality. To our knowledge, no other current technique can prove these results. The power
of the s-energy is that it makes no connectivity requirements about the underlying dynamic
networks. We use it typically to bound the communication count Cε, which is defined as the
maximum number of steps t such that gt has at least one edge of length ε > 0 or higher. From
the inequality Cε ≤ ε−sE(s), setting s = 1/ log 1
Theorem 1.2. The communication count satisfies Cε = O
and Cε = O
for any 2−n ≤ ε ≤ 1/2,
ε in Theorem 1.1 yields:
for 0 < ε < 2−n.
ε and s = n/ log 1
(cid:17)n−1
(cid:17)n−1
(cid:16) 1
ρ log 1
ε
(cid:16) 1
ρn log 1
ε
This lowers the previous upper bound of (1/ρ)n2+O(1)(log 1/ε)n−1 [3]. We prove in §5.B that
the new bound is optimal for any positive ε ≤ ρ2n and ρ ≤ 1/3. We close this introduction with
a few remarks about the results and their context:
1. The results extend to a large family of asymmetric averaging systems.
Indeed, Theo-
rems 1.1 and 1.2 hold for any infinite sequence of cut-balanced digraphs gt: recall that
a directed graph is said to be cut-balanced if its weakly connected components are also
strongly connected.
tinctive feature of time-varying network-based dynamics. Markov chains, for example,
have convergence rates proportional to log 1/ε.
2. The polylogarithmic factor(cid:0)log 1/ε(cid:1)n−1 in the convergence rate of Theorem 1.2 is a dis-
introduced the total s-energy as(cid:80)
3. Our definition of the s-energy differs slightly from the original formulation [3], which
(i, j)∈gt di j(t)s, where di j(t) is the distance between
, our bounds
the vertices i, j in the embedding of gt. Up to a correction factor of at most
apply to the total s-energy as well.
(cid:16)n
(cid:17)
(cid:80)
t>0
2
4. As noted in [6], the s-energy can be interpreted as a generalized Dirichlet series or, al-
ternatively, as a partition function with s as the inverse temperature. Both interpretations
have their own benefits, such as highlighting the lossless encoding properties of the s-
energy or the usefulness of Legendre-transform arguments with the relevant thermody-
namical quantities.
2 Twist Systems
We reduce averaging systems to a simpler kind of dynamics where agents keep the same order-
ing at all time. In a twist system, n points move within [0, 1] at discrete time steps. As before,
we fix t ∈ Z+ and describe the motion of each point xi at time t to its next position yi at time t +1.
3
Unlike the averaging kind, twist systems preserve order; that is, assuming that x1 ≤ ··· ≤ xn,
then y1 ≤ ··· ≤ yn. To describe the motion from t to t + 1, we choose two integers 1 ≤ u < v ≤ n
and, for any i (u ≤ i ≤ v), we define the twist of xi as the interval within [xu, xv] defined by
τi =(cid:2)xu + ρ(xmin{i+1,v} − xu), xv − ρ(xv − xmax{i−1,u})(cid:3).
(2)
Fixing ρ ∈ (0, 1/2] ensures that all the twists are well-defined.5 The only constraints on the
dynamics are: (i) y1 ≤ ··· ≤ yn; and (ii) yi ∈ τi for any u ≤ i ≤ v, and yi = xi otherwise.
Figure 1: The interval τi extends from a distance ρ(xi+1 − xu) to the right of xu to a distance ρ(xv − xi−1)
to the left of xv: it thus twists [xi−1, xi+1] into the allowed interval for yi.
Observe that conditions (i,ii) are always feasible: for example, we can choose yi to be the
leftmost point in τi; of course, there is no need to do so and the expressive power of twist systems
comes from the freedom they offer. Like their averaging counterparts, such systems are highly
nondeterministic: at each step t, both the choice of u, v and the motion of the points are entirely
arbitrary within the constraints (i,ii). Writing (cid:96)t = (xv − xu)s, we define the s-energy of the twist
system as E(s) =(cid:80)
t>0 (cid:96)t. The next result justifies the introduction of twist systems.
Theorem 2.1. Any averaging system can be viewed as a twist system with the same parameter
ρ and the same s-energy.
Proof. Referring to our previous notation, recall that µ1, . . . , µk denote the lengths of the intervals
I j formed by the union of the edge embeddings of gt. We subdivide the time interval from t to
t + 1 into k time windows and, for j = 1, . . . , k, we process the motion within I j during the j-th
window while keeping the other vertices fixed. All windows are treated similarly, so it suffices
to explain the case k = 1. Let xi (resp. x(cid:48)
i) be the position of vertex i at time t (resp. t + 1) and
let y1 ≤ ··· ≤ yn be the sequence of x(cid:48)
i sorted in nondecreasing order.6 Let xu, . . . , xv denote the
positions within I1; we may assume that u < v. The other vertices are kept fixed, so we have
yi = xi for i < u or i > v. To show that the transition from xi to yi meets the conditions of a
5Indeed, we can check that τi = [a, b], where a ≤ b. The terminology refers to the "twisting" of the interval
6We break ties by using the index i. Note that the yi's are sorted, so they are not the same as those used in the
[xi−1, xi+1] around xi into the interval τi around yi.
definition of averaging systems given above.
4
x1τiyixuxixvxnyuyvyny1 twist system, we need to prove that yi ∈ τi for any i between u and v. By the symmetry of (2), it
suffices to show that, for u ≤ i ≤ v,
yi ≤ xv − ρ(xv − xmax{i−1,u}).
(3)
Assume that u < i ≤ v and let ¯x j be shorthand for ρx j +(1−ρ)xv. The entire interval I1 is covered
by edges of gt, so there must be at least one edge (a, b) that covers [xi−1, xi], ie, b < i ≤ a. By (1),
a ≤ ¯xi−1. It also follows from (1)
a ≤ ρxl(a) + (1− ρ)xr(a), with l(a) ≤ b < i and r(a) ≤ v; hence x(cid:48)
x(cid:48)
j ≤ ρxl( j) + (1 − ρ)xr( j) ≤ ¯xi−1 for any j (u ≤ j < i); also
and the presence of self-loops that x(cid:48)
= x j ≤ ¯xi−1 for j < u. Putting it all together, this proves the existence of at least i indices
x(cid:48)
l ≤ ¯xi−1. It follows that yi ≤ ¯xi−1; hence (3) for u < i ≤ v. To complete the
l ≤ v such that x(cid:48)
proof of (3), we note that the case i = u follows from yu ≤ yu+1. The case k > 1 is handled by
repeating the previous analysis for each interval I j. The s-energy contributed by one step of the
(cid:3)
averaging system matches the energetic contribution of the k substeps of the twist system.
j
3 Bounding the s-Energy
The proof of Theorem 1.1 is unusual in the context of dynamics because it is algorithmic: it
consists of a set of trading rules that allows money to be injected into the system and exchanged
among the vertices to meet their needs. As the transactions take place, money is spent to pay for
the s-energy expended along the way. If all of the energy can be accounted for in this manner,
then the amount of money injected in the system is an upper bound on E(s). In our earlier
work [3], we were able to pursue this approach only for the case s = 1. We show here how to
extend it to all s ∈ (0, 1]. The idea was to supply each vertex with its own credit account and
then let them trade credits to pay for the s-energy incrementally. This strategy does not work
here because of its inability to cope with all the scales present in the system.7 The remedy is
to supply each pair of vertices with their own account. Only then are we able to accommodate
all scales at once. By appealing to Theorem 2.1, we may substitute twist systems for averaging
systems. We focus the analysis on the transition at time t from x1 ≤ ··· ≤ xn to y1 ≤ ··· ≤ yn.
Our only assumption is that, for some u, v (1 ≤ u < v ≤ n), we have yi ∈ τi for any u ≤ i ≤ v,
and yi = xi otherwise.
For each pair (i, j) such that 1 ≤ i < j ≤ n, we maintain an account Bi, j consisting of
(x j − xi)sA j−i credits, where A:= 2/ρs and one credit is used to pay for a single unit of s-energy.
(Amounts paid need not be integers.) We show that updating each Bi, j at time t to B(cid:48)
i, j at time
t + 1 leaves us with enough unused money to pay for the s-energy (xv − xu)s released at that
step.8 No new money is needed past the initial injection at time 1, so the s-energy is at most the
7We illustrate the difficulty with a simple example. Set n = 3 and assign xs
i Ai credits to the account for vertex
i = 1, 2, 3. Initialize the system with x1 = 0, x2 = 1 − ε, and x3 = 1; set ρ = 1/2, with g1 consisting of the single
edge (2, 3). Assume now that y1 = 0 and y2 = y3 = 1 − ε/2. The account for vertex 3, the only one to release money,
gives out only (1 − (1 − ε/2)s)A3 ≈ 1
2 sεA3 credits. If s < 1 and ε > 0 is very small, this is not enough to cover the
s-energy of εs needed for the first step. The problem is that the credit accounts do not operate at all scales.
8We refer to Bi, j as both the account for (i, j) and its value.
5
i< j A j−i <(cid:0) A
A−1
For n = 2, E(s) ≤ A, hence Theorem 1.1. We begin with a few words of intuition:
sum of all the Bi, j's at the beginning: E(s) ≤(cid:80)
(cid:1)2An−1 < 2(2/ρs)n−1, for n > 2.
i, j by considering the pairs (i, j) in descending order of j − i, starting
with (1, n). In general, the update for (i, j) will rely on money released by the pairs (i−1, j)
and (i, j + 1), whose accounts will have already been updated. In turn, the pair (i, j) will
then be expected to provide money to both (i, j − 1) and (i + 1, j): the donation will be
made in two equal amounts.
• We update Bi, j to B(cid:48)
• How much money should (i, j) receive from its donors. For the sake of this informal
discussion, let us focus on the case u ≤ i < j ≤ v. The account Bi, j should receive enough
to grow to (xv − xu)sA j−i. This typically exceeds its balance of (x j − xi)sA j−i at time t, so
an infusion of money is required. Of course, the amount actually needed for B(cid:48)
i, j is only
passed on to (i, j − 1) and (i + 1, j).
(y j − yi)sA j−i, so this in turn frees(cid:0)(xv − xu)s − (y j − yi)s(cid:1)A j−i ≥ 0, which can be then
• We pay for the energetic contribution at time t by spending the leftover money from the
update for (u, u + 1), which we show to be at least (xv − xu)s, as required.
Figure 2: Updating B1,4 to its new value of B(cid:48)
the pairs (1, 3) and (2, 4). With this scheme in place, updating B2,3 to B(cid:48)
1
2(D1,3 + D2,4) credits.
1,4 releases D1,4 credits, which are passed on evenly to
2,3 can make use of C2,3 =
Proof of Theorem 1.1. We update Bi, j by using Ci, j credits supplied by the accounts Bi−1, j and
Bi, j+1. We show how this produces a leftover Di, j, which can then be donated to (i + 1, j) and
(i, j − 1) in equal amounts. Here are the details: for all 1 ≤ i < j ≤ n in descending order of
j − i = n − 1, . . . , 1, apply the following assignments (Fig.2):
Ci, j ← 1
2(Di−1, j + Di, j+1)
Di, j ← Bi, j + Ci, j − B(cid:48)
i, j,
6
(4)
B1,4→′B1,4B1,3→′B1,3B2,4→′B2,4B1,2→′B1,2B2,3→′B2,3B3,4→′B3,412D1,412D1,412D1,312D1,312D2,412D2,4 Bi, j + Ci, j ≥ (xv( j) − xu(i))sA j−i
i, j
where Bi, j = (x j − xi)sA j−i, B(cid:48)
= (y j − yi)sA j−i, and Di, j = 0 if i < 1 or j > n. The assign-
ments denote transfers of money. This explains the factor of 1/2, which keeps the money pool
conserved: for example, one half of Di, j goes to (i, j − 1) and the other half to (i + 1, j). The
soundness of the trading scheme rests entirely on the claimed nonnegativity of all the donations
Di, j. For any i ∈ {1, . . . , n}, define u(i) = u and v(i) = v if u ≤ i ≤ v; and set u(i) = v(i) = i
otherwise. We prove by induction on j − i > 0 that, for 1 ≤ i < j ≤ n,
(5)
(6)
The next inequality, which follows from dzs/dz ≥ s for s, z ∈ (0, 1], will prove useful in estab-
lishing (5, 6):
Di, j ≥ 0.
1 − (1 − x)s ≥ sx for any s, x ∈ [0, 1].
(7)
• Case u ≤ i < j ≤ v. By affine invariance, we can always assume that xu = xv − 1 = 0. We
begin with the case u < i < j ≤ v and observe that v( j) = v and u(i − 1) = u(i) = u. Because
yi−1 ∈ τi−1, we have yi−1 ≥ ρxi. Using (7), we find that
i−1, j ≥(cid:0)(xv( j) − xu(i−1))s − (y j − yi−1)s(cid:1)A j+1−i
2 ρs(cid:0)1−(x j− xi)(cid:1)A j+1−i ≥(cid:0)1−(x j− xi)s(cid:1)A j−i; therefore,
(8)
If i = u, we have xi = 0, hence (8) merely expresses nonnegativity, which holds inductively.
We conclude that (8) obtains for any u ≤ i < j ≤ v. Likewise, by symmetry, Di, j+1 ≥ ρs(1 −
x j)A j+1−i. It follows from (4) that Ci, j ≥ 1
Bi, j + Ci, j ≥ (x j − xi)sA j−i +(cid:0)1 − (x j − xi)s(cid:1)A j−i = A j−i = (xv( j) − xu(i))sA j−i,
Di−1, j = Bi−1, j + Ci−1, j − B(cid:48)
≥(cid:0)1 − (1 − ρxi)s(cid:1)A j+1−i ≥ ρsxiA j+1−i.
which establishes (5). Since xu(i) = xu ≤ yi ≤ y j ≤ xv = xv( j), this also proves that
Di, j = Bi, j + Ci, j − B(cid:48)
i, j ≥ A j−i − (y j − yi)sA j−i ≥ 0;
hence (6).
• Case i < u ≤ j ≤ v. This time, we set xi = 0 and xv = 1 and note that u(i) = i and v( j) = v.
We begin with the case j < v, which implies that v( j + 1) = v. Using (4, 5), yi = xi, y j+1 ∈ τ j+1,
and (7) in this order, we find that
Di, j+1 = Bi, j+1 + Ci, j+1 − B(cid:48)
i, j+1 ≥(cid:0)(xv( j+1) − xu(i))s − (y j+1 − xi)s(cid:1)A j+1−i
≥(cid:0)1 − (1 − ρ(1 − x j))s(cid:1)A j+1−i ≥ ρs(1 − x j)A j+1−i ≥ (1 − x j)A j−i.
+ (1 − x j)(cid:1)A j−i ≥ A j−i = (xv( j) − xu(i))sA j−i;
2 Di, j+1 ≥(cid:0)xs
j
Bi, j + Ci, j ≥ Bi, j + 1
Again, by induction, Di−1, j ≥ 0; therefore, by (4),
(9)
hence (5). For the case j = v, again note that the lower bounds on Di−1, j and Di, j+1 we just used
still hold, and thus so does (5) for all i < u ≤ j ≤ v. Finally, y j ≤ xv; hence xu(i) = xi = yi ≤ y j ≤
xv = xv( j), and (6) follows from (4, 5).
7
The case u ≤ i ≤ v < j is the mirror image of the last one while the remaining three cases are
trivial and require no account updates. We pay for the s-energy contribution at time t by tapping
into Du,u+1, which is unused. For this to work, it suffices to show that Du,u+1 ≥ (xv − xu)s. We
have yi ∈ τi (i = u, u + 1); hence
yu+1 − yu ≤ xv − ρ(xv − xu) − (xu + ρ(xu+1 − xu))
≤ ρ(xu − xu+1) + (1 − ρ)(xv − xu) ≤ (1 − ρ)(xv − xu).
Thus, it follows from (4, 5, 7), together with u(u) = u and v(u + 1) = v, that
Du,u+1 = Bu,u+1 + Cu,u+1 − B(cid:48)
≥(cid:0)1 − (1 − ρ)s(cid:1)A(xv − xu)s ≥ ρsA(xv − xu)s ≥ (xv − xu)s.
u,u+1 ≥ A(xv(u+1) − xu(u))s − A(yu+1 − yu)s
This completes the proof of Theorem 1.1 for twist systems. By Theorem 2.1, this also implies
(cid:3)
the same upper bound for averaging systems.
4 Applications
A number of known convergence rates for various averaging systems can be sharpened by ap-
pealing to Theorems 1.1 and 1.2. We give a few examples below.
4.1 Asymmetric averaging systems
Symmetric averaging systems have been widely used to model backward products of the form
(At ··· A1x)t>0, where each Ak is a type-symmetric stochastic matrix with positive diagonal and
nonzero entries at least ρ > 0 [2, 8, 11, 13, 15, 17].9 In other words, Ak is the matrix of a lazy
random walk in an undirected graph gk with a lower bound of ρ on the nonzero probabilities.
A close examination of the proof of Theorem 2.1 shows that the graphs gt may be directed
as long as the vertices still have self-loops, and, for each i = u + 1, . . . , v, there exist edges
"hovering" over i from both sides, ie, (a, b) and (b(cid:48), a(cid:48)), with a, a(cid:48) < i ≤ b, b(cid:48). We note that this
property holds if each directed graph gt is cut-balanced.10 This gives us a strict generalization of
Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 for asymmetric averaging systems whose sequences of digraphs are cut-
balanced. This goes beyond the convergence of these systems, which was established in [12].
4.2 Opinion dynamics
There has been considerable attention given to consensus formation in social dynamics [8 -- 10].
Given a set of agents in high-dimensional space, where coordinates model opinions, one imag-
ines that at each step a subset of them come into contact and, through a process of deliberation,
adjust their opinions toward agreement. Will such a process converge to consensus, polarization,
a mixture of both, or not at all? Mathematically, the agents are represented by their position in
9A matrix A is type-symmetrix if Ai j and A ji are both positive or both 0 for all i, j.
10A directed graph is cut-balanced if its weakly connected components are strongly connected.
8
d-dimensional space: x1, . . . , xn in [0, 1]d. We fix 0 < α ≤ 1 and iterate on the following process
forever: (1) choose an arbitrary nonempty subset of the agents and move them anywhere inside
the box (1 − α)B + αc, where B is the smallest (axis-parallel) box enclosing the chosen agents
and c is the center of B; (2) repeat. Intuitively, one "squeezes" the subset of agents together a
little.
Theorem 4.1. For any positive ε ≤ 2−dn, at all but O(cid:0) 1
(cid:1)n−1 time steps, the smallest box
dαn log 1
ε
enclosing the chosen agents has volume less than ε.
Proof. We set up a symmetric averaging system as follows: gt consists of n self-loops, together
with the complete graph joining the agents of the chosen subset; along each axis, the dynamics
obeys (1) with parameter ρ = α/2. Let (cid:96)t( j) be the length of the graph's projection onto the j-th
t>0 (cid:96)t( j)r ≤ (6/αr)n−1. Let Vt be the
volume of the smallest box enclosing the agents picked at time t. By the generalized Holder's
axis. By Theorem 1.1, we know that, for any 0 < r ≤ 1,(cid:80)
inequality, for 0 < s ≤ 1/d,(cid:88)
(cid:96)t( j)ds(cid:17)1/d ≤ (6/dαs)n−1.
(cid:96)t( j)s ≤ d(cid:89)
(cid:16)(cid:88)
d(cid:89)
(cid:88)
V s
t =
t>0
t>0
j=1
j=1
t>0
Set s = n/ log 1
ε and use Markov's inequality to complete the proof.
(cid:3)
4.3 Flocking
Many models of bird flocking have been developed over the years and used to great effect in CGI
for film and animation. Their mathematical analysis has lagged behind, however. In a simple,
popular model tracing its roots back to Cucker & Smale, Vicsek, and ultimately Reynolds, a
group of n birds is represented by two n-by-3 matrices x(t) and v(t), where the i-th rows encode
the location and velocity in R3 of the i-th bird, respectively [7, 13, 21]. The dynamics obeys the
relations
x(t) = x(t − 1) + v(t)
v(t + 1) = P(t) x(t),
where P(t) is an n-by-n stochastic matrix whose entry (i, j) is positive if and only if birds i
and j are within a fixed distance R of each other. All entries are rationals over O(log n) bits. A
tight bound on the convergence of the dynamical system was established in [4, 5]: it was shown
that steady state is always reached within a number of steps equal to a tower-of-twos of height
proportional to log n; even more amazing, this bound is optimal. The lead-up to steady-state
consists of two phases: fragmentation and aggregation. The latter can feature only the merging
of flocks while the (much shorter) fragmentation phase can witness the repeated formation and
breakup of flocks. Technically, a flock is defined as the birds in a given connected component of
the network joining any two birds within distance R. It has been shown that the total number of
network switches (ie, the number of steps where the communication network changes) is nO(n2).
We improve this bound to nO(n) by using the s-energy. It was demonstrated in [4] (page 21:7)
9
that the number of network switches is bounded by the communication count Cε, for ε ≥ n−bn2,
ρ ≥ n−c and constant b, c > 0. Our claim follows from Theorem 1.2.
(cid:3)
4.4 Self-synchronizing oscillators
The self-organized synchronization of coupled oscillators is a well-known phenomenon in physics
and biology: it is observed in circadian neurons, firing fireflies, yeast cell suspensions, cardiac
pacemaker cells, power plant grids, and even musical composition (eg, Ligeti's po`eme sym-
phonique). In the discrete Kuramoto model studied in [16 -- 18], all oscillators share the same
natural frequency and the phase of the i-th one obeys the recurrence:
θi(t + 1) = θi(t) +
K∆T
ni(t)
sin(cid:0)θ j(t) − θi(t)(cid:1),
(cid:88)
j∈ni(t)
where ni(t) is the set of vertices adjacent to i in gt (which includes i). Following [17], we assume
that all n phases start in the same open half-circle, which we can express as α−π/2 ≤ θi(0) ≤ π/2,
for some arbitrarily small positive constant α. We find that sin(θ j(0)− θi(0)) = ai j
where cα ≤ ai j ≤ 1, for constant c > 0. This condition holds for all t since averaging keeps
the phases in the same open half-circle. The dynamics is that of a symmetric averaging system
provided that we pick ρ small enough so that bρn/α ≤ K∆T ≤ 1, for a suitable constant b > 0.
By Theorem 1.2, for any ε ≤ 2−n, the number of steps where two oscillators are joined by an
edge while their phases are off by ε or more is O(cid:0)
(cid:1)n−1.
(cid:0)θ j(0)− θi(0)(cid:1),
1
αK∆T log 1
ε
5 The Lower Bound Proofs
(cid:1)
and ρ ≤ 1/3. A lower bound construction from [3] (page 1703) describes a system whose
n-agent s-energy satisfies the recurrence En ≥ ρsEn−1 + (1 − 2ρ)sEn + 1 for n > 1; hence,
for positive constant b, E2 ≥ b/ρs and En ≥ (bρs−1/s)En−1 for n > 2. This shows that
(cid:3)
A. We prove that the bound O(1/ρs)n−1 from Theorem 1.1 is optimal for s = O(cid:0)1/ log 1
En ≥ (b/ρs)n−1ρs(n−2) = Ω(1/ρs)n−1, for s = O(cid:0)1/ log 1
(cid:1), as claimed.
ρ
ρ
ε
ρn log 1
, for any positive ε ≤ ρ2n and ρ ≤ 1/3. Note that ρ must
B. We prove that Cε = Ω
be bounded away from 1/2 (we choose 1/3 for convenience): indeed, in the case of two vertices
at distance 1 joined by an edge, we have the trivial bound Cε = 1 for ρ = 1/2. The proof revisits
an earlier construction [3] and modify its analysis to fit our purposes. If n > 1, the n vertices
of g1 are positioned at 0, except for xn = 1. Besides the self-loops, the graph g1 has the single
edge (n − 1, n). At time 2, the vertices are all at 0 except for xn−1 = ρ and xn = 1 − ρ. The first
n − 1 vertices form a system that stays in place if n = 2 and, otherwise, proceeds recursively
within [0, ρ] until it converges to the fixed point ρ/(n− 1): this value is derived from the fact that
each step keeps the mass center invariant. After convergence11 of the vertices labeled 1 through
(cid:16) 1
(cid:17)n−1
11We can use a limiting argument to break out of the infinite loop.
10
C(n, ε) ≥ 1 + C
n − 1,
ε
ρ
+ C
n,
1 − ρn/(n − 1)
.
ε
(cid:18)
(cid:18)
(cid:19)
(cid:18)
(cid:19)
(cid:19)
(10)
(11)
(cid:25)
.
(cid:24)(log ε)/n − log ρ
2 log(1 − 2ρ)
n− 1, the n-vertex system repeats the previous construction within [ρ/(n− 1), 1− ρ]. Let C(n, ε)
denote the communication count for n agents: we have C(n, ε) = 0 if n = 1 or ε > 1; else
By expanding the recurrence and using monotonicity,
C(n, ε) ≥ k + k C
n − 1,
ε
ρ(1 − 2ρ)k−1
,
for k =
Assume now that ε ≤ ρ2n. From our choice of k, we easily verify that
The recurrence (11) requires that ε/(cid:0)ρ(1 − 2ρ)k−1(cid:1) < 1, which follows from (12). Since ε1/2n ≤
ρ(1 − 2ρ)k−1 ≥ ε1/n .
(12)
ρn log 1
ε, for constant b > 0. It follows that C(2, ε) = Ω( 1
ρ log 1
ε) and, for
ρ ≤ 1/3, we have k ≥ b
n > 2, by (12),
C(n, ε) ≥(cid:18) b
(cid:17)n−1
ρn
(cid:16) 1
(cid:19)
1
ε
log
C
(cid:16)
n − 1, ε1−1/n(cid:17)
.
We verify that the condition ε ≤ ρ2n holds recursively: ε1−1/n ≤ ρ2(n−1). By induction, it follows
that C(n, ε) ≥ Ω
(cid:3)
, as desired.
ρn log 1
ε
References
[1] Bullo, F., Cort´es, J., Martinez, S., Distributed Control of Robotic Networks, Applied Mathematics
Series, Princeton University Press, 2009.
[2] Cao, M., Spielman, D.A. Morse, A.S. A lower bound on convergence of a distributed network
consensus algorithm, 44th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, and the European Control
Conference, Seville, Spain (2005), 2356 -- 2361.
[3] Chazelle, B. The total s-energy of a multiagent system, SIAM J. Control Optim. 49 (2011), 1680 --
1706.
[4] Chazelle, B. The convergence of bird flocking, Journal ACM 61 (2014), 21:1 -- 35.
[5] Chazelle, B. How many bits can a flock of birds compute?, Theory of Computing 10 (2014), 421 --
451.
[6] Chazelle, B. An algorithmic approach to collective behavior, Journal of Statistical Physics 158
(2015), 514 -- 548.
[7] Cucker, F., Smale, S. Emergent behavior in flocks, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 52
(2007), 852 -- 862.
11
[8] Fagnani, F., Frasca, P. Introduction to Averaging Dynamics over Networks, Lecture Notes in Con-
trol and Information Sciences 472, Springer, 2018.
[9] Fortunato S. On the consensus threshold for the opinion dynamics of Krause-Hegselmann, Interna-
tional Journal of Modern Physics C, 16, 2 (2005), 259 -- 270.
[10] Hegselmann, R., Krause, U. Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence models, analysis, and
simulation, J. Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 5, 3 (2002).
[11] Hendrickx, J.M., Blondel, V.D. Convergence of different linear and non-linear Vicsek models, Proc.
17th International Symposium on Mathematical Theory of Networks and Systems (MTNS2006),
Kyoto (Japan), July 2006, 1229 -- 1240.
[12] Hendrickx, J.M., Tsitsiklis, J. Convergence of type-symmetric and cut-balanced consensus seeking
systems, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 58 (2013), 214 -- 218.
[13] Jadbabaie, A., Lin, J., Morse, A.S. Coordination of groups of mobile autonomous agents using
nearest neighbor rules, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 48 (2003), 988 -- 1001.
[14] Jadbabaie, A., Motee, N., Barahona, M. On the stability of the Kuramoto model of coupled nonlin-
ear oscillators, Proc. American Control Conference 5 (2004), 4296 -- 4301.
[15] Lorenz, J. A stabilization theorem for dynamics of continuous opinions, Physica A: Statistical Me-
chanics and its Applications 355 (2005), 217 -- 223.
[16] Martinez, S. A convergence result for multiagent systems subject to noise, Proc. American Control
Conference (2009), St. Louis, Missouri.
[17] Moreau, L. Stability of multiagent systems with time-dependent communication links, IEEE Trans-
actions on Automatic Control 50 (2005), 169 -- 182.
[18] Scardovi, L., Sarlette, A., Sepulchre, R. Synchronization and balancing on the N-torus, Systems &
Control Letters 56 (2007), 335 -- 341.
[19] Strogatz, S.H. From Kuramoto to Crawford: exploring the onset of synchronization in populations
of coupled oscillators, Physica D 143 (2000), 1 -- 20.
[20] Tsitsiklis, J.N., Problems in decentralized decision making and computation, PhD thesis, MIT,
1984.
[21] Vicsek, T., Czir´ok, A., Ben-Jacob, E., Cohen, I., Shochet, O. Novel type of phase transition in a
system of self-driven particles, Physical Review Letters 75 (1995), 1226 -- 1229.
12
|
1707.06600 | 2 | 1707 | 2017-09-06T17:32:44 | A multi-agent reinforcement learning model of common-pool resource appropriation | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.NE",
"q-bio.PE"
] | Humanity faces numerous problems of common-pool resource appropriation. This class of multi-agent social dilemma includes the problems of ensuring sustainable use of fresh water, common fisheries, grazing pastures, and irrigation systems. Abstract models of common-pool resource appropriation based on non-cooperative game theory predict that self-interested agents will generally fail to find socially positive equilibria---a phenomenon called the tragedy of the commons. However, in reality, human societies are sometimes able to discover and implement stable cooperative solutions. Decades of behavioral game theory research have sought to uncover aspects of human behavior that make this possible. Most of that work was based on laboratory experiments where participants only make a single choice: how much to appropriate. Recognizing the importance of spatial and temporal resource dynamics, a recent trend has been toward experiments in more complex real-time video game-like environments. However, standard methods of non-cooperative game theory can no longer be used to generate predictions for this case. Here we show that deep reinforcement learning can be used instead. To that end, we study the emergent behavior of groups of independently learning agents in a partially observed Markov game modeling common-pool resource appropriation. Our experiments highlight the importance of trial-and-error learning in common-pool resource appropriation and shed light on the relationship between exclusion, sustainability, and inequality. | cs.MA | cs |
A multi-agent reinforcement learning model of
common-pool resource appropriation
Julien Perolat∗
DeepMind
London, UK
[email protected]
Joel Z. Leibo∗
DeepMind
London, UK
[email protected]
Vinicius Zambaldi
DeepMind
London, UK
[email protected]
Charles Beattie
DeepMind
London, UK
[email protected]
Karl Tuyls
University of Liverpool
Liverpool, UK
[email protected]
Thore Graepel
DeepMind
London, UK
[email protected]
Abstract
Humanity faces numerous problems of common-pool resource appropriation. This
class of multi-agent social dilemma includes the problems of ensuring sustainable
use of fresh water, common fisheries, grazing pastures, and irrigation systems.
Abstract models of common-pool resource appropriation based on non-cooperative
game theory predict that self-interested agents will generally fail to find socially
positive equilibria-a phenomenon called the tragedy of the commons. However,
in reality, human societies are sometimes able to discover and implement stable
cooperative solutions. Decades of behavioral game theory research have sought
to uncover aspects of human behavior that make this possible. Most of that work
was based on laboratory experiments where participants only make a single choice:
how much to appropriate. Recognizing the importance of spatial and temporal
resource dynamics, a recent trend has been toward experiments in more complex
real-time video game-like environments. However, standard methods of non-
cooperative game theory can no longer be used to generate predictions for this case.
Here we show that deep reinforcement learning can be used instead. To that end,
we study the emergent behavior of groups of independently learning agents in a
partially observed Markov game modeling common-pool resource appropriation.
Our experiments highlight the importance of trial-and-error learning in common-
pool resource appropriation and shed light on the relationship between exclusion,
sustainability, and inequality.
Introduction
1
Natural resources like fisheries, groundwater basins, and grazing pastures, as well as technological
resources like irrigation systems and access to geosynchronous orbit are all common-pool resources
(CPRs). It is difficult or impossible for agents to exclude one another from accessing them. But
whenever an agent obtains an individual benefit from such a resource, the remaining amount available
for appropriation by others is ever-so-slightly diminished. These two seemingly-innocent properties
of CPRs combine to yield numerous subtle problems of motivation in organizing collective action [12,
26, 27, 6]. The necessity of organizing groups of humans for effective CPR appropriation, combined
with its notorious difficulty, has shaped human history. It remains equally critical today.
∗indicates equal contribution
31st Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS 2017), Long Beach, CA, USA.
Renewable natural resources† have a stock component and a flow component [10, 35, 7, 26]. Agents
may choose to appropriate resources from the flow. However, the magnitude of the flow depends
on the state of the stock‡. Over-appropriation negatively impacts the stock, and thus has a negative
impact on future flow. Agents secure individual rewards when they appropriate resource units from a
CPR. However, the cost of such appropriation, felt via its impact on the CPR stock, affects all agents
in the community equally. Economic theory predicts that as long as each individual's share of the
marginal social cost is less than their marginal gain from appropriating an additional resource unit,
agents will continue to appropriate from the CPR. If such over-appropriation continues unchecked for
too long then the CPR stock may become depleted, thus cutting off future resource flows. Even if an
especially clever agent were to realize the trap, they still could not unilaterally alter the outcome by
restraining their own behavior. In other words, CPR appropriation problems have socially-deficient
Nash equilibria. In fact, the choice to appropriate is typically dominant over the choice to show
restraint (e.g. [32]). No matter what the state of the CPR stock, agents prefer to appropriate additional
resources for themselves over the option of showing restraint, since in that case they receive no
individual benefit but still endure the cost of CPR exploitation by others.
Nevertheless, despite such pessimistic theoretical predictions,
human communities frequently are able to self-organize to solve
CPR appropriation problems [26, 28, 27, 6]. A major goal of
laboratory-based behavioral work in this area is to determine
what it is about human behavior that makes this possible. Be-
ing based on behavioral game theory [4], most experimental
work on human CPR appropriation behavior features highly
abstracted environments where the only decision to make is
how much to appropriate (e.g. [29]). The advantage of such
a setup is that the theoretical predictions of non-cooperative
game theory are clear. However, this is achieved by sacrificing
the opportunity to model spatial and temporal dynamics which
are important in real-world CPRs [26]. This approach also
downplays the role of trial-and-error learning.
One recent line of behavioral research on CPR appropriation
features significantly more complex environments than the ab-
stract matrix games that came before [16, 18, 17, 14, 15]. In
a typical experiment, a participant controls the movements of
an on-screen avatar in a real-time video game-like environment
that approximates a CPR with complex spatial and temporal
dynamics. They are compensated proportionally to the amount
of resources they collect. Interesting behavioral results have
been obtained with this setup. For example, [18] found that
participants often found cooperative solutions that relied on
dividing the CPR into separate territories. However, due to
the increased complexity of the environment model used in
this new generation of experiments, the standard tools of non-
cooperative game theory can no longer be used to generate
predictions.
(a) Open map
(b) Small map with agent's observation
Figure 1: (a) The initial state of the
commons game at the start of each
episode on the large open map used in
sections 3.2, 3.3, and 3.5. Apples are
green, walls are grey, and players are
red or blue. (b) The initial state of the
small map used for the single-agent ex-
periment (Section 3.1). The size of the
window of pixels a player receives as
an observation is also shown.
We propose a new model of common-pool resource appropriation in which learning takes the center
stage. It consists of two components: (1) a spatially and temporally dynamic CPR environment,
similar to [17], and (2) a multi-agent system consisting of N independent self-interested deep
reinforcement learning agents. On the collective level, the idea is that self-organization to solve
CPR appropriation problems works by smoothly adjusting over time the incentives felt by individual
agents through a process akin to trial and error. This collective adjustment process is the aggregate
result of all the many individual agents simultaneously learning how best to respond to their current
situation.
†Natural resources may or may not be renewable. However, this paper is only concerned with those that are.
‡CPR appropriation problems are concerned with the allocation of the flow. In contrast, CPR provision
problems concern the supply of the stock. This paper only addresses the appropriation problem and we will say
no more about CPR provision. See [7, 26] for more on the distinction between the two problems.
2
This model of CPR appropriation admits a diverse range of emergent social outcomes. Much of the
present paper is devoted to developing methodology for analyzing such emergence. For instance,
we show how behavior of groups may be characterized along four social outcome metrics called:
efficiency, equality, sustainability, and peace. We also develop an N-player empirical game-theoretic
analysis that allows one to connect our model back to standard non-cooperative game theory. It
allows one to determine classical game-theoretic properties like Nash equilibria for strategic games
that emerge from learning in our model.
Our point is not to argue that we have a more realistic model than standard non-cooperative game
theory. This is also a reductionist model. However, it emphasizes different aspects of real-world CPR
problems. It makes different assumptions and thus may be expected to produce new insights for the
general theory of CPR appropriation that were missed by the existing literature's focus on standard
game theory models. Our results are broadly compatible with previous theory while also raising a
new possibility, that trial-and-error learning may be a powerful mechanism for promoting sustainable
use of the commons.
2 Modeling and analysis methods
2.1 The commons game
The goal of the commons game is to collect "apples" (resources). The catch is that the apple regrowth
rate (i.e. CPR flow) depends on the spatial configuration of the uncollected apples (i.e the CPR stock):
the more nearby apples, the higher the regrowth rate. If all apples in a local area are harvested then
none ever grow back-until the end of the episode (1000 steps), at which point the game resets to
an initial state. The dilemma is as follows. The interests of the individual lead toward harvesting as
rapidly as possible. However, the interests of the group as a whole are advanced when individuals
refrain from doing so, especially in situations where many agents simultaneously harvest in the same
local region. Such situations are precarious because the more harvesting agents there are, the greater
the chance of bringing the local stock down to zero, at which point it cannot recover.
(a) Single agent return
(b) Optimal path
So far,
the proposed commons game is quite similar to
the dynamic game used in human behavioral experiments
[16, 18, 17, 14, 15]. However, it departs in one notable way. In
the behavioral work, especially [17], participants were given
the option of paying a fee in order to fine another participant,
reducing their score. In contrast, in our commons game, agents
can tag one another with a "time-out beam". Any agent caught
in the path of the beam is removed from the game for 25 steps.
Neither the tagging nor the tagged agent receive any direct
reward or punishment from this. However, the tagged agent
loses the chance to collect apples during its time-out period and
the tagging agent loses a bit of time chasing and aiming, thus
paying the opportunity cost of foregone apple consumption. We
argue that such a mechanism is more realistic because it has an
effect within the game itself, not just on the scores.
The commons game is a partially-observable general-sum
Markov Game [33, 22].
In each state of the game, agents
take actions based on a partial observation of the state space
and receive an individual reward. Agents must learn through
experience an appropriate behavior policy while interacting
with one another.
In technical terms, we consider an N-player partially observ-
able Markov game M defined on a finite set of states S.
The observation function O : S × {1, . . . , N} → Rd speci-
fies each player's d-dimensional view on the state space. In
any state, players are allowed to take actions from the set
A1, . . . ,AN (one for each player). As a result of their joint
action a1, . . . , aN ∈ A1, . . . ,AN the state changes following
the stochastic transition function T : S × A1 × ··· × AN → ∆(S) (where ∆(S) denotes the set of
discrete probability distributions over S) and every player receives an individual reward defined as
Figure 2: (a) Single-agent returns as
a function of training steps. (b) The
optimal resource appropriation policy
for a single agent on this map. At con-
vergence, the agent we study nearly
learns this policy: https://youtu.
be/NnghJgsMxAY.
3
01000020000300004000050000Episode050100150200250300350400Efficiency (U) ri : S × A1 × ··· × AN → R for player i. Finally, let us write Oi = {oi s ∈ S, oi = O(s, i)} be
the observation space of player i.
Each agent learns, independently through their own experience of the environment, a behavior policy
πi : Oi → ∆(Ai) (written π(aioi)) based on their own observation oi = O(s, i) and reward
ri(s, a1, . . . , aN ). For the sake of simplicity we will write (cid:126)a = (a1, . . . , aN ), (cid:126)o = (o1, . . . , oN )
and (cid:126)π(.(cid:126)o) = (π1(.o1), . . . , πN (.oN )). Each agent's goal is to maximize a long term γ-discounted
payoff defined as follow:
(cid:126)π(s0) = E
V i
γtri(st, (cid:126)at)(cid:126)at ∼ (cid:126)πt, st+1 ∼ T (st, (cid:126)at)
(cid:35)
(cid:34) ∞(cid:88)
t=0
2.2 Deep multi-agent reinforcement learning
Multi-agent learning in Markov games is the subject of a large literature [3], mostly concerned with
the aim of prescribing an optimal learning rule. To that end, many algorithms have been proposed
over the past decade to provide guarantees of convergence in specific settings. Some of them address
the zero-sum two-player case [22], or attempt to solve the general-sum case [13, 11]. Others study
the emergence of cooperation in partially observable Markov decision processes [9, 37, 38] but rely
on knowledge of the model which is unrealistic when studying independent interaction. Our goal, as
opposed to the prescriptive agenda, is to describe the behaviour that emerges when agents learn in the
presence of other learning agents. This agenda is called the descriptive agenda in the categorization
of Shoham & al. [34]. To that end, we simulated N independent agents, each simultaneously learning
via the deep reinforcement learning algorithm of Mnih et al. (2015) [24].
Reinforcement learning algorithms learn a policy through experience balancing exploration of the
environment and exploitation. These algorithms were developed for the single agent case and
are applied independently here [21, 3] even though this multi-agent context breaks the Markov
assumption [20]. The algorithm we use is Q-learning with function approximation (i.e. DQN) [24].
In Q-learning, the policy of agent i is implicitly represented through a state-action value function
Qi(O(s, i), a) (also written Qi(s, a) in the following). The policy of agent i is an -greedy policy
and is defined by πi(aO(s, i)) = (1 − )1a=arg max
Qi(s,a) + Ai. The parameter controls the
amount of exploration. The Q-function Qi is learned to minimize the bellman residual (cid:107)Qi(oi, ai) −
Qi(o(cid:48)i, b)(cid:107) on data collected through interaction with the environment (oi, ai, ri, o(cid:48)i) in
ri − max
b
{(oi
t, ri
t, oi
t, ai
t+1)} (where oi
2.3 Social outcome metrics
Unlike in single-agent reinforcement learning where the value function is the canonical metric of
agent performance, in multi-agent systems with mixed incentives like the commons game, there is no
scalar metric that can adequately track the state of the system (see e.g. [5]). Thus we introduce four
key social outcome metrics in order to summarize group behavior and facilitate its analysis.
Consider N independent agents. Let {ri
the i-th agent over an episode of duration T . Likewise, let {oi
t t = 1, . . . , T} be the sequence of rewards obtained by
t t = 1, . . . T} be the i-th agent's
observation sequence. Its return is given by Ri =(cid:80)T
t = O(st, i)).
a
t.
t=1 ri
The Utilitarian metric (U), also known as Efficiency, measures the sum total of all rewards obtained
by all agents. It is defined as the average over players of sum of rewards Ri. The Equality metric
(E) is defined using the Gini coefficient [8]. The Sustainability metric (S) is defined as the average
time at which the rewards are collected. The Peace metric (P ) is defined as the average number of
untagged agent steps.
(cid:35)
(cid:34)(cid:80)N
E(cid:104)
N T −(cid:80)N
i=1 Ri
T
U = E
P =
, E = 1 −
(cid:80)T
t=1 I(oi
t)
i=1
T
(cid:80)N
(cid:105)
(cid:80)N
2N(cid:80)N
j=1 Ri − Rj
(cid:40)
i=1 Ri
i=1
where I(o) =
4
(cid:34)
1
N
(cid:35)
ti
N(cid:88)
i=1
, S = E
where ti = E[t ri
t > 0].
1
0
if o = time-out observation
otherwise.
3 Results
3.1 Sustainable appropriation in the single-agent case
In principle, even a single agent, on its own, may learn a strategy that over-exploits and depletes its
own private resources. However, in the single-agent case, such a strategy could always be improved
by individually adopting a more sustainable strategy. We find that, in practice, agents are indeed able
to learn an efficient and sustainable appropriation policy in the single-agent case (Fig. 2).
3.2 Emergent social outcomes
Now we consider the multi-agent case. Unlike in the single agent case where learning steadily
improved returns (Fig. 2-a), in the multi-agent case, learning does not necessarily increase returns.
The returns of a single agent are also a poor indicator of the group's behavior. Thus we monitor how
the social outcome metrics that we defined in Section 2.3 evolve over the course of training (Fig. 3).
The system moves through 3 phases characterized by
qualitatively different behaviors and social outcomes.
Phase 1, which we may call naïvety, begins at the
start of training and extends until ≈ 900 episodes.
It is characterized by healthy CPR stocks (high ap-
ple density). Agents begin training by acting ran-
domly, diffusing through the space and collecting
apples whenever they happen upon them. Apples
density is high enough that the overall utilitarian ef-
ficiency (U ) is quite high, and in fact is close to the
max it will ever attain. As training progresses, agents
learn to move toward regions of greater apple density
in order to more efficiently harvest rewards. They de-
tect no benefit from their tagging action and quickly
learn not to use it. This can be seen as a steady in-
crease in the peace metric (P ) (Fig. 3). In a video§
of typical agent behavior in the naïvety phase, it can
be seen that apples remain plentiful (the CPR stock
remains healthy) throughout the entire episode.
Phase 2, which we may call tragedy, begins where
naïvety ends (≈ episode 900), it is characterized by
rapid and catastrophic depletion of CPR stock in each
episode. The sustainability metric (S), which had
already been decreasing steadily with learning in the
previous phase, now takes a sudden and drastic turn
downward. It happens because agents have learned
"too well" how to appropriate from the CPR. With
each agent harvesting as quickly as they possibly can,
no time is allowed for the CPR stock to recover. It
quickly becomes depleted. As a result, utilitarian
efficiency (U ) declines precipitously. At the low
point, agents are collecting less than half as many
apples per episode as they did at the very start of
training-when they were acting randomly (Fig. 3).
In a video¶ of agent play at the height of the tragedy
one can see that by ≈ 500 steps into the (1100-step)
episode, the stock has been completely depleted and
no more apples can grow.
Phase 3, which we may call maturity, begins when ef-
ficiency and sustainability turn the corner and start to
recover again after their low point (≈ episode 1500)
and continues indefinitely. Initially, conflict breaks
out when agents discover that, in situations of great
Figure 3: Evolution of the different social out-
come metrics (Sec.2.3) over the course of training
on the open map (Fig.1a) using a time-out beam
of length 10 and width 5. From top to bottom is
displayed, the utility metric (U), the sustainability
metric (S), the equality metric (E), and the peace
metric (P ).
§learned policy after 100 episodes https://youtu.be/ranlu_9ooDw.
¶learned policy after 1100 episodes https://youtu.be/1xF1DoLxqyQ.
5
010002000300040005000600070008000Episode050100150200250300350Efficiency (U)010002000300040005000600070008000Episode0100200300400500Sustainability (S)010002000300040005000600070008000Episode0.700.750.800.850.900.951.00Equality (E)010002000300040005000600070008000Episode5006007008009001000 Peacefulness (P) apple scarcity, it is possible to tag another agent to prevent them from taking apples that one could
otherwise take for themselves. As learning continues, this conflict expands in scope. Agents learn
to tag one another in situations of greater and greater abundance. The peace metric (P ) steadily
declines (Fig. 3). At the same time, efficiency (U ) and sustainability (S) increase, eventually
reaching and slightly surpassing their original level from before tragedy struck. How can efficiency
and sustainability increase while peace declines? When an agent is tagged by another agent's beam,
it gets removed from the game for 25 steps. Conflict between agents in the commons game has the
effect of lowering the effective population size and thus relieving pressure on the CPR stock. With
less agents harvesting at any given time, the survivors are free to collect with greater impunity and
less risk of resource depletion. This effect is evident in a video(cid:107) of agent play during the maturity
phase. Note that the CPR stock is maintained through the entire episode. By contrast, in an analogous
experiment with the tagging action disabled, the learned policies were much less sustainable (Supp.
Fig. 11).
(a) Territorial effect
(b) Histogram of the equality metric on the territory maps
Figure 4: (a) Scatter plot of return by range size (variance of position) for individual agents in experiments with
one tagging agent (red dots, one per random seed) and 11 non-tagging agents (blue dots, eleven per random
seed). The tagging players collect more apples per episode than the others and remain in a smaller part of the
map. This illustrates that the tagging players take over a territory and harvest sustainably within its boundary.
(b) represents the distribution of the equality metric (E) for different runs on four different maps with natural
regions from which it may be possible to exclude other. The first map is the standard map from which others will
be derived (Fig. 6c). In the second apples are more concentrated on the top left corner and will respawn faster
(Fig. 6d). the third is porous meaning it is harder for an agent to protect an area (Fig 6e). On the fourth map, the
interiors walls are removed (Fig. 6f). Figure 4b shows inequality rises in maps where players can exclude one
another from accessing the commons.
3.3 Sustainability and the emergence of exclusion
Suppose, by building a fence around the resource or some other means, access to it can be made
exclusive to just one agent. Then that agent is called the owner and the resource is called a private
good [30]. The owner is incentivized to avoid over-appropriation so as to safeguard the value of
future resource flows from which they and they alone will profit. In accord with this, we showed
above (Fig. 2) that sustainability can indeed be achieved in the single agent case. Next, we wanted to
see if such a strategy could emerge in the multi-agent case.
The key requirement is for agents to somehow be able to exclude one another from accessing part of
the CPR, i.e. a region of the map. To give an agent the chance to exclude others we had to provide it
with an advantage. Thus we ran an experiment where only one out of the twelve agents could use
the tagging action. In this experiment, the tagging agent learned a policy of controlling a specific
territory by using its time-out beam to exclude other agents from accessing it. The tagging agents
roam over a smaller part of the map than the non-tagging agents but achieve better returns (Fig. 4a).
This is because the non-tagging agents generally failed to organize a sustainable appropriation pattern
(cid:107)learned policy after 3900 episodes https://youtu.be/XZXJYgPuzEI.
6
taggersnon-taggers0.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01.1Equality_E02468101214161. single entrance2. single entrance / unequal3. multiple entrances4. no walls (a) Early training (after 500 episodes) Schelling dia-
gram for L = taggers and R = non-taggers
Figure 5: Schelling diagram from early (5a) and late (5b) in training for the experiment where L = taggers and
R = non-taggers.
(b) Late training (after 3000 episodes) Schelling dia-
gram for L = taggers and R = non-taggers
and depleted the CPR stock in the area available to them (the majority of the map). The tagging agent,
on the other hand, was generally able to maintain a healthy stock within its "privatized" territory∗∗.
Interestingly, territorial solutions to CPR appropriation problems have emerged in real-world CPR
problems, especially fisheries [23, 1, 36]. Territories have also emerged spontaneously in laboratory
experiments with a spatially and temporally dynamic commons game similar to the one we study
here [18].
3.4 Emergence of inequality
To further investigate the emergence of exclusion strategies using agents that all have the same
abilities (all can tag), we created four new maps with natural regions enclosed by walls (see Supp.
Fig. 6). The idea is that it is much easier to exclude others from accessing a territory that has only a
single entrance than one with multiple entrances or one with no walls at all. This manipulation had a
large effect on the equality of outcomes. Easier exclusion led to greater inequality (Fig. 4b). The
lucky agent that was first to learn how to exclude others from "its territory" could then monopolize
the lion's share of the rewards for a long time (Supp. Figs. 7a and 7b). In one map with unequal
apple density between the four regions, the other agents were never able to catch up and achieve
returns comparable to the first-to-learn agent (Supp. Fig. 7b). On the other hand, on the maps where
exclusion was more difficult, there was no such advantage to being the first to learn (Supp. Figs. 7c
and 7d).
3.5 Empirical game-theoretic analysis of emergent strategic incentives
We use empirical game theoretic analysis to characterize the strategic incentives facing agents at
different points over the course of training. As in [21], we use simulation to estimate the payoffs of an
abstracted game in which agents choose their entire policy as a single decision with two alternatives.
However, the method of [21] cannot be applied directly to the case of N > 2 players that we study in
this paper. Instead, we look at Schelling diagrams [32]. They provide an intuitive way to summarize
the strategic structure of a symmetric N-player 2-action game where everyone's payoffs depend only
on the number of others choosing one way or the other. Following Schelling's terminology, we refer
to the two alternatives as L and R (left and right). We include in the appendix several examples of
Schelling diagrams produced from experiments using different ways of assigning policies to L and R
groups (Supp. Fig. 8).
∗∗A typical episode where the tagging agent has a policy of excluding others from a region in the lower left
corner of the map: https://youtu.be/3iGnpijQ8RM.
7
All playersL: taggersR: non-taggersnumber of non-taggersAll playersL: taggersR: non-taggersnumber of non-taggers In this section we restrict our attention to an experiment where L is the choice of adopting a policy
that uses the tagging action and R the choice of a policy that does not tag. A Schelling diagram
is interpreted as follows. The green curve is the average return obtained by a player choosing L
(a tagger) as a function of the number of players choosing R (non-taggers). Likewise, the red
curve is the average return obtained by a player choosing R as a function of the number of other
players also choosing R. The average return of all players is shown in blue. At the leftmost point,
R = 0 =⇒ L = N, the blue curve must coincide with the green one. At the rightmost point,
R = N =⇒ L = 0, the blue curve coincides with the red curve.
Properties of the strategic game can be read off from the Schelling diagram. For example, in Fig. 5b
one can see that the choice of a tagging policy is dominant over the choice of a non-tagging policy
since, for any R, the expected return of the L group is always greater than that of the R group.
This implies that the Nash equilibrium is at R = 0 (all players tagging). The Schelling diagram
also shows that the collective maximum (blue curve's max) occurs when R = 7. So the Nash
equilibrium is socially-deficient in this case.
In addition to being able to describe the strategic game faced by agents at convergence, we can also
investigate how the strategic incentives agents evolve over the course of learning. Fig. 5a shows that
the strategic game after 500 training episodes is one with a uniform negative externality. That is, no
matter whether one is a tagger or a non-tagger, the effect of switching one additional other agent from
the tagging group to the non-tagging group is to decrease returns. After 3000 training episodes the
strategic situation is different (Fig. 5b). Now, for R > 5, there is a contingent externality. Switching
one additional agent from tagging to non-tagging has a positive effect on the remaining taggers and a
negative effect on the non-taggers (green and red curves have differently signed slopes).
4 Discussion
This paper describes how algorithms arising from reinforcement learning research may be applied
to build new kinds of models for phenomena drawn from the social sciences. As such, this paper
really has two audiences. For social scientists, the core conclusions are as follows. (1) Unlike most
game theory-based approaches where modelers typically "hand engineer" specific strategies like
tit-for-tat [2] or win-stay-lose-shift [25], here agents must learn how to implement their strategic
decisions. This means that the resulting behaviors are emergent. For example, in this case the tragedy
of the commons was "solved" by reducing the effective population size below the environment's
carrying capacity, but this outcome was not assumed. (2) This model endogenizes exclusion. That is,
it allows agents to learn strategies wherein they exclude others from a portion of the CPR. Then, in
accord with predictions from economics [26, 1, 18, 36], sustainable appropriation strategies emerge
more readily in the "privatized" zones than they do elsewhere. (3) Inequality emerges when exclusion
policies are easier to implement. In particular, natural boundaries in the environment make inequality
more likely to arise.
From the perspective of reinforcement learning research, the most interesting aspect of this model is
that-despite the fact that all agents learn only toward their individual objectives-tracking individual
rewards over the course of training is insufficient to characterize the state of the system. These results
illustrate how multiple simultaneously learning agents may continually improve in "competence"
without improving their expected discounted returns. Indeed, learning may even decrease returns in
cases where too-competent agents end up depleting the commons. Without the social outcome metrics
(efficiency, equality, sustainability, and peace) and other analyses employed here, such emergent
events could not have been detected. This insight is widely applicable to other general-sum Markov
games with mixed incentives (e.g. [19, 21]).
This is a reductionist approach. Notice what is conspicuously absent from the model we have
proposed. The process by which groups of humans self-organize to solve CPR problems is usually
conceptualized as one of rational negotiation (e.g. [26]). People do things like bargain with one
another, attempt to build consensus for collective decisions, think about each other's thoughts, and
make arbitration appeals to local officials. The agents in our model can't do anything like that.
Nevertheless, we still find it is sometimes possible for self-organization to resolve CPR appropriation
problems. Moreover, examining the pattern of success and failure across variants of our model
yields insights that appear readily applicable to understanding human CPR appropriation behavior.
The question then is raised: how much of human cognitive sophistication is really needed to find
adequate solutions to CPR appropriation problems? We note that nonhuman organisms also solve
them [31]. This suggests that trial-and-error learning alone, without advanced cognitive capabilities
may sometimes be sufficient for effective CPR appropriation.
8
References
[1] James M Acheson and Roy J Gardner. Spatial strategies and territoriality in the maine lobster industry.
Rationality and society, 17(3):309–341, 2005.
[2] Robert Axelrod. The Evolution of Cooperation. Basic Books, 1984.
[3] Lucian Busoniu, Robert Babuska, and Bart De Schutter. A comprehensive survey of multiagent reinforce-
ment learning. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews),
2(38):156–172, 2008.
[4] Colin F Camerer. Progress in behavioral game theory. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11(4):167–
188, 1997.
[5] Georgios Chalkiadakis and Craig Boutilier. Coordination in multiagent reinforcement learning: a bayesian
approach. In The Second International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents & Multiagent Systems,
AAMAS 2003, July 14-18, 2003, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, Proceedings, pages 709–716, 2003.
[6] Thomas Dietz, Elinor Ostrom, and Paul C Stern. The struggle to govern the commons.
302(5652):1907–1912, 2003.
science,
[7] Roy Gardner, Elinor Ostrom, and James M Walker. The nature of common-pool resource problems.
Rationality and Society, 2(3):335–358, 1990.
[8] C. Gini. Variabilità e mutabilità: contributo allo studio delle distribuzioni e delle relazioni statistiche.
[.]. Number pt. 1 in Studi economico-giuridici pubblicati per cura della facoltà di Giurisprudenza della R.
Università di Cagliari. Tipogr. di P. Cuppini, 1912.
[9] Piotr J Gmytrasiewicz and Prashant Doshi. A framework for sequential planning in multi-agent settings.
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 24:49–79, 2005.
[10] H Scott Gordon. The economic theory of a common-property resource: the fishery. Journal of political
economy, 62(2):124–142, 1954.
[11] A. Greenwald and K. Hall. Correlated-Q learning. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on
Machine Learning (ICML), pages 242–249, 2003.
[12] Garrett Hardin. The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162(3859):1243–1248, 1968.
[13] J. Hu and M. P. Wellman. Multiagent reinforcement learning: Theoretical framework and an algorithm. In
Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), pages 242–250, 1998.
[14] Marco Janssen. Introducing ecological dynamics into common-pool resource experiments. Ecology and
Society, 15(2), 2010.
[15] Marco Janssen. The role of information in governing the commons: experimental results. Ecology and
Society, 18(4), 2013.
[16] Marco Janssen, Robert Goldstone, Filippo Menczer, and Elinor Ostrom. Effect of rule choice in dynamic
interactive spatial commons. International Journal of the Commons, 2(2), 2008.
[17] Marco A Janssen, Robert Holahan, Allen Lee, and Elinor Ostrom. Lab experiments for the study of
social-ecological systems. Science, 328(5978):613–617, 2010.
[18] Marco A Janssen and Elinor Ostrom. Turfs in the lab: institutional innovation in real-time dynamic spatial
commons. Rationality and Society, 20(4):371–397, 2008.
[19] Max Kleiman-Weiner, M K Ho, J L Austerweil, Michael L Littman, and Josh B Tenenbaum. Coordinate to
cooperate or compete: abstract goals and joint intentions in social interaction. In Proceedings of the 38th
Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 2016.
[20] Guillaume J. Laurent, Laëtitia Matignon, and N. Le Fort-Piat. The world of independent learners is not
Markovian. Int. J. Know.-Based Intell. Eng. Syst., 15(1):55–64, 2011.
[21] Joel Z. Leibo, Vinicius Zambaldi, Marc Lanctot, Janusz Marecki, and Thore Graepel. Multi-agent Rein-
forcement Learning in Sequential Social Dilemmas. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference
on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AA-MAS 2017), Sao Paulo, Brazil, 2017.
[22] M. L. Littman. Markov games as a framework for multi-agent reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of
the 11th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), pages 157–163, 1994.
9
[23] Kent O Martin. Play by the rules or don't play at all: Space division and resource allocation in a rural
newfoundland fishing community. North Atlantic maritime cultures, pages 277–98, 1979.
[24] V. Mnih, K. Kavukcuoglu, D. Silver, A. A. Rusu, J. Veness, M. G. Bellemare, A. Graves, M. Riedmiller,
A. K. Fidjeland, G. Ostrovski, S. Petersen, C. Beattie, A. Sadik, I. Antonoglou, H. King, D. Kumaran,
D. Wierstra, S. Legg, and D. Hassabis. Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning. Nature,
518(7540):529–533, 2015.
[25] Martin Nowak, Karl Sigmund, et al. A strategy of win-stay, lose-shift that outperforms tit-for-tat in the
prisoner's dilemma game. Nature, 364(6432):56–58, 1993.
[26] Elinor Ostrom. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge
University Press, 1990.
[27] Elinor Ostrom, Joanna Burger, Christopher B Field, Richard B Norgaard, and David Policansky. Revisiting
the commons: local lessons, global challenges. Science, 284(5412):278–282, 1999.
[28] Elinor Ostrom and Roy Gardner. Coping with asymmetries in the commons: self-governing irrigation
systems can work. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7(4):93–112, 1993.
[29] Elinor Ostrom, Roy Gardner, and James Walker. Rules, games, and common-pool resources. University of
Michigan Press, 1994.
[30] Vincent Ostrom and Elinor Ostrom. Public goods and public choices. In Alternatives for Delivering Public
Services: Toward Improved Performance, pages 7–49. Westview press, 1977.
[31] Daniel J Rankin, Katja Bargum, and Hanna Kokko. The tragedy of the commons in evolutionary biology.
Trends in ecology & evolution, 22(12):643–651, 2007.
[32] Thomas C Schelling. Hockey helmets, concealed weapons, and daylight saving: A study of binary choices
with externalities. Journal of Conflict resolution, 17(3):381–428, 1973.
[33] L. S. Shapley. Stochastic Games. In Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America, 1953.
[34] Y. Shoham, R. Powers, and T. Grenager. If multi-agent learning is the answer, what is the question?
Artificial Intelligence, 171(7):365–377, 2007.
[35] Vernon L Smith. Economics of production from natural resources. The American Economic Review,
58(3):409–431, 1968.
[36] Rachel A Turner, Tim Gray, Nicholas VC Polunin, and Selina M Stead. Territoriality as a driver of fishers'
spatial behavior in the northumberland lobster fishery. Society & Natural Resources, 26(5):491–505, 2013.
[37] Pradeep Varakantham, Jun-young Kwak, Matthew E Taylor, Janusz Marecki, Paul Scerri, and Milind
Tambe. Exploiting coordination locales in distributed POMDPs via social model shaping. In Proceedings
of the 19th International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling, ICAPS, 2009.
[38] Chao Yu, Minjie Zhang, Fenghui Ren, and Guozhen Tan. Emotional multiagent reinforcement learning in
spatial social dilemmas. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 26(12):3083–3096,
2015.
10
Appendix
A Simulation methods
The partially-observed Markov game environment underlying our implementation of the commons game is a 2D
grid-world game engine. It works as follows. The state st and the joint action of all players (cid:126)a determine the
state at the next time-step st+1. Observations O(s, i) ∈ R3×20×21 (RGB) of the true state st depend on the i-th
player's current position and orientation. The observation window extends 20 grid squares ahead and 10 grid
squares from side to side (see Fig. 1). Actions a ∈ R8 were agent-centered: step forward, step backward, step
left, step right, rotate left, rotate right, tag, and stand still. The beam extends 20 grid squares in the direction
faced by the tagger. It is 5 squares wide. If another agent is in the path of the beam then it is tagged. A tagged
agent is removed from the game for 25 timesteps. Being tagged has no direct impact on rewards. However,
there is an indirect effect since a tagged agent cannot collect apples during its time-out period. Each player
appears blue in its own local view and red in its opponent's view. Each episode lasted for 1, 000 steps. The local
flow of apple respawning depends on local stock size. Specifically, the per-timestep respawn probability pt of a
potential apple at position c depends on the number of already-spawned apples in a ball of radius 2 centered
around its location, i.e. the local stock size L = {already-spawned apples ∈ B2(c)}. The per-timestep respawn
probability as a function of local stock size is given by:
0
0.01
0.05
0.1
pt(L) =
if L = 0
if L = 1 or 2
if L = 3 or 4
if L > 4
(1)
Default neural networks had two hidden layers with 32 units, interleaved with rectified linear layers which
projected to the output layer which had 8 units, one for each action. During training, players implemented
epsilon-greedy policies, with epsilon decaying linearly over time (from 1.0 to 0.1). The default per-time-step
discount rate γ was 0.99.
(a) Small map
(b) Open map
(c) Basic single-entrance region
map
(d) Unequal single-entrance region
map
(e) Multi-entrance region map
(f) Region map with no walls
Figure 6: We used six different maps in our experiments. Map 6a is a small environment where a single random
player will sometimes harvest all the apples. Map 6b is considerably larger. It was designed so that a single
agent, acting alone cannot remove all the apples but with several agents harvesting simultaneously it becomes
relatively easy to remove them all. Maps 6c, 6e, and 6f were constructed in order to manipulate the ease with
which agents can exclude one another from accessing territories defined by natural boundaries (walls). They
were designed to be compared to one another. Thus all three have the same number and spatial configuration
of apples. Map 6c has only one single entrance to each region. Map 6e has two additional entrances to each
region and in map 6f, all walls were removed. Map 6d was created to test the effects of territories with unequal
productivity. In its top left corner region, the apples are placed closer to one another than in the other regions.
Thus, since the growth rule is density dependent, apples respawn faster in this region (greater CPR flow).
11
(a) Basic single-entrance region map (6c)
(b) Unequal single-entrance region map (6d)
(c) Multi-entrance region map (6e)
(d) Region map with no walls (6f)
Figure 7: These figures shows how inequality emerges and persists on different maps. In this experiment, 12
players learns simultaneously on maps 6c, 6d, 6e, and 6f. In each plot, the red time series shows reward as a
function of training time for the agent that was most successful in the first 1000 episodes (before the vertical red
dashed line). The aim of this analysis was to determine whether an early advantage would persist over time.
That is, was the inequality persistent, with the same agent coming out on top in episode after episode? Or was it
more random, with different agents doing well in each episode? As expected from Fig. 4b, in the multi-entrance
and no-walls maps, this analysis shows no inequality. Interestingly, the two cases where inequality emerged are
different from one another. The advantage of the first-to-learn agent on the basic single-entrance map (6c) was
transient. However on the unequal single-entrance map (6d), its advantage was persistent.
12
010002000300040005000600070008000Episode050100150200250Individual return010002000300040005000600070008000Episode050100150200250Individual return010002000300040005000600070008000Episode050100150200250Individual return010002000300040005000600070008000Episode050100150200250Individual return (a) Schelling diagram for fast and slow players
where L = fast and R = slow
(b) Schelling diagram for players with small and
large γ where L = hight γ (γ = 0.99) and R =
low γ (γ = 0.9)
Schelling
small
(c)
players
with
networks where
L = small network (hidden layer = (5)) and
R = large network (hidden layer = (32, 32))
for
diagram
large
and
(d) Schelling diagram for tagging and non-tagging
players where L = taggers and R = non-taggers.
Figure 8: Schelling diagrams at convergence. Fig. 8a shows the interaction between fast and slow players,
Fig. 8b shows the interaction between players with large and small γ (γ = 0.9 or 0.99), Fig. 8c shows the
interaction between players with large and small neural network, and Fig. 8d shows the interaction between
players that have the ability to tag or not.
13
024681012R = number of slow players050100150200250300350400Expected returnAll playersL: fastR: slowEpisode 8000024681012R = number of players with small gamma0100200300400500Expected returnAll playersL: large gamma groupR: small gamma groupEpisode 8000024681012R = Number of players with a small network050100150200250300350400Expected returnAll playersL: large network groupR: small network groupEpisode 8000All playersL: taggersR: non-taggersnumber of non-taggers Figure 9: Schelling diagrams during training for the experiment where L = taggers and R = non-taggers.
Figure 10: Schelling diagrams during training for the experiment where L = fast and R = slow.
14
All playersL: taggersR: non-taggersnumber of non-taggersAll playersL: taggersR: non-taggersnumber of non-taggersAll playersL: taggersR: non-taggersnumber of non-taggersAll playersL: taggersR: non-taggersnumber of non-taggersAll playersL: taggersR: non-taggersnumber of non-taggersAll playersL: taggersR: non-taggersnumber of non-taggers024681012R = number of slow players050100150200250300350400Expected returnAll playersL: fastR: slowEpisode 500024681012R = number of slow players050100150200250300350400Expected returnAll playersL: fastR: slowEpisode 1000024681012R = number of slow players050100150200250300350400Expected returnAll playersL: fastR: slowEpisode 1500024681012R = number of slow players050100150200250300350400Expected returnAll playersL: fastR: slowEpisode 2000024681012R = number of slow players050100150200250300350400Expected returnAll playersL: fastR: slowEpisode 2500024681012R = number of slow players050100150200250300350400Expected returnAll playersL: fastR: slowEpisode 3000 Figure 11: Left: Evolution of the different social outcome metrics (Sec.2.3) over the course of training on the
open map (Fig.1a) for the case without the time-out beam tagging action. Right: the same figure from the main
text is reproduced for comparison. From top to bottom is displayed, the utilitarian efficiency metric (U), the
sustainability metric (S), the equality metric (E), and the peace metric (P ). Notice that in the case without the
time-out beam, the final sustainability value is considerably lower than in the case with the time-out beam. This
means that agents frequently deplete their resources before the end of the episode in the conflict-free case.
15
010002000300040005000600070008000Episode050100150200250300350Efficiency (U)010002000300040005000600070008000Episode0100200300400500Sustainability (S)010002000300040005000600070008000Episode0.700.750.800.850.900.951.00Equality (E)010002000300040005000600070008000Episode5006007008009001000 Peacefulness (P)010002000300040005000600070008000Episode050100150200250300350Efficiency (U)010002000300040005000600070008000Episode0100200300400500Sustainability (S)010002000300040005000600070008000Episode0.700.750.800.850.900.951.00Equality (E)010002000300040005000600070008000Episode5006007008009001000 Peacefulness (P) |
1311.4894 | 1 | 1311 | 2013-11-02T10:29:50 | Multitask Diffusion Adaptation over Networks | [
"cs.MA",
"eess.SY"
] | Adaptive networks are suitable for decentralized inference tasks, e.g., to monitor complex natural phenomena. Recent research works have intensively studied distributed optimization problems in the case where the nodes have to estimate a single optimum parameter vector collaboratively. However, there are many important applications that are multitask-oriented in the sense that there are multiple optimum parameter vectors to be inferred simultaneously, in a collaborative manner, over the area covered by the network. In this paper, we employ diffusion strategies to develop distributed algorithms that address multitask problems by minimizing an appropriate mean-square error criterion with $\ell_2$-regularization. The stability and convergence of the algorithm in the mean and in the mean-square sense is analyzed. Simulations are conducted to verify the theoretical findings, and to illustrate how the distributed strategy can be used in several useful applications related to spectral sensing, target localization, and hyperspectral data unmixing. | cs.MA | cs | Multitask Diffusion Adaptation over Networks
Jie Chen† , Student Member, IEEE, C ´edric Richard† , Senior Member, IEEE
Ali H. Sayed‡ , Fellow Member, IEEE
1
† Universit ´e de Nice Sophia-Antipolis, UMR CNRS 7293, Observatoire de la C ote d’Azur
Laboratoire Lagrange, Parc Valrose, 06102 Nice - France
fax: (33) 492 076 321
phone: (33) 492 076 394
[email protected]
[email protected]
‡ Electrical Engineering Department
University of California, Los Angeles, USA
phone: (310) 267 2142
fax: (310) 206 8495
[email protected]
EDICS: NET-ADEG, NET-DISP, MLR-DIST, SSP-PERF
Abstract
Adaptive networks are suitable for decentralized inference tasks, e.g., to monitor complex natural phenomena.
Recent research works have intensively studied distributed optimization problems in the case where the nodes have
to estimate a single optimum parameter vector collaboratively. However, there are many important applications that
are multitask-oriented in the sense that there are multiple optimum parameter vectors to be inferred simultaneously,
in a collaborative manner, over the area covered by the network. In this paper, we employ diffusion strategies to
develop distributed algorithms that address multitask problems by minimizing an appropriate mean-square error
criterion with (cid:96)2 -regularization. The stability and convergence of the algorithm in the mean and in the mean-square
sense is analyzed. Simulations are conducted to verify the theoretical findings, and to illustrate how the distributed
strategy can be used in several useful applications related to spectral sensing, target localization, and hyperspectral
data unmixing.
Multitask learning, distributed optimization, diffusion strategy, collaborative processing, asymmetric regulariza-
tion, spectral sensing, target localization, data unmixing.
Index Terms
3
1
0
2
v
o
N
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
4
9
8
4
.
1
1
3
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
This work was partly supported by the Agence Nationale pour la Recherche, France, (Hypanema project, ANR-12-BS03-003), and the
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, France (Display project, Mastodons). The work of A. H. Sayed was supported in part by NSF
grant CCF-1011918.
2
I . IN TRODUC T ION
Distributed adaptation over networks has emerged as an attractive and challenging research area with the advent of multi-
agent (wireless or wireline) networks. Accessible overviews of recent results in the field can be found in [1], [2]. In adaptive
networks, the interconnected nodes have to continually learn and adapt, as well as perform preassigned tasks such as parameter
estimation from observations collected by the dispersed agents. Although centralized strategies with a fusion center can benefit
more fully from information collected throughout the network but stored at a single point, in most cases, distributed strategies
are more attractive to solve inference problems in a collaborative and autonomous manner. Scalability, robustness, and low-
power consumption are key characteristics of these strategies. Applications include environment monitoring, but also modeling
of self-organized behavior observed in nature such as bird flight in formation and fish schooling [1], [3].
There are several useful distributed strategies for sequential data processing over networks including consensus strategies [4]–
[9], incremental strategies [10]–[14], and diffusion strategies [1], [2], [15]–[18]. Incremental techniques require the determination
of a cyclic path that runs across the nodes, which is generally a challenging (NP-hard) task to perform. Besides, incremental
solutions can be problematic for adaptation over networks because they are sensitive to link failures. On the other hand,
diffusion strategies are attractive since they are scalable, robust, and enable continuous adaptation and learning. In addition,
for data processing over adaptive networks, diffusion strategies have been shown to have superior stability and performance
ranges [19] than consensus-based implementations. Consequently, we shall focus on diffusion-type implementations in the
sequel. The diffusion LMS strategy was proposed and studied in [15], [16]. Its performance in the presence of imperfect
information exchange and model non-stationarity was analyzed in [20]–[22]. Diffusion LMS with (cid:96)1 -norm regularization was
considered in [23]–[26] to promote sparsity in the model. In [27], the problem of distributed learning in diffusion networks
was addressed by deriving projection algorithms onto convex sets. Diffusion RLS over adaptive networks was studied in [28],
[29]. More recently, a distributed dictionary learning algorithm based on a diffusion strategy was derived in [30]–[32]. This
literature mainly considers quadratic cost functions and linear models where systems are characterized by a parameter vector
in the Euclidean space. Extensions to more general cost functions that are not necessarily quadratic and to more general data
models are studied in [17], [18] in the context of adaptation and learning over networks. Moreover, several other works explored
distributed estimation for nonlinear input-output relationships defined in a functional space, such as reproducing kernel Hilbert
spaces. For instance, in [33], inference is performed with a regularized kernel least-squares estimator, where the distributed
information-sharing strategy consisted of successive orthogonal projections. Distributed estimation based on adaptive kernel
regression [34], [35] is also studied in [36]–[39], with information passed from node to node in an incremental manner. In [40],
non-negative distributed regression is considered for nonlinear model inference subject to non-negativity constraints, where the
diffusion strategy is used to conduct information exchange.
An inspection of the existing literature on distributed algorithms shows that most works focus primarily, though not
exclusively [41]–[43], on the case where the nodes have to estimate a single optimum parameter vector collaboratively. We
shall refer to problems of this type as single-task problems. However, many problems of interest happen to be multitask-
oriented in the sense that there are multiple optimum parameter vectors to be inferred simultaneously and in a collaborative
manner. The multitask learning problem is relevant in several machine learning formulations and has been studied in the
machine learning community in several contexts. For example, the problem finds applications in web page categorization [44],
web-search ranking [45], and disease progression modeling [46], among other areas. Clearly, this concept is also relevant in
the context of distributed estimation and adaptation over networks. Initial investigations along these lines for the traditional
3
diffusion strategy appear in [42], [47]. In this article, we consider the general situation where there are connected clusters of
nodes, and each cluster has a parameter vector to estimate. The estimation still needs to be performed cooperatively across the
network because the data across the clusters may be correlated and, therefore, cooperation across clusters can be beneficial.
Obviously, a limit case of this problem is the situation where all clusters are of equal size one, that is, each node has its own
parameter vector to estimate but shares information with its neighbors. Another limit case is when the size of the cluster agrees
with the size of the network in which case all nodes have the same parameter vector to estimate. The aim of this paper is to
derive diffusion strategies that are able to solve this general multitask estimation problem, and to analyze their performance in
terms of mean-square error and convergence rate. Simulations are also conducted to illustrate the theoretical analysis, and to
apply the algorithms to three useful applications involving spectral sensing, target localization, and hyperspectral data unmixing.
This paper is organized as follows. Section II formulates the distributed estimation problem for multitask learning. Section
III presents a relaxation strategy for optimizing local cost functions over the network. Section IV derives a stochastic gradient
algorithm for distributed adaptive learning in a multitask-oriented environment. Section V analyzes the theoretical performance
of the proposed algorithm, in the mean and mean-square-error sense. In Section VI, experiments and applications are presented
to illustrate the performance of the approach. Section VII concludes this paper and gives perspectives on future work.
I I . N E TWORK MOD EL S AND MULT I TA SK LEARN ING
Before starting our presentation, we provide a summary of some of the main symbols used in the article. Other symbols
will be defined in the context where they are used:
x
x
R
(·)(cid:62)
I N
Nk
N −k
Ci
C (k)
J (·), J (·)
w(cid:63) , wo
Normal font denotes scalars.
Boldface small letters denote vectors. All vectors are column vectors.
Boldface capital letters denote matrices.
Matrix transpose.
Identity matrix of size N × N .
The index set of nodes that are in the neighborhood of node k , including k .
The index set of nodes that are in the neighborhood of node k , excluding k .
Cluster i, i.e., index set of nodes in the i-th cluster.
The cluster to which node k belongs, i.e., C (k) = {Ci : k ∈ Ci }.
Cost functions without/with regularization.
Optimum parameter vectors without/with regularization.
We consider a connected network consisting of N nodes. The problem is to estimate an L × 1 unknown vector at each node
k from collected measurements. Node k has access to temporal measurement sequences {dk (n), xk (n)}, with dk (n) denoting
a scalar zero-mean reference signal, and xk (n) denoting an L × 1 regression vector with a positive-definite covariance matrix,
Rx,k = E {xk (n)x(cid:62)k (n)} > 0. The data at node k are assumed to be related via the linear regression model:
dk (n) = x(cid:62)k (n) w(cid:63)
k + zk (n)
(1)
k is an unknown parameter vector at node k , and zk (n) is a zero-mean i.i.d. noise that is independent of any other
where w(cid:63)
signal and has variance σ2
z ,k . Considering the number of parameter vectors to estimate, which we shall refer to as the number of
tasks, the distributed learning problem can be single-task or multitask oriented. We therefore distinguish among the following
k across the nodes are related:
three types of networks, as illustrated by Figure 1, depending on how the parameter vectors w(cid:63)
4
• Single-task networks: All nodes have to estimate the same parameter vector w(cid:63) . That is, in this case we have that
∀k ∈ {1, . . . , N }
• Multitask networks: Each node k has to determine its own optimum parameter vector, w(cid:63)
k . However, it is assumed that
similarities and relationships exist among the parameters of neighboring nodes, which we denote by writing
w(cid:63)
k = w(cid:63) ,
(2)
(3)
if (cid:96) ∈ Nk
k ∼ w(cid:63)
w(cid:63)
(cid:96)
The sign ∼ represents a similarity relationship in some sense, and its meaning will become clear soon once we introduce
expressions (8) and (9) further ahead. Within the area of machine learning, the relation between tasks can be promoted
in several ways, e.g., through mean regularization [48], low rank regularization [49], or clustered regularization [50]. We
note that a number of application problems can be addressed using this model. For instance, consider an image sensor
array and the problem of image restoration. In this case, links in Figure 1(b) can represent neighboring relationships
between adjacent pixels. We will consider this application in greater detail in the simulation section.
• Clustered multitask networks: Nodes are grouped into Q clusters, and there is one task per cluster. The optimum parameter
vectors are only constrained to be equal within each cluster, but similarities between neighboring clusters are allowed to
exist, namely,
Cq , whenever k ∈ Cq
k = w(cid:63)
w(cid:63)
if Cp , Cq are connected
w(cid:63)
Cp ∼ w(cid:63)
Cq ,
where p and q denote two cluster indexes. We say that two clusters Cp and Cq are connected if there exists at least one
edge linking a node from one cluster to a node in the other cluster.
(4)
(5)
One can observe that the single-task and multitask networks are particular cases of the clustered multitask network. In the case
where all the nodes are clustered together, the clustered multitask network reduces to the single-task network. On the other
hand, in the case where each cluster only involves one node, the clustered multitask network becomes a multitask network.
Building on the literature on diffusion strategies for single-task networks, we shall now generalize its use and analysis for
distributed learning over clustered multitask networks. The results will be applicable to multitask networks by setting the
number of clusters equal to the number of nodes.
A. Global cost function and optimization
I I I . PROBL EM FORMU LAT ION
Clustered multitask networks require that nodes that are grouped in the same cluster estimate the same coefficient vector.
Thus, consider the cluster C (k) to which node k belongs. A local cost function, Jk (wC (k) ), is associated with node k and it is
assumed to be strongly convex and second-order differentiable, an example of which is the mean-square error criterion defined
(cid:110)(cid:12)(cid:12)dk (n) − x(cid:62)k (n) wC (k)
(cid:12)(cid:12)2(cid:111)
by
Jk (wC (k) ) = E
In order to promote similarities among adjacent clusters, appropriate regularization can be used. For this purpose, we introduce
the squared Euclidean distance as a possible regularizer, namely,
(6)
.
∆(wC (k) , wC ((cid:96)) ) = (cid:107)wC (k) − wC ((cid:96))(cid:107)2 .
(7)
5
(a) Single-task network
(b) Multitask network
(c) Clustered multitask network
E
+ η
(P1 )
Fig. 1. Three types of networks. The single-task and multitask networks can be viewed as special cases of the clustered multitask network.
(cid:110)(cid:12)(cid:12)dk (n) − x(cid:62)k (n) wC (k)
(cid:12)(cid:12)2(cid:111)
N(cid:88)
N(cid:88)
(cid:88)
Combining (6) and (7) yields the following regularized problem P1 at the level of the entire network:
J glob (wC1 , . . . , wCQ ) =
ρk(cid:96) (cid:107)wC (k) − wC ((cid:96))(cid:107)2 ,
k=1
k=1
(cid:96)∈Nk \C (k)
where wCi is the parameter vector associated with cluster Ci and η > 0. The second term on the right-hand-side of expression (8)
promotes similarities between the wCi of neighboring clusters, with strength parameter η .
Observe from the right-most term in (8) that the regularization strength between two clusters is directly related to the
number of edges that connect them. The non-negative coefficients ρk(cid:96) aim at adjusting the regularization strength but they do
not necessarily enforce symmetry. That is, we do not require ρk(cid:96) = ρ(cid:96)k even though the regularization term (cid:107)wC (k) − wC ((cid:96))(cid:107)2
is symmetric with respect to the weight vectors wC (k) and wC ((cid:96)) ; this term will be weighted by the sum ρk(cid:96) + ρ(cid:96)k due to the
summation over the N nodes. Consequently, problem formulation P1 inevitably leads to symmetric regularization despite the
fact that ρk(cid:96) (cid:54)= ρ(cid:96)k . However, we would like the design problem to benefit from the additional flexibility that is afforded by the
use of asymmetric regularization coefficients. This is because asymmetry allows clusters to scale their desire for closer similarity
with their neighbors differently. For example, asymmetric regularization would allow cluster Ck to promote similarities with
cluster C(cid:96) while cluster C(cid:96) may be less inclined towards promoting similarities with Ck . In order to exploit this flexibility more
fully, we consider an alternative problem formulation P2 defined in terms of Q Nash equilibrium problems as follows:
(cid:110)(cid:12)(cid:12)dk (n) − x(cid:62)k (n) wC (k)
(cid:12)(cid:12)2(cid:111)
(cid:88)
(cid:88)
(cid:88)
for i = 1, . . . , Q
min
JCi (wCi , w−Ci )
wCi
with JCi (wCi , w−Ci ) =
k∈Ci
k∈Ci
(cid:96)∈Nk \Ci
where each cluster Ci estimates wCi by minimizing JCi (wCi , w−Ci ). Note that we have kept the notation wC (k) to make the
role of the regularization term clearer, even though in formulation (9) we have wC (k) = wCi for all k in Ci . In (9), the notation
w−Ci denotes the collection of weight vectors estimated by the other clusters, i.e., w−Ci = {wCk : k = 1, . . . , Q} − {wCi }.
The Nash equilibrium of P2 satisfies the condition [51]:
wo
JCi (wCi , wo
Ci = arg min
−Ci )
wCi
denotes the collection of the Nash equilibria by the other clusters. Problem P2 has
ρk(cid:96) (cid:107)wC (k) − wC ((cid:96)) (cid:107)2
E
+ η
(P2 )
(8)
(9)
(10)
for i = 1, . . . , Q, where the notation wo
−Ci
the following properties:
13426859710w\x{FFFF}13426859710w\x{FFFF}1w\x{FFFF}2w\x{FFFF}3w\x{FFFF}4w\x{FFFF}5w\x{FFFF}6w\x{FFFF}7w\x{FFFF}8w\x{FFFF}9w\x{FFFF}1013426859710w\x{FFFF}C1w\x{FFFF}C2w\x{FFFF}C3 6
1) An equilibrium exists for P2 since JCi (wCi , w−Ci ) is convex with respect to wCi for all i.
i=1 satisfies the diagonal strict convexity property.1
2) The equilibrium for P2 is unique since {JCi (wCi , w−Ci )}Q
3) Problems P1 and P2 have the same solution by setting the value of ρk(cid:96) in P2 to that of ρk(cid:96) + ρ(cid:96)k from P1 .
Properties 1) and 2) can be checked via Theorems 1 and 2 in [52]. Property 3) can be verified by the optimality conditions
for the two problems.
Problem P1 can be solved either analytically in closed form or iteratively by using a steepest-descent algorithm. Unfortunately,
there is no analytical expression for general Nash equilibrium problems. We estimate the equilibrium of problem P2 iteratively
by the fixed point of the best response iteration [51], that is,
wCi (n + 1) = arg min
wCi
JCi (wCi , w−Ci (n))
(11)
for i = 1, . . . , Q, and leads to the solution of (9). Since the equilibrium is unique and the cost function for each cluster is
convex, the solution of (9) can also be approached by means of a steepest-descent iteration as follows:
∇wCi
JCi (wCi , w−Ci (n)) ∝
(Rx,kwCi − pxd,k ) + η
for i = 1, . . . , Q, with ∇wCi
wCi (n + 1) = wCi (n) − µ ∇wCi
JCi (wCi (n), w−Ci (n))
(cid:88)
(cid:88)
(cid:88)
(cid:0)wCi − wC ((cid:96)) (n)(cid:1).
denoting the gradient operation with respect to wCi , and µ a positive step-size. We have
k∈Ci
k∈Ci
(cid:96)∈Nk \Ci
where pxd,k = E {xk (n)dk (n)} is the input-output cross-correlation vector between xk (n) and dk (n) at node k . If some
additional constraints are imposed on the parameters to estimate, the gradient update relation can be modified using methods
such as projection [53] or fixed point iteration techniques [54]. In the body of the paper, we focus on the unconstrained case
during the algorithm derivation and its analysis. However, a constrained problem will be presented in the simulation section.
Since P1 is equivalent to P2 with proper setting of the weights ρk(cid:96) , we shall now derive a distributed algorithm for solving
N(cid:88)
problem P2 . In this paper, we shall consider normalized weights that satisfy
(cid:96)=1
and ρk(cid:96) = 0 if (cid:96) /∈ Nk \C (k).
ρk(cid:96) = 1,
ρk(cid:96)
(12)
(13)
(14)
B. Local cost decomposition and problem relaxation
The solution method (12) using (13) requires that every node in the network should have access to the statistical moments
Rx,k and pxd,k over its cluster. There are two problems with this scenario. First, nodes can only be assumed to have access
to information from their immediate neighborhood and the cluster of every node k may include nodes that are not direct
neighbors of k . Second, nodes rarely have access to the moments {Rx,d , pxd,k }; instead, they have access to data generated
from distributions with these moments. Therefore, more is needed to enable a distributed solution that relies solely on local
interactions within neighborhoods and that relies on measured data as opposed to statistical moments. To derive a distributed
algorithm, we follow the approach of [2], [16]. The first step in this approach is to show how to express the cost (9) in terms
of other local costs that only depend on data from neighborhoods.
1Let g(w, ζ ) = [ζi∇wCi
i=1 arranged as a row vector with ζi > 0. The cost functions {JCi (wCi , w−Ci )}Q
JCi (wCi , w−Ci )]Q
i=1 satisfy the
diagonal strict convexity property if g(w, ζ ) is strictly decreasing in w for some positive vector ζ , that is, (g( w, ζ )− g(w, ζ ))(cid:62) ( w −w) < 0
for all nonequal w , w .
.
(16)
(15)
c(cid:96)k E
J loc
k (wC (k) ) =
N(cid:88)
Thus, let us introduce an N × N right stochastic matrix C with nonnegative entries c(cid:96)k such that
and c(cid:96)k = 0 if k /∈ N(cid:96) ∩ C ((cid:96)).
c(cid:96)k = 1,
k=1
(cid:12)(cid:12)2(cid:111)
(cid:110)(cid:12)(cid:12)d(cid:96) (n) − x(cid:62)(cid:96) (n) wC (k)
(cid:88)
With these coefficients, we associate a local cost function of the following form with each node k [2]:
(cid:96)∈Nk ∩C (k)
One important distinction from the local cost defined in [2] is that in [2] the summation in (16) is defined over the entire
neighborhood of node k , i.e., for all (cid:96) ∈ Nk . Here we are excluding those neighbors of k that do not belong to its cluster. This
is because these particular neighbors will be pursuing a different parameter vector than node k . Furthermore, we note in (16)
that wC (k) = wC ((cid:96)) because (cid:96) ∈ C (k). To make the notation simpler, we shall write wk instead of wC (k) . A consequence of
this notation is that wk = w(cid:96) for all (cid:96) ∈ C (k). Incorporating the estimates of the neighboring clusters, we modify (16) to
(cid:12)(cid:12)2(cid:111)
(cid:110)(cid:12)(cid:12)d(cid:96) (n) − x(cid:62)(cid:96) (n) wk
(cid:88)
(cid:88)
associate a regularized local cost function with node k of the following form
(cid:96)∈Nk \C (k)
(cid:96)∈Nk ∩C (k)
Observe that this local cost is now solely defined in terms of information that is available to node k from its neighbors. Using
this regularized local cost function, it can be verified that the global cost function for cluster Ci in (9) can be now expressed
ρk(cid:96) (cid:107)wC (k) − wC ((cid:96))(cid:107)2(cid:17)
(cid:12)(cid:12)2(cid:111)
(cid:110)(cid:12)(cid:12)d(cid:96) (n) − x(cid:62)(cid:96) (n) wC (k)
(cid:16) (cid:88)
(cid:88)
(cid:88)
as
(cid:88)
k∈Ci
(cid:96)∈Nk \Ci
(cid:96)∈C (k)
J loc
k (wk )
k∈Ci
= J loc
k (wk ) +
c(cid:96)kE
(cid:88)
(cid:96)∈C (k)\k
Let wo
k denote the minimizer of the local cost function (17), given w(cid:96) for all (cid:96) ∈ Nk \C (k). A completion-of-squares argument
shows that each J loc
k (wk ) can be expressed as
ρk(cid:96) (cid:107)wk − w(cid:96)(cid:107)2 .
JCi (wCi , w−Ci ) =
J loc
k (wk ) =
J loc
(cid:96) (w(cid:96) )
c(cid:96)k E
(17)
+ η
+ η
7
(18)
=
(19)
Rk =
where
ρk(cid:96)I L .
c(cid:96)k Rx,(cid:96) + η
k (wk ) = J loc
J loc
k (cid:107)2
k ) + (cid:107)wk − wo
k (wo
Rk
(cid:88)
(cid:88)
(cid:96)∈Nk ∩C (k)
(cid:96)∈Nk \C (k)
Substituting equation (19) into the second term on the right-hand-side of (18), and discarding the terms {J loc
(cid:96) )}because
(cid:96) (wo
they are independent of the optimization variables in the cluster, we can consider the following equivalent cost function for
(cid:88)
cluster C (k) at node k :
(cid:96)∈C (k)\k
where it holds that wk = w(cid:96) because (cid:96) ∈ C (k). Note that we have omitted w−k in the notation for JC (k) (wk ) for the sake
of brevity. Therefore, minimizing (21) is equivalent to minimizing the original cost (18) or (9) over wk . However the second
term (21) still requires information from nodes (cid:96) that may not be in the direct neighborhood of node k even though they
belong to the same cluster. In order to avoid access to information via multi-hop, we can relax the cost function (21) at node
JC (k) (wk ) (cid:44) J loc
k (wk ) +
(cid:96) (cid:107)2
(cid:107)w(cid:96) − wo
R(cid:96)
(20)
(21)
8
k by considering only information originating from its neighbors. This can be achieved by replacing the range of the index
(cid:88)
over which the summation in (21) is computed as follows:
−
(cid:96)∈N
k ∩C (k)
Usually, especially in the context of adaptive learning in a non-stationary environment, the weighting matrices R(cid:96) are unavailable
since the covariance matrices Rx,(cid:96) at each node may not be known beforehand. Following an argument based on the Rayleigh-
Ritz characterization of eigenvalues, it was explained in [2] that a useful strategy is to replace each matrix R(cid:96) by a weighted
multiple of the identity matrix, say, as:
JC (k) (cid:48) (wk ) = J loc
k (wk ) +
(cid:96) (cid:107)2
(cid:107)wk − wo
R(cid:96)
(22)
.
(23)
(cid:96) (cid:107)2
(cid:107)wk − wo
R(cid:96) ≈ b(cid:96)k (cid:107)wk − wo
(cid:96) (cid:107)2
for some nonnegative coefficients b(cid:96)k that can possibly depend on the node k . As shown later, these coefficients will be
incorporated into a left stochastic matrix to be defined and, therefore, the designer does not need to worry about the selection
of the b(cid:96)k at this stage. Based on the arguments presented so far, and using (17), the global cost function (22) can then be
(cid:110)(cid:12)(cid:12)d(cid:96) (n) − x(cid:62)(cid:96) (n) wk
(cid:12)(cid:12)2(cid:111)
(cid:88)
relaxed to the following form:
JC (k) (cid:48)(cid:48) (wk ) =
(cid:88)
(cid:88)
(cid:96)∈Nk ∩C (k)
ρk(cid:96) (cid:107)wk − w(cid:96)(cid:107)2 +
+ η
−
(cid:96)∈Nk \C (k)
(cid:96)∈N
k ∩C (k)
Observe that the two last sums on the right-hand-side of (24) divide the neighbors of node k into two exclusive sets: those
that belong to its cluster (last sum) and those that do not belong to its cluster (second term). In summary, the argument so far
enabled us to replace the cost (9) by the alternative cost (24) that depends only on data within the neighborhood of node k . We
can now proceed to use (24) to derive distributed strategies. Subsequently, we study the stability and mean-square performance
of the resulting strategies and show that they are able to perform well despite the approximation introduced in steps.
b(cid:96)k (cid:107)wk − wo
(cid:96) (cid:107)2 .
c(cid:96)k E
(24)
IV. S TOCHA ST IC A P PROX IMAT ION A LGOR I THM S
To begin with, a steepest-descent iteration can be applied by each node k to minimize the cost function (24). Let wk (n)
denote the estimate for wk at iteration n. Using a constant step-size µ for each node, the update relation would take the
(cid:88)
(cid:88)
(cid:1)
(cid:0)Rx,(cid:96)wk (n) − pxd,k
following form:
(cid:88)
− µη
wk (n + 1) = wk (n) − µ
ρk(cid:96) (wk (n) − w(cid:96) (n))
c(cid:96)k
(cid:96)∈Nk \C (k)
(cid:96)∈Nk ∩C (k)
b(cid:96)k (wk (n) − wo
− µ
(cid:96) )
−
k ∩C (k)
(cid:96)∈N
(cid:88)
Among other possible forms, expression (25) can be evaluated in two successive update steps
(cid:88)
(cid:1) + η
(cid:0)Rx,(cid:96)wk (n) − pxd,k
(cid:88)
ρk(cid:96) (wk (n) − w(cid:96) (n))
c(cid:96)k
(cid:96)∈Nk \C (k)
(cid:96)∈Nk ∩C (k)
b(cid:96)k (wo
(cid:96) − wk (n))
wk (n + 1) = ψk (n + 1) + µ
−
k ∩C (k)
(cid:96)∈N
Following the same line of reasoning from [2] in the single-task case, and extending the argument to apply to clusters, we use
(cid:96) in (27) since the latter is unavailable and ψ (cid:96) (n + 1) is an intermediate estimate for it
ψ (cid:96) (n + 1) as a local estimate for wo
ψk (n + 1) = wk (n) − µ
(25)
(27)
(26)
9
(28)
(29)
(30)
(32)
b(cid:96)k
wk (n + 1) =
wk (n + 1) =
akk (cid:44) 1 − µ
a(cid:96)k (cid:44) µ b(cid:96)k ,
a(cid:96)k (cid:44) 0,
that is available at node (cid:96) at time n + 1. In addition, again in step (27), we replace wk (n) by ψk (n + 1) since it is a better
ψk (n + 1) + µ
1 − µ
estimate obtained by incorporating information from the neighbors according to (26). Step (27) then becomes
(cid:88)
(cid:88)
b(cid:96)k
b(cid:96)k ψ (cid:96) (n + 1).
−
−
k ∩C (k)
(cid:96)∈N
k ∩C (k)
(cid:96)∈N
(cid:88)
The coefficients in (28) can be redefined as:
−
(cid:96)∈N
k ∩C (k)
(cid:96) ∈ N −k ∩ C (k)
(cid:96) /∈ Nk ∩ C (k)
It can be observed that the entries {a(cid:96)k } are nonnegative for all (cid:96) and k (including akk ) for sufficiently small step-size.
Moreover, the matrix A with ((cid:96), k)-th entry a(cid:96)k is a left-stochastic matrix, which means that the sum of each of its columns is
equal to one. With this notation, we obtain the following adapt-then-combine (ATC) diffusion strategy for solving problem (9)
(cid:88)
in a distributed manner:
(cid:88)
(cid:1) + η
(cid:0)Rx,(cid:96)wk (n) − pxd,k
(cid:88)
ψk (n + 1) = wk (n) − µ
ρk(cid:96) (wk (n) − w(cid:96) (n))
c(cid:96)k
(cid:96)∈Nk ∩C (k)
(cid:96)∈Nk \C (k)
a(cid:96)k ψk (n + 1)
(cid:96)∈Nk ∩C (k)
At each instant n + 1, node k updates the intermediate value ψk (n + 1) with a local steepest descent iteration. This step
involves a regularization term in the case where the set of inter-cluster neighbors of node k is not empty. Next, an aggregation
step is performed where node k combines its intermediate value ψk (n + 1) with the intermediate values ψ (cid:96) (n + 1) from its
cluster neighbors. It is also possible to arrive at a combine-then-adapt (CTA) diffusion strategy where the aggregation step is
performed prior to the adaptation step [2]. In what follows, it is sufficient to focus on the ATC strategy to illustrate the main
results. Employing instantaneous approximations for the required signal moments in (30), we arrive at the desired diffusion
strategy for clustered multitask learning described in Algorithm 1 where the regularization factors ρk(cid:96) are chosen according
(cid:88)
to (14), and the coefficients {c(cid:96)k , a(cid:96)k } are nonnegative scalars chosen at will by the designer to satisfy the following conditions:
(31)
a(cid:96)k = 1, a(cid:96)k = 0 for (cid:96) /∈ Nk ∩ C (k)
(cid:88)
(cid:96)∈Nk ∩C (k)
c(cid:96)k = 1,
k∈N(cid:96)∩C ((cid:96))
There are several ways to select these coefficients such as using the averaging rule or the Metropolis rule (see [2] for a listing
of these and other choices).
In the case of a single-task network when there is a single cluster that consists of the entire set of nodes we get Nk ∩ C (k) =
Nk and Nk \C (k) = ∅ for all k , so that expression (33) reduces to the diffusion adaptation strategy [2], [16] described in
Algorithm 2.
In the case of a multitask network where the size of each cluster is one, we have Nk ∩ C (k) = {k} and Nk \C (k) = N −k
for all k , the algorithm and (34) degenerate into Algorithm 3. Interestingly, this is the instantaneous gradient counterpart of
equation (12) for each node.
c(cid:96)k = 0 for k /∈ N(cid:96) ∩ C ((cid:96))
a(cid:96)k ≥ 0,
c(cid:96)k ≥ 0,
10
(cid:62)
d(cid:96) (n) − x
(cid:96) (n)wk (n)
wk (n + 1) =
Algorithm 1: Diffusion LMS for clustered multitask networks
(cid:88)
(cid:16)
Start with wk (0) = 0 for all k , and repeat:
(cid:88)
c(cid:96)k
ψk (n + 1) = wk (n) + µ
(cid:96)∈Nk ∩C (k)
a(cid:96)k ψk (n + 1)
(cid:96)∈Nk ∩C (k)
Algorithm 2: Diffusion LMS for single-task networks [15], [16].
(cid:16)
(cid:88)
Start with wk (0) = 0 for all k , and repeat:
(cid:88)
c(cid:96)k
ψk (n + 1) = wk (n) + µ
(cid:96)∈Nk
(cid:96)∈Nk
Algorithm 3: Diffusion LMS for multitask networks
(cid:16)
Start with wk (0) = 0 for all k , and repeat:
a(cid:96)k ψk (n + 1)
wk (n + 1) =
(cid:17)
(cid:62)
k (n)wk (n)
wk (n + 1) = wk (n) + µ
dk (n) − x
(cid:17)
(cid:88)
ρk(cid:96) (w(cid:96) (n) − wk (n))
x(cid:96) (n) + η
(cid:96)∈Nk \C (k)
(33)
(34)
x(cid:96) (n)
(cid:17)
(cid:62)
d(cid:96) (n) − x
(cid:96) (n)wk (n)
(cid:88)
(cid:96)∈N −
k
ρk(cid:96) (w(cid:96) (n) − wk (n))
(35)
xk (n) + η µ
V. M EAN -SQUAR E ERROR P ER FORMANC E ANA LY S I S
w(n) =
We now examine the stochastic behavior of the adaptive diffusion strategy (33). In order to address this question, we collect
information from across the network into block vectors and matrices. In particular, let us denote by w(n), w(cid:63) and ψ the block
w1 (n)
,
ψ1 (n)
w(cid:63)
,
weight estimate vector, the block optimum weight vector and block intermediate weight estimate vector, all of size LN × 1,
i.e.,
1
...
...
...
w(cid:63) =
w(cid:63)
wN (n)
ψN (n)
N
with w(cid:63)
C (k) . The weight error vector for each node k at iteration n is defined by vk (n) = wk (n) − w(cid:63)
k . The weight
k = w(cid:63)
v1 (n)
error vectors vk (n) are also stacked on top of each other to get the block weight error vector defined as follows:
...
vN (n)
To perform the theoretical analysis, we introduce the following independence assumption.
ψ(n) =
v(n) =
(36)
(37)
Assumption 1: (Independent regressors) The regression vectors xk (n) arise from a stationary random process that is
temporally stationary, white and independent over space with Rx,k = E {xk (n)x(cid:62)k (n)} > 0.
11
A direct consequence is that xk (n) is independent of v (cid:96) (m) for all (cid:96) and m ≤ n. Although not true in general, this assumption
is commonly used for analyzing adaptive constructions because it allows to simplify the derivations without constraining the
conclusions. Moreover, various analyses in the literature have already shown that performance results obtained under this
assumption match well the actual performance of adaptive algorithms when the step-size is sufficiently small [55].
A. Mean error behavior analysis
The estimation error that appears in the first equation of (33) can be rewritten as
d(cid:96) (n) − x(cid:62)(cid:96) (n)wk (n) = x(cid:62)(cid:96) (n)w(cid:63)
k + z(cid:96) (n) − x(cid:62)(cid:96) (n)wk (n)
= z(cid:96) (n) − x(cid:62)(cid:96) (n)vk (n)
because w(cid:63)
k for all (cid:96) ∈ Nk ∩ C (k). Subtracting w(cid:63)
k from both sides of the first equation in (33), and using the above
(cid:96) = w(cid:63)
relation, the update equation for the block weight error vector of ψk (n + 1) can be expressed as
(38)
ψ(n + 1) − w(cid:63) = v(n) − µ H x (n) v(n) + µ pzx (n) − µ η Q (v(n) + w(cid:63) )
(39)
where
(40)
Q = I LN − P ⊗ I L ,
with ⊗ denoting the Kronecker product, and P the N × N matrix with (k , (cid:96))-th entry ρk(cid:96) . Moreover, the matrix H x (n) is
(cid:111)
(cid:110) (cid:88)
(cid:88)
block diagonal of size LN × LN defined as
H x (n) = diag
c(cid:96)N x(cid:96) (n)x(cid:62)(cid:96) (n)
c(cid:96)1 x(cid:96) (n)x(cid:62)(cid:96) (n), . . . ,
,
(cid:96)∈N1∩C (1)
(cid:96)∈NN ∩C (N )
(cid:17)(cid:62) .
(cid:16) (cid:88)
(cid:88)
and pzx (n) is the following vector of length LN × 1:
c(cid:96)N x(cid:62)(cid:96) (n)z(cid:96) (n)
c(cid:96)1 x(cid:62)(cid:96) (n)z(cid:96) (n), . . . ,
pzx (n) =
(cid:96)∈N1∩C (1)
(cid:96)∈NN ∩C (N )
Let AI = A ⊗ I L . The second equation in (33) then allows us to write
w(n + 1) = A(cid:62)I ψ(n + 1)
(43)
(41)
(42)
Subtracting w(cid:63) from both sides of the above expression, and using equation (39), the update relation can be written in a single
expression as follows
v(n + 1) = A(cid:62)I [I LN − µ (H x (n) + η Q)] v(n) + µ A(cid:62)I pzx (n) − µ η A(cid:62)I Q w(cid:63)
Taking the expectation of both sides, and using Assumption 1 we get
E {v(n + 1)} = A(cid:62)I [I LN − µ (H R + η Q)] E {v(n)} − µ η A(cid:62)I Q w(cid:63)
where
with
H R (cid:44) E {H x (n)} = diag {R1 , . . . , RN }
(cid:88)
(cid:96)∈Nk ∩C (k)
c(cid:96)k Rx,(cid:96) .
Rk =
(44)
(45)
(46)
(47)
12
ρ
< 1
(48)
0 < µ <
Theorem 1: (Stability in the mean) Assume data model (1) and Assumption 1 hold. Then, for any initial condition, the
(cid:17)
(cid:16)
diffusion multitask strategy (33) asymptotically converges in the mean if the step-size is chosen to satisfy
A(cid:62)I [I LN − µ (H R + η Q)]
where ρ(·) denotes the spectral radius of its matrix argument. A sufficient condition for (48) to hold is to choose µ such that
2
(49)
maxk {λmax (Rk )} + 2 η
where λmax (·) denotes the maximum eigenvalue of its matrix argument. In that case, it follows from (45) that the asymptotic
(cid:110)
(cid:111)−1
mean bias is given by
A(cid:62)I [I LN − µ (H R + η Q)] − I LN
E {v(n)} = µ η
lim
n→∞
Proof: Since any induced matrix norm is lower bounded by the spectral radius, we have the following relation in terms
(cid:17)
(cid:16)
of the block maximum norm (see [2] for definition and properties of the norm):
≤ (cid:107)A(cid:62)I (I LN − µ (H R + η Q)) (cid:107)b,∞
A(cid:62)I [I LN − µ (H R + η Q)]
Now using norm inequalities and the fact that A is a left-stochastic matrix (whose block maximum norm is equal to one), we
find that:
A(cid:62)I Q w(cid:63) .
(50)
(51)
ρ
(cid:107)A(cid:62)I [I LN − µ (H R + η Q)] (cid:107)b,∞ ≤ (cid:107)A(cid:62)I (cid:107)b,∞ · (cid:107)I LN − µ (H R + η Q)(cid:107)b,∞
= (cid:107)I LN − µ (H R + η Q)(cid:107)b,∞
≤ (cid:107)I LN − µ H R − µηI LN (cid:107)b,∞ + µη (cid:107)P ⊗ I L (cid:107)b,∞
using the definition Q = (I N − P ) ⊗ I L and the triangle inequality. Now, it holds that
(52)
(cid:107)P ⊗ I L (cid:107)b,∞ = (cid:107)P (cid:107)∞ = 1
because P is a right stochastic matrix according to condition (14). Furthermore, since (1 − µη) I LN − µ H R is a block diagonal
Hermitian matrix, its block maximum norm is equal to its spectral radius [2], namely,
(53)
(cid:107)(1 − µη) I LN − µ H R (cid:107)b,∞ = ρ ((1 − µη) I LN − µ H R ) .
Using (53)–(54) in (52) we conclude that a sufficient condition for mean stability is to require
ρ ((1 − µη) I LN − µ H R ) + µη ≤ 1,
(54)
(55)
which yields condition (49).
B. Mean-square error behavior analysis
In order to make the presentation clearer, we shall use the following notation for terms in the weight-error expression (44):
B (n) = A(cid:62)I [I LN − µ (H x (n) + η Q)]
g(n) = A(cid:62)I pzx (n)
r = A(cid:62)I Q w(cid:63)
(56)
so that
13
v(n + 1) = B (n) v(n) + µ g(n) − µ η r .
Using Assumption 1 and E {g(n)} = 0, the mean-square of the weight error vector v(n + 1), weighted by any positive
(cid:9) + µ2 η2 (cid:107)r(cid:107)2
Σ(cid:48) } + µ2 trace (cid:8)ΣE {g(n)g(cid:62) (n)}
semi-definite matrix Σ that we are free to choose, satisfies the following relation:
Σ} = E {(cid:107)v(n)(cid:107)2
E {(cid:107)v(n + 1)(cid:107)2
Σ
− 2µ η r(cid:62) ΣB E {v(n)}
(58)
(57)
where
B (cid:44) {B (n)} = A(cid:62)I [(I LN − µ (H R + η Q)]
Σ(cid:48) (cid:44) E {B(cid:62) (n) Σ B (n)}
In expression (58), the freedom in selecting Σ will allow us to derive several performance metrics. Let
(59)
(60)
G = E {g(n)g(cid:62) (n)}
= A(cid:62)I C (cid:62)I diag{σ2
z ,1Rx,1 , . . . , σ2
z ,N Rx,N } C I AI
where C I = C ⊗ I L . Then, relation (58) can be rewritten as
Σ(cid:48) } + µ2 trace {ΣG} + µ2 η2 (cid:107)r(cid:107)2
Σ − 2µ η r(cid:62) ΣB E {v(n)}
Σ} = E {(cid:107)v(n)(cid:107)2
E {(cid:107)v(n + 1)(cid:107)2
We would like to show that this variance relation converges for sufficiently small step-sizes and we would also like to evaluate
its steady-state value in order to determine the mean-square-error of the distributed strategy. However, note that the weighting
matrices Σ and Σ(cid:48) on both sides of (62) are different, which means that (62) is still not an actual recursion. To handle this
situation, we transform the weighting matrices into vector forms as follows. Let vec(·) denote the operator that stacks the
columns of a matrix on top of each other. Vectorizing the matrices Σ and Σ(cid:48) by σ = vec(Σ) and σ (cid:48) = vec(Σ(cid:48) ), it can be
verified that the relation between them can be expressed as the following linear transformation:
(61)
(62)
σ (cid:48) = K σ
where K is the (LN )2 × (LN )2 matrix given by
K = E {B(cid:62) (n) ⊗ B(cid:62) (n)}
= AI ⊗ AI − µ (H R + η Q)(cid:62)AI ⊗ AI − µ AI ⊗ (H R + η Q)(cid:62)AI
+ µ2 E {(H (n) + η Q)(cid:62)AI ⊗ (H (n) + η Q)(cid:62)AI }.
Neglecting the influence of second-order terms in µ, K can be approximated by
(63)
(64)
K ≈ B(cid:62) ⊗ B(cid:62) .
Finally, let us define f (σ , E {v(n)}) as the last two terms on the right hand side of (62), i.e.,
f (σ , E {v(n)}) (cid:44) µ2 η2 (cid:107)r(cid:107)2
σ − 2µ η (B E {v(n)} ⊗ r)(cid:62) σ .
For notational convenience, we are omitting the argument r of f since it is deterministic. Equation (62) can be expressed as
follows:
(66)
(65)
Kσ } + µ2 vec(G(cid:62) )(cid:62) σ + f (σ , E {v(n)})
σ } = E {(cid:107)v(n)(cid:107)2
E {(cid:107)v(n + 1)(cid:107)2
(67)
14
where we will be using the notations (cid:107) · (cid:107)Σ and (cid:107) · (cid:107)σ interchangeably.
Theorem 2: (Mean-square stability) Assume data model (1) and Assumption 1 hold. Assume further that the step-size µ
is sufficiently small such that approximation (49) is justified by neglecting higher-order powers of µ, and relation (67) can
be used as a reasonable representation for the evolution of the (weighted) mean-square-error. Then the diffusion multitask
strategy (33) is mean-square stable if the matrix K is stable. Under approximation (65), the stability of K is guaranteed by
sufficiently small step-sizes that also satisfy (49).
Proof: Iterating recursion (67) starting from n = 0, we find that
K n+1σ } + µ2 vec(G(cid:62) )(cid:62)
σ } = E {(cid:107)v(0)(cid:107)2
E {(cid:107)v(n + 1)(cid:107)2
n(cid:88)
i=0
K iσ +
n(cid:88)
i=0
f (K iσ , E {v(n − i)})
(68)
with initial condition v(0) = w(0) − w(cid:63) . Provided that K is stable, the first and the second term on the RHS of (68) converge
as n → ∞, to zero for the former, and to a finite value for the latter. Consider now the third term on the RHS of (68). We
know from (45) that E {v(n)} is uniformly bounded because (45) is a BIBO stable recursion with a bounded driving term
−µ η A(cid:62)I Q w(cid:63) . Moreover, from (66), the expression for f (K iσ , E {v(n − i)}) can be written as
f (K iσ , E {v(n − i)}) = µ2 η2 vec{rr(cid:62)}(cid:62)K iσ − 2µ η (B E {v(n − i)} ⊗ r)(cid:62) K iσ .
(69)
We further know that K is stable. Therefore, there exists a matrix norm [2], denoted by (cid:107) · (cid:107)ρ such that (cid:107)K (cid:107)ρ = cρ < 1.
Applying this norm to f and using the triangular inequality, we can deduce that
f (K iσ , E {v(n − i)}) < ν ci
ρ
(70)
for some positive finite constant ν . It follows that the sum appearing as the right-most term in (68) converges as n → ∞. We
σ } converges to a bounded value as n → ∞, and the algorithm is said to be mean-square stable.
conclude that E {(cid:107)v(n + 1)(cid:107)2
Theorem 3: (Transient MSD) Considering a sufficiently small step-size µ that ensures mean and mean-square stability, and
selecting Σ = 1
N I LN , then the network MSD learning curve, defined by ζ (n) = 1
N E {(cid:107)v(n)(cid:107)}2 evolves according to the
(cid:16)
following recursions for n ≥ 0:
(cid:17)
1
µ2 vec(G(cid:62) )(cid:62) K nvec(I LN ) − E {(cid:107)v(0)(cid:107)2
(I (N L)2 −K )K n vec(I LN )} + µ2 η2(cid:107)r(cid:107)2
ζ (n + 1) = ζ (n) +
K n vec(I LN )
N
− 2µη (Γ(n) + (B E {v(n)} ⊗ r)(cid:62) vec(I LN )
Γ(n + 1) = Γ(n) K + (B E {v(n)} ⊗ r)(cid:62) (K − I (LN )2 )
(71)
(72)
N (cid:107)v(0)(cid:107)2 and Γ(0) = 0(LN )2 .
with initial condition ζ (0) = 1
Proof: Comparing (68) at instants n + 1 and n, we can relate E {(cid:107)v(n + 1)(cid:107)2
σ } to E {(cid:107)v(n)(cid:107)2
σ } as follows:
n(cid:88)
n−1(cid:88)
σ } + µ2 vec(G(cid:62) )(cid:62) K nσ − E {(cid:107)v(0)(cid:107)2
σ } =E {(cid:107)v(n)(cid:107)2
E {(cid:107)v(n + 1)(cid:107)2
(I (N L)2 −K )K nσ }
f (K iσ , E {v(n − 1 − i)})
f (K iσ , E {v(n − i)}) −
i=0
i=0
+
(73)
(cid:111)
n(cid:88)
n−1(cid:88)
We can rewrite the last two terms on the RHS of (73) as follows:
(cid:110)
f (K iσ , E {v(n − 1 − i)})
n(cid:88)
i=0
i=0
2µ η (B E {v(n)} ⊗ r)(cid:62) K iσ
(cid:111)
i=0
f (K iσ , E {v(n − i)}) −
= µ2 η2 (cid:107)r(cid:107)2
(cid:110)
K nσ −
n−1(cid:88)
2µ η (B E {v(n)} ⊗ r)(cid:62) K iσ
i=0
(cid:110) n(cid:88)
n−1(cid:88)
K nσ − 2µ η (B E {v(n)} ⊗ r)(cid:62) σ
= µ2 η2 (cid:107)r(cid:107)2
(B E {v(n)} ⊗ r)(cid:62) K i +
− 2µ η
i=1
i=0
n(cid:88)
n−1(cid:88)
(B E {v(n)} ⊗ r)(cid:62) K i +
i=1
i=0
we can reformulate recursion (73) as follows:
σ } + µ2 vec(G(cid:62) )(cid:62) K nσ − E {(cid:107)v(0)(cid:107)2
(I (N L)2 −K )K nσ } + µ2 η2(cid:107)r(cid:107)2
σ } = E {(cid:107)v(n)(cid:107)2
E {(cid:107)v(n + 1)(cid:107)2
K nσ
− 2µη (Γ(n) + (B E {v(n)} ⊗ r)(cid:62) σ
Γ(n + 1) = Γ(n)K + (B E {v(n)} ⊗ r)(cid:62) (K − I (LN )2 )
N vec(I LN ).
with Γ(0) = 0(LN )2 . To derive the transient curve for the MSD, we replace σ by 1
(B E {v(n)} ⊗ r)(cid:62) K i(cid:111)
σ .
(B E {v(n)} ⊗ r)(cid:62) K i ,
Introducing the following notation
+
Γ(n) =
15
(74)
(75)
(76)
(77)
Theorem 4: (Steady-state MSD) If the step size is chosen sufficiently small to ensure mean and mean-square-error conver-
(cid:19)
(cid:18) 1
gence, then the value of the steady-state MSD for the diffusion network (33) is given by
N
(I (LN )2 − K )−1vec(I LN ), E {v(∞)}
ζ (cid:63) =
(78)
µ2
vec(G(cid:62) )(cid:62) (I (LN )2 − K )−1vec(I LN ) + f
N
where E {v(∞)} is determined by expression (50).
Proof: The steady-state MSD is the limiting value
1
ζ (cid:63) = lim
N
n→∞
From the recursive expression (67) we obtain as n → ∞ that
(I (N L)2 −K )σ } = µ2 vec(G(cid:62) )(cid:62) σ + f (σ , E {v(∞)}).
E {(cid:107)v(n)(cid:107)2
lim
n→∞
Comparing expressions (79) and (80), we observe that to arrive at the MSD requires us to choose σ to satisfy
E {(cid:107)v(n)(cid:107)}2 .
This leads to expression (78).
(I (N L)2 − K ) σMSD =
1
N
vec(I LN ).
V I . S IMU LAT ION EXAM PL E S
(79)
(80)
(81)
In this section, we first conduct simulations on a simple network to illustrate the proposed algorithm and the analytical
performance models. Then, we provide several application-oriented examples where the proposed distributed learning strategy
may find applications. These experiments will illustrate the behavior and the advantage of the proposed strategy.
16
Fig. 2. Experimental setup. Left: network studied in Section VI-A, with 10 nodes divided into 4 different clusters. Right: input signal and
noise variances for each node.
A. Illustrative numerical example
In this subsection we provide an illustrative example to show how the proposed distributed algorithm converges over clustered
multitask network. We consider a network consisting of 10 nodes with the topology depicted in Figure 2 (left). The nodes
were divided into 4 clusters: C1 = {1, 2, 3}, C2 = {4, 5, 6}, C3 = {7, 8} and C4 = {9, 10}. Two-dimensional coefficient vectors
of the form w(cid:63)
Ci = wo + δwCi were chosen as wo = [0.5, −0.4](cid:62) , δwC1 = [0.0287, −0.005](cid:62) , δwC2 = [0.0234, 0.005](cid:62) ,
δwC3 = [−0.0335, 0.0029](cid:62) , and δwC4 = [0.0224, 0.00347](cid:62) . The regression inputs xk (n) were zero-mean 2 × 1 random
x,k I L , and the σ2
vectors governed by a Gaussian distribution with covariance matrices Rx,k = σ2
x,k shown in the top right plot
of Figure 2. The background noises zk (n) were i.i.d. zero-mean Gaussian random variables, independent of any other signals.
The corresponding variances σ2
z ,k are depicted in the bottom right plot of Figure 2.
Regularization strength ρk(cid:96) was chosen as ρk(cid:96) = Nk \C (k)−1 for (cid:96) ∈ Nk \C (k), and ρk(cid:96) = 0 for any other (cid:96). This
setting usually leads to asymmetrical regularization weights. We considered the diffusion algorithm with measurement diffusion
governed by a uniform matrix C such that c(cid:96)k = N(cid:96) ∩ C ((cid:96))−1 for k ∈ N(cid:96) ∩ C ((cid:96)). Likewise, a uniform A was used such that
a(cid:96)k = Nk ∩ C (k)−1 for (cid:96) ∈ Nk ∩ C (k).
The algorithm was run with different step-size and regularization parameters (µ, η) such as (0.01, 0.1), (0.05, 0.1) and
(0.01, 1). Simulation results were obtained by averaging 100 Monte-Carlo runs. Transient MSD curves were obtained by (71)
and (72). Steady-state MSD values were obtained by expression (78). It can be observed in the left plot of Figure 3 that the
models accurately match the simulated results.
These models were used to illustrate the performance of several learning strategies: 1) the non-cooperative LMS algorithm,
2) the multitask algorithm and 3) the clustered multitask algorithm. The non-cooperative algorithm was obtained by assigning
a cluster to each node and setting η = 0. The multitask algorithm was obtained by assigning a cluster to each node and setting
η (cid:54)= 0. The right plot of Figure 3 shows that the noncooperative algorithm has the largest MSD as nodes do not collaborate
for additional benefit. If estimation is performed without cluster information, but only with regularization between nodes as in
the case of the multitask diffusion LMS, it can be observed that the performance is better than in the non-cooperative case.
Finally, providing prior information to the clustered multitask network via an appropriate definition of clusters leads to the
13265971048w\x{FFFF}C1w\x{FFFF}C2w\x{FFFF}C3w\x{FFFF}C4123456789100.80.911.11.21.3
123456789100.080.090.10.110.12
best performance. Clustering strategies are not discussed in this paper. This will be investigated in future work. One strategy
is proposed in [42].
17
Fig. 3. Network performance illustration. Left: transient and steady-state MSD (model vs. Monte Carlo) for different step-sizes and
regularization parameters. Right: performance comparison for different strategies using theoretical models.
B. Distributed spectrum estimation with multi-antenna devices
We now consider an example of distributed spectral sensing using the clustered multitask diffusion LMS. Cognitive radio
systems involve two types of users: primary users (PU) and secondary users (SU). Secondary users are allowed to detect
and temporarily occupy unused frequency bands provided that they do not cause harmful interference to primary users [56].
Therefore, secondary users need to sense spectral bands that are occupied by active primary users. In [2], [57], collaborative
spectral sensing was studied with single-antenna nodes via the diffusion strategy. In this subsection, we explore a distributed
spectral sensing method over the network with multi-antenna devices.
Consider a communication environment consisting of NP primary users and NS secondary users, each secondary user being
equipped with NR antennas. We assume that the power spectrum of the signal transmitted by each primary user q can be
NB(cid:88)
represented as a linear combination of NB basis functions weighted by the weights αqm , namely,
S q (f ) =
αqm φm (f )
(cid:33)
(cid:32) NB(cid:88)
m=1
NP(cid:88)
The power spectrum of the signal received at the (cid:96)-th antenna of device k is given by
αqm φm (f )
m=1
q=1
where pk(cid:96),q is the path loss factor between the primary user q and the (cid:96)-th antenna of node k , and σ2
k(cid:96) is the receiver noise
power.
At each time instant, the (cid:96)-th antenna of device k gets measurements of the power spectrum Rk(cid:96) (f ) over NF frequency
samples. Assume that the receiver noise power can be estimated with high accuracy using energy detection over an idle band.
(cid:33)
(cid:32) NB(cid:88)
NP(cid:88)
Then, at instant n, we can define the reference signal on this antenna element at the j -th frequency band by
αqm φm (fj )
m=1
q=1
j = 1, . . . , NF
+ zk(cid:96),j (n)
rk(cid:96),j (n) =
pk(cid:96),q
Rk(cid:96) (f ) =
pk(cid:96),q
+ σ2
k(cid:96)
(82)
(83)
(84)
for
02004006008001000−35−30−25−20−15−10−50IterationnMSD(dB) µ=0.01,η=0.1µ=0.1,η=0.1µ=0.1,η=1SimulatedMSDTheoreticalMSDSteadystateMSD02004006008001000−35−30−25−20−15−10−5 MSD(dB)IterationnNon-cooperativealgo.Multitaskalgo.(η=2)Clusteredmultitaskalgo.(η=0)Clusteredmultitaskalgo.(η=0.3) 18
where zk(cid:96),j (n) is the sampling noise, assumed to be zero-mean Gaussian with variance σ2
zk(cid:96),j . We denote by Φ the NF × NB
matrix of basis functions with j -th row defined by [φ1 (fj ), . . . , φNB (fj )], and let
Φk(cid:96) = [pk(cid:96),1 , . . . , pk(cid:96),NP ] ⊗ Φ.
We collect coefficients αqm into the vectors αq = [αq1 , . . . , αqNB ](cid:62) and α = [α(cid:62)1 , . . . , α(cid:62)NP ](cid:62) , measurements rk(cid:96),j (n) into the
vector rk(cid:96) (n) = [rk(cid:96),1 (n), . . . , rk(cid:96),NF (n)](cid:62) , and noise samples zk(cid:96),j (n) into the vector zk(cid:96) (n) = [zk(cid:96),1 (n), . . . , zk(cid:96),NF (n)](cid:62) .
At time instant n, the model (84) can then be expressed in the following vector form
(85)
rk(cid:96) (n) = Φk(cid:96) α + zk(cid:96) (n)
(86)
for each antenna (cid:96) of each sensor node k , at each time instant n. Inverting the linear model (86) should allow each pair (k , (cid:96))
to estimate the solution α(n). However, in practice, the path loss factor pk(cid:96),q cannot be estimated accurately, or even estimated
due to failures of synchronization if the power of the received signal is lower than a certain threshold. Thus, Φk(cid:96) , depending
on the estimated path loss factors pk(cid:96),q , should be used instead of Φk(cid:96) in the model (86). In the experiment described hereafter,
we treat each multi-antenna device as a cluster of NR antennas because they are supposed to sense the same local spectrum. In
addition, we assume that each cluster is fully connected, i.e., with links between each pair of antennas. Existence of connections
between devices depends on their distance from one another. As a consequence, the number of intra-cluster neighbors for each
antenna element is NR , including itself, and the number of extra-cluster neighbors for each antenna element is NR times the
number of neighboring devices.
Estimating the spectrum in a noncooperative manner would lead to a local profile of the spectrum occupation, with hidden
node effects. We used our algorithm to circumvent this drawback. We considered a connected network composed of NP = 2
primary users and NS = 10 secondary users. Each secondary user was equipped with an antenna array of NR elements. The
topology of the network is shown in Figure 4. The secondary users sampled NF = 80 frequency bins. We used NB = 16
Gaussian basis functions defined as
φm (f ) = e−
(87)
(cid:107)2
(cid:107)f −fci
2σ2
b
with centers fci uniformly distributed along the frequency axis, and variance σ2
b = 0.0025. Vectors α1 and α2 were arbitrarily
set to α1 = [0(cid:62)10 0.4 0.38 0.4 0(cid:62)3 ](cid:62) and α2 = [0(cid:62)3 0.4 0.38 0.4 0(cid:62)10 ](cid:62) , where 0q is a q × 1 vector of zeros. The path loss factor
at instant n between the primary user q and the (cid:96)-th antenna of the secondary user k was set to pk(cid:96),q (n) = ¯pk,q + δpk(cid:96),q (n),
where ¯pk,q is the deterministic path loss factor determined by the distance between k and q via the free space propagation
model, i.e., the received signal power is inversely proportional to the squared distance to the transmitter, and δpk(cid:96),q (n) is a
zero-mean Gaussian variable with standard deviation 0.2 ¯pk,q , which served as the random fading among antenna elements.
In practice, the path loss factors have to be estimated. We considered that each antenna of the secondary user k was able to
estimate pk(cid:96),q (n) = ¯pk,q if ¯pk,q ≥ p0 , otherwise pk(cid:96),q (n) = 0 due to the loss of the synchronization. The noise zk(cid:96),j (n) was
assumed to be zero-mean Gaussian with the standard deviation 0.01. The antenna elements were considered as fully connected
on each device. The information exchange matrix C and the combination matrix A were arbitrarily set to uniform matrices,
as each multi-antenna device was considered as a cluster. Within each cluster, the regularization
with entries thus equal to 1
NR
parameter ρk(cid:96) was uniformly set to one over NR multiplied by the number of neighboring devices.
Our algorithm was run on the multi-antenna device network with different settings. In the left plot of Figure 5, a diffusion
strategy was applied within each device, without cooperation between devices (η = 0), for several numbers NR of antennas per
device. In the right plot of Figure 5, a diffusion strategy was applied within each device, and cooperation between devices was
19
Fig. 4. Cognitive radio network with multi-antenna devices.
promoted (η = 0.01). The step-sizes were adjusted so that the initial convergence rates were equivalent. It can be observed that
increasing the number of antennas, and promoting cooperation between the sets of antennas, allow to improve the performance
notably. Figure 6 provides the estimated power spectra for 4 of the 10 devices. Three learning strategies are considered: a non-
cooperative strategy (η = 0) with single-antenna devices (NR = 1), and a cooperative strategy (η = 0.01) with single-antenna
devices (NR = 1) and multi-antenna devices (NR = 4).
Red dashed curves represent ground-truth spectra transmitted by the primary users. An inspection of the device locations
in Figure 4 shows that the non-cooperative strategy is highly influenced by the local profile of power spectra. For instance,
device 8 was close to PU1 and far from PU2, and it poorly estimated the power spectra generated by PU2. Device 10 was not
able to estimate any spectrum because it was out of range for PU1 and PU2. Channel allocation relying on such local spectral
profile may have led to a hidden node effect. Cooperative strategies clearly provide more consistent results, and using multiple
antennas provides additional gain.
C. Distributed non-point target localization
The second application addresses the problem of target localization. Existing localization methods based on the diffusion
strategy assume point targets [2], [3]. However, in some situations, targets may not be reduced to a single point such as its
centroid. For instance, this includes the case where the target is a region of interest scanned by a laser light sheet. The algorithm
should be able to jointly estimate a series of coordinates that characterizes the target area.
The problem we considered is shown in Figure 7. The target was the arc of a circle with center wo . The angular resolution
of the nodes was denoted by δ . This means that arcs of the circle with solid angle δ were viewed as a single point wq by
the cluster Cq of nodes within the cone of axis (wo , wq ). Note that the distance between each node k ∈ Cq and wq can be
expressed in the inner product form
rkq = u(cid:62)kq (wq − pk )
(88)
1. . . .2. . . .3. . . .4. . . .5. . . .8. . . .9. . . .6. . . .7. . . .10. . . .PU2PU1 20
Fig. 5. MSD learning curves. Left: non-cooperating devices (η = 0). Right: cooperating devices (η = 0.01).
Fig. 6. PSD estimation. From top to bottom: estimate on nodes 3, 6, 8, and 10. From left to right: non-cooperative single-antenna system
(NR = 1, η = 0), cooperative single-antenna system (NR = 1, η = 0.01), cooperative multi-antenna system (NR = 4, η = 0.01).
where pk is the location of node k , and ukq is the unit-norm vector pointing from pk to wq . We assumed that sensors were
aware of their location pk . Let dkq = rkq + u(cid:62)kq pk , that is, dkq = u(cid:62)kq wq . The problem was thus to estimate w(cid:63)
q from noisy
input-output data (ukq (n), dkq (n)) collected by nodes k ∈ Cq . The model that was thus considered is given by [2]:
dkq (n) = u(cid:62)kq (n) w(cid:63)
q + vkq (n)
(89)
with ukq (n) = ukq + αk (n) u⊥kq + βk (n) ukq
with vkq (n) a zero-mean temporally and spatially i.i.d. Gaussian noise of variance σ2
v . Moreover, the measured direction vector
ukq (n) was assumed to be a noisy realization of the unit-norm vector pointing from pk to w(cid:63)
q , with αk (n) and βk (n) two
α and σ2
Gaussian random variables of variances σ2
β , respectively.
0100020003000400050006000−5−4.5−4−3.5−3−2.5−2−1.5−1−0.50IterationnMSD(dB) NR=4NR=2NR=10100020003000400050006000−25−20−15−10−50IterationnMSD(dB) NR=1NR=2NR=400.20.40.60.8100.20.4NormalizedfrequencyPSD(k=3)00.20.40.60.8100.20.40.6NormalizedfrequencyPSD(k=6)00.20.40.60.8100.20.40.6NormalizedfrequencyPSD(k=8)00.20.40.60.8100.20.40.6NormalizedfrequencyPSD(k=10)00.20.40.60.8100.20.4NormalizedfrequencyPSD(k=3)00.20.40.60.8100.20.40.6NormalizedfrequencyPSD(k=6)00.20.40.60.8100.20.40.6NormalizedfrequencyPSD(k=8)00.20.40.60.8100.20.40.6NormalizedfrequencyPSD(k=10)00.20.40.60.8100.20.4NormalizedfrequencyPSD(k=3)00.20.40.60.8100.20.40.6NormalizedfrequencyPSD(k=6)00.20.40.60.8100.20.40.6NormalizedfrequencyPSD(k=8)00.20.40.60.8100.20.40.6NormalizedfrequencyPSD(k=10) 21
The multitask algorithm (33) was used to estimate the coordinates w(cid:63)
q for q ∈ {1, . . . , Q}, and to approximate the arc of
radius R. Each node was connected to its neighbors within its cluster and the adjacent clusters. We considered two network
topologies. In the first scenario, see the left-hand plot in Figure 8 (first row), 100 nodes ranging from 3R to 4R were grouped
into 10 clusters, with 10 nodes in each. The nodes were deployed uniformly with connections between neighbors. In the second
scenario, see the right-hand plot in Figure 8 (first row), 200 nodes ranging from 3R to 4R were grouped into 10 clusters, with
20 nodes in each cluster. The nodes were deployed randomly. For both experiments, the noise variances were set as follows:
v = 0.5, σ2
α = 0.1, and σ2
β = 0.01. We used an identity information exchange matrix C = I . The combination matrix A
σ2
was defined as a(cid:96)k = Nk ∩ C (k)−1 in order to average the estimates of within-cluster neighbors. The regularization strengths
ρk(cid:96) were set to ρk(cid:96) = Nk \C (k)−1 for (cid:96) ∈ Nk \C (k), with k (cid:54)= 1 and k (cid:54)= Q. Recall that C1 and CQ are boundary clusters,
and the specific regularization strengths ρ1(cid:96) = ρQ(cid:96) = 0 for all (cid:96) were used to preserve the configuration of the group.
We ran the non-cooperative algorithm, and the clustered multitask algorithm with η = 0.5 and η = 0.0005 for each scenario,
respectively. Figure 8 (second row) shows one realization of the estimated points wq for each arc. The cooperative algorithm
clearly outperformed the non-cooperative algorithm. Figure 8 (third row) compares the MSD of the two strategies mentioned
above, with the clustered multitask algorithm with η = 0. In this case, the diffusion strategy is applied independently in each
cluster, without inter-cluster interactions. This experiment clearly illustrates the advantage of fully cooperative strategies in this
problem.
Fig. 7. Target surface localization.
D. Distributed unmixing of hyperspectral data
Finally, we consider the problem of distributed unmixing of hyperspectral images using the multitask learning algorithm.
Hyperspectral imaging provides 2-dimensional spatial images over many contiguous bands. The high spectral resolution allows
to identify and quantify distinct materials from remotely observed data. In hyperspectral images, a pixel is usually a spectral
CqCq+2Cq+1Cq 1Cq 2w⇤q 1w⇤qw⇤q+1 w0 22
Fig. 8. Target surface localization. Left: uniform network. Right: randomly-distributed network. Row 1: network connectivity, with cluster
boundaries in green. Row 2: estimation results, red crosses for the non-cooperative algorithm, black circles for the cooperative algorithm.
Row 3: MSD learning curves.
−15−14−13−12−11−10−9−8−7−6−19−18−17−16−15−14−13−12−11−10−9XY−15−14−13−12−11−10−9−8−7−6−19−18−17−16−15−14−13−12−11−10−9XY−4−3.5−3−2.5−2−5−4.5−4−3.5−3XY−4−3.8−3.6−3.4−3.2−3−2.8−2.6−2.4−2.2−2−5−4.5−4−3.5−3XY050100150200250300350400−40−30−20−1001020IterationnMSD(dB) Non-cooperativealgo.Clusteredmultitaskalgo.(η=0)Clusteredmultitaskalgo.(η=0.5)050100150200250300350400−25−20−15−10−5051015IterationnMSD(dB) Non-cooperativealgo.Clusteredmultitaskalgo.(η=0)Clusteredmultitaskalgo.(η=5×10−4) 23
mixture of several spectral signatures of pure materials, termed endmembers, due to limited spatial resolution of devices
and diversity of materials [58]. Although nonlinear mixture models have begun to support novel applications [59]–[61], the
linear mixture model is still widely used for determining and quantifying materials in sensed images due to its simpler physical
interpretation. With the linear mixture model, pixels can be decomposed as linear combinations of constituent spectra, weighted
by fractions of abundance.
To facilitate the presentation, we shall consider that the 3-dimensional hyperspectral image under study has been reshaped
into an L × N matrix Y = [y1 , . . . , yN ], with N the number of pixels and L the number of wavelengths. Let M be the
L × R matrix of endmember spectra, with R the number of endmembers, and W = [w1 , . . . , wN ] the R × N matrix of the
abundance vectors of the pixels in Y . The linear mixture model is expressed by
Y = M W + V
(90)
where V = [v1 , . . . , vn ] is the modeling error matrix. Suppose that the material signatures (matrix M ) in a scene have been
determined by some endmember extraction algorithm [62]–[64]. The unmixing problem boils down to estimating the abundance
vector associated with each pixel. Besides minimizing the modeling error, it is important to promote similarities of abundance
(cid:88)
N(cid:88)
vectors between neighboring pixels due to their possible correlations. Now we write the unmixing problem as follows:
W (cid:107)Y − M W (cid:107)2
min
F + η
j∈Nk
k=1
subject to wk (cid:60) 0
and 1(cid:62)wk = 1 with 1 ≤ k ≤ N ,
F is the matrix Frobenius norm, Nk is the set of neighbors of pixel k , η is the spatial regularization parameter
where (cid:107) · (cid:107)2
and ρkj is the regularization weights. In the above expression, the nonnegativity constraints and sum-to-one constraints are
imposed to ensure physical interpretability of the vectors of fractional abundances.
ρkj (cid:107)wk − wj (cid:107)1
(91)
wk (n + 1) = P(cid:96)+
1
(92)
wk (n) + µ M (cid:62) (yk − M wk (n)) − µ η
To conduct linear unmixing of large images in a distributed way, we considered each sensor of the camera as a node,
and we applied the diffusion LMS for multitask problems, that is, one node per cluster – see Figure 9. In order to exploit
the spatial correlations, we defined the regularization function ∆(wk , wj ) as the (cid:96)1 -norm of wk − wj to promote piecewise
constant transitions in the fractional abundance of each endmember among neighboring pixels. Similar regularization can be
(cid:17)
(cid:16)
(cid:88)
found in [65], [66]. This led us to the following algorithm:
j∈Nk
where we used that the subgradient ∂x (cid:107)x(cid:107)1 = sgn(x), with sgn(·) the component-wise sign function. In this expression,
(·) denotes the iterative operator defined in [67] that projects a vector onto the nonnegative phase of the (cid:96)1 -ball to satisfy
P(cid:96)+
1
the nonnegativity and sum-to-one constraint in (91). This algorithm clearly contrasts with existing batch approaches based on
FISTA [68] and ADMM [69], which cannot easily address large problems (90).
The algorithm (92) was run on a data cube containing 100 × 100 mixed pixels. Each pixel was generated by the linear
mixture model (91) using 9 endmember signatures randomly selected from the spectral library ASTER [70]. Each signature
of this library has reflectance values measured over 224 spectral bands, uniformly distributed in the interval 3 − 12 µm. The
abundance maps of the endmembers are the same as for the image DC2 in [69]. Among these 9 materials, only the 1st, 6th, 8th,
and 9th abundances are considered for pictorial illustration in Figure 11. The first row of this figure depicts the true distribution
of these 5 materials. Spatially homogeneous areas with sharp transitions can be clearly observed. The generated scene was
ρkj sgn(wk (n) − wj (n))
24
Fig. 9. Hyperspectral image unmixing problem with first-order connections between neighboring nodes.
corrupted by a zero-mean white Gaussian noise vn with an SNR level of 20 dB. In this experiment, the regularization weights
ρkj were set equal to the normalized spectral similarity:
(cid:80)
ρkj =
(93)
θ(yk , y j )
−
θ(yk , y (cid:96) )
k
(cid:96)∈N
y(cid:62)
k yj
where θ(yk , y j ) =
. These weights emphasize the regularization between similar pixels and de-emphasize it for less
(cid:107)yk (cid:107)(cid:107)yj (cid:107)
similar pixels. When one knows the ground truth map, a commonly used performance measure for evaluating the performance
(cid:118)(cid:117)(cid:117)(cid:116) 1
of an unmixing algorithm is the root mean-square error (RMSE), defined as
N(cid:88)
N R
n=1
The RMSE learning curves using algorithm (92), with spatial regularization (η = 0.05) and without spatial regularization
(η = 0), are depicted in Figure 10. The corresponding abundance distributions are shown in Figure 11. The spatial regularization
results in a lower estimation error, and more homogenous abundance distribution maps with less noise.
n(cid:107)2 .
(cid:107)wn − w(cid:63)
RMSE =
V I I . CONC LU S ION AND PER S PEC T IV E S
In this paper, we formulated multi-task problems where networks are able to handle situations beyond the case where the
nodes estimate a unique parameter vector over the network. Considering each parameter vector estimation as a task, and
possibly connecting these tasks in order that they can share information, we extended the distributed learning problem from
single-task learning to clustered multitask learning. An algorithm was derived. A mean behavior analysis of the proposed
algorithm was provided, in the case of the least-mean-square error criterion with (cid:96)2 -norm regularization. Several applications
that may benefit from this framework were investigated. Several open problems still have to be solved for specific applications.
For instance, it would be interesting to show which regularization can be advantageously used with our distributed multitask
algorithm, and how they can be efficiently implemented in an adaptive manner. It would also be interesting to investigate how
nodes can autonomously adjust regularization parameters to optimize the learning performance and how they can learn the
structure of the clusters in real-time.
wiwjwkwpw\x{FFFF} 25
Fig. 10. RMSE curve comparison.
Fig. 11. Abundance maps. From left to right: 1st, 6th, 8th, and 9th abundances. From top to bottom: true abundances, estimated abundances
without and with spatial regularization.
[1] A. H. Sayed, S.-Y Tu, J. Chen, X. Zhao, and Z. Towfic, “Diffusion strategies for adaptation and learning over networks,” IEEE Signal
Processing Magazine, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 155–171, May 2013.
R E F ER ENC E S
02004006008001000120014001600180020000.020.040.060.080.10.120.140.160.180.20.22IterationnRMSE WithoutspatialregularizationWithspatialregularization(λ=0.05)00.20.40.60.8100.20.40.60.8100.20.40.60.81 26
[2] A. H. Sayed, “Diffusion adaptation over networks,” in Academic Press Libraray in Signal Processing, R. Chellapa and S. Theodoridis,
Eds., pp. 322–454. Elsevier, 2013. Also available as arXiv:1205.4220 [cs.MA], May 2012.
[3] S.-Y. Tu and A. H. Sayed, “Mobile adaptive networks,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, vol. 5, no. 4, pp.
649–664, August 2011.
[4] J. Tsitsiklis and M. Athans, “Convergence and asymptotic agreement in distributed decision problems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic
Control, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 42–50, January 1984.
[5] L. Xiao and S. Boyd, “Fast linear iterations for distributed averaging,” System & Control letters, vol. 53, no. 9, pp. 65–78, September
2004.
[6] P. Braca, S. Marano, and V. Matta, “Running consensus in wireless sensor networks,” in Proc. International Conference on Information
Fusion (FUSION), Cologne, Germany, June-July 2008, pp. 1–6.
[7] A. Nedic and A. Ozdaglar, “Distributed subgradient methods for multi-agent optimization,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,
vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 48–61, January 2009.
[8] S. Kar and J. M. F. Moura, “Distributed consensus algorithms in sensor networks: Link failures and channel noise,” IEEE Transactions
on Signal Processing, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 355–369, January 2009.
[9] K. Srivastava and A. Nedic, “Distributed asynchronous constrained stochastic optimization,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal
Processing, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 772–790, August 2011.
[10] D. P. Bertsekas, “A new class of incremental gradient methods for least squares problems,” SIAM Journal on Optimization, vol. 7, no.
4, pp. 913–926, November 1997.
[11] A. Nedic and D. P. Bertsekas, “Incremental subgradient methods for nondifferentiable optimization,” SIAM Journal on Optimization,
vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 109–138, July 2001.
[12] M. G. Rabbat and R. D. Nowak, “Quantized incremental algorithms for distributed optimization,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in
Areas in Communications, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 798–808, April 2005.
[13] D. Blatt, A. O. Hero, and H. Gauchman, “A convergent incremental gradient method with constant step size,” SIAM Journal on
Optimization, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 29–51, February 2007.
[14] C. G. Lopes and A. H. Sayed, “Incremental adaptive strategies over distributed networks,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing,
vol. 55, no. 8, pp. 4064–4077, August 2007.
[15] C. G. Lopes and A. H. Sayed, “Diffusion least-mean squares over adaptive networks: Formulation and performance analysis,” IEEE
Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 56, no. 7, pp. 3122–3136, July 2008.
[16] F. S. Cattivelli and A. H. Sayed, “Diffusion LMS strategies for distributed estimation,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol.
58, no. 3, pp. 1035–1048, March 2010.
[17] J. Chen and A. H. Sayed, “Diffusion adaptation strategies for distributed optimization and learning over networks,” IEEE Transactions
on Signal Processing, vol. 60, no. 8, pp. 4289–4305, August 2012.
[18] J. Chen and A. H. Sayed, “Distributed Pareto optimization via diffusion strategies,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal
Processing, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 205–220, April 2013.
[19] S.-Y. Tu and A. H. Sayed, “Diffusion strategies outperform consensus strategies for distributed estimation over adaptive netowrks,”
IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 60, no. 12, pp. 6217–6234, December 2012.
[20] S.-Y. Tu and A. H. Sayed, “Adaptive networks with noisy links,” in Proc. IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM),
Houston, TX, December 2011, pp. 1–5.
[21] A. Khalili, M. A. Tinati, A. Rastegarnia, and J. A. Chambers, “Steady-state analysis of diffusion LMS adaptive networks with noisy
links,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 974–979, February 2012.
[22] X. Zhao, S.-Y. Tu, and A. H. Sayed, “Diffusion adaptation over networks under imperfect information exchange and non-stationary
data,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 60, no. 7, pp. 3460–3475, July 2012.
[23] P. Di Lorenzo, S. Barbarossa, and A. H. Sayed, “Sparse diffusion lms for distributed adaptive estimation,” in Proc. 37th IEEE
International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Kyoto, Japan, March 2012, pp. 3281–3284.
27
[24] Y. Liu, C. Li, and Z. Zhang, “Diffusion sparse least-mean squares over networks,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 60,
no. 8, pp. 4480–4485, August 2012.
[25] S. Chouvardas, K. Slavakis, Y. Kopsinis, and S. Theodoridis, “A sparsity-promoting adaptive algorithm for distributed learning,” IEEE
Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 60, no. 10, pp. 5412–5425, October 2012.
[26] P. Di Lorenzo and A. H. Sayed, “Sparse distributed learning based on diffusion adaptation,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing,
vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 1419–1433, March 2013.
[27] S. Chouvardas, K. Kalvakis, and S. Theodoridis, “Adaptive robust distributed learning in diffusion sensor networks,” IEEE Transactions
on Signal Processing, vol. 59, no. 10, pp. 4692–4707, October 2011.
[28] F. Cattivelli, C. G. Lopes, and A. H. Sayed, “Diffusion recursive least-squares for distributed estimation over adaptive networks,” IEEE
Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 1865–1877, May 2008.
[29] A. Bertrand, M. Moonen, and A. H. Sayed, “Diffusion bias-compensated RLS estimation over adaptive networks,” IEEE Transactions
on Signal Processing, vol. 59, no. 11, pp. 5212–5224, November 2011.
[30] P. Chainais and C. Richard,
“Distributed dictionary learning over a sensor network,”
Automatique (CAP), Lille, France, July 2013, pp. 1–6.
in Proc. Conf ´erence sur l’APprentissage
[31] P. Chainais and C. Richard, “Learning a common dictionary over a sensor network,” in Proc. IEEE International Workshop on
Computational Advances in Multi-Sensor Adaptive Processing (CAMSAP), Saint Martin, France, December 2013, pp. 1–4.
[32] W. Wee and I. Yamada, “A proximal splitting approach to regularized distributed adaptive estimation in difffusion network,” in
Proc. 38th IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Vancouver, Canada, May 2013, pp.
5420–5424.
[33] J. Predd, S. Kulkarni, and H. Vincent Poor, “Distributed learning in wireless sensor networks,” IEEE Signal Processing Magazine,
vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 59–69, July 2006.
[34] C. Richard, J.-C. M. Bermudez, and P. Honeine, “Online prediction of time series data with kernels,” IEEE Transactions on Signal
Processing, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 1058–1067, 2009.
[35] P. Honeine, C. Richard, and J.-C. M. Bermudez, “Online nonlinear sparse approximation of functions,” in Proc. IEEE International
Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT), Nice, France, June 2007, pp. 956–960.
[36] P. Honeine, C. Richard, H. Snoussi, J.-C. M. Bermudez, and J. Chen, “A decentralized approach for non-linear prediction of time series
data in sensor networks,” EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking, vol. 2010, no. 1, pp. 6247372, April 2010.
[37] P. Honeine, C. Richard, J.-C. M. Bermudez, H. Snoussi, M. Essoloh, and F. Vincent, “Functional estimation in Hilbert space for
distributed learning in wireless sensor networks,” in Proc. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing
(ICASSP), Taipei, Taiwan, April 2009, pp. 2861–2864.
[38] P. Honeine, M. Essoloh, C. Richard, and H. Snoussi, “Distributed regression in sensor networks with a reduced-order kernel model,”
in Proc. IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM), New Orleans, LO, USA, 2008, pp. 1–5.
[39] P. Honeine, C. Richard, J.-C. M. Bermudez, and H. Snoussi, “Distributed prediction of time series data with kernels and adaptive
filtering techniques in sensor networks,” in Proc. 44th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers (ASILOMAR), Pacific
Grove, CA, USA, 2008, pp. 246–250.
[40] J. Chen, C. Richard, P. Honeine, and J.-C. M Bermudez, “Non-negative distributed regression for data inference in wireless sensor
networks,” in Proc. 44th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems, and Computers (ASILOMAR), Pacific Grove, CA, USA, November
2010, pp. 451–455.
[41] S.-Y. Tu and A. H. Sayed, “Adaptive decision making over complex networks,” in Proc. 46th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems,
and Computers (ASILOMAR), Pacific Grove, CA, USA, November 2012, pp. 525–530.
[42] X. Zhao and A. H. Sayed, “Clustering via diffusion adaptation over networks,” in Proc. International Workshop on Cognitive Information
Processing (CIP), Parador de Baiona, Spain, May 2012, pp. 1–6.
28
[43] N. Bogdanovi ´c, J. Plata-Chaves, and K. Berberidis, “Distributed incremental-based LMS for node-specific parameter estimation over
adaptive networks,” in Proc. 38th IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Vancouver,
Canada, May 2013, pp. 5425–5429.
[44] J. Chen, L. Tang, J. Liu, and J. Ye, “A convex formulation for leaning shared structures from muliple tasks,” in Proc. 26th Annual
International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), Montreal, Canada, Juin 2009, pp. 137–144.
[45] O. Chapelle, P. Shivaswmy, K. Q. Vadrevu, S. Weinberger, Y. Zhang, and B. Tseng, “Multi-task learning for boosting with application
to web search ranking,” in Proc. 16th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, Washington
DC, USA, July 2010, pp. 1189–1198.
[46] J. Zhou, L. Yuan, J. Liu, and J. Ye, “A multi-task learning formulation for predicting disease progression,” in Proc. 17th ACM SIGKDD
International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Diego, CA, USA, August 2011, pp. 814–822.
[47] J. Chen and C. Richard, “Performance analysis of diffusion LMS in multitask networks,” in Proc. IEEE International Workshop on
Computational Advances in Multi-Sensor Adaptive Processing (CAMSAP), Saint Martin, France, December 2013, pp. 1–4.
[48] T. Evgeniou and M. Pontil, “Regularized multi-task learning,” in Proc. 10th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge
Discovery and Data Mining, Seattle, WA, USA, August 2004.
[49] S. Ji and J. Ye, “An accelerated gradient method for trace norm minimization,” in Proc. 26th Annual International Conference on
Machine Learning (ICML), Prague, Czech Republic, August 2009, pp. 457–464.
[50] J. Zhou, J. Chen, and Ye, “Clustered multi-task learning via alternating structure optimization,” in Advances in Neural Information
Processing Systems 24, J. Shawe-Taylor, R. S. Zemel, P. Bartlett, F. C. N. Pereira, and K. Q. Weinberger, Eds., pp. 702–710. 2011.
[51] T. Basar and G. J. Olsder, Dynamic Noncooperative Game Theory, London : Academic press, 2nd edition, 1995.
[52] J. B. Rosen, “Existence and uniqueness of equilibrium points for concave n-person games,” Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric
Society, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 520–534, 1965.
[53] S. Theodoridis, K. Slavakis, and I. Yamada, “Adaptive learning in a world of projections,” IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, vol. 28,
no. 1, pp. 97–123, January 2011.
[54] J. Chen, C. Richard, J.-C. M. Bermudez, and P. Honeine, “Nonnegative least-mean-square algorithm,” IEEE Transactions on Signal
Processing, vol. 59, no. 11, pp. 5225–5235, November 2011.
[55] A. H. Sayed, Adaptive Filters, John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
[56] M. Joseph and J. Q. Maguire, “Cognitive radio: Making software radios more personal,” IEEE Personal Communications, vol. 6, no.
4, pp. 13–18, August 1999.
[57] P. Di Lorenzo, S. Barbarossa, and A. H. Sayed, “Bio-inspired decentralized radio access based on swarming mechanisms over adaptive
networks,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 61, no. 12, pp. 3183–3197, June 2013.
[58] N. Keshava and J. F. Mustard, “Spectral unmixing,” IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 44–57, January 2002.
[59] J. M. Bioucas-Dias, A. Plaza, N. Dobigeon, M. Parente, Q. Du, P. Gader, and J. Chanussot, “Hyperspectral unmixing overview:
geometrical, statistical, and sparse regression-based approches,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and
Remote Sensing, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 354–379, April 2012.
[60] J. Chen, C. Richard, and P. Honeine, “Nonlinear unmixing of hyperspectral data based on a linear-mixture/nonlinear-fluctuation model,”
IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 480–492, January 2013.
[61] J. Chen, C. Richard, and P. Honeine, “Estimating abundance fractions of materials in hyperspectral images by fitting a post-nonlinear
mixing model,” in Proc. 5th Workshop on Hyperspectral Image and Signal Processing: Evolution in Remote Sensing (WHISPERS),
Gainesville, F, USA, Juin 2013, pp. 1–4.
[62] M. E. Winter, “N-FINDR: an algorithm for fast autonomous spectral end-member determination in hyperspectral data,” in Proc. SPIE
3753, Imaging Spectrometry V, October 1999, vol. 266, pp. 266–275.
[63] J. M. P. Nascimento and J. M. Bioucas-Dias, “Vertex Component Analysis: A fast algorithm to unmix hyperspectral data,” IEEE
Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 898–910, April 2005.
29
[64] P. Honeine and C. Richard, “Geometric unmixing of large hyperspectral images: A barycentric coordinate approach,” IEEE Transactions
on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 2185–2195, June 2012.
[65] J. Chen, C. Richard, and P. Honeine, “Nonlinear estimation of material abundances in hyperspectral images with (cid:96)1 -norm spatial
regularization,” IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2013, (to appear).
[66] J. Chen, C. Richard, A. Ferrari, and P. Honeine, “Nonlinear unmixing of hyperspectral data with partially linear least-squares support
vector regression,” in Proc. 38th IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Vancouver,
Canada, May 2013, pp. 2174–2178.
[67] J. Duchi, S. Shalev-Shwartz, Y. Singer, and T. Chandra, “Efficient projections onto the (cid:96)1 -ball for learning in high dimensions,” in
Proc. 25th International Conference on Machine Learning, Helsinki, Finland, July 2008, pp. 272–279.
[68] A. Beck and M. Teboulle, “A fast iterative shrinkage-thresholding algorithm for linear inverse problems,” SIAM Journal on Imaging
Sciences, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 183–202, March 2009.
[69] M.-D. Iordache, J. Bioucas-Dias, and A. Plaza, “Total variation spatial regularization for sparse hyperspectral unmixing,” IEEE
Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, vol. 50, no. 11, pp. 4484–4502, November 2012.
[70] A. M. Baldridge, S. J. Hook, C. I. Grove, and G. Rivera, “The ASTER spectral library version 2.0,” Remote Sensing of Environment,
vol. 113, no. 4, pp. 711–715, April 2009.
|
1906.07588 | 2 | 1906 | 2019-07-08T08:31:24 | Shared Autonomous Vehicle Simulation and Service Design | [
"cs.MA"
] | Today, driverless cars, as a new technology that allows a more accessible, dynamic and intelligent form of Shared Mobility, are expected to revolutionize urban transportation. One of the conceivable mobility services based on driverless cars is shared autonomous vehicles (SAVs). This service could merge cabs, carsharing, and ridesharing systems into a singular transportation mode. However, the success and competitiveness of future SAV services depend on their operational models, which are linked intrinsically to the service configuration and fleet specification. In addition, any change in operational models will result in a different demand. Using a comprehensive framework of SAV simulation in a multi-modal dynamic demand system with integrated SAV user taste variation, this study evaluates the performance of various SAV fleets and vehicle capacities serving travelers across the Rouen Normandie metropolitan area in France. Also, the impact of ridesharing and rebalancing strategies on service performance is investigated.Research results suggest that the performance of SAV is strongly correlated with the fleet size and the strategy of individual or shared rides. Further analysis indicates that for the pricing scheme proposed in this study (i.e., 20% lower for ridesharing scenario), the standard 4-seats car with shared ride remains the best option among all scenarios. The results also underline that enabling vehicle-rebalancing strategies may have an important effect on both user and service-related metrics. The estimated SAV average and maximum driven distance prove the importance of vehicle range and charging station deployment. | cs.MA | cs | Shared Autonomous Vehicle Simulation and Service Design
Reza Vosooghia,b,*, Jakob Puchingera,b, Marija Jankovicb, Anthony Vouillonc
aInstitut de Recherche Technologique SystemX, Palaiseau 91120, France
bLaboratoire Génie Industriel, CentraleSupeléc, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette 91190, France
cDirection de la Recherche / Nouvelles Mobilité (DEA-IRM), Technocentre Renault, Guyancourt 78280, France
Abstract
Today, driverless cars, as a new technology that allows a more accessible, dynamic and intelligent form of Shared Mobility,
are expected to revolutionize urban transportation. One of the conceivable mobility services based on driverless cars is
shared autonomous vehicles (SAVs). This service could merge cabs, carsharing, and ridesharing systems into a singular
transportation mode. However, the success and competitiveness of future SAV services depend on their operational models,
which are linked intrinsically to the service configuration and fleet specification. In addition, any change in operational
models will result in a different demand. Using a comprehensive framework of SAV simulation in a multi-modal dynamic
demand system with integrated SAV user taste variation, this study evaluates the performance of various SAV fleets and
vehicle capacities serving travelers across the Rouen Normandie metropolitan area in France. Also, the impact of ridesharing
and rebalancing strategies on service performance is investigated.
Research results suggest that the performance of SAV is strongly correlated with the fleet size and the strategy of individual
or shared rides. Further analysis indicates that for the pricing scheme proposed in this study (i.e., 20% lower for ridesharing
scenario), the standard 4-seats car with shared ride remains the best option among all scenarios. The results also underline
that enabling vehicle-rebalancing strategies may have an important effect on both user and service-related metrics. The
estimated SAV average and maximum driven distance prove the importance of vehicle range and charging station
deployment.
Keywords: Shared autonomous vehicle; Multi-agent simulation; Demand modeling; Service performance
1. Introduction
Driverless cars or autonomous vehicles (AVs) represent a transformative technology that may have important
implications for society, urban mobility, economy, and environment (Fagnant and Kockelman, 2015, 2014;
Greenblatt and Shaheen, 2015). The fact that this technology is driverless and accordingly available every time
and every place makes us assume that they are rather shared and consequently easily accessible and affordable
for all (Fagnant et al., 2015; Harper et al., 2016; Meyer et al., 2017). After several years of growing interest in
AVs by car manufacturers investing millions of dollars to develop driverless cars, gaining expertise of operation
of future shared autonomous vehicles (SAVs) is a major concern. Their goal is to play the role of an operator of
vehicle sharing systems with new business models capturing profit per kilometer or per trip (Burns et al., 2013;
Firnkorn and Müller, 2012; Stocker and Shaheen, 2018). Although several SAV services are conceivable, it yet
is largely unclear which ones will prevail in term of efficiency and effectiveness.
Today's mostly experimental SAV services are modified versions of ordinary electric cars with four or five
seats inside. However, it is still uncertain how the most efficient design of these vehicles would look like. In
addition to the vehicle characteristics and features, operational aspects of this new service could intensely
influence its success. Some configurational characteristics such as fleet size, allocation and relocation strategies,
service area, and infrastructures have a direct impact on the parameters that are important for mode choice decision
of travelers. Although travel time and cost are the most important parameters in this regard, in the case of a shared
system, some other parameters such as wait times and detour times (in the ride share mode) are of great
significance. Moreover, the variation of individuals' attitude toward using this system may significantly affect
service performance. In particular, the absence of a driver in SAV may generate an important concern for travelers
and consequently result in lower demand. Thus, all of these parameters have to be considered in the upstream
planning for having an accurate estimation of service performance measures.
Thanks to recently developed approaches, especially multi-agent simulation, parameters important for mode
choice decision of travelers can be reflected at a fine-grained level. Potentially, earlier multi-agent activity-based
simulations are able to consider the complex supply-demand relationships of the multi-modal transportation
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +33-6-6597-4453.
E-mail address: [email protected]
2
system. Various aspects of operating future SAVs are the subject of current research efforts based upon this
approach. In particular, some in-depth investigations have been recently carried out on SAV fleet optimization,
rebalancing, and cost structures of operational models (Bösch et al., 2018; Hörl et al., 2019; Loeb and Kockelman,
2019). In several studies, the human-related side of driverless cars and their impacts on service demand have been
assessed (Kamel et al., 2018; Vosooghi et al., 2019). The impact of ridesharing on the operational efficiency of
SAV has also been the subject of few investigations (Farhan and Chen, 2018; Hörl, 2017). However, to the best
of our knowledge, none of these studies considers all affecting aspects of SAV operation at the same time. The
present research addresses this gap by conducting comprehensive dynamic demand simulations in a multimodal
network. The analysis of given simulation outputs allows investigating the effects of different operational
components and vehicle specifications (specifically vehicle capacity) on the efficiency of the offered service,
considering dynamic demand responsive to the network and the level-of-service (LoS) by integrating user taste
variations and value of travel time (VTT). The further contribution of the present research is designing an SAV
service upon a real-world case study and evaluating its performance using more relevant metrics. To respond to
the existing needs in the simulation and analysis, some features on traveler behavior and vehicle allocation and
relocation strategies are modified or developed beforehand. Simulation experiments are based upon the real data
for the transportation system of the Rouen Normandie metropolitan area in France using the multi-agent transport
simulation platform (MATSim).
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. In Section 2, a review of the relevant literature on this
topic is presented. In Section 3, we present the model specification and setup process. In Section 4, overall results,
as well as detailed analysis categorized by each service aspect, are presented. Finally, in Section 5, insights gained
through this research are discussed and suggestions for further work are given.
2. Prior research
To date, numerous investigations have been conducted on SAV demand modeling and simulation particularly
in the last 5 years. Several approaches have been developed to anticipate the demand for future SAV services.
These approaches fall into two main categories: (i) survey and analysis, and (ii) agent-based simulation. The first
approach is mainly used to produce rough estimations of potential demand based on stated preferences surveys
(Bansal et al., 2016; Haboucha et al., 2017; Krueger et al., 2016). The second approach is widely employed for
various study purposes and particularly those related to the supply side of SAV services in the context of dynamic
demand simulation. The simulations based on the latter approach involve two different multidimensional decision
processes: (i) discrete choice modeling and (ii) co-evolutionary algorithm. Discrete choice modeling is based on
the assumption of random utility maximization, but co-evolutionary algorithm is more relied on finding
stochastically the maximized utility for various choice sets including not only travelers' route and mode choice
decisions, but also a set of activity decisions. The second group of simulations is known as activity-based multi-
agent simulation. Given the purpose of this study -- i.e., conducting comprehensive simulations considering all
factors affecting the designing of the SAV services -- we review multi-modal simulations incorporating dynamic
demand that are responsive to the network and traffic.
Several studies have integrated SAVs into the area where private cars are not allowed or they are all replaced
by the new service. Azevedo et al. (2016) proposed an integrated agent-based traffic simulator built on
disaggregated behavior models in both demand and supply (SimMobility) to study the potential impacts of
introducing autonomous mobility on demand (AMoD) service in a car-restricted zone of Singapore. In this work,
individual preferences to use autonomous vehicles were kept unchanged and only the cost of the service was
assumed as 40% less than the regular cab service of Singapore. The studied AMoD system employs autonomous
mid-size sedans without sharing rides. Their simulation is performed through some optimization processes in
terms of facility location, vehicle assignment and routing, and vehicle rebalancing. Their results suggest that
rebalancing results in higher demand. In addition, the passenger waiting time is strongly correlated with the fleet
size and number of parking stations. However, further growth of those variables has no more impacts once an
optimal demand is reached. Heilig et al. (2017) used an agent-based travel demand model with macroscopic traffic
simulation to evaluate the transportation system of the Stuttgart region where all the private cars are replaced by
an AMoD service. They performed simulation for more than one day (one week) and analyzed the changes in
overall transportation system performance. Furthermore, the fleet required to fulfill the demand is investigated.
In their simulation, the cost per mile of a proposed service is assumed 70% less compared to the private cars and
the user preferences are kept unchanged. The simulation encompasses the relocation strategy during nighttime,
and it is shown that total vehicle mileage decreases up to 20% after the introduction of a new AMoD service.
Martinez and Viegas (2017) tried to explore the potential outcomes of so-called radical change in urban mobility
configuration of Lisbon city after introducing Shared Mobility services based upon a spatially aggregated agent-
based simulation. In the simulated scenarios, all private mobility and conventional buses are replaced by
Autonomous Shared Taxis and Taxi-Buses. Their simulation incorporates several optimization models in order to
assign dynamically the vehicles or generate them if needed for a given day. Based on their results, it is inferred
that congestion and emissions would strongly decline by introducing those shared services. Chen and Kockelman
3
(2016) employed a multinomial logit mode choice model in an agent-based framework to asses various dynamic
pricing strategies on mode shares estimate of electric SAV in Austin, Texas. Due to the spatial aggregation, the
mentioned study ignores trips under one mile and non-motorized modes. Since SAV travelers can use their in-
vehicle time to do other activities, the value of travel time (VTT) for this mode in the mentioned study is
considered variable and dissimilar to transit. The simulation includes private cars, transit, and electric SAV.
According to the performed analysis, electric SAV modal share changes significantly by variations of VTT and
service fares. Besides, it is shown that some service operational metrics can be improved via targeted pricing
strategies. Wen et al. (2018) in a comprehensive study investigated the deployment of AV and SAV services as
the last-mile solution focusing on operation design. They employed a detailed nested logit structure for the mode
choice model. In their study, an agent-based simulation is used to estimate the LoSs. They showed that there exists
an important trade-off between fleet size, vehicle occupancy, and traveler experience in terms of service
availability and response time. Although the mentioned research incorporates SAV user preferences by varying
the alternative specific constant in the mode choice model, it includes only the unobserved (undetected)
parameters of mode choice decision and neglects user specific attributes.
All the above-mentioned studies incorporate discrete choice modeling as a traveler decision choice mechanism.
In some other studies, however, utility scoring is used instead. Hörl (2017) utilized MATSim to evaluate the
dynamic demand response of autonomous cab service. This researcher integrated two service operators into the
simulation and system performance and compared operational indicators. A fleet of 1000 AVs is introduced to
the transportation system of the city of Sioux Falls in all scenarios. The simulation results reveal that the service
with ridesharing attracts a larger number of travelers at off-peak hours. The user taste variation in the mentioned
study is kept unchanged. In our previous work, we used the same framework (MATSim) to explore the impact of
user trust and willingness-to-use on fleet sizing of SAV service integrating to the transportation system of Rouen
Normandie metropolitan area (Vosooghi et al., 2019). The simulation is performed using the categorized utility
scoring according to the individual sociodemographic attributes of users. Our previous work incorporates the first
dynamic demand simulation of SAV service considering the user taste variation. The mentioned study shows the
significant importance of traveler trust and willingness-to-use varying the SAV service use and the required fleet
size. This work benefits of several optimization models to assign the vehicles dynamically. However, the study
incorporates SAV services without ridesharing and rebalancing strategy.
Table 1 presents a summary of the mentioned studies stating their objectives and the main features.
Table 1
Summary of the selected literature on SAV demand modeling and service simulation.
Author(s), year
Demand estimation approach/
Mode choice mechanism
Vehicle
characteristics
SAV user
preferences
Assessment purposes
Azevedo et al.,
(2016)
Activity-based multi-agent
simulation/Hierarchical discrete choice
modeling
Mid-size sedans
w/o ridesharing
Unvaried
Impact assessment, determine the fleet
size and parking stations requirements
Chen and
Kockelman, (2016)
Activity-based multi-agent
simulation/Multinomial logit mode
choice modeling
NM
Variable
(willingness to pay,
the value of travel
time)
Heilig et al., (2017)
Activity-based multi-agent
simulation/Discrete choice modeling
Standard 4-seats
w/ ridesharing
Unvaried
Martinez and
Viegas, (2017)
Trip-based multi-agent
simulation/Discrete choice modeling
6-seats minivan
w/ ridesharing
Hörl, (2017)
Activity-based multi-agent
simulation/Utility scoring
Wen et al., (2018)
Trip-based multi-agent
simulation/Nested logit mode choice
modeling
Standard 4-seats
w/ and w/o
ridesharing
Standard 4-seats
w/ and w/o
ridesharing
Vosooghi et al.,
(2019)
Activity-based multi-agent
simulation/Categorized utility scoring
Standard 4-seats
w/o ridesharing
Sensitivity assessment of pricing
strategies E-SAVs mode shares
Impact assessment, determine the fleet
size
Impact assessment, impacts on car
fleet size, the volume of travel and
parking requirements, CO2 emissions
Dynamic demand response simulation
of AVs and SAVs
Variable (car
ownership, public
transport pass)
Unvaried
Variable (intrinsic
preference)
Design of last-mile AV and SAV
services integrated to public transit
Variable (age,
gender, and
household income)
Impact assessment of user preferences
on individual-ride SAV fleet sizing
Some other studies investigate the use of SAV services in a multi-modal system incorporating various
dispatching strategies or pricing schemes. However, the demand of the proposed services in these simulations is
not necessarily dynamic (Auld et al., 2017; Farhan and Chen, 2018; Hörl et al., 2019) or responsive to the traffic
states (Chen et al., 2016; Fagnant and Kockelman, 2018, 2014). Many other studies incorporate static or
predefined demands (Boesch et al., 2016; Fagnant and Kockelman, 2014; Levin et al., 2017) or simulate only one
mode (Bischoff and Maciejewski, 2016; Loeb and Kockelman, 2019; Zhang et al., 2015a). There are also large
in-depth investigations on AV dynamic assignment (Hyland and Mahmassani, 2018), ride-share matching
optimization problem (Agatz et al., 2011; Alonso-Mora et al., 2017), and SAV rebalancing and ridesharing
4
(Spieser et al., 2014; Zhang et al., 2015b). These studies focused rather on optimization problems and ignored
mode choice mechanism in a multi-modal context or time-dependency in travel time caused by congestion.
As shown in Table 1, most of earlier comprehensive simulations to investigate the operation of SAV service
are based on the homogeneous structure of behavior in terms of sociodemographic attributes, except our previous
work (Vosooghi et al., 2019) that incorporated only individual ride service. Hence, the vehicle characteristics and
specifically vehicle capacity and its impacts on SAV service performance have remained a missing component in
all prior studies. Service cost and the need for enabling rebalancing strategy have similarly received low attention.
Considering all mentioned SAV simulation features, to the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first
comprehensive investigation of a real-world scenario that could provide new insight into the design of such
service.
3. Model specification and set up
3.1. Simulation framework
In this work, the multi-agent transport simulation (MATSim) (Horni et al., 2016) and its Dynamic Vehicle
Routing Problem (DVRP) extension (including the Demand Responsive Transport (DRT) application) (Bischoff
et al., 2017; Maciejewski et al., 2017) are used. The main idea behind MATSim is the simulation of an artificial
population, represented by agents, who perform their respective plans including activities and movements between
activity locations throughout a day. The movements are simulated within a dynamic queue-based model in which
all agents interact dynamically with each other in a network (traffic simulation). At the end of the simulation day,
which usually exceeds 24 hours due to the longest activity chain, all agents evaluate the performance of the
executed plan by measuring and scoring the deviations from the initial plan and the utility of using a mode. This
process is called "utility scoring". In the next iterations, agents try to maximize their scores by modifying their
plans. This "re-planning" process is performed rather by using another mode and route or by ending an activity
sooner than at its planned end time. The more agents explore potential alternatives, the more they learn about their
optimal plans. Once the convergence on the total score is reached, agents stop to innovate their plans and try to
select one plan from their memorized set of plans and to find out the plan with the best score. This is repeated
until a systematic relaxation is reached.
Re-planning is usually done after the plan execution and traffic simulation. However, for the simulation of new
transportation systems and specifically those that need a cyclic re-computation of vehicle tasks and routes (e.g.
SAV, on-demand services with multiple requests), instant decisions must be made while the traffic simulation is
running. Such a decision making is possible is possible using dynamic agent module included in DVRP-DRT
extension (Maciejewski, 2016), which directly interacts with the traffic simulation of MATSim.
3.2. Ridesharing and rebalancing
In the present study, we used the dispatch algorithm of ridesharing developed by Bischoff et al. (2017) that
performs a centralized on-the-fly assignment of vehicles to on-demand requests. This optimizer returns a list of
requests and vehicle paths between pick-up and drop-off points. In order to route SAVs dynamically, an insertion
heuristic that aims to minimize the total SAVs workload is employed. The SAVs workload is measured as the
total time spent on handling requests. This leads to a lower detour for each user. The optimization process seeks
also to decrease vehicle usage for more requests, which results in more service availability and consequently
greater demand. During the simulation, when a new request is submitted, the algorithm searches the routes of all
vehicles for optimal insertions. An insertion is feasible when it satisfies the following conditions: (i) the overall
travel time constraints (including waiting and in-vehicle times) are satisfied for already inserted requests
(passenger(s) on board) and (ii) the expected boarding times for the awaiting and upcoming requests need to
remain within a defined time frame. All feasible insertions are then evaluated and the first insertion that offers the
smallest increase of vehicle work time will be selected. If no feasible insertion is found, the request is rejected. A
request can be rejected (e.g., due to constraints violation) only immediately after submission, and already accepted
requests cannot be rejected or re-scheduled.
We employed the rebalancing strategy that is included in the DRT extension of MATSim, which is based on
the Minimum Cost Flows problem. In this problem, one seeks to "optimize" the time-varying flows on each arc
between aggregated demand hubs and idle vehicles, taking into account congestion effects along arcs and at nodes.
Idle vehicles are relocated in regular intervals according to the estimated demand of the previous iteration. The
expected demand for the next 60 minutes is considered in the optimization process.
It is noteworthy that the selected dispatch and rebalancing algorithm may have a strong impact on service
performance indicators (Hörl et al., 2019; Hyland and Mahmassani, 2018). Particularly, when the demand for
SAV service is relatively high, applying simplified assignments (e.g. FIFO) can lead to the worst service
efficiency (Hyland and Mahmassani, 2018). However, we found that the employed strategies for vehicle
assignment and relocation are accurate enough for our purpose. Furthermore, it is of note that the multi-agent
5
simulation already adopts heuristic rules in feedback loops to achieve approximate convergence and consistency
between multidimensional decisions and network loading. Thus, it may require even more computational
resources to achieve equilibrium when very sophisticated heuristic rules are applied to find good assignment and
relocation of vehicles.
3.3. Inputs and model setup
As mentioned earlier, the main goal of the present study is to design an SAV service considering all affecting
operational and user-related aspects. For this purpose, the simulation inputs are based on real activity chains
replicating the traveler patterns and schedules derived from the transport survey and census. Fig. 1 illustrates the
overall framework. A synthetic population for the case study area is generated using an open source generator
developed in our work (Kamel et al., 2018) that applies fitness-based synthesizing with multilevel controls. Some
major attributes such as age, gender, household income range, and socio-professional category are used for
controls. These are the attributes with an important impact on SAV mode choice (Al-Maghraoui, 2019) or are the
joint attributes of synthetic population and activity models. The activity chains are then allocated to each synthetic
individual according to their socio-professional attributes. Based on transport survey analysis conducted for two
French case study areas (Paris and Rouen Metropolitan area), we found that the activity chains are significantly
correlated to those attributes (Kamel et al., 2019; Vosooghi et al., 2019). The socio-professional category consists
of six groups of persons: employed, unemployed, students, people under 14 years, retired, and homemakers. The
generated synthetic population is validated by comparing relative errors of the synthetic and real population in
each zone for estimated and given marginal data of each attribute.
For two main trip purposes (work and study), the fine-grained geographical zones of activity are given in the
census data. For other trip purposes, an origin-destination matrix based on the transport survey is estimated. Both
of these data are employed in the process of activity chain allocation. In the latter case, for each trip origin in each
zone, a destination zone according to the probability of trip purpose by socio-professional category is allocated.
Then, the activity's precise locations are randomly appointed along the zone in keeping with existing activity
types and land-use category.
Fig. 1. Synthetic population generation and activity chaining framework.
In MATSim, utility scoring is performed based on the Charypar-Nagel scoring method (Charypar and Nagel,
2005). The function includes both activity and leg scores. In conducted simulations, due to the lack of data only
legs' scoring utilities are set according to the utility functions estimated from the recent local transport survey
(EMD Métropole Rouen Normandie 2017) by employing a logit model. In addition to travel time (including
waiting time) and travel cost, user's car ownership, as well as parking availability at destination, were found to
be significant parameters in the mode choice model. Thus, they are incorporated into utility scoring. The detailed
list of parameters as well as the estimations is available in Vosooghi et al. (2019).
In the ridesharing algorithm, we set up the detours considering that the ride times can be extended up to 30%
of the direct distance. Bigger detour times for passengers are allowed only if their waiting times do not surpass
15 min. However, in that case, the SAV ride is more penalized in terms of utility (scoring). During the simulation,
the idle SAVs are rebalanced every 5 min. The size of square cells used for demand aggregation is assumed to be
1 km.
Activity Chain AnalysisPublic Use Microdata SampleTransport SurveySynthetic Population GenerationActivity Location AnalysisSynthetic Population with Allocated Located Daily Activity Chain (Plan)Facility DataJointed by socio-professional attributes and activity typesMissed attributes 6
3.4. User taste variation
User taste variations were integrated into the model based on the methodology proposed in our previous work
(Vosooghi et al., 2019). In order to set up the model according to the travelers' perception and a tendency toward
using SAVs, an online survey was made in (Al-Maghraoui, 2019). Users' trust and subjective criteria behind their
willingness-to-use were identified. We found that the socio-professional and three other sociodemographic
attributes (i.e., income, age and gender) are significant to SAV taste variations among individuals. For instance,
the above-mentioned survey shows that in general men are more likely to use an SAV than women. Similarly,
younger persons are more likely to use SAVs compared to older ones. In order to integrate these variations into
the simulation, all the utility scoring and functions are estimated and set up separately for each group of users
within the same socio-professional category. The marginal time and cost-varying parameters in the scoring
function are then multiplied by the factors of user trust and willingness-to-use so that the score (utility) of SAV
for the similar trips varies according to the sociodemographic attributes of travelers including age, gender and
household income range.
3.5. Simulated scenarios
In order to apply our simulation to design an SAV service for a real-world scenario, we chose to consider the
Rouen Normandie metropolitan area (France) as the case study. Rouen was a fitting venue for at least three
reasons. First, we had access to the most recent transport survey (EMD Métropole Rouen Normandie 2017).
Second, the population (about 500,000 inhabitants) and the metropolitan area network sizes allow us to perform
the simulation with an acceptable downscaling rate (10%), which results in quite accurate outputs compared to
the full-scale model (Bischoff and Maciejewski, 2016). Actually, in some studies relying on agent-based
simulation and utility scoring, the population of case study areas is highly downscaled (1%) due to the high
computational time (Hörl et al., 2019; Kamel et al., 2019). This extensive downscaling may potentially affect the
service performance evaluations considering the spatiotemporal interaction of supply and demand in large study
areas. The third reason for choosing this area is that some experiments on self-driving cars are currently
undertaken; thus, it is possible to gain data on traveler behavior in a near future and to integrate them to the
extended simulations. Furthermore, Rouen Normandie metropolitan area is a promising candidate for replacing
existing private modes with an SAV service, especially in the Rouen old town.
To support the simulation of such a scenario, the synthetic population from the Public Use Microdata Sample
(INSEE 2014) was generated. Based on the local survey including 5,059 households and 11,107 individuals, 929
activity chains including eight trip purposes were found. As mentioned before, the activity chains and time profiles
were allocated to the synthetic individuals according to their socio-professional category.
The simulations were run for several fleet-size and fleet-capacity scenarios with and without considering
ridesharing or rebalancing strategies to appreciate system performance metrics. Regarding SAV, prices of 0.5
Euro per kilometer for the individual ride and 0.4 Euro per kilometer (direct distance) for ridesharing services are
assumed. These service prices are slightly more expensive than private car ride costs in France (0.3 Euro per
kilometer - DG Trésor (2018)). Moreover, they are almost similar to the values that have been estimated or
concluded in other investigations. For instance, Chen et al. (2016) estimated the price for electric SAV from $0.42
to $0.49 per person-trip-mile and Bösch et al. (2018) estimated it 0.43 CHF per passenger kilometer. In our study,
the SAV service waiting time is integrated to the utility scoring and the value of waiting time is considered 1.5
times larger than the value of in-vehicle travel time (Wardman et al., 2016). The SAV fleet is initially distributed
from four fixed points inside the city and out of old town. Therefore, no "warm-start" - as in Fagnant and
Kockelman (2014) - or random distribution are considered.
3.6. Performance metrics
Although a limited number of studies have simulated SAV service incorporating its dynamic demand, there are
several investigations on the performance evaluation of such a system. In this regard, a long list of performance
metrics has been used as well. These metrics do not necessarily have the same consequences. For instance, Fagnant
and Kockelman (2014) used traveler wait times in order to estimate required fleet sizes to serve various predefined
demands. Since the demand in their study is considered static, the wait times could be a relevant indicator to
evaluate the service performance. However, as shown in a more recent work of the same authors, the lower in-
vehicle and wait times in a simulation enabling dynamic ridesharing result in higher excess vehicle kilometer
traveled (VKT) (Fagnant and Kockelman, 2018) and therefore cannot be the only relevant indicators for the fleet
sizing. In this regard, traveler wait times have been used as a key indicator to define the optimum scenario in some
other dynamic demand simulations (e.g. in Azevedo et al. (2016) or Chen and Kockelman (2016)). However, in
the current research we use the term "fleet in-service rate" for the fleet sizing. This indicator is defined as the
number of occupied or in-service vehicles (including going to pick up a client) over all vehicles. The other metric
representing the proportion of extra VKT (due to the unoccupied or rebalancing mileage) over total VKT will be
7
used in parallel to evaluate empty vehicle traveling distances and to find the balanced trade-off between these two
indicators. The detour distance would be among the main traveler-related indicators representing extra travel
distances due to the shared rides. The traveler wait times here will be used as the LoS evaluation; the lower the
wait time, the higher the service level is. In fact, due to the dynamic decision mechanism between available
alternatives for each traveler, higher wait times result in lower SAV demand and consequently service usage.
Therefore, this parameter implicitly affects the main performance indicators. With the aim of comparing the
service revenues for different scenarios, the in-vehicle passenger kilometer traveled (PKT) is defined. This
indicator presents the sum of trip distances traveled by each individual on SAVs. In order to investigate the usage
pattern of SAV service in the case of ridesharing, the "on-board occupancy rates by a number of passengers" is
proposed. Other metrics used in the dynamic demand simulations to evaluate the performance of proposed service
are the number of persons or vehicle trips (Chen and Kockelman, 2016; Heilig et al., 2017) and average in-vehicle
times (Hörl, 2017; Martinez and Viegas, 2017). However, these performance indicators are descriptive rather than
consequential and thus will not be used for the fleet sizing and vehicle capacity determination.
To evaluate the overall performance of the transportation system, mode share indicator as in the majority of
other studies will be compared. Although this research does not incorporate environmental impact measurements,
the total distances driven by car and SAV are estimated and compared for all scenarios to illustrate how the
congestion would change after the introduction of different SAV services. It is of note that due to the high
uncertainty of future SAV service and infrastructure costs, in the present study only transport-related indicators
are evaluated and analyzed.
4. Case study results
4.1. Overview
A base-case scenario (S0) simulation run was conducted without integrating SAV and calibrated using the
actual modal shares of the case study area. Next, the SAV service was simulated for various fleet sizes (2.0 k to
6.0 k) with individual rides (S1) and for those with ridesharing strategy. In the case of ridesharing, three different
vehicle capacities were suggested for the simulation: a small car with two seats (S2), standard 4-seats car (S3),
and 6-seats minivan (S4). Table 2 illustrates the modal splits for all scenarios. It is noteworthy that given the low
modal share of the bike (less than 0.1%) and related changes, this mode was not simulated.
Table 2
Modal splits estimated for all scenarios and fleet sizes*.
Scenario
S1- non-ridesharing
S2- ridesharing
(2-seats small car)
S3- ridesharing
(standard 4-seats car)
S4- ridesharing
(6-seats minivan)
Fleet size
Mode
Car
Walk
SAV
PT
Car
Walk
SAV
PT
Car
Walk
SAV
PT
Car
Walk
SAV
PT
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
59.3
28.3
3.1
9.2
59.1
28.3
3.8
8.8
58.9
28.3
4.0
8.7
59.1
28.2
4.1
8.6
58.8
28.3
4.4
8.4
58.8
28.3
4.6
8.3
58.7
28.3
4.6
8.3
58.8
28.3
4.6
8.3
58.5
28.2
5.3
8.0
58.5
28.3
5.2
8.0
58.3
28.3
5.3
8.0
58.4
28.3
5.4
7.9
58.3
28.2
6.0
7.6
58.3
28.2
5.9
7.6
58.1
28.3
5.9
7.7
58.2
28.3
5.9
7.6
58.0
28.2
6.5
7.3
58.1
28.2
6.3
7.5
58.0
28.3
6.0
7.6
58.0
28.3
6.1
7.5
57.7
28.2
6.9
7.1
57.8
28.3
6.5
7.3
57.9
28.3
6.4
7.4
57.9
28.3
6.4
7.4
57.6
28.2
7.2
7.1
57.7
28.3
6.7
7.2
57.8
28.3
6.6
7.3
57.8
28.3
6.8
7.3
57.4
28.1
7.5
6.9
57.8
28.2
6.9
7.1
57.7
28.3
6.8
7.2
57.8
28.2
6.7
7.2
57.5
28.1
7.6
6.8
57.7
28.2
7.0
7.1
57.7
28.3
6.8
7.2
57.7
28.2
6.9
7.1
* Due to the rounding process for each modal share, the sum could exceed or be less than 100%.
As shown in Table 2, the modal shifts toward an SAV service come from both public transport and car modes.
This shift is consistent with findings in the literature (Chen and Kockelman, 2016; Hörl, 2017; Martinez and
Viegas, 2017; Wen et al., 2018). However, in the case of big SAV fleet sizes, the public transport mode share
decreases significantly relative to the car. This reduction is due to the utility of the proposed service, which is
8
rather similar to the public transport mode. The service cost is also an important factor that encourages public
transport users to choose a service that costs a bit more but is more appealing due to the lower travel time. Table
2 illustrates an interesting result regarding SAV modal share evolution. As can be expected, by increasing the
fleet size, SAV modal shares increase accordingly. However, this growth does not follow the same trend for all
scenarios. While SAV modal share in scenario 1 (individual ride) is the lowest one among all scenarios in the case
of the smallest fleet size, this metric is conversely the highest for the fleet size of 6.0se k vehicles. This result can
be explained by the presence of a balanced trade-off between service cost, demand (which affects waiting time)
and extra in-vehicle time due to detour distances. In fact, when the waiting time is more important compared to
in-vehicle times, which is the case for small fleet sizes, the time-based cost of service could surpass the service
cost for users. Therefore, the SAV demand and consequently its modal share decreases. However, in the case of
big fleet sizes, as the waiting time is not as important as in the case of small fleet sizes, the in-vehicle time
(including detour time) becomes an important factor for the decision-making.
Table 3 presents the evolution of total driven distance including private cars and SAVs. By deploying SAV
services, this indicator increases in all scenarios. Clearly, having a bigger fleet size in each scenario results in
more use of vehicles. However, scenarios with ridesharing strategy have lower total driven distance compared to
individual ride (except for the scenario with 2.0 k SAVs). This difference is attributed to the higher SAVs'
occupancy rates in ridesharing scenarios. Comparison of vehicle capacities shows that in the scenarios with the
fleets of 4-seats and 6-seats SAVs, the total driven distance is slightly lower than when 2-seats small SAVs are
simulated (except for the scenario with 2.0 k SAVs). Meanwhile, for some fleet sizes, this indicator has the lowest
value when 4-seats standard cars are used. The shorter total driven distance of individual ride service and smaller
vehicles in ridesharing scenarios when 2.0 k SAVs are simulated is because of the relatively much lower service
demand, which is due to the low LoS provided in that fleet size.
Table 3
Total driven distance including car and SAV modes (million kilometers).
Fleet
size
-
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
S0- base-case
scenario
S1- non-
ridesharing
S2- ridesharing
(2-seats small car)
S3- ridesharing
(standard 4-seats
car)
S4- ridesharing
(6-seats minivan)
8.88
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
10.05
10.50
10.77
10.95
11.12
11.20
11.26
11.31
11.32
-
10.06
10.33
10.43
10.61
10.62
10.66
10.60
10.73
10.69
-
10.14
10.31
10.43
10.50
10.48
10.55
10.53
10.60
10.58
-
10.17
10.30
10.45
10.53
10.53
10.53
10.56
10.59
10.63
Table 4 presents a summary of the average number of rides per SAV for all scenarios. As can be seen, in the
case of small fleet sizes, the SAVs with bigger capacity satisfy more requests because the expected waiting time
is relatively high enough to play a major role in the mechanism of SAV mode choice decision. In the scenarios of
SAVs with ridesharing and bigger vehicle capacity, the expected waiting time is shorter compared to the scenarios
of the individual ride, thus more rides are satisfied. However, by increasing the number of vehicles, the detour
distance becomes a more important parameter and therefore in the scenarios with more places in the vehicles,
slightly fewer requests are observed. It should be noted that the expected waiting and detour times are the
parameters that are estimated for each synthetic individual (agent) during the simulation. Agents learn about their
plans (including trips and activities) and final decisions are made in the last iteration when convergence is reached.
Thus, the real and expected waiting and detour times have different values. Since the number of expected values
is huge and we cannot visualize them all, we present only real values in this paper.
Table 4
Average number of rides per SAV.
9
Fleet size
S1- non-
ridesharing
S2- ridesharing
(2-seats small car)
S3- ridesharing
(standard 4-seats
car)
S4- ridesharing
(6-seats minivan)
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
11
16
17
17
17
17
16
15
14
16
17
17
17
16
16
14
14
13
17
17
18
17
16
15
14
13
13
17
17
18
17
16
15
14
13
13
As shown in Fig. 2, the average detour time varies between 4 and 7 minutes in all scenarios. Likewise, the
average in-vehicle time varies from 37 to 48 minutes. However, the variation of waiting time (excluding the
smallest fleet size) for each fleet size remains very slight. It is noteworthy that since the simulations are dynamic-
demand, low average waiting times for small fleet sizes are due to the low SAV demand especially during peak
hours (particularly in S1 and S2). In fact, for fleet size below a certain size, the expected waiting time increases
considerably. Therefore, SAV mode becomes less competitive to other available alternatives in terms of
generalized cost, except in the morning peak hour when the LoS of other alternatives are as low as SAV (Fig. 3).
Thus, the demand for SAV service and consequently estimated waiting time decreases. By increasing the number
of vehicles, the expected waiting time declines. However, this time is shorter than a critical waiting time (a value
that makes SAV non-competitive in terms of utility), its impact on SAV mode choice becomes minor. As a result,
the estimated waiting time follows a very slight decreasing trend particularly in ridesharing scenarios. In the non-
ridesharing scenario, the estimated average waiting time falls faster for big fleet sizes. This faster decline by
increasing the number of vehicles is explained by the fact that for each request an available SAV can be found in
lower direct access distance; however, in the ridesharing scenario, this SAV may not necessarily be without
passenger and therefore a relatively higher waiting time is required. Thus, the decrease in average waiting time
by enlarging fleet size in ridesharing scenarios becomes slighter.
Fig. 2. SAV service time variables for all scenarios and fleet sizes.
4.2. Fleet size
The bigger fleet size and accordingly the higher SAV modal share do not necessarily lead to a better-optimized
operation. In fact, a trade-off between overall expenses and revenues has to be balanced. Service costs include
capital expenditure (CAPEX) and operating expenses (OPEX). Since this research does not incorporate
0.05.010.015.020.025.030.032.034.036.038.040.042.044.046.048.050.02.0 k2.5 k3.0 k3.5 k4.0 k4.5 k5.0 k5.5 k6.0 kAverage waiting time (min)Average in-vehicle time (min)Fleet size (number of vehicles)S1 : non-ridesharing Average detour timeAverage in-vehicle time without detourAverage waiting time0.05.010.015.020.025.030.032.034.036.038.040.042.044.046.048.050.02.0 k2.5 k3.0 k3.5 k4.0 k4.5 k5.0 k5.5 k6.0 kAverage waiting time (min)Average in-vehicle time (min)Fleet size (number of vehicles)S3 : ridesharing (standard 4-seats car)0.05.010.015.020.025.030.032.034.036.038.040.042.044.046.048.050.02.0 k2.5 k3.0 k3.5 k4.0 k4.5 k5.0 k5.5 k6.0 kAverage waiting time (min)Average in-vehicle time (min)Fleet size (number of vehicles)S2 : ridesharing (2-seats small car 0.05.010.015.020.025.030.032.034.036.038.040.042.044.046.048.050.02.0 k2.5 k3.0 k3.5 k4.0 k4.5 k5.0 k5.5 k6.0 kAverage waiting time (min)Average in-vehicle time (min)Fleet size (number of vehicles)S4 : ridesharing (6-seats minivan)
10
infrastructures of SAV service, CAPEX is assumed directly correlated with the fleet size. OPEX is however
associated with fleet usages and mileage. Fig. 3 illustrates the hourly fleet in-service rates for all scenarios and
various fleet sizes. As shown in this figure, consistent with daily trip patterns, two peak service usages occur for
morning and evening peak hours. However, unlike the SAV modal share, the service use is decreased for big fleet
sizes. In fact, by increasing the fleet size, once the fleet usage becomes no longer saturated in the morning peak
hour, the latter decreases quickly. This occurs by improving the LoS indicators (waiting time or accessibility in
this case) and leads to the demand growth. However, this demand is somehow limited to the number of people
who are already likely to choose this service compared to other alternatives that they have, even if the waiting
time is very low. Similarly, if the fleet size is small and the LoS is accordingly low, users try to find a more
appropriated mode. As a result, as shown in Fig. 3, for the small fleet sizes and especially in scenario 1 (individual
ride), the fleet usage decreases abruptly. Again, we emphasize that the simulation results present the indicators
when the interaction of service demand and supply is iteratively relaxed. In other words, the agents have already
experienced the SAV service for various level of demands. Agents also tried to slightly modify their activity end
time and to depart sooner in order to arrive to the next activity on time. However, the memorized expected waiting
time is supposed to be high for many travelers specifically in the case of small fleet sizes. Consequently, SAV is
not as used as in the case of medium and large fleet sizes.
As presented in Fig. 3, in individual ride scenario (S1), SAV service reaches the maximum fleet usage at least
for one hour in some fleet sizes. This maximum use, however, does not occur for ridesharing scenarios due to two
main reasons. First, in ridesharing scenarios in peak hours there are always SAVs with available seats in the
acceptable distance for any requests. Second, since there is no rebalancing strategy in those scenarios (SAVs stay
at the same place where the last passenger is dropped off), some SAVs that dropped off a passenger(s) far from
demand hubs remain in idle mode at that location and thus the fleet usage does not reach the maximum value.
This shows the importance of enabling rebalancing strategy especially when rides are shared among travelers.
Fig. 3. SAV fleet hourly in-service rates.
Empty traveling distance is also a part of fleet usage. High-performance fleet size is characterized by a greater
use and a lower empty distance. Fig. 4 compares average daily in-vehicle service rates (fleet usage ratio) and
empty distance ratio (empty VKT over total VKT) for all scenarios and fleet sizes. As can be seen from this figure,
the fleet usage fluctuates more than the empty distance ratio. In fact, by increasing fleet sizes, the empty distance
ratio changes only by a maximum of 3%, meanwhile, the fleet usage drops dramatically (up to 16%). This abrupt
decline may occur because there is no rebalancing strategy incorporated in those scenarios and the pick-up ride
distances remain approximately within the same range of values (with lower usage and consequently more
available vehicles, the pick-up ride distance becomes slightly shorter). In order to identify the best performing
fleet size, two aforementioned indicators are used. Actually, regardless of any estimations about service
operational cost and benefits, the fleet usage indicator can be used as the measure of effectiveness concerning
CAPEX. Similarly, the empty distance ratio may be sufficiently indicative for the changes on OPEX term. Since
the latter indicator stays rather constant for all fleet sizes, the best fleet sizes are identified according to the fleet
Total duration of in-service drive over total duration of all tasks0102030405060708090100(a) S1 : non-ridesharing(c) S3 : ridesharing (standard 4-seats car) 600000127285177868670596067676670757360543114460000012618376574665138353842434854595640191035500001393259829495746367767972757880756440185550000127214271746857443942464850566462432111350000013933647996977664718484818083827664371755000001382042697572574339424749525863674922124450001141037658610099796774838382868889817345205450000137264974818065494849515359687472532513540000014113966861009986708088918685909282764321740000023926497787846750485053586269757756271443500002412457389100998169818891868688928278492683500001410326087918468595961687076777776603117630000014154872921009878758592928582798680754826930000124123764869083686262636975747375766839195250001251553779298786170778082797566646574523010250000251439739187766465656670716867687376402282000012515516890813128445953525247382326353225720000125164777949274555963646468717264605937279123456789101112131415161718192021222324123456789101112131415161718192021222324(b) S2 : ridesharing (2-seats small car) (d) S4 : ridesharing (6-seats minivan) 6000001262040707669554139414345516067584220114600000127193867746553403839404348545960441910455000012722437479745844434549525665706544221235500001272141697468554440414446515965614320114500000137234673807760464447505459667266452412450000013723437176735944424446485464706747221144500001392754798984654950556061657178785627134450000138254977817863524748515459677268492515440000013102955849287675251586064707581796030165400000141028537984826655535459616471767255261443500001410336184898670615963697374808382653417635000114103461839187706259596669727577756331175300000151136618285806457606367717170747665362053000002410356789908369636365717172737881683820625000025134073918977636264666768717173736938216250001241341688582726158626264697067677368382172000012614426686845344576261615954494449594025820000136154675979467526268696869686659636342267123456789101112131415161718192021222324123456789101112131415161718192021222324Hour of dayFleet sizeHour of dayFleet sizeHour of dayFleet sizeHour of dayFleet size 11
usage ratio. For individual ride service, the fleet of 3.5 k SAVs, in the case of small cars with two seats, 2.5 k
vehicles and for the other scenarios, approximately 3.0 k vehicles seem to be the best performing size of the fleet.
Fig. 4. Comparison of fleet usage and empty distance ratios for different scenarios and fleet sizes.
Another noteworthy point in Fig. 3 is the shift of the morning peak-hour service usage from 7-9 a.m. for small
fleet sizes to 8-10 a.m. for big fleet sizes. This shift is actually due to two main reasons. First, in small and big
fleet sizes the SAV users are dissimilar in terms of the socio-professional category to which they belong. These
users have a different trip pattern, consequently by varying fleet sizes the hourly usage of SAV service changes.
Second, the possibility of small changes in the activity end-time in the simulation allowed some users to leave the
previous activity slightly sooner in order to arrive to the next activity with lower delay. This happens when
departing earlier from an origin activity such as "Home" has not an important impact on the score of agent's whole
day plan. However, when the activity at origin is "Work" or "Study", shorten those activity durations results in a
much lower score and penalizes the use of SAV service. The possibility of slight changes on activity end time is
enabled for all modes in the simulation, however given the score of performing activities, these changes may not
surpass several minutes. Regarding different group of users, in the simulation, agents with different socio-
professional category have different utility scoring. In other words, for instance, for some groups of people, the
marginal utility of traveling or the value of travel time (VoT) is bigger than for other groups. Furthermore, user
taste variation among the different category of travelers affects SAV mode choice. As a result, by increasing fleet
sizes and improving the LoS (travel time, including wait time), the SAV service for some users with different
socio-professional categories and accordingly different trip purposes become more attractive (in terms of utility).
Since each activity at the destination has a dissimilar model of start-time and duration, hourly usage pattern of
SAV service changes when considering a different group of users. Fig. 5 illustrates the evolution of SAV service
users by their socio-professional categories for different fleet sizes. As can be seen, the ratio of employed people
in all scenarios decreases by increasing fleet sizes. For students and people under 14 years of age, a slight increase
in big fleet sizes is observed. Meanwhile, the changes in the ratio of unemployed people remain minor. However,
there is a relatively significant growth in the use of SAV service by retired people and homemakers when the fleet
size is large (especially in the case of the individual ride). By comparing scenarios of each fleet size, it can be
seen that the SAV service with the individual ride is less attractive for employed and unemployed users. This
occurs since the cost-related parameters of mode choice decision are more important than time-related parameters
for those groups of users. The above analysis shows the importance of considering users' profile in estimating
fleet hourly usage, which can potentially affect the fleet sizing.
4350484847454039361314141414141313122.0 k2.5 k3.0 k3.5 k4.0 k4.5 k5.0 k5.5 k6.0 kFleet size (number of vehicles)4848514945423836351515161514131313132.0 k2.5 k3.0 k3.5 k4.0 k4.5 k5.0 k5.5 k6.0 kFleet size (number of vehicles)3654595959575452481515151415151414132.0 k2.5 k3.0 k3.5 k4.0 k4.5 k5.0 k5.5 k6.0 kFleet size (number of vehicles)4950504944423736331516151514141313132.0 k2.5 k3.0 k3.5 k4.0 k4.5 k5.0 k5.5 k6.0 kFleet size (number of vehicles)Fleet usage ratio (%)Empty distance ratio (%)(a) S1 : non-ridesharing(c) S3 : ridesharing (standard 4-seats car) (d) S4 : ridesharing (6-seats minivan) (b) S2 : ridesharing (2-seats small car) 12
Fig. 5. SAV service users by socio-professional category.
4.3. The sharing strategy of ride
As shown in Fig. 3, in the scenarios with ridesharing, the fleets are never 100% in-service for 1-h time slices.
This may occur when rides are shared but empty vehicles are not rebalanced. When a request is registered, the
nearest occupied vehicle with an available seat and acceptable detour time is assigned. As a result, there are always
some vehicles quite far from the demand hubs that are not consequently used for a while. In fact, ridesharing
results in relatively lower fleet usage for almost all fleet sizes except for the fleet size of 2.0 k (Fig. 4). The more
rides are shared, the less the fleet is used. However, each user pays for the provided services and traveled
kilometers. In this case, the indicator of in-vehicle passenger kilometer traveled (PKT) may be more relevant.
This indicator presents the sum of distances traveled by each individual being on-board SAVs. Fig. 6 compares
SAV overall PKT for all scenarios and fleet sizes. As shown in this figure, the overall PKT of the individual ride
scenario is minimum for all fleet sizes. This indicator is however almost the same for all ridesharing scenarios in
the case of medium fleet sizes (i.e., 3.5 k to 4.5 k). By increasing the number of vehicles, the relative difference
of PKT between individual ride and ridesharing scenarios decreases. This decline can be attributed to the high
LoS provided in the case of large fleet sizes. In fact, the potential requests for the SAV service are limited. Thus,
when the fleet is accessible enough for a major part of potential users, the greater service availability (occurring
when the rides are shared) does not necessarily result in an important increase in demand and PKT accordingly.
As a result, the growth of PKT and its differences between individual ride and ridesharing scenarios decline.
Fig. 6. Comparison of SAV overall PKT for all scenarios and fleet sizes.
4.4. Vehicle capacity
As mentioned earlier, the best performing fleet size in the case of ridesharing scenarios according to the fleet
usage and empty ratios is between 2.5 k and 3.5 k vehicles. Comparing the PKT for those fleet sizes reveals that
the fleet of the standard 4-seats car may be the best performing option for ridesharing. As shown in Fig. 6, for
small fleet sizes, the overall PKT of the standard 4-seats car is greater. In fact, for those fleet sizes, the fleet usage
is almost saturated during peak hours (Fig. 3). As a result, services are less accessible especially when the vehicle
76.876.678.977.876.276.878.778.775.577.278.077.475.477.277.777.074.876.977.577.173.676.676.576.673.376.277.277.072.676.176.876.972.875.977.276.70.30.40.40.40.30.40.40.40.40.40.40.40.40.40.50.50.40.50.50.40.50.50.50.50.40.50.50.40.40.40.40.40.40.40.40.421.421.619.620.722.521.619.719.722.721.020.220.922.520.720.120.822.220.320.020.822.620.921.221.421.820.719.820.622.221.421.021.121.921.820.721.31.51.41.11.11.01.21.21.21.41.41.41.31.71.71.71.52.62.32.01.73.32.01.81.54.52.62.52.04.82.11.81.64.91.91.71.650%55%60%65%70%75%80%85%90%95%100%S1S2S3S4S1S2S3S4S1S2S3S4S1S2S3S4S1S2S3S4S1S2S3S4S1S2S3S4S1S2S3S4S1S2S3S42.0 k2.5 k3.0 k3.5 k4.0 k4.5 k5.0 k5.5 k6.0 kSAV users by socio-professional category (%)Scenario and fleet size (number of vehicles)Retired and homemakersStudents and people under 14 y/oUnemployedEmployed0500000100000015000002000000250000030000002.0 k2.5 k3.0 k3.5 k4.0 k4.5 k5.0 k5.5 k6.0 kSAV In-vehicle PKT (kilometers)Fleet size (number of vehicles)S1 : non-ridesharingS2 : ridesharing (2-seats small car)S3 : ridesharing (standard 4-seats car)S4 : ridesharing (6-seats minivan)
13
is smaller and the number of available seats is lower. It seems that the service with bigger capacity vehicles would
be more used by travelers in that case; however, due to extra detour time (expected), the PKT of 6-seats SAVs is
slightly less than 4-seats SAVs. In other words, for the same SAV service price, users prefer to choose a medium
capacity car that has relatively shorter waiting and in-vehicle times compared to a 6-seats minivan. By increasing
fleet size, as there is enough SAVs to satisfy the demand, the differences between PKTs for those scenarios
become relatively minor. However, since in that case more demand is satisfied, the probability of pooling rides
with an acceptable detour time becomes higher. Thus, a limited number of vehicles handle many requests in high
demand areas. Meanwhile, the idle vehicles that have already dropped off a passenger far from the demand hubs
stay at the same place for a while. This non-homogeneous spatial distribution of idle and high workload SAVs
results in a different PKT for ridesharing scenarios with big fleet sizes. This difference occurs when the
rebalancing strategy is not enabled. It is of note that in the small and medium fleet sizes, the fleet usage is relatively
high and thus, SAVs are somehow rebalanced across the high demand hubs and dispersed better within the region.
This shows again the importance of considering rebalancing strategy.
In order to explore the use of vehicle capacities, on-board occupancy rates by the number of passengers (PAX
occupancy ratio) are compared for ridesharing scenarios. As shown in Fig. 7, for all ridesharing scenarios, by
increasing the fleet size, the 1 PAX ratio decreases slightly while the other ones increase. In fact, when more
vehicles are available, the demand is greater; thus, the probability of finding further trip requests in an acceptable
time or distance buffer from the actual ride(s) becomes higher. Therefore, the rides are more shared in the big
fleet sizes and more seats are occupied. As illustrated in Fig. 7, 3 PAX ratio varies from 5 to 8% in the case of a
standard 4-seats car and 6-seats minivan. However, the ratio of 4 PAX is less than 1%. Furthermore, the sixth seat
of the minivan is almost never used. Actually, by comparing the other metrics one can observe that the differences
between standard 4-seats car and 6-seats minivan are very small. In fact, given the amount of initial investment
and operational costs of the bigger vehicles, the extra capacity may not necessarily be profitable. Therefore, it
seems that standard 4-seats car is more compatible to the proposed service rather than a 6-seats minivan.
Nevertheless, we have to keep in mind that the extra capacity could have an important impact on SAV's LoS.
Furthermore, the 6-seats minivan can also be used for special requirements such as larger groups and families.
Fig. 7. On-board occupancy rates by the number of passenger for ridesharing scenarios.
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%2.0 k2.5 k3.0 k3.5 k4.0 k4.5 k5.0 k5.5 k6.0 kPAX occupancy ratio (%)Fleet size (number of vehicles)1 PAX2 PAX3 PAX4 PAX5 PAX6 PAX(c) S4 : ridesharing (6-seats minivan) 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%2.0 k2.5 k3.0 k3.5 k4.0 k4.5 k5.0 k5.5 k6.0 kPAX occupancy ratio (%)Fleet size (number of vehicles)(b) S3 : ridesharing (standard 4-seats car) 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%2.0 k2.5 k3.0 k3.5 k4.0 k4.5 k5.0 k5.5 k6.0 kPAX occupancy ratio (%)Fleet size (number of vehicles)(a) S2 : ridesharing (2-seats small car) 14
The analysis on the origin and destination activities of trips performed by a fleet of 3.0 k standard 4-seats SAVs
(Fig. 8) illustrates that almost half of all trips start from or end at users' homes. For the total of 9% of trips, the
purpose at origin or destination is shopping or accompanying (escorting), indicating the importance of extra
vehicle capacities in terms of the number of seats or luggage space. Also, given an important share of work and
study activities at origin and destination (about 40%), it is likely that providing extra space and additional services
for business, entertainment, and education purposes may provide a better customer experience while using SAV
service.
Fig. 8. The share of activities in origin and destination of trips performed by a fleet of 3.0 k standard 4-seats SAVs (percentage).
4.5. Vehicle range
Future SAVs are likely to be electric. In electric vehicles, the range is limited according to the battery capacity
and specifications (e.g., weight and life cycle). In fact, given the important cost of battery among vehicles parts,
its capacity may strongly affect the capital expenditure and operational expenses. According to the analysis of the
SAV range for different scenarios and fleet sizes (Table 5), it is shown that the average driven distance of SAVs
may intensely vary from 361 to 647 km. Furthermore, the vehicles do not have the same driven distance and for
some vehicles, the average driven distance could be very long (even 975 km). This occurs when the demand is
saturated and the vehicles are occupied for a long time during the day. By comparing the outputs, one can observe
that the average driven distance correlates with the fleet usage ratio (Fig. 4) and the average number of rides per
SAV (Table 4). In all fleet sizes, except when 2.0 k vehicles are simulated, the average driven distance of non-
ridesharing SAVs is the largest compared to other scenarios. This result can be explained by the fact that SAV
driven distances are shorter for the case of sharing the ride than when the ride is dedicated just to one passenger.
However, in the case of the smallest fleet size, the fleet usage is dramatically lower compared to other fleet sizes
due to the high expected waiting time and lower service request (Fig. 3). Thus, the average driven distance of
non-ridesharing SAVs remains the lowest among all scenarios. The aforementioned distances could further
increase by considering vehicle rebalancing, suggesting that vehicle ranges and possibly charging infrastructure
need to be taken into account in future research.
45%8%29%2%3%7%1%6%Activities in origin and destination of trips performed by SAVs 15
Table 5
Summary of vehicle driven distances for all scenarios and fleet sizes.
Scenario
Fleet size
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
S1- non-ridesharing
S2- ridesharing
(2-seats small car)
S3- ridesharing
(standard 4-seats car)
S4- ridesharing
(6-seats minivan)
Average driven distance (km)
Maximum driven distance (km)
Average driven distance (km)
Maximum driven distance (km)
Average driven distance (km)
Maximum driven distance (km)
Average driven distance (km)
Maximum driven distance (km)
414
652
469
779
546
820
541
861
610
975
549
880
553
919
528
847
645
907
528
923
546
866
552
888
647
894
543
869
524
900
526
870
631
895
503
820
463
825
479
779
606
866
477
817
445
866
444
883
566
925
422
791
392
799
408
761
543
822
408
778
386
797
383
841
495
884
377
807
354
691
361
714
4.6. Ridesharing service cost
The above-mentioned results are given when the cost of the ridesharing service is assumed to be 20% less than
individual rides (0.4 Euro per kilometer compared to 0.5 Euro per kilometer for the individual ride). This price is
encouraging enough for the travelers to prefer the ridesharing service to individual rides within the same fleet size
according to the PKTs (Fig. 6). Although reducing service price and sharing rides lead to a higher PKT, the former
may not be interesting for the operators as the service benefits for each kilometer of ride decrease, assuming that
by an increase in PKT, the fixed cost of operation per kilometer remains unchanged. Thus, it is important to
compare the benefit that an operator could gain due to the growth of PKT with the loss that occurs due to the
reduction of profit per kilometer. In order to explore the evolution of service performance indicators, two lower
prices for ridesharing services are assumed (i.e., 30% and 40% less than individual ride price) and the impacts on
PKT and empty vehicle traveling distance in kilometer (EVK) are compared. As shown in Fig. 9, reducing service
price results in 4-10% higher PKT compared to the initial ridesharing scenario, with the maximum value for 3.0
k SAVs in the second and third scenarios and 2.5 k SAVs in the fourth scenario. However, the EVK changes vary
between -4% and 18% with the maximum values at the same fleet sizes in each scenario. As can be noticed, the
reduction of service price does not cause proportionate improvements in the operational performance indicators
of the major scenarios and fleet sizes. In fact, the increase of PKT as the main indicator of service profits, which
is lower than 10% in the best case, is not enough to cover the loss of direct income occurred due to the lower
service price (30-40%). In fact, the latter is certainly higher than 10% since the operational costs are included in
the service price. Moreover, in the cases when an important growth of PKT occurs, the EVK increases and
therefore the cost of service for operator grows, as well. Hence, for the fleet of 2.5 k to 3.5 k SAVs, the scenarios
with initial service price remain more advantageous.
16
Fig. 9. The changes on PKT and EVK in the case of lower prices for ridesharing SAV services of 2.5 k to 3.5 k vehicles.
4.7. Rebalancing strategy
The fleet usage ratio and PKT may be improved by rebalancing SAVs. However, enabling this strategy can
result in higher EVK. In order to explore the impacts on SAV service performances, the optimum fleet size of
each scenario is re-simulated with rebalancing enabled. During these simulations, vehicles are reallocated to
different cells with an area of 1 km2 (used for demand aggregation) according to the cost flow minimization of
idle vehicles and scattered requests. Empty vehicles are considered idle when there is no request after 10 minutes
of stay. The reallocation process is done every 5 minutes. The costs of the single ride and ridesharing services are
assumed to be as initial values (0.5 €/km for a single ride and 0.4 €/km for ridesharing). Table 6 illustrates the
changes in performance metrics. As can be seen, modal share, fleet usage ratio, and in-vehicle PKT increase for
all scenarios when SAVs are rebalanced. However, the empty distance ratio increases significantly. In fact, the
growth of service benefits that is correlated with fleet usage and in-vehicle PKT occurs at the expense of extra
operational costs due to empty traveling distance. Consequently, the decision on using a rebalancing strategy has
to be made according to the cost and benefits that the operator of such services expects for each kilometer traveled
by empty vehicles and passengers. Some other important changes occur in terms of the SAV's LoS. As presented
in Table 6, the average waiting time has meaningfully decreased for the ridesharing scenarios after introducing
rebalancing. This decrease occurs when the empty vehicles, which are far from the demand hubs, are reallocated
to those zones. As a result, there are more vehicles available within lower wait times. Nevertheless, in-vehicle and
detour times remain almost unchanged. Regarding in-vehicle time, the changes before and after introducing
rebalancing strategy are minor since the trip patterns do not change significantly. Consequently, this indicator
varies in the same order observed for various fleet sizes of the same scenario (Fig. 2). However, given the greater
number of available vehicles and accordingly lower wait times, it seems that the detour time should similarly
decrease. This decrease did not occur due to the higher demand as well as lower 1 PAX and bigger 2 and 3 PAX
ratios. In fact, after enabling rebalancing, more rides are shared. Therefore, the average detour time remains almost
unchanged. In the case of the individual ride scenario, since the service is saturated during morning and evening
peak hours, the rebalancing strategy does not necessarily result in significant waiting time changes.
Similar to fleet usage and in-vehicle PKT, average and maximum driven distances increase for all scenarios.
In other words, by introducing a rebalancing strategy the vehicles need to have larger batteries or need to recharge
more frequently.
4814105-5051015202.5 k3.0 k3.5 kPKT changes (%)(a) S2 : ridesharing (2-seats small car) 524887-5051015202.5 k3.0 k3.5 kPKT changes (%)Fleet size (number of vehicles)(c) S4 : ridesharing (6-seats minivan) 141476-5051015202.5 k3.0 k3.5 kPKT changes (%)(b) S3 : ridesharing (standard 4-seats car) 1315-2121812-5051015202.5 k3.0 k3.5 kEVK changes (%)0.35 €(-30%)0.3 €(-40%)SAV service price €/km (diffrence with individual ride price%)-410691410-5051015202.5 k3.0 k3.5 kEVK changes (%)120716910-5051015202.5 k3.0 k3.5 kEVK changes (%)Fleet size (number of vehicles) 17
Table 6
Performance metrics' changes before and after enabling the rebalancing strategy.
Scenario
Non-ridesharing (3.5 k)
no
rebalancing
with
rebalancing
Ridesharing 2-seats small
car (2.5 k)
no
rebalancing
with
rebalancing
Ridesharing standard 4-
seats car (3.0 k)
no
rebalancing
with
rebalancing
Ridesharing 6-seats
minivan (3.0 k)
no
rebalancing
with
rebalancing
SAV modal share (%)
Average waiting time (min)
Average in-vehicle time (min)
Average detour time (min)
Fleet usage ratio (%)
Empty distance ratio (%)
In-vehicle PKT (km)
1 PAX ratio (%)
2 PAX ratio (%)
3 PAX ratio (%)
4 PAX ratio (%)
5 PAX ratio (%)
6 PAX ratio (%)
Average driven distance (km)
Max. driven distance (km)
6.0
18.5
38.5
N/A
59
14
1.93 M
100
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
647
894
5. Discussion and conclusion
6.3
18.4
38.7
N/A
68
20
2.08 M
100
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
746
978
4.6
18.9
43.9
4.7
50
14
1.53 M
69
31
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
549
880
5.2
13.9
44.1
5.2
66
26
1.81 M
63
37
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
715
964
5.3
20.7
46.0
6.1
50
15
1.97 M
67
26
6
1
N/A
N/A
546
866
6.4
13.1
45.2
5.8
66
24
2.40 M
59
33
7
1
N/A
N/A
707
896
5.4
21.1
46.0
6.0
51
16
1.97 M
66
27
6
1
<1
0
552
888
6.4
14.8
44.8
5.9
67
24
2.41 M
61
31
7
1
<1
0
723
939
The rising popularity of carsharing and technological advancements on electric and autonomous vehicles has
led to the emergence of new shared mobility systems. Some car manufacturers and transportation network
companies (e.g., Uber and Lyft) have already announced their plans for deploying SAVs in the future.
Understanding dynamic tradeoffs between service configuration and demand is an important prerequisite for
delivering such services. This study sought to investigate the design of an SAV service considering its demands
responsive to the network, user taste variations, and traffic in a multi-modal context. Simulations of various SAV
fleet sizes and capacities considering ridesharing and rebalancing strategies across the Rouen Normandie
metropolitan area in France provide initial insights. As suggested by these simulations, the SAVs performance is
strongly correlated to the fleet size, specifically in the case of individual ride service. The results show that the
SAV modal shares vary from 3.1% to 7.6% for different fleet sizes of 2.0 k to 6.0 k vehicles. While the SAV
modal share of small fleet size for the individual ride is the minimum among all scenarios including ridesharing
with various vehicle capacities, this term is the greatest for the medium and big fleet sizes. The latter actually
occurs when the fleet of individual ride service exceeds a critical size (i.e., 2.5 k), from which the smaller fleet
size results in a significant decline of fleet usage (i.e., 34% compared to 8% that is observed from 3.0 k to 2.5 k
vehicles). In fact, for fleet sizes this small, the expected wait times increase meaningfully and lead to very low
service utility compared to other alternatives; and the demand decreases, accordingly. On the contrary, once the
peak hour demand is satisfied in acceptable wait times, the service performance decreases slightly by increasing
fleet size. This variation is not as significant as in ridesharing scenarios where the change of fleet size has less
important impacts on the LoS. The results also suggest that the average waiting time, which is estimated when the
interaction of demand and supply is relaxed (and therefore it is different from the aforementioned expected waiting
time), decreases meaningfully for the smallest fleet sizes. This decrease is actually contrary to what is usually
suggested when the SAV simulation with predefined or static demand is performed and shows the importance of
considering dynamic demand in the simulation of on-demand services.
Further analysis reveals that in the case of ridesharing services without vehicle rebalancing, the changes in
average waiting time remain insignificant for the medium and big fleet sizes. Nevertheless, this indicator decreases
in the individual ride service for the big fleet sizes. In fact, in ridesharing scenarios since the service is never
saturated in the case of medium and big fleet sizes, when an upcoming request is registered, the nearest vehicle
with available seats is allocated to it. However, in individual ride services, the nearest empty vehicle has to be
allocated to that request. Bigger fleet sizes result in a large number of vehicles available in individual ride services
and the waiting time decreases accordingly. The increase in fleet size similarly results in more available seats in
ridesharing scenarios (up to 5%). However, this change is not significant since the fleets are not as occupied as in
individual ride scenario and the increase in seat availability does not have an important impact on the availability
of service. It is also shown that average in-vehicle and detour times vary slightly according to the fleet size. These
changes are relatively minor (less than 4 minutes) and follow almost the same trend.
18
By comparing the fleet usages and empty distance ratios of different scenarios, we found that the optimum fleet
sizes for the individual ride and ridesharing cases are different. These results suggest that while the best fleet size
of individual rides is 3.5 k, in the case of a small car with two seats, 2.5 k vehicles and for standard 4-seats car
and 6-seats minivan, 3.0 k vehicles are the best performing fleet sizes. Based on the obtained results, considering
transport related service performance, there are no big differences between standard 4-seats car and 6-seats
minivan. Since the bigger capacity vehicle may be financially less efficient due to the higher vehicle and
operational costs, it seems that 6-seats minivan cannot be a performant alternative. Nevertheless, we have to bear
in mind that the extra capacity and seats may potentially affect the user comfort perception and consequently their
choice in the real world. Further comparison of four suggested fleet sizes illustrates that given the relatively high
in-vehicle PKT and low empty distance ratio of the 3.0 k vehicles with share rides, this scenario is the best option
among all the considered scenarios. Furthermore, taking into account the trade-off between waiting and detour
times and service cost, we consider that the proposed pricing scheme for SAV ridesharing service (20% less
compared to individual ride) is attractive enough for users. In addition, the results show that a decrease in
ridesharing service prices up to 40% of the individual ride does not cause proportionate improvements on the
operational performance indicators and is not beneficial for the operator.
Importantly, enabling vehicle rebalancing is found to have a profound effect on both user and service-related
metrics. For optimum fleet sizes of ridesharing scenarios, rebalancing leads to shorter average waiting times (i.e.,
25-35%). However, in individual ride scenario, this indicator remains unchanged since the service is already
saturated in peak hours without enabling rebalancing. Although in-vehicle PKT and empty distance ratio increase
for all scenarios, the change in the latter indicator is relatively more important (i.e., 42-85% against 7-17%).
Besides, the detour times remain almost unchanged. Given these indicators, the decision on enabling rebalancing
strategy should be made according to the financial analysis based on the cost and benefits that operator of such
services expects for each kilometer traveled by passengers and empty vehicles.
The average driven distances for optimum scenarios without rebalancing varies from 546 to 647 km. Given
the relatively lower range of today's electric vehicles, it will be necessary to recharge the majority of SAVs during
the day. Furthermore, enabling rebalancing leads to longer average traveled distance (i.e., 707 to 746 km).
Considering the maximum driven distance that exceeds even 900 km, these indicators suggest that future SAVs
will necessarily require some recharging infrastructure.
The employed agent-based simulations in this study incorporate users' trip pattern and taste variation developed
previously by the authors. The detailed service usage indicator estimated for 1-h time slices illustrates a shift of
the morning peak-hour service usage from 7-9 a.m. for the small fleet sizes to 8-10 a.m. for big fleet sizes. This
result indicates the effect that different SAV users with different trip patterns and taste variation may have on the
service usage and prove the importance of considering that user differentiations in SAV demand modeling and
simulation.
While these investigations and results offer a broad and new understanding of SAV service performance and
design, there are several opportunities for improvement. For example, rather than having the same pricing scheme
for all rides, future efforts should examine dynamic pricing (e.g., time-based or demand-based). In addition, an
improved rebalancing strategy may be proposed and evaluated within this simulation framework. The authors
further plan to integrate electric SAV (ESAV) into the simulation and investigate the evolution of service
performance indicators according to various charging station positioning and vehicle ranges.
Acknowledgments
This research work has been carried out in the framework of IRT SystemX, Paris-Saclay, France, and therefore
granted with public funds within the scope of the French Program "Investissements d'Avenir". The authors
would like to thank Groupe Renault for partially financing this work and Métropole Rouen-Normandie for
providing the data.
References
Agatz, N.A.H., Erera, A.L., Savelsbergh, M.W.P., Wang, X., 2011. Dynamic ride-sharing: A simulation study in metro Atlanta. Transp.
Res. Part B Methodol. 45, 1450 -- 1464. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRB.2011.05.017
Al-Maghraoui, O., 2019. Designing for Urban Mobility - Modeling the traveler experience. Interfaces, Université Paris Saclay.
Alonso-Mora, J., Samaranayake, S., Wallar, A., Frazzoli, E., Rus, D., 2017. On-demand high-capacity ride-sharing via dynamic trip-
vehicle assignment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 114, 462 -- 467. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1611675114
Auld, J., Sokolov, V., Stephens, T.S., 2017. Analysis of the Effects of Connected -- Automated Vehicle Technologies on Travel Demand.
Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2625, 1 -- 8. https://doi.org/10.3141/2625-01
Azevedo, C.L., Marczuk, K., Raveau, S., Soh, H., Adnan, M., Basak, K., Loganathan, H., Deshmunkh, N., Lee, D.-H., Frazzoli, E., Ben-
Akiva, M., 2016. Microsimulation of Demand and Supply of Autonomous Mobility On Demand. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res.
Board 2564, 21 -- 30. https://doi.org/10.3141/2564-03
Bansal, P., Kockelman, K.M., Singh, A., 2016. Assessing public opinions of and interest in new vehicle technologies: An Austin
perspective. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 67, 1 -- 14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2016.01.019
19
Bischoff, J., Maciejewski, M., 2016. Autonomous Taxicabs in Berlin -- A Spatiotemporal Analysis of Service Performance. Transp. Res.
Procedia 19, 176 -- 186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2016.12.078
Bischoff, J., Maciejewski, M., Nagel, K., 2017. City-wide shared taxis: A simulation study in Berlin, in: 2017 IEEE 20th International
Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC). IEEE, pp. 275 -- 280. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITSC.2017.8317926
Boesch, P.M., Ciari, F., Axhausen, K.W., 2016. Autonomous Vehicle Fleet Sizes Required to Serve Different Levels of Demand. Transp.
Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2542, 111 -- 119. https://doi.org/10.3141/2542-13
Bösch, P.M., Becker, F., Becker, H., Axhausen, K.W., 2018. Cost-based analysis of autonomous mobility services. Transp. Policy 64,
76 -- 91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2017.09.005
Burns, L.D., Jordan, W.C., Analytics, J., Scarborough, B.A., 2013. Transforming Personal Mobility, The Earth Institute -- Columbia
University. New York.
Charypar, D., Nagel, K., 2005. Generating complete all-day activity plans with genetic algorithms. Transportation (Amst). 32, 369 -- 397.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-004-8287-y
Chen, T.D., Kockelman, K.M., 2016. Management of a Shared Autonomous Electric Vehicle Fleet: Implications of Pricing Schemes.
Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2572, 37 -- 46. https://doi.org/10.3141/2572-05
Chen, T.D., Kockelman, K.M., Hanna, J.P., 2016. Operations of a shared, autonomous, electric vehicle fleet: Implications of vehicle
& charging infrastructure decisions. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 94, 243 -- 254.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRA.2016.08.020
DG Trésor [WWW Document], 2018. URL https://www.tresor.economie.gouv.fr/
Fagnant, D.J., Kockelman, K., 2015. Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations.
Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 77, 167 -- 181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.04.003
Fagnant, D.J., Kockelman, K.M., 2018. Dynamic ride-sharing and fleet sizing for a system of shared autonomous vehicles in Austin,
Texas. Transportation (Amst). 45, 143 -- 158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-016-9729-z
Fagnant, D.J., Kockelman, K.M., 2014. The travel and environmental implications of shared autonomous vehicles, using agent-based
model scenarios. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 40, 1 -- 13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2013.12.001
Fagnant, D.J., Kockelman, K.M., Bansal, P., 2015. Operations of Shared Autonomous Vehicle Fleet for Austin, Texas, Market. Transp.
Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2536, 98 -- 106. https://doi.org/10.3141/2536-12
Farhan, J., Chen, T.D., 2018. Impact of ridesharing on operational efficiency of shared autonomous electric vehicle fleet. Transp. Res.
Part C Emerg. Technol. 93, 310 -- 321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2018.04.022
Firnkorn, J., Müller, M., 2012. Selling Mobility instead of Cars: New Business Strategies of Automakers and the Impact on Private
Vehicle Holding. Bus. Strateg. Environ. 21, 264 -- 280. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.738
Greenblatt, J.B., Shaheen, S., 2015. Automated Vehicles, On-Demand Mobility, and Environmental Impacts. Curr. Sustain. Energy
Reports 2, 74 -- 81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40518-015-0038-5
Haboucha, C.J., Ishaq, R., Shiftan, Y., 2017. User preferences regarding autonomous vehicles. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 78,
37 -- 49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2017.01.010
Harper, C.D., Hendrickson, C.T., Mangones, S., Samaras, C., 2016. Estimating potential increases in travel with autonomous vehicles for
the non-driving, elderly and people with travel-restrictive medical conditions. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 72, 1 -- 9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRC.2016.09.003
Heilig, M., Hilgert, T., Mallig, N., Kagerbauer, M., Vortisch, P., 2017. Potentials of Autonomous Vehicles in a Changing Private
Transportation System -- a Case Study in the Stuttgart Region. Transp. Res. Procedia 26, 13 -- 21.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2017.07.004
Hörl, S., 2017. Agent-based simulation of autonomous taxi services with dynamic demand responses. Procedia Comput. Sci. 109, 899 --
904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.05.418
Hörl, S., Ruch, C., Becker, F., Frazzoli, E., Axhausen, K.W., 2019. Fleet operational policies for automated mobility: A simulation
assessment for Zurich. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 102, 20 -- 31. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRC.2019.02.020
Horni, A., Nagel, K., Axhausen, K.W., 2016. The Multi-Agent Transport Simulation MATSim. Ubiquity Press, London.
https://doi.org/10.5334/baw
Hyland, M., Mahmassani, H.S., 2018. Dynamic autonomous vehicle fleet operations: Optimization-based strategies to assign AVs to
immediate traveler demand requests. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 92, 278 -- 297.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRC.2018.05.003
Kamel, J., Vosooghi, R., Puchinger, J., 2018. Synthetic Population Generator for France. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.19137.81763
Kamel, J., Vosooghi, R., Puchinger, J., Ksontini, F., Sirin, G., 2019. Exploring the Impact of User Preferences on Shared Autonomous
Vehicle Modal Split: A Multi-Agent Simulation Approach. Transp. Res. Procedia 37, 115 -- 122.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2018.12.173
Krueger, R., Rashidi, T.H., Rose, J.M., 2016. Preferences for shared autonomous vehicles. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 69, 343 --
355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2016.06.015
Levin, M.W., Kockelman, K.M., Boyles, S.D., Li, T., 2017. A general framework for modeling shared autonomous vehicles with
dynamic network-loading and dynamic ride-sharing application. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 64, 373 -- 383.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2017.04.006
Loeb, B., Kockelman, K.M., 2019. Fleet performance and cost evaluation of a shared autonomous electric vehicle (SAEV) fleet: A case
study for Austin, Texas. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 121, 374 -- 385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.01.025
Maciejewski, M., 2016. Dynamic Transport Services, in: Horni, A., Nagel, K., Axhausen, K.W. (Eds.), The Multi-Agent Transport
Simulation MATSim. Ubiquity Press, pp. 145 -- 152. https://doi.org/10.5334/baw.23
Maciejewski, M., Bischoff, J., Hörl, S., Nagel, K., 2017. Towards a Testbed for Dynamic Vehicle Routing Algorithms. Springer, Cham,
pp. 69 -- 79. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60285-1_6
Martinez, L.M., Viegas, J.M., 2017. Assessing the impacts of deploying a shared self-driving urban mobility system: An agent-based
model applied to the city of Lisbon, Portugal. Int. J. Transp. Sci. Technol. 6, 13 -- 27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtst.2017.05.005
Meyer, J., Becker, H., Bösch, P.M., Axhausen, K.W., 2017. Autonomous vehicles: The next jump in accessibilities? Res. Transp. Econ.
62, 80 -- 91. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RETREC.2017.03.005
Spieser, K., Treleaven, K., Zhang, R., Frazzoli, E., Morton, D., Pavone, M., 2014. Toward a Systematic Approach to the Design and
Evaluation of Automated Mobility-on-Demand Systems: A Case Study in Singapore, in: Road Vehicle Automation. Springer, pp.
229 -- 245. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05990-7_20
20
Stocker, A., Shaheen, S., 2018. Shared Automated Mobility: Early Exploration and Potential Impacts, in: Road Vehicle Automation 4.
pp. 125 -- 139. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60934-8_12
Vosooghi, R., Kamel, J., Puchinger, J., Leblond, V., Jankovic, M., 2019. Robo-Taxi service fleet sizing: assessing the impact of user trust
and willingness-to-use. Transportation (Amst). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-019-10013-x
Wardman, M., Chintakayala, V.P.K., de Jong, G., 2016. Values of travel time in Europe: Review and meta-analysis. Transp. Res. Part A
Policy Pract. 94, 93 -- 111. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRA.2016.08.019
Wen, J., Chen, Y.X., Nassir, N., Zhao, J., 2018. Transit-oriented autonomous vehicle operation with integrated demand-supply
interaction. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 97, 216 -- 234. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRC.2018.10.018
Zhang, W., Guhathakurta, S., Fang, J., Zhang, G., 2015a. The Performance and Benefits of a Shared Autonomous Vehicles Based
Dynamic Ridesharing System: An Agent-Based Simulation Approach, in: Transportation Research Board 95th Annual Meeting.
Washington DC, United States.
Zhang, W., Guhathakurta, S., Fang, J., Zhang, G., 2015b. Exploring the impact of shared autonomous vehicles on urban parking demand:
An agent-based simulation approach. Sustain. Cities Soc. 19, 34 -- 45. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCS.2015.07.006
|
1109.3948 | 2 | 1109 | 2012-02-06T09:21:16 | The Projection Method for Reaching Consensus and the Regularized Power Limit of a Stochastic Matrix | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.NI",
"eess.SY",
"math.OC",
"math.PR"
] | In the coordination/consensus problem for multi-agent systems, a well-known condition of achieving consensus is the presence of a spanning arborescence in the communication digraph. The paper deals with the discrete consensus problem in the case where this condition is not satisfied. A characterization of the subspace $T_P$ of initial opinions (where $P$ is the influence matrix) that \emph{ensure} consensus in the DeGroot model is given. We propose a method of coordination that consists of: (1) the transformation of the vector of initial opinions into a vector belonging to $T_P$ by orthogonal projection and (2) subsequent iterations of the transformation $P.$ The properties of this method are studied. It is shown that for any non-periodic stochastic matrix $P,$ the resulting matrix of the orthogonal projection method can be treated as a regularized power limit of $P.$ | cs.MA | cs |
ISSN 0005-1179, Automation and Remote Control, 2011, Vol. 72, No. 12, p. 2458. c(cid:13) Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2011.
Original Russian Text c(cid:13) R.P. Agaev and P.Yu. Chebotarev, 2011, published in Avtomatika i Telemekhanika, 2011, No. 12, pp. 38-59.
MULTI-AGENT SYSTEMS
The Projection Method for Reaching Consensus and
the Regularized Power Limit of a Stochastic Matrix1
R. P. Agaev and P. Yu. Chebotarev
Trapeznikov Institute of Control Sciences, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia
Received February 22, 2011
Abstract -- In the coordination/consensus problem for multi-agent systems, a well-known condition of
achieving consensus is the presence of a spanning arborescence in the communication digraph. The
paper deals with the discrete consensus problem in the case where this condition is not satisfied.
A characterization of the subspace TP of initial opinions (where P is the influence matrix) that ensure
consensus in the DeGroot model is given. We propose a method of coordination that consists of: (1) the
transformation of the vector of initial opinions into a vector belonging to TP by orthogonal projection
and (2) subsequent iterations of the transformation P. The properties of this method are studied. It is
shown that for any non-periodic stochastic matrix P, the resulting matrix of the orthogonal projection
method can be treated as a regularized power limit of P.
In the last decade, the problem of reaching consensus in multi-agent systems has been the subject of
many works. For the basic results in the field, we refer to the surveys and monographs [1 -- 11].
1. INTRODUCTION
1, . . . , s0
1, . . . , sk
n)T is the vector of initial opinions of the members of a group and s(k) = (sk
One of the first discrete models of reaching consensus was proposed by DeGroot [12]. Suppose that
n)T
s(0) = (s0
is the vector of their opinions after the kth step of coordination. In accordance with the DeGroot model,
s(k) = P s(k − 1), k = 1, 2, . . . , where P is a row stochastic influence matrix whose entry pij specifies the
degree of influence of agent j on the opinion1 of agent i. Thereby,
s(k) = P ks(0),
k = 1, 2, . . . .
(1)
Consensus is [asymptotically] achieved if limk→∞ sk
i = ¯s for some ¯s ∈ R and all i ∈ {1, . . . , n}.
It has been shown [12] that consensus is achieved for any initial opinions if and only if the matrix
P ∞ = limk→∞ P k exists and all rows of P ∞ are identical, which is equivalent to the regularity2 of P .
Thus, reaching consensus in the DeGroot model is determined by the asymptotic properties of the powers
of P and the initial opinions.
If P is not regular, then the opinions do not generally tend to agreement. Yet, consensus can be
achieved if the vector of initial opinions belongs to a certain subspace. Below we characterize this
subspace and consider the method of projection which ensures that consensus is achieved even if the
vector of initial opinions does not belong to the above-mentioned subspace. Furthermore, it is found that
1 This work was supported in part by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, project no. 09-07-00371 and the program
of RAS Presidium "Mathematical Theory of Control."
1 Thus, row i of P determines an iterative adjustment process for agent i's opinion; since P is row stochastic, the degrees
of influence on each agent sum to 1.
2 A stochastic matrix is said to be regular [13] if it has no eigenvalues of modulus 1 except for the simple eigenvalue 1.
In the terminology of matrix
Regular stochastic matrices are also called SIA (stochastic, indecomposable, aperiodic).
analysis, we mainly follow [13, 14]; in the terminology of graph theory we follow [15 -- 17].
2458
THE PROJECTION METHOD FOR REACHING CONSENSUS
2459
the resulting matrix of the orthogonal projection procedure can be treated as a regularized power limit
of the initial stochastic matrix.
The paper is organized as follows. After introducing the terminology (Section 2) and listing a number
of well-known results used in the analysis of network dynamics (Section 3), in Section 4 we discuss the
conditions of reaching consensus in the DeGroot model. Section 5 characterizes the region of convergence
to consensus for the DeGroot model. Sections 6 -- 8 present the orthogonal projection procedure which
generalizes the DeGroot algorithm and can be applied when this algorithm does not ensure that consensus
is achieved. These sections also give the structure of the projection and the properties of the proposed
method. In Section 9, we consider some non-orthogonal projections onto the subspace of convergence to
consensus. In Section 8, we demonstrate that in the orthogonal projection procedure (as well as in the
DeGroot algorithm), the nonbasic agents do not affect the final result. In sections 10 and 12, the case of
the absence of nonbasic agents is studied and the main result is extended to the general case. Section 11
briefly discusses the interpretation of the orthogonal projection procedure, and the final Section 13 deals
with the concept of the regularized power limit of a stochastic matrix.
2. BASIC NOTATION
With a stochastic influence matrix P, we associate the communication digraph Γ with vertex set
V (Γ) = {1, . . . , n}. Γ has the (j, i) arc with weight wji = pij whenever pij > 0 (i.e., whenever agent j
influences agent i). Thus, arcs in Γ are oriented in the direction of influence; the weight of an arc is the
power of influence.
The Kirchhoff matrix (see [16, 18]) L = L(Γ) = (ℓij) of digraph Γ is defined as follows:
if j 6= i,
then ℓij = −wji whenever Γ has the (j, i) arc and ℓij = 0 otherwise; ℓii = −Pk6=i ℓik, i = 1, . . . , n. The
Kirchhoff matrix has zero row sums and nonpositive off-diagonal entries.
The matrices of this kind are sometimes referred to as directed Laplacians [19]. However, in a more
precise terminology [18, Section 2.2], the Laplacian matrix of a digraph is the matrix with zero row sums
whose non-diagonal entries are defined by ℓij = −wij, i.e., as distinct from the Kirchhoff matrix, the
entries in the ith row are determined by the weights of the arcs outgoing from3 i. Consequently, if all arcs
of Γ are reversed, then the Laplacian matrix of the resulting digraph coincides with the Kirchhoff matrix
of Γ and vice versa. Consequently, the Kirchhoff matrices and Laplacian matrices of digraphs form the
same class.
By virtue of the above definitions, for the digraph Γ associated with P we have
L(Γ) = I − P,
(2)
where I is the identity matrix.
Any maximal by inclusion strong (i.e., with mutually reachable vertices) subgraph of a digraph is
called a strong component (or a bicomponent) of this digraph. A basic bicomponent is a bicomponent
such that the digraph has no arcs coming into this bicomponent from outside. Vertices belonging and
not belonging to basic bicomponents can be called basic and nonbasic, respectively. Similarly, we call
an agent basic/nonbasic when the vertex representing this agent is basic/nonbasic. Let b and ν be the
number of basic vertices and the number of basic bicomponents in Γ, respectively.
We enumerate the basic bicomponents and after them the nonbasic bicomponents. Furthermore, we
enumerate the vertices in the first bicomponent, next the vertices in the second bicomponent, and so on.
We shall assume that agents are numbered correspondingly. In this case, the influence matrix P and the
3 Because of the similarity of these definitions, the Kirchhoff and Laplacian matrices are often confused. In the problems of
decentralized control, either formalism can be used. If the analysis is based on the construction of the influence digraph (as
in the present paper), it is convenient to use Kirchhoff matrices, while if the digraph of references (requests for information)
is constructed whose arcs are directed oppositely, it is more convenient to use Laplacian matrices.
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
2460
AGAEV, CHEBOTAREV
Kirchhoff matrix L have a lower block-triangular form called the Frobenius normal form. In the matrices
P and L represented in this form, the upper-left blocks of size b × b correspond to the basic vertices of
the communication digraph. These blocks will be denoted by PB and LB:
P = PB 0
∗ ! , L = LB 0
∗ ! .
∗
∗
(3)
PB and LB respectively coincide with the influence matrix and the Kirchhoff matrix of the communication
digraph restricted to the set of basic vertices/agents.
The vertex set of any bicomponents is called a class. We also speak of the corresponding classes of
agents. The vertex set of a basic bicomponent will be called a final class 4 [20].
If the DeGroot algorithm converges and vertex j is not basic, then, as noted in [12], column j in
the limiting matrix P ∞ is zero and the initial opinion of agent j does not affect the limiting vector of
opinions.
3. USEFUL RESULTS FROM ALGEBRAIC GRAPH THEORY
In this section, we present a number of results that are useful in the analysis of the DeGroot model
and other network control models. In particular, they are used to prove the subsequent theorems and
propositions (the proofs are given in the Appendix).
First, if the sequence of powers P k of a stochastic matrix P has a limit P ∞, then
P ∞ = J,
(4)
where J is the normalized matrix of maximum out-forests of the corresponding weighted digraph Γ (a
corollary of the matrix tree theorem for Markov chains [21]).
The matrix J is equal to the matrix Jn−ν defined recursively:
Jk = I − k
L Jk−1
tr(L Jk−1)
, where k = 1, . . . , n − ν, J0 = I, and L Jn−ν = 0
(see [23, Section 4] or [18, Section 5]) and can also be found by passage to the limit:
(Theorem 6 in [22]).
Furthermore, since L = I − P, we have
J = lim
τ →∞
(I + τ L)−1
P ∞L = LP ∞ = 0
and
N (P ∞) = R(L), R(P ∞) = N (L),
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
where N (A) and R(A) are the kernel (null space) and the range of A, respectively (see, e.g., [23, Sec-
tion 5]). Moreover, P ∞ is the eigenprojection5 (principal idempotent) of L [26, 27] and
rank P ∞ = ν;
rank L = n − ν,
(9)
4 In the above context, this definition may seem illogical, since a basic bicomponent does not allow arcs from outside.
However, it is justified by the fact that in the Markov chain determined by the influence matrix P, transitions occur not
in the direction of the arcs of influence, but rather in the direction of agents that influence. Thereby, "all roads lead to"
the basic bicomponents, and the union of final classes is exactly the set of essential states of the corresponding Markov
chain.
5 On the methods of computing eigenprojections, see, e.g., [24, 25].
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
THE PROJECTION METHOD FOR REACHING CONSENSUS
where ν is the number of basic bicomponents in Γ [22, Proposition 11]. It follows from (9) that
where dim N (L) is the dimension of the kernel (the nullity) of L. Finally, by [18, Proposition 12],
dim N (L) = ν,
N (L) ∩ R(L) = {0},
ind L = 1,
2461
(10)
(11)
(12)
where ind L (the index of L) is the order of the largest Jordan block of L corresponding to the zero
eigenvalue, and by (10) and (12),
mL(0) = ν,
(13)
where mL(0) is the multiplicity of 0 as an eigenvalue of L.
4. CONDITIONS FOR CONVERGENCE TO CONSENSUS IN THE DEGROOT MODEL
As noted in the Introduction, the DeGroot algorithm converges to consensus for any initial opinions
if and only if there exists a limiting matrix P ∞ = limk→∞ P k having all rows equal. According to the
ergodic theorem for Markov chains, a necessary and sufficient condition for this is, in turn, the regularity
(the SIA property) of P.
The equality of all rows of P ∞ amounts to
P ∞ = 1πT
(14)
with some probability vector (the components are non-negative and sum to 1) π, where 1 = (1, . . . , 1)T.
In this case, the consensus ¯s is expressed by the inner product of the vectors π and s(0):
s(∞) = P ∞s(0) = 1πTs(0) = 1¯s,
(15)
where s(∞) is the limiting vector of opinions, π is the limiting weight distribution of the DeGroot
algorithm, and ¯s = πTs(0) is the consensus.
A probability vector π is called a stationary vector of a stochastic matrix P if it is a left eigenvector
of P corresponding to the eigenvalue 1: πTP = πT. Obviously, this condition is satisfied for the vector
π in the representation P ∞ = 1πT of P ∞, provided that the convergence of the DeGroot algorithm to
consensus is guaranteed by the regularity of P.
By Theorem 3 in [12], if for any vector of initial opinions s(0), the DeGroot algorithm converges to
the consensus πTs(0), then6 π is a unique stationary vector of P .
Let us mention some sufficient conditions [12] of the convergence of P k (k → ∞) to a matrix with
identical rows. One of them is the presence of an entirely positive column (stochastic matrices with at
least one positive column are called Markov matrices) in P k for some k. Another sufficient condition is
that all states in the Markov chain corresponding to P are mutually accessible (in this case, Γ is strongly
connected and the agents belong to the same class) and P is proper [13] (which means that P has no
eigenvalues of modulus 1 that are not equal to 1); in this case, P is said to be primitive.
A criterion of convergence to consensus for the DeGroot algorithm can also be formulated in terms of
the communication digraph Γ. The equality of the rows of P ∞ is equivalent to rank P ∞ = 1. Therefore,
owing to (9), when the sequence {P k} converges, consensus is achieved for any initial opinions if and only
if the communication digraph Γ corresponding to P has a single basic bicomponent (ν = 1). Consequently,
6 In fact, already in [13] (§ 7 of Chapter 13) it was observed that if P is regular, then the vector π can be uniquely recovered
from the equation π = P Tπ and each row of P ∞ = limk→∞ P k is the transpose of π.
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
2462
AGAEV, CHEBOTAREV
provided that the sequence P k converges, ν = 1 is equivalent to the regularity of P . In turn, by (13),
this is the case if and only if 0 is a simple eigenvalue of L.
Finally, ν = 1 if and only if Γ has a spanning out-tree (also called arborescence and branching) [22,
ij ) = J = ( Jij) is the normalized matrix of spanning
In this case (see (4)), P ∞ = (p∞
Proposition 6].
out-trees [22]:
ij = πj = Jij =
p∞
tj
t
,
i, j = 1, . . . , n,
(16)
where tj is the total weight7 of Γ's spanning out-trees rooted at j and t is the total weight of all spanning
out-trees of Γ. It follows from (15) and (16) that in the case of guaranteed consensus,
¯s =(cid:18) t1
t
, . . . ,
tn
t (cid:19) s(0) = t−1
nXj=1
tj s0
j .
A survey of some results on the DeGroot model and its generalizations can be found in [4, 8]. Note
that one of the applications of the DeGroot model is information control in social networks [28].
5. THE REGION OF CONVERGENCE TO CONSENSUS OF THE DEGROOT ALGORITHM
Consider an influence matrix P whose powers converge to8 P ∞, but the rows of P ∞ are not necessarily
equal.
In the vector space of initial opinions s(0), let us find the subspace TP whose vectors are transformed
by P ∞ into vectors with equal components. Obviously, the DeGroot algorithm (1) with a proper matrix P
leads to a consensus if and only if s(0) ∈ TP . That is why TP will be referred to as the region of convergence
to consensus of the DeGroot algorithm (1). In Section 6, we will present a consensus procedure which
consists of two steps: on the first step, the vector of initial opinions s(0) 6∈ TP is replaced by the nearest
vector in TP ; on the second step, the algorithm (1) is applied to the result of the first step.
The following theorem characterizes the subspace TP .
Theorem 1. If the powers P k of the stochastic matrix P converge, then TP = R(L) ⊕ T1, where TP
is the region of convergence to consensus of the DeGroot algorithm (1), L = I − P, and T1 is the linear
span of the vector 1 = (1, . . . , 1)T.
Now we reformulate Theorem 1 in a different form.
ξ
Corollary 1. Suppose that the powers P k of the stochastic matrix P converge and L = I − P. Let L(i)
be the matrices resulting from L by substituting 1 for the ith column and adding ξ1, where
and M (i)
ξ ∈ R r {0}, to the ith column, respectively. Then TP = R(L(i)) = R(cid:0)M (i)
ξ (cid:1) for any i = 1, . . . , n.
To prove Corollary 1, it is sufficient observe that any column of L is equal to the sum of the remaining
columns taken with the minus sign. Consequently, its removal does not affect the linear span of the
columns. Thus, R(L(i)) = R(L) ⊕ T1 and so TP = R(L(i)) is equivalent to the assertion of Theorem 1.
Similarly, R(cid:0)M (i)
ξ (cid:1) = R(L) ⊕ T1, and TP = R(cid:0)M (i)
ξ (cid:1) is also equivalent to the assertion of Theorem 1.
Remark 1. Corollary 1 can also be formulated as follows: s(0) ∈ TP if and only if either system
Indeed, the consistency of these systems is
of equations L(i)x = s(0) or M (i)
ξ x = s(0) is consistent.
tantamount to s(0) ∈ R(L(i)) and s(0) ∈ R(cid:0)M (i)
ξ (cid:1), respectively.
7 The weight of an out-tree (and, more generally, of a digraph) is the product of the weights of all its arcs.
8 This assumption is not too restrictive. It is satisfied, e.g., if every final class has at least one agent taking into account its
own current opinion in the iterative adjustment of its opinion. More generally, the limit P ∞ exists [13] if and only if P is
proper, i.e., P has no eigenvalues (6= 1) of modulus 1.
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
THE PROJECTION METHOD FOR REACHING CONSENSUS
2463
In what follows, we will need a matrix with independent columns whose range is TP .
Corollary 2. Let U be any matrix obtained from L by (1) deleting, for each final class, one column
corresponding to some vertex of this class and (2) adding 1 as the first column. Then the columns of U
are independent and TP = R(U ).
Remark 2. Owing to Corollary 2, the n − b columns of L corresponding to the nonbasic vertices are
linearly independent. Therefore, for U to remain a matrix of full column rank, they can be replaced
by any n − b independent columns with zeros in all "basic" rows (see also Proposition 1 and Corollary 4
below).
Using (8) and (4) the region TP of convergence to consensus can also be represented through the kernel
of P ∞ = J.
Corollary 3. Under the assumptions of Theorem 1, TP = N ( J ) ⊕ T1.
Remark 3. According to (9) rank J = ν. By virtue of [13, (102) in Chapter 13], P ∞ = J has a lower
block-triangular form. Moreover, its submatrix corresponding to the basic vertices is block-diagonal:
every basic bicomponent is represented by a diagonal block with equal rows. Therefore, N ( J ) is the
orthogonal complement of the linear span of ν columns of J T taken one from each diagonal block repre-
senting a basic bicomponent.
The following proposition enables one to "locate" the subspace TP .
Proposition 1. Let x ∈ Rn. Then x ∈ TP ⇔ xB ∈ TPB, where xB is x with the nonbasic components
removed.
By the definition of TP , to prove Proposition 1, it is sufficient establish that P ∞x = a1n ⇔ (PB)∞xB =
a1b, where a ∈ R, (PB)∞ = limk→∞(PB)k, and the vectors 1 are supplied with their dimensions as a
subscript. This equivalence can be easily deduced from the following properties of the matrix P ∞
(see [13, (102) in Chapter 13]): (1) the submatrix of P ∞ corresponding to the basic vertices coincides
with (PB)∞; (2) the last n − b columns of P ∞ consist of zeros; (3) the last n − b rows of P ∞ are convex
combinations of the first b rows.
Corollary 4 (of Proposition 1). The region of convergence to consensus of the DeGroot algorithm has
the form TP = TPB × Rn−b.
Example 1. Consider the multi-agent system whose communication digraph Γ is shown in Fig. 1.
For simplicity, Fig. 1 does not show loops (every vertex has a loop whose weight sums to 1 with the
weights of all arcs entering this vertex).
The basic bicomponents of Γ are the restrictions of Γ to the classes {1, 2, 3} and {4, 5}; the class {6, 7}
is nonbasic. Matrices P and L = I − P of the communication digraph Γ are as follows:
P =
0 0.3
0.7
0.1 0.9
0
0.4 0.2 0.4
0
0
0
0
0 0.1 0.3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0.7 0.3
0 0.2 0.8
0
0 0.2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0.3 0.3
0 0.2 0.6
, L =
0
0
0
0.3
−0.1
0.1
−0.4 −0.2
0
0
0 −0.3
0
0.6
0
0 −0.2
0
0 −0.2
0
0
0 −0.1 −0.3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.3 −0.3
0.2
0
0 −0.2
0
0
0
0
0
0.7 −0.3
0.4
0
.
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
2464
AGAEV, CHEBOTAREV
Fig. 1. The communication digraph Γ of a multi-agent system.
We construct the matrix U (see Corollary 2) by removing the first and the fourth column of L and
adding 1 as the first column; also find the matrix P ∞ = J by using (5) or (6) or by computing limk→∞ P k :
U =
0 −0.3
0
0.6
0
1
0
1
0.1
1 −0.2
0
0 −0.3
0
1
0
0.2
1
0
1 −0.1 −0.3
0
0 −0.2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.7 −0.3
0.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
, P ∞ ≈
0.2
0.2
0.2
0
0
0.4
0.4
0.4
0
0
0.4
0.4
0.4
0
0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0.6 0 0
0.6 0 0
0.291 0.291 0.146 0.109 0.164 0 0
0.146 0.146 0.073 0.255 0.382 0 0
0
0
0
0.4
0.4
(17)
(in P ∞, all entries, except for the decimal values in the last two rows, are exact).
According to Corollary 2, U has full column rank and the linear span of its columns coincides with
the region of convergence to consensus of the DeGroot algorithm: R(U ) = TP . Finally, according to
Corollary 3 and Remark 3, TP is the direct sum of T1 and the orthogonal complement of the linear span
of the vectors9
π1 =(cid:0)0.4 0.4 0.2 0 0 0 0(cid:1)T and π2 =(cid:0)0 0 0 0.4 0.6 0 0(cid:1)T,
obtained by transposing the rows of P ∞ corresponding to the different final classes.
(18)
6. THE ORTHOGONAL PROJECTION METHOD
If P is not regular, then TP 6= Rn, i.e., there are vectors of initial opinions not driven to consensus by
the DeGroot algorithm. Consider the case where consensus is still needed. How can it be reached? A
natural suggestion is to enrich the communication digraph with additional links that will ensure regularity
of the matrix P and to perform the iterative adjustment of opinions with the new matrix. However, one
can imagine a situation where communication between agents is their prerogative and the only thing the
"center" may suggest (or theoretically consider) is a certain correction of the initial conditions s(0). In
what follows, we consider mathematical and algorithmic aspects of this approach.
As shown above, to ensure reaching consensus by means of the DeGroot algorithm with matrix P,
it is necessary to transform the vector s(0) into some vector s′(0) ∈ TP . In doing so, it is desirable to
minimize ks′(0) − s(0)k, where k·k is the Euclidean norm.
The transformation mapping any vector s(0) into the closest vector in TP is the orthogonal projection
P ). According to Lemma 2.3 in [29] this projection is
of Rn onto TP (along the orthogonal subspace T ⊥
given by a symmetric idempotent matrix; we will denote it by S.
9 Here, the row vectors are represented in a "matrix" form, i.e., their components are separated by a space.
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
THE PROJECTION METHOD FOR REACHING CONSENSUS
2465
If the initial conditions are adjusted by means of the orthogonal projection S, then the limiting vector
of opinions s(∞) can be represented as follows:10
s(∞) = P ∞Ss(0).
This method will be called the orthogonal projection procedure for reaching consensus. The matrix
∞
P :
P ∞S will be referred to as the resulting matrix of the orthogonal projection procedure and denoted by
∞
P = P ∞S.
(19)
By construction, the orthogonal projection procedure leads to a consensus for any vector of initial
opinions11 s(0) (recall that TP is the region of convergence to consensus of the DeGroot algorithm, while
∞
S projects Rn onto TP ). Consequently, all rows of the matrix
P are identical, i.e., there is a vector
α = (α1, . . . , αn)T such that
∞
P = 1αT.
(20)
Vector α will be referred to as the weight vector of the orthogonal projection procedure. Thus, the proposed
procedure can be written in the form
s(∞) = P ∞Ss(0) =
∞
P s(0) = 1αTs(0) = 1¯s,
(21)
where s(0) is an arbitrary vector of initial opinions, α is the weight vector of the orthogonal projection
procedure, and ¯s = αTs(0) is the consensus.
Is α a probability vector? S is the projection onto the subspace TP which by Theorem 1 contains 1.
Consequently, S leaves 1 fixed, i.e., S has all row sums equal to 1. Given the fact that P ∞ is stochastic,
i=1 αi = 1. Observe, however, that S may have
we obtain that
negative entries. Therefore, the answer to the question on the nonnegativity of the weight vector α is
not immediately obvious. This question will be answered in Section 10. This will enable one to interpret
the matrix
P = P ∞S also has row sums 1, i.e., Pn
∞
∞
P as the regularized power limit of the stochastic matrix P.
7. FINDING THE ORTHOGONAL PROJECTION
Consider the properties of the projection S. It is known [29] that for any rectangular matrix A, the
matrix AA+ where A+ is the Moore-Penrose generalized inverse of A, is the orthogonal projection with
range R(A).
Note that the matrix U defined in Corollary 2 has full column rank n − ν + 1 and R(U ) = TP . Hence,
owing to the above fact, the orthogonal projection S with range TP has the expression S = U U +. To
determine U +, we use the formula U + = (U TU )+U T (see, e.g., Problem 2.17(d) in [29]) which for the
matrix U of full column rank takes the form U + = (U TU )−1U T. Consequently,
S = U U + = U (U TU )−1U T.
(22)
The following proposition clarifies the structure of S.
10 Note that in finding s(∞), as well as in the DeGroot algorithm, there is no necessity to compute the powers of P : it is
sufficient to iterate the multiplication of P by vectors, starting with the vector Ss(0); the calculation of Ss(0) will be
discussed below.
11 Formally, this can be proved as follows: by the definition of S, Theorem 1, and Eq. (7), R(P ∞S) = {P ∞Ss(0) s(0) ∈
Rn} = {P ∞(Ly + a1) y ∈ Rn, a ∈ R} = {a1 a ∈ R}.
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
2466
AGAEV, CHEBOTAREV
Proposition 2. The orthogonal projection S onto the subspace TP has the form
S = SB 0
I ! ,
0
(23)
where SB is the orthogonal projection onto the region TPB of convergence to consensus of the DeGroot
algorithm with matrix PB.
Proposition 2 follows from Corollary 4. The nonbasic components of any vector do not alter when the
vector is projected onto TP , since any alteration would be contrary to the minimality of the distance to
the projection.
Computing, with the help of (22), the projection S for Example 1 we obtain
S =
1
22
18 −4 −2
−4
18 −2
−2 −2
21
2
4
3 −6
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
6
0
4
6
0
2
3
18 −6
0
13
0
0 22
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 22
4
6
0
0
≈
0.818 −0.182 −0.091
0.818 −0.091
0.955
0.091
0.136 −0.273
0
0
−0.182
−0.091 −0.091
0.182
0.273
0
0
0.273 0 0
0.182
0.273 0 0
0.182
0.091
0.136 0 0
0.818 −0.273 0 0
0.591 0 0
0 1 0
0 0 1
0.182
0.273
0
0
0
0
.
Substituting S and the matrix P ∞ = J (17) into (19) we find the resulting matrix of the orthogonal
projection procedure:
∞
P = P ∞S = 1· 1
Note the following properties of the vector α = 1
110(cid:0)26 26 13 18 27 0 0(cid:1) ≈ 1·(cid:0)0.2364 0.2364 0.1182 0.1636 0.2455 0 0(cid:1).
110(cid:0)26 26 13 18 27 0 0(cid:1)T representing the matrix
∞
P in
accordance with (20): (1) the components of α corresponding to the basic vertices are strictly positive;
i=1 αi = 1; (3) as the comparison
m, where
the components corresponding to the nonbasic vertices are zero; (2) Pn
of (24) and (18) suggests, if vertices k and m belong to the ith final class, then αk/αm = πi
πi is the stationary vector of the influence matrix of the ith basic bicomponent.
k/πi
(24)
The second property has already been proved in the general case (Section 6). Later in this paper we
will prove that the remaining properties hold true as well.
Generally speaking, the orthogonal projection procedure makes a transition from the matrix P ∞
bringing each final class to its separate consensus to the matrix
∞
P establishing a common consensus.
8. DO THE NONBASIC AGENTS AFFECT ANYTHING?
As noted in the Introduction, if the DeGroot algorithm leads to a consensus, then this consensus does
not depend on the initial opinions of the nonbasic agents. This property is inherited by the orthogonal
projection procedure with the difference that under this procedure with a proper (aperiodic) matrix P,
consensus is always achieved. This is stated by the following proposition.
Proposition 3. In the case of a proper matrix P, the resulting vector of opinions s(∞) of the orthogonal
projection procedure does not depend on the initial opinions of the nonbasic agents.
Note that according to (21), s(∞) = P ∞s′(0), where s′(0) = Ss(0). By Proposition 2, the components
of s′(0) corresponding to the nonbasic vertices are equal to the corresponding components of s(0): the
"preequalization" performed by the transformation S does not alter the opinions of the nonbasic agents.
Proposition 3 immediately follows from the equation s(∞) =
∞
P s(0) (21) and the following represen-
tation of the matrix
∞
P .
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
THE PROJECTION METHOD FOR REACHING CONSENSUS
2467
Theorem 2. For any proper matrix P, vector α determining the resulting matrix
∞
P = 1αT of the
orthogonal projection procedure has the form
where (α1, . . . , αb) is any row of the matrix (PB)∞SB (see (3) and (23)).
α = (α1, . . . , αb, 0, . . . , 0)T,
The answer to the more general question "Is the result of the orthogonal projection procedure affected
by the presence of nonbasic agents?" is also "No."
Proposition 4. In the case of a proper matrix P, consensus ¯s of the orthogonal projection procedure
does not alter with the exclusion of nonbasic agents, provided that the initial opinions of the basic agents,
as well as the weights of their influence on each other, are preserved.
Proposition 4, as well as Proposition 3, follows from Theorem 2 which implies that the vector (α1, . . . , αb)T
∞
P does not alter with the exclusion of nonbasic agents. The properties of this vector will be
determining
summarized in Theorem 3 (Section 10).
Thus, under the orthogonal projection procedure, the only result of the presence of nonbasic agents is
that finally their opinions come to the same consensus as the opinions of the basic ones. This consensus
does not depend on the initial opinions of the nonbasic agents or even their presence.
9. NONORTHOGONAL PROJECTION ON THE SUBSPACE OF CONVERGENCE TO
CONSENSUS
In the orthogonal projection procedure, iterative adjustment (1) is preceded by the projection of the
vector of initial opinions s(0) onto the subspace TP (preequalization). By virtue of Proposition 2, to
find the orthogonal projection matrix S, the communication digraph can be restricted to the set of basic
vertices.
An alternative to S is a stochastic matrix that transforms any vector of initial opinions into a vector
in TP and at the same time approximates P. It makes sense to additionally require that this matrix be
idempotent, since otherwise it would alter some vectors already in TP which do not need any preequal-
ization. The problem of finding such a matrix has much in common with the classical problem of matrix
approximation (see, e.g., [30] and [14, Section 7.4]).
corresponding rows of S and the remaining rows equal to the last n − b rows of P . More specifically, if
It can be shown that instead of S one can use the matrix eS that has the first b rows equal to the
P = PB 0
0
(25)
= kP − SkE,
B D ! and S = SB 0
I ! (see (3) and (23)), then
B D ! .
eS = SB 0
eS is not generally idempotent, however, since B 6= 0, we have
0 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)E
<(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)
kP − eSkE =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)
PB − SB 0
PB − SB
B
0
0
D − I (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)E
a zero block corresponding to the nonbasic vertices (indeed, they correspond to the inessential states of
where kXkE is the Euclidean norm of X, i.e., eS is closer to P than S. On the other hand, since P ∞ has
the Markov chain determined by P ; see [13, (102) in Chapter 13]), we have P ∞S = P ∞eS, consequently,
the following proposition holds.
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
2468
AGAEV, CHEBOTAREV
leads to the same consensus as the orthogonal projection procedure.
Proposition 5. If P is proper and eS is given by (25), then the two-stage procedure of coordination
consisting of the preequalization s′(0) = eSs(0) and the iterative adjustment s(k) = P ks′(0), k = 1, 2, . . . ,
As a consequence, we obtain that R(eS) ⊆ TP . It can be shown that if the nonsingularity of the block
D is satisfied, then R(eS) = TP .
Remark 4. Let us mention other specific transformations of the space of initial opinions Rn into
the subspace TP . They do not require computing the orthogonal projection S. Owing to Corollary 1 of
Theorem 1, for the matrices L(i) and M (i)
ξ obtained from L by substituting 1 for the ith column and adding
to it ξ1, where ξ ∈ R r {0}, respectively, R(L(i)) = R(M (i)
ξ ) = TP holds. Thus, preequalization of the
initial vector s(0) by means of either L(i) or M (i)
ensures achieving consensus in the subsequent iterative
adjustment with P. However, it is easy to verify that this approach generates dictatorial procedures:
they lead to a consensus that is equal to the initial opinion of the ith agent if L(i) or M (i)
is used or is
1
proportional to it (i.e., distorts it) in the case of M (i)
ξ with ξ 6∈ {0, 1}. Thus, this method is only good for
the concealment of the dictatorial "coordination" of opinions.
ξ
In considering other possible mappings of the space Rn into TP , the main advantages of the projection
S should be taken into account, namely, that it guarantees the minimal difference between the initial
vector of opinions and the result of its preequalization.
The orthogonal projection S has the expression (22). In Section 10, we will obtain another explicit
expression for S which is useful for studying the properties of the orthogonal projection procedure and
its interpretation.
10. THE ORTHOGONAL PROJECTION METHOD WHEN ALL AGENTS ARE BASIC
According to Theorem 2 nonbasic agents do not affect the vector (α1, . . . , αb)T which determines the
consensus in the orthogonal projection procedure. Therefore, all essential problems can be seen in the
case where all agents are basic. This case is considered in the present section.
Suppose, as before, that P is proper, limk→∞ P k = P ∞, and the number of basic bicomponents is ν.
Since there are no connections between the basic bicomponents, in the absence of nonbasic agents the
DeGroot algorithm is divided into ν independent processes of coordination. It is interesting to see how
the orthogonal projection procedure integrates these processes.
Let mi be the number of vertices in the ith bicomponent. Its influence matrix, Kirchhoff matrix, and
, respectively. In the absence
the power limit of the influence matrix we denote by Pi, Li = (ℓi
of nonbasic agents, P, L, and P ∞ have the form:
uv), and P ∞
i
P =
, L =
, P ∞ =
(26)
where the diagonal blocks correspond to the final classes and the entries not in these blocks are zero.
The matrices P ∞
correspond to the strongly connected digraphs, so (see the sufficient conditions of
achieving consensus in Section 4) all the rows of each of them are identical, i.e., these matrices can be
represented in the form
i
where (πi)T is any row of P ∞
i
.
P ∞
i = 1(πi)T,
i = 1, . . . , ν,
(27)
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
P1
P2
. . .
Pν
L1
L2
. . .
Lν
P ∞
1
P ∞
2
. . .
P ∞
ν
,
THE PROJECTION METHOD FOR REACHING CONSENSUS
2469
Consider the following problem: How is the weight vector α of the orthogonal projection procedure
(21) related to the vectors πi?
Let qi = πi−1 − πi, i = 2, . . . , ν, where πi ∈ Rn is πi supplemented by zeros in the positions correspond-
ing to all bicomponents, except for the ith one. Define X as the matrix obtained from L by replacing
the first column by 1 and the first columns of the blocks corresponding to the other bicomponents by
the zero columns. Thus, X contains ν − 1 zero columns and all other columns of X are independent, so
rank X = n − ν + 1 (see Corollary 2 to Theorem 1).
Now define Z as the matrix obtained from X by replacing the zero columns in the blocks with numbers
i = 2, . . . , ν by the vectors qi. The form of Z with ν = 3 is presented in Eq. (28):
Z =
ℓ1
1m1
1
ℓ1
12
...
1
1 ℓ1
m12
1
0
. . .
. . .
. . . ℓ1
. . .
m1m1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
0
π1
1
...
π1
m1
−π2
1
...
−π2
m2 ℓ2
m22
0
0
0
0
ℓ2
12
...
0
0
0
0
. . .
. . .
...
0
0
0
0
0
0
. . .
0
0
0
0
0
ℓ2
1m2
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . . ℓ2
. . .
m2m2
...
0
0
0
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
π2
1
...
π2
m2
−π3
1
...
−π2
m3 ℓ3
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
0
0
ℓ3
12
...
m32 . . . ℓ3
0
0
ℓ3
1m3
...
m3m3
.
(28)
Lemma 1. Z is nonsingular.
By virtue of Lemma 1 and the proof of Theorem 2.8 in [29], the orthogonal projection S with range
TP satisfies
S = XZ −1.
Substituting (29) into (19) and using (20) yield
1αT =
∞
P = P ∞S = P ∞XZ −1.
(29)
(30)
Equation (30) is used in Theorem 3 which summarizes some properties of the vector α, the weight
vector of the orthogonal projection procedure (see (21)). In particular, this theorem establishes a relation
between α and the vectors πi and matrix Z −1 (see (27) and (28)).
Theorem 3. If all agents are basic, then the following assertions hold:
1. The row vector αT coincides with the first row of Z −1;
2. All components of α are positive and Pn
except for the first row , is 0;
i=1 αi = 1. The sum of the entries in any row of Z −1,
3. Let c(g) be the number of the bicomponent containing vertex g. Then for g, h = 1, . . . , n,
αg
αh
=
g
βc(g) πc(g)
βc(h) πc(h)
h
,
of Γ and the total weight of those of them that are rooted at l, respectively.
l=1(ti
l)2; ti and ti
l are the total weight of all spanning out-trees in the ith bicomponent
where βi = (ti)2/Pmi
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
2470
AGAEV, CHEBOTAREV
Fig. 2. The communication digraph ΓB.
Example 2. Restrict the communication digraph of Example 1 to the union of the final classes (Fig. 2).
In other words, consider the subsystem whose influence matrix and Kirchhoff matrix have the form:
PB =
0 0.3
0.7
0.1 0.9
0
0.4 0.2 0.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0.7 0.3
0 0.2 0.8
, LB = I − PB =
0.3
−0.1
0.1
−0.4 −0.2
0
0
0 −0.3
0
0.6
0
0 −0.2
0
0
0
0.3 −0.3
0.2
0
0
0
0
0
.
The limiting matrix (PB)∞ = limk→∞(PB)k of this subsystem is the "basic" submatrix of P ∞ = J
which was found in Section 5 (see (17)):
Find the resulting matrix of the orthogonal projection procedure using (29). First, we construct the
matrices X and Z defined above:
X =
1
1
0.1
1 −0.2
0
1
1
0
0 −0.3 0
0 0
0.6 0
0
0
0
0 0 −0.3
0 0
0.2
, Z =
0 −0.3
0
0.6
1
1
0.1
1 −0.2
0
1
1
0
0.4
0.4
0.2
0
0
0
0 −0.4 −0.3
0 −0.6
0.2
.
Compute Z −1 and, using Eq. (29), the projection SB:
(PB)∞ = JB =
0.4 0.4 0.2
0.4 0.4 0.2
0.4 0.4 0.2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0.4 0.6
0 0.4 0.6
.
, SB ≈
Z −1 ≈
0.236 0.236
0.118
−4.182 5.818 −2.091
−1.939 1.394
0.455 0.455
0.182 0.182
0.245
0.273
0.697 −0.061 −0.091
0.227 −0.455 −0.682
0.091 −2.182
1.727
0.164
0.182
0.818 −0.182 −0.091
0.818 −0.091
0.955
0.091
0.136 −0.272
−0.182
−0.091 −0.091
0.182
0.273
0.182
0.273
0.182
0.273
0.091
0.136
0.818 −0.273
0.591
0.182
0.273
.
SB coincides (see Proposition 2) with the "basic" submatrix of the projection S found in Section 7.
The resulting matrix of the orthogonal projection procedure is given by (19):
In accordance with Theorem 2,
of Z −1 coincides with any row of
∞
P B = (PB)∞SB ≈ 1·(cid:0)0.2364 0.2364 0.1182 0.1636 0.2455(cid:1).
∞
P B coincides with the "basic" submatrix of
∞
P (see (24)). The first row
∞
P B, as stated in Theorem 3.
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
THE PROJECTION METHOD FOR REACHING CONSENSUS
2471
Thus, in the case where all agents are basic, the orthogonal projection method makes a transition
from a series of local consensuses reached by applying the transformation (PB)∞ to a global consensus
P B with the vectors πi that determine
established by
(PB)∞ is given by item 3 of Theorem 3.
∞
P B. A relation between the vector α determining
∞
11. ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THE ORTHOGONAL PROJECTION METHOD
∞
An interpretation of the orthogonal projection method can be obtained using the following consequence
P = 1αT) is a probability
of Theorem 3: α (the weight vector of the orthogonal projection procedure:
vector; in other words, it determines an impact distribution on the set of agents. Indeed, the resulting
consensus is equal to the weighted mean of the initial opinions with weights taken from the distribution α.
By Theorem 3, the relative weight of the ith vertex of the kth bicomponent in the distribution α is
determined by (1) the fraction of the weight of out-trees starting from vertex i in the total weight of
out-trees of the kth bicomponent (this fraction is equal to πi
k) and (2) the relative uniformity of the kth
bicomponent w.r.t. the weight of the trees starting from its vertices: it can be shown that the higher the
uniformity, the grater βi. This leads to the conclusion that the resulting opinion is maximally influenced
by those leaders in the bicomponents who "broke away from their pursuers." Note that Eq. (A.6) gives
several expressions for αg/αh which provide a number of variations in interpretation of agents' weights
in the orthogonal projection procedure.
In fact, the two-stage method consisting of the preequalization and the subsequent averaging using
the influence matrix acts as if the basic bicomponents were combined into a single component by some
additional arcs. In a subsequent paper, we shall specify what additional arcs lead to a result equivalent
to the preequalization using the orthogonal projection.
Note that enriching connections and finding the stationary vector of the stochastic matrix correspond-
ing to the resulting digraph is the essence of the PageRank method [31]. In it, the links are added evenly,
between all vertices and with equal weights. The structure of additional connections that emulates the
orthogonal projection procedure is more complex.
12. MORE ON NONBASIC AGENTS
The projection S can be represented in the form (29) not only in the case where all agents are basic,
but in the general case as well. For this, it is sufficient to apply the definitions of X and Z given in
Section 10 to an arbitrary matrix L and use the proof of Theorem 2.8 in [29]. In this case, item 1 of
Theorem 3 remains true.
Below we "obtain a somewhat more general result. For the set of basic vertices, we define the matrix
XB using the definition of X given in Section 10. Now to define the matrix X for the whole set of vertices,
we supplement XB with a zero block on the right, the block LB that corresponds in L to the nonbasic
vertices, and an arbitrarily filled block12 G; let Z be the same extension of ZB:
X = XB 0
G LB ! , Z = ZB 0
G LB ! .
(31)
Due to Lemma 1 in Section 10, ZB is nonsingular. According to the proof of Proposition 11 in [22],
LB is also nonsingular. Therefore, Z is invertible. Using (31), the Frobenius formula for the inversion of
block matrices [13, (86) in Chapter 2], (29), and (23) we find
XZ −1 = XB 0
G LB !
B
Z −1
B GZ −1
0
B L−1
−L−1
B ! = XBZ −1
0
B 0
I ! = SB 0
I ! = S.
0
12 Both the block G and the zero block on the right can simply be copied from the Kirchhoff matrix L.
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
2472
AGAEV, CHEBOTAREV
Thus, the following result holds (the second assertion is proved as in Theorem 3).
Proposition 6.
1.
In the presence of nonbasic agents, the orthogonal projection onto the subspace of convergence
to consensus of the DeGroot algorithm has the representation S = XZ −1, where X and Z are defined
in (31).
2. The row vector αT such that
∞
P = 1αT coincides with the first row of Z −1.
13. THE REGULARIZED POWER LIMIT OF A STOCHASTIC MATRIX
The meaning of Eq. (30), Theorem 3, and Proposition 6 is beyond the scope of the consensus problem.
P = P ∞S is stochastic, has
In particular, they state that for any proper stochastic matrix P, the matrix
∞
rank 1 (and thus all its rows are identical) and in the case where P is regular,
∞
P = P ∞.
Moreover, item 3 of Theorem 3 states that the components of the vector α that determines
∞
P =
1αT) have a natural property, namely, within the same (ith) basic bicomponent, their ratio is equal to
the ratio of the corresponding components of the vector πi, the stationary vector of the bicomponent.
Otherwise, if two vertices belong to different bicomponents i and j, then to obtain their ratio, the ratio
of the corresponding elements of πi and πj is to be multiplied by the ratio of specific "weights" of the
bicomponents measuring their internal homogeneity.
∞
P (
On the other hand, studying the problem of consensus leads to the conclusion that there are cases
where it is useful to associate with a stochastic matrix P an adjusted power limit of rank 1, even though
P can be not regular.
These considerations allow us to call the matrix
∞
P associated with a proper stochastic matrix P the
regularized power limit of P . The meaningfulness of this concept is supported by the following properties.
Proposition 7. For any proper stochastic matrix P :
(1) vector α such that
∞
P =
∞
P P = P
P = P ∞
(2)
∞
∞
∞
P P ∞ =
∞
P .
P = 1αT is a stationary vector of the matrix P : αTP = αT;
Item 1 of Proposition 7 follows from the fact that by item 3 of Theorem 3, α is a linear combination
of the vectors π1, . . . , πν each of which is a stationary vector of P. Item 2 follows from item 1.
Note that using the Ces`aro limit limm→∞
k=1 P k, the concept of the regularized power limit of a
stochastic matrix can be extended to arbitrary (not necessarily proper) stochastic matrices.
1
m Pm
14. CONCLUSION
In this paper, we considered the problem of reaching consensus in the case where the influence matrix
appearing in the DeGroot model is proper, but not necessarily regular. To solve this problem, we
propose the orthogonal projection method. On the first stage, this method projects the space of initial
opinions onto the region TP of convergence to consensus of the DeGroot algorithm; this stage is called
preequalization. On the second stage, the result of the first stage is transformed into consensus by the
iterative adjustment with the initial influence matrix. The subspace TP is the direct sum of R(L), where
L = I − P, and the linear span of the vector 1 consisting of ones. We studied the properties of the method
and obtained an interpretation of the resulting weights of agents in terms of spanning out-trees in the
P = P ∞S of the orthogonal projection
communication digraph. It is shown that the resulting matrix
procedure, where S is the orthogonal projection onto TP and P ∞ = limk→∞ P k, can be considered as
the regularized power limit of the stochastic matrix P.
∞
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
THE PROJECTION METHOD FOR REACHING CONSENSUS
2473
APPENDIX
Proof of Theorem 1. From L1 = 0 it follows that 1 ∈ N (L), and by (11), 1 /∈ R(L). Therefore, the
sum of R(L) and T1 is direct. Suppose that a vector of initial opinions x belongs to R(L) ⊕ T1. Then
x = v + a1, where v ∈ R(L) and a ∈ R. By (7), P ∞x = P ∞(v + a1) = a1, i.e., consensus is achieved:
x ∈ TP .
Suppose now that for a vector of initial opinions x, a consensus is achieved: x ∈ TP . Then P ∞x = a1
for some a ∈ R. Since P ∞1 = 1, we have P ∞(x − a1) = 0, from which x − a1 ∈ N (P ∞). By (8)
N (P ∞) = R(L), therefore, x − a1 ∈ R(L). Consequently, for some v ∈ R(L) we have x = v + a1, and so
⊓⊔
x ∈ R(L) ⊕ T1.
Proof of Corollary 2. According to (9), rank L = n − ν. In the proof of Proposition 11 in [22], it is
shown that the diagonal block of L corresponding to the union of the nonbasic bicomponents of Γ has
full rank. On the other hand, each diagonal block Li corresponding to a basic bicomponent has rank
one less than its order and the sum of the columns of this block is 0. Therefore, constructing a maximal
set of linearly independent columns of L and having chosen all columns corresponding to the nonbasic
bicomponents, among the columns corresponding to any basic bicomponent, one can reject no more than
one, thus, exactly one column, since the number of rejected columns must be ν. In the representation of
the rejected column corresponding to the ith basic bicomponent by a linear combination of a maximal set
of independent columns, the coefficients of the columns that correspond to the ith bicomponent are −1.
Thus, removing from L a single arbitrary column for each basic bicomponent and adding all "nonbasic"
columns, we obtain a maximal set of linearly independent columns of L. Owing to Theorem 1, for matrix
U composed of a maximal set of linearly independent columns of L and the column 1, we have R(U ) = TP .
⊓⊔
Proof of Theorem 2. Since the nonbasic vertices correspond to the inessential states of the Markov
chain determined by P , P ∞ has the form (∗ 0), where block 0 consists of n − b columns [13, (102) in
∞
P = P ∞S, as well as P ∞, has the form (∗ 0).
Chapter 13]. According to (23), S = SB 0
0 I!, therefore,
Using (20) we obtain α = (α1, . . . , αb, 0, . . . , 0)T.
∞
respectively. Using (23) we obtain that the upper left block of order b of
completes the proof of Theorem 2.
By virtue of (3) the upper left blocks of order b of P 2, P 3, . . . and P ∞ are (PB)2, (PB)3, . . . and (PB)∞,
P = P ∞S is (PB)∞SB, which
⊓⊔
Proof of Lemma 1. We first prove that q2, . . . , qν are linearly independent. Indeed, in the opposite
i=2 αiqi = 0, where some coefficients αi are nonzero. Let j = min { i αi 6= 0}. Then by definition,
αjqj contains the nonzero components of αjπj−1, while the corresponding components of all vectors qi
i=2 αiqi 6= 0, which proves the linear independence of
case,Pν
with i > j are equal to zero. We obtain that Pν
Let q1 be 1, the column of n ones. Assume that q1, q2, . . . , qν are dependent. Then q1 =Pν
k=2 αkqk for
some α2, . . . , αν (as q2, . . . , qν are independent). Since the first m1 components of q2 are positive and the
corresponding components of qi are equal to zero for i > 2, we have α2 > 0. The next m2 components are
negative in q2, positive in q3, and equal to zero in the remaining vectors qi, therefore, α3 > 0. Proceeding
by induction we obtain αν > 0. On the other hand, the last mν components of qν are negative, which
q2, . . . , qν .
contradicts q1 =Pν
k=2 αkqk. Thus, q1, . . . , qν are linearly independent.
By definition, q2, . . . , qν ∈ R(P ∞). According to (8), R(P ∞) = N (L). Hence, q2, . . . , qν ∈ N (L).
Furthermore, q1 ∈ N (L) as L1 = 0. Thus, the whole set of columns of Z consists of the vectors q1, . . . , qν
forming a linearly independent subset in N (L) and a collection of linearly independent columns of L that
belong to R(L). Finally, by (11), N (L) ∩ R(L) = {0}. Therefore, the columns of Z are independent and
⊓⊔
Z is nonsingular.
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
2474
AGAEV, CHEBOTAREV
Proof of Theorem 3.
1. Consider Eq. (30).
It follows from the definition of X, stochasticity of P ∞, and the identity
P ∞L = 0 (7) that the first column of P ∞X consists of ones, while the remaining columns consist of
zeros. Therefore, each row of the resulting matrix P ∞XZ −1 = 1αT is equal to the first row of Z −1.
2. To prove this assertion, we use the following lemma.
Lemma A.1. If all the entries in the first column of A ∈ Cn×n are equal to 1 and A is invertible, then
A−11 = (1, 0, . . . , 0)T.
Proof of Lemma A.1. By Aij we denote the cofactor of the element aij of A. Let σk be the sum of
the entries in the kth row of A−1. Under the assumptions of Lemma A.1, the expansion of det A along
the first column yields
σ1 = Pn
i=1 Ai1
det A
= Pn
Pn
i=1 Ai1
i=1(1 · Ai1)
= 1.
By M ik and M ijkm we denote the minor of A obtained by removing row i and column k and the
minor obtained by removing rows i and j and columns k and m, respectively. Expanding the minors
M ik of order n − 1 along the first column, for k > 1 we obtain
σk det A =
nXi=1
(−1)i+kM ik =
nXi=1
(−1)i+k(cid:16)i−1Xj=1
(−1)1+jM ij1k +
nXj=i+1
(−1)jM ij1k(cid:17).
(A.1)
For any i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n} such that j < i, the minor M ij1k enters the sum (A.1) with the sign (−1)i+k+1+j,
while the minor M ji1k (having the same value) enters it with the sign (−1)j+k+i. Hence, these minors
⊓⊔
cancel out. Consequently, if det A 6= 0 and k > 1, then σk = 0 holds. The lemma is proved.
Corollary A.1 (of Lemma A.1). If all the entries in the kth column of A ∈ Cn×n are equal to y ∈ C
and A is invertible, then A−11 = (0, . . . , 0, y−1, 0, . . . , 0)T, where y−1 is the kth component of the vector.
Corollary A.1 is obvious.
Now we prove item 2 of Theorem 3. The identity Pn
i=1 αi = 1 was proved in the last paragraph of
Section 6. Since the first column of Z consists of ones, the row sums of Z −1, except for the sum of the
first row (which is equal to 1), are equal to zero by Lemma A.1.
It remains to prove the positivity of the elements of the first row of Z −1. Denote by ti and ti
k the
total weight of all spanning out-trees of the ith bicomponent of Γ and the total weight of those of them
that are rooted at the kth vertex of the ith bicomponent, respectively. According to the matrix tree
theorem (see, e.g., Theorem VI.27 in [16] or Theorem 16.9′ in [15], which is formulated for the matrix LT
and unweighted digraphs) ti
k is equal to the cofactor of any element in the kth row of Li (see (26)). Let
Wi be the determinant of the matrix obtained from Li by replacing the first column by the vector πi.
Expanding Wi along the first column and using (16) we obtain
Wi =
miXk=1
πi
k ti
k =
(πi
k)2 ti =
miXk=1
k)2
(ti
ti
.
miXk=1
Find the cofactors Z h1 (h = 1, . . . , n) of the elements in the first column of Z (see (28)). Here, we
u=1 mu + k(h), where c(h) is the number of the
basic bicomponent containing vertex h and k(h) is the number of this vertex in the bicomponent with
number c(h). Let Z hh1i be the matrix Z after deleting the hth row and the first column. To find
represent the number h of the row in the form h =Pc(h)−1
Z h1 = (−1)h+1 det Z hh1i,
(A.2)
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
THE PROJECTION METHOD FOR REACHING CONSENSUS
2475
in Z hh1i we sequentially move each column qu+1 (where u = 1, . . . , c(h) − 1) mu − 1 steps to the left (if
c(h) = 1, then no columns are moved). Denoting the resulting determinant by Z h1, we have
det Z hh1i = (−1)Pc(h)−1
u=1
(mu−1) Z h1 = (−1)h−k(h)−(c(h)−1) Z h1.
(A.3)
Furthermore, the determinant Z h1 is equal to the product of its diagonal subdeterminants of orders
m1, . . . , mc(h)−1, mc(h) − 1, mc(h)+1, . . . , mν , since the products containing other elements of the columns
qu (including the columns that were moved) are equal to zero. Consequently,
Z h1 =
Wu(−1)k(h)+1 tc(h)
k(h)(−1)ν−c(h)
Wu = (−1)ν−c(h)+k(h)+1 tc(h)
Wu,
(A.4)
νYu=c(h)+1
k(h) Yu6=c(h)
c(h)−1Yu=1
where the factor (−1)ν−c(h) appears due to the negativity of the first columns of the last ν − c(h) diagonal
subdeterminants. Substituting (A.4) into (A.3) and (A.3) into (A.2) we obtain
Z h1 = (−1)ν+1 tc(h)
k(h) Yu6=c(h)
Wu.
(A.5)
From (A.5) and item 1 of Theorem 3 it follows that the signs of all components of α are the same;
k(h) are nonzero. Since, as shown in Section 6, the sum of the components of α is equal to 1,
note that tc(h)
all these components are positive.
Prove item 3 of Theorem 3. For simplicity, we use the following notation: i = c(g), j = c(h), k = k(g),
and r = k(h). Due to item 1 of Theorem 3, (A.5) and (16), we have
αg
αh
=
=
ti
k/Wi
tj
r/Wj
Z g1
Z h1 =
k(ti)2/Pmi
πi
r(tj)2/Pmj
πj
l=1(ti
l=1(tj
=
k/Pmi
r/Pmj
l=1 πi
l=1 πj
βiπi
k
βjπj
r
=
l ti
l
l tj
ti
tj
=
ti
tj
l)2
l )2
l
l ti
l
l tj
l
=
πi
πj
k ti/Pmi
r tj/Pmj
l=1(ti
l=1(tj
l=1 πi
l=1 πj
l)2
l )2
,
k ti/Pmi
r tj/Pmj
from which, in particular, we obtain the desired statement. The theorem is proved.
(A.6)
⊓⊔
REFERENCES
1. Ren, W., Beard, R.W. and Atkins, E.M., Information Consensus in Multivehicle Cooperative Control, IEEE
Control Syst. Mag., 2007, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 71 -- 82.
2. Olfati-Saber, R., Fax, J.A. and Murray, R.M., Consensus and Cooperation in Networked Multi-agent Systems,
Proc. IEEE, 2007, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 215 -- 233.
3. Chebotarev, P.Yu. and Agaev, R.P., Coordination in Multiagent Systems and Laplacian Spectra of Digraphs,
Automat. Remote Control, 2009, vol. 70, no. 3, pp. 469 -- 483.
4. Agaev, R.P. and Chebotarev, P.Yu., Convergence and Stability in Consensus and Coordination Problems (A
Survey of Basic Results), UBS, 2010, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 470 -- 505. In Russian.
5. Wu, C.W., Evolution and Dynamics of Complex Networks of Coupled Systems, IEEE Circuits Syst. Mag.,
2010, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 55 -- 63.
6. Gubanov, D.A., Novikov, D.A. and Chkhartishvili, A.G., Sotsial'nie seti. Modeli informatsionnogo vliyaniya,
upravleniya i protivoborstva (Social Networks. Models of Information Impact, Control, and Confrontation).
Moscow: Fizmatlit, 2010.
7. Wu, C.W., Synchronization in Complex Networks of Nonlinear Dynamical Systems. Singapore: World Scien-
tific, 2007.
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
2476
AGAEV, CHEBOTAREV
8. Jackson, M.O., Social and Economic Networks. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press, 2008.
9. Ren, W. and Beard, R.W., Distributed Consensus in Multi-vehicle Cooperative Control: Theory and Applica-
tions. London: Springer, 2008.
10. Mesbahi, M. and Egerstedt, M., Graph Theoretic Methods in Multiagent Networks. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
Univ. Press, 2010, 413 pp.
11. Ren, W. and Cao, Y., Distributed Coordination of Multi-agent Networks: Emergent Problems, Models, and
Issues. London: Springer, 2011.
12. DeGroot, M.H., Reaching a Consensus, J. Amer. Statist. Associat., 1974, vol. 69, no. 345, pp. 118 -- 121.
13. Gantmacher, F.R., The Theory of Matrices. New York: Chelsea, 1959.
14. Horn, R.A. and Johnson, C.R., Matrix Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1986.
15. Harary, F., Graph Theory. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1969.
16. Tutte, W.T., Graph Theory. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1984.
17. Cvetkovi´c, D.M., Doob, M. and Sachs, H., Spectra of Graphs. New York: Academic Press, 1980.
18. Chebotarev, P. and Agaev, R., Forest Matrices Around the Laplacian Matrix, Linear Algebra Appl., 2002, vol.
356, pp. 253 -- 274.
19. Veerman, J.J.P., Lafferriere, G., Caughman, J. and Williams, A., Flocks and Formations, J. Statist. Physics,
2005, vol. 121, no. 5 -- 6, pp. 901 -- 936.
20. Berman, A. and Shaked-Monderer, N., Non-negative Matrices and Digraphs, in Encyclopedia of Complexity
and Systems Science. New York: Springer, 2009, pp. 6239 -- 6252.
21. Wentzell, A.D. and Freidlin, M.I., On Small Random Perturbations of Dynamical Systems, Russian Math.
Surveys, 1970, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 1 -- 55.
22. Agaev, R.P. and Chebotarev, P.Yu., The Matrix of Maximum Out Forests of a Digraph and Its Applications,
Automat. Remote Control, 2000, vol. 61, no. 9, pp. 1424 -- 1450.
23. Agaev, R.P. and Chebotarev, P.Yu., Spanning Forests of a Digraph and Their Applications, Automat. Remote
Control, 2001, vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 443 -- 466.
24. Agaev, R.P. and Chebotarev, P.Yu., On Determining the Eigenprojection and Components of a Matrix, Au-
tomat. Remote Control, 2002, vol. 63, no. 10, pp. 1537 -- 1545.
25. Chebotarev, P.Yu. and Agaev, R.P., Addendum to the Paper "On Determining the Eigenprojection and Com-
ponents of a Matrix," Automat. Remote Control, 2011, vol. 72, no. 3, p. 626.
26. Meyer, Jr., C.D., The Role of the Group Generalized Inverse in the Theory of Finite Markov Chains, SIAM
Rev., 1975, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 443 -- 464.
27. Rothblum, U.G., Computation of the Eigenprojection of a Nonnegative Matrix at Its Spectral Radius, in
Stochastic Systems: Modeling, Identification and Optimization II, ser. Mathematical Programming Study,
Wets, R.J.-B., ed. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1976, vol. 6, pp. 188 -- 201.
28. Barabanov, I.N., Korgin, N.A., Novikov, D.A. and Chkhartishvili, A.G., Dynamic Models of Informational
Control in Social Networks, Automat. Remote Control, 2010, vol. 71, no. 11, pp. 2417 -- 2426.
29. Ben-Israel, A. and Greville, T.N.E., Generalized Inverses: Theory and Applications. New York: Wiley, 1974
(2nd Ed.: New York: Springer, 2003).
30. Eckart, C. and Young, G., The Approximation of One Matrix by Another of Lower Rank, Psychometrika, 1936,
vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 211 -- 218.
31. Langville, A.N. and Meyer, C.D., Google's PageRank and Beyond: The Science of Search Engine Rankings.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press, 2006.
AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 72 No. 12
2011
|
1906.11362 | 2 | 1906 | 2019-06-30T04:04:59 | Interactive Physics-Inspired Traffic Congestion Management | [
"cs.MA"
] | This paper proposes a new physics-based approach to effectively control congestion in a network of interconnected roads (NOIR). The paper integrates mass flow conservation and diffusion-based dynamics to model traffic coordination in a NOIR. The mass conservation law is used to model the traffic density dynamics across the NOIR while the diffusion law is applied to include traffic speed and motion direction into planning. This paper offers an analogy between traffic coordination in a transportation system and heat flux in a thermal system to define a potential filed over the NOIR. The paper also develops an interactive light-based and boundary control to manage traffic congestion through optimizing the traffic signal operations and controlling traffic flows at the NOIR boundary nodes. More specifically, a model predictive boundary control optimizes the NOIR inflow traffic while a receding horizon optimizer assigns the optimal movement phases at the NOIR intersections. For simulation, the paper models traffic congestion in a heterogeneous NOIR with a large number of interior and boundary nodes where the proposed interactive control can successfully manage the congestion. | cs.MA | cs | 1
Interactive Physics-Inspired Traffic
Congestion Management
Hossein Rastgoftar
Abstract -- This paper proposes a new physics-based approach
to effectively control congestion in a network of interconnected
roads (NOIR). The paper integrates mass flow conservation and
diffusion-based dynamics to model traffic coordination in a NOIR.
The mass conservation law is used to model the traffic density
dynamics across the NOIR while the diffusion law is applied to
include traffic speed and motion direction into planning. This
paper offers an analogy between traffic coordination in a
transportation system and heat flux in a thermal system to define
a potential filed over the NOIR. The paper also develops an
interactive light-based and boundary control to manage traffic
congestion through optimizing the traffic signal operations and
controlling traffic flows at the NOIR boundary nodes. More
specifically, a model predictive boundary control optimizes the
NOIR inflow traffic while a receding horizon optimizer assigns the
optimal movement phases at the NOIR intersections. For
simulation, the paper models traffic congestion in a heterogeneous
NOIR with a large number of interior and boundary nodes where
the proposed interactive control can successfully manage the
congestion.
I. INTRODUCTION
T
is a complex phenomenon dealing with
RAFFIC
coordination of many vehicles
in a network of
interconnected roads (NOIR). While the number of
vehicles in an NOIR can change with time, the space contained
by the NOIR is fixed and limited. Traffic congestion is an
important issue that wastes time and fuel and can cause accident
in highways. Therefore,
congestion
management models are highly demanded as they can
positively impact several aspects of human life as well as the
environment. This paper will offer a new interactive physic-
based traffic control (IPBTC) approach to model and control
traffic congestion in a heterogeneous NOIR consisting of
unidirectional and bidirectional roads. The proposed IPBTC
can address the urban mobility key challenges by improving the
traffic speed which in turn results in reducing car emissions.
efficient
traffic
Researchers have suggested a variety of approaches to
manage traffic congestion. The traditional fixed-cycle control
[1], [2] has been applied by the traffic signals to manage vehicle
coordination at
is
commonly specified by the cycle time, split time, and offset
intersections. A fixed cycle control
time to characterize cycle completion, green light duration, and
delays, respectively. Traffic network study tool (TRANSYT)
[3], [4] is the existing software used for optimizing the signal
timing under the fixed-cycle assumption.
traffic
control
More recently, the traffic responsive control methods have
been proposed by the researchers due to advancement in
sensing, computing, and vision algorithms. The available
approaches can be classified as model-free and model-based
methods. Model-free methods suggested in [5] -- [12] use the
reinforcement learning (RL) to adaptively mange the traffic
signal operations and traffic coordination in a transportation
infrastructure. Model-based
approaches
commonly use the conservation law and model the traffic
dynamics by a linear system [13] -- [16]. In particular, cell
transition model (CTM) [17] -- [19] has been used to fill every
road by a finite number of serially-connected road elements and
develop a first-order conservation-based traffic dynamics by
discretizing the mass flow conservation PDE. Model-based
reinforcement learning using Markov decision process offered
in [20] -- [22] to manage traffic congestion. Particularly, single
agent RL [5] and multi-agent RL [8] have been previously
proposed to optimize the traffic signal movement phases. Refs.
[23] -- [26] apply MPC to assign optimal traffic speed in
highways. MPC have been also applied in Refs. [27] -- [29] to
optimize the traffic signal operations. Additionally, researchers
have suggested fuzzy logic [30] -- [33], neural network [34] --
[37], mixed nonlinear programming (MNLP) [38] approaches
for the model-based traffic management. Furthermore, traffic
congestion management is modeled as a boundary control
problem in Refs. [39], [40]. In Refs. [39], [40], a first-order
traffic dynamics inspired by mass flow conservation is
developed to the traffic coordination freeways.
This paper aims to advance the resilience and efficiency of
the traffic congestion control by incorporating the macroscopic
and microscopic traffic behavior into planning. To this end, the
paper effectively integrates conduction-based boundary control
and conservation-based light control to manage the traffic
congestion. Particularly, an interactive physics-based traffic
control (IPBTC) will be developed to optimize (i) discrete
actions commanded by the traffic lights at the NOIR
intersections, and (ii) traffic inflow rates at the NOIR boundary
H. Rastgoftar is with the Department of Aerospace Engineering, University
of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109 USA e-mail: [email protected].
2
nodes. IPBTC models the traffic macroscopic coordination as a
conduction problem governed by a parabolic PDE with spatio-
temporal parameters. Conduction-based coordination
is
inspired by the following two facts:
1) Traffic must move at a certain direction assigned by an
authorized decision-maker (ADM) at every NOIR (See
Figure 1).
2) The traffic speed is a distributed non-negative quantity
assuming vehicles obey the prescribed motion direction at
any location of the NOIR.
These two features of traffic coordination are analogous to
conduction in a thermal system. More specifically, heat flux is
the gradient of the temperature distribution in a thermal system
where it is always conducted from high-temperature locations
toward low-temperature locations. Similarly, the paper defines
a scalar potential field over the NOIR which is analogous to
temperature distribution in a thermal system. By defining the
traffic speed as the gradient of the traffic potential function,
traffic flows from a high-potential location to a low-potential
location. Furthermore, IPBTC applies the mass conservation
law to model the microscopic traffic congestion. Particularly,
the microscopic traffic coordination is modeled by a stochastic
switching dynamics obtained by governing
the mass
conservation law at every road element across the NOIR.
1) This paper offers a novel interactive light-based and
boundary congestion control approach.
2) A new probabilistic traffic dynamics inspired by mass
flow conservation will be developed where both traffic inflow
and outflow rates are included to obtain the traffic dynamics at
every road element (This will be discussed more in Remark 2).
3) The proposed probabilistic dynamics ensures that the
traffic density is positive at any time t. Therefore, the MPC
boundary controller can control the traffic congestion with
minimum computation cost only by imposing the inequality
constraints on the boundary traffic inflow rates without
imposing state constraints.
4) An interface between conduction-based and conservation
dynamics will be defined in the papers. Therefore, parameters
of the conduction-based dynamics are uniquely related to the
parameters of the mass conservation-based dynamics.
This paper is organized as follows: Preliminary notions on
graph theory and discrete state transition are presented in
Section II. Problem statement in Section III is followed by the
proposed physics-based traffic coordination model given in
Section IV. Interactive boundary and light-based traffic control
model is developed in Section V. Simulation results presented
in Section VI are followed by concluding remarks in Section
VII.
(a)
(b)
Figure 2: (a) Example NOIR-Manhattan. NOIR boundary and
interior nodes are shown by red and green, respectively1. (b) Fixed
movement cycle at NOIR intersection 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶 modeled by a non-
deterministic finite automata.
II. PRELIMINARIES
This paper defines the following three graphs to model and
control the traffic congestion:
1. NOIR graph 𝒢NOIR( 𝒱NOIR, ℰNOIR) with node set
𝒱NOIR = {1, ⋯ , 𝑚} defining all NOIR intersections
and edge set ℰNOIR ⊂ 𝒱NOIR × 𝒱NOIR. 𝒱NOIR =
𝒱𝐵⋃𝒱𝐶 where 𝒱𝐵 = {1, ⋯ , 𝑚𝐵} and 𝒱𝐶 = {𝑚𝐵 +
Figure 1: Analogy between traffic coordination and heat diffusion.
Traffic coordinates from a high-potential location 𝑖 (with potential
value 𝜙𝑖) toward a low-potential location 𝑗 (with potential value 𝜙𝑗)
where traffic speed is always positive at every location across the
road element. Similarly, heat flux is directed from a high-
temperature location toward a low-temperature location in a
thermal system.
Compared to the existing literature, this papers offers the
following contributions:
1 The background image was downloaded from Google Map.
1, ⋯ , 𝑚}. An example NOIR defined over Manhattan
is shown in Figure 2.
2. BC traffic network 𝒢( 𝒱, ℰ) with node set 𝒱 and edge
set ℰ ⊂ 𝒱 × 𝒱. A node 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 represent a road element
with specified motion direction. Graph G is used to
study the macroscopic traffic behavior.
3. Switching LBRC traffic network 𝒢LBRC,𝜆( 𝒱, ℰ𝜆)
with node set 𝒱 and edge set ℰ𝜆 ⊂ 𝒱 × 𝒱. Note that
𝜆 ∈ Λ and ℰ𝜆 ⊂ ℰ, Λ is a finite set defining traffic
network topologies commanded by traffic lights at the
NOIR intersections, i.e. Λ determines every possible
movement phase across the NOIR junctions.
Movement phases are defined by finite set
Λ = 𝜆𝑚𝐵+1 × · · · × 𝜆𝑚,
where 𝜆𝑖 specifies all possible movement phases at intersection
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶, and "×" is the Cartesian product symbol. In particular,
it is assumed that mi unique movements can be commanded at
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱NOIR, therefore,
𝜆𝑖 = {λ𝑖,1, ⋯ , λ𝑚𝑖,1}, i ∈ 𝒱𝐶 .
In this paper, we make the following assumptions:
1. A unique movement phase 𝜆𝑖,𝑗[𝑘] (𝑗 = 1, ⋯ , 𝑚𝑖) can
be commanded at node 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶 over the time interval
[𝑡𝑘−1, 𝑡𝑘 ].
2. Transition of movement phases across the NOIR is
defined by a non-deterministic finite state automaton
[41] at every intersection node 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶 (See Figure 2
(b)).
3. An upper bound time limit 𝑇𝐿,𝑖 is considered for the
duration of movement 𝜆𝑖,𝑗 at intersection 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶. A
local timer measures activation period 𝜏𝑖,𝑗 of the
movement phase 𝜆𝑖,𝑗 at NOIR intersection 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶.
Once 𝜏𝑖,𝑗 = 𝑇𝐿,𝑖,
is
overridden at 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶.
the movement phase 𝜆𝑖,𝑗
Given the time-limit threshold 𝑇𝐿,𝑖 at every node 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶,
Λ𝑛𝑒𝑥𝑡[k] = 𝜆𝑚𝐵+1
𝑛𝑒𝑥𝑡 [k] × ⋯ × 𝜆𝑚
𝑛𝑒𝑥𝑡 [k] ⊂ Λ
𝑛𝑒𝑥𝑡 ≤ 2 at any time 𝑘 (∀𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶). 𝜆𝑖
specifies next allowable movement phases at time 𝑘 + 1 given
movement phases at current time 𝑘. This paper assumes that the
movement cycle is fixed at every NOIR intersection. Therefore,
𝑛𝑒𝑥𝑡 = 2 , if 𝜏𝑖,𝑗 < 𝑇𝐿,𝑖
𝜆𝑖
when 𝜆𝑖,𝑗 is active at NOIR intersection node 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶.
𝑛𝑒𝑥𝑡 drops to 1.
Otherwise, the ADM overrides 𝜆𝑖,𝑗 and 𝜆𝑖
Consequently, Λ𝑛𝑒𝑥𝑡 ≤ 2𝑚−𝑚𝐵. Figure 2 (b) shows an example
four-leg NOIR intersection node 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶 with eight possible
movements.
3
(a)
(b)
Figure 3: (a) Discretizing a road into a finite number of serially-
connected bar elements. It is assumed that the traffic potential
function 𝜙 is linearly decreasing across a road element. Therefore,
𝑉𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡 and 𝑉𝑖,𝑖𝑛are positive quantities at every node 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱. (b)
Schematic of regular and connection road elements.
III. PROBLEM STATEMENT
This paper studies the problem of traffic congestion control in
a large heterogeneous NOIR consisting of bidirectional and
unidirectional roads. This problem is splitted into the following
two problems:
1. Traffic Boundary Control through controlling the
traffic inflows at the NOIR boundary nodes.
2. Traffic Light-Based Responsive Control (LBRC)
through optimizing discrete actions commanded by
the traffic lights situated at the NOIR intersection
nodes.
For the traffic boundary control, traffic coordination is
modeled as a diffusion problem governed by a parabolic PDE.
A scalar potential field 𝜙(𝐫, 𝑡) is defined over the NOIR where
𝐫 and 𝑡 denote position and time, respectively. Potential
function 𝜙(𝐫, 𝑡) is similar to temperature distribution in a
thermal system and governed by the following PDE:
𝐶(𝐫, 𝑡)
𝜕𝜙(𝐫,𝑡)
𝜕𝑡
= ∇ ⋅ (𝐾(𝐫, 𝑡)∇𝜙(𝐫, 𝑡))
(1)
is
where 𝐶(𝐫, 𝑡) is the specific coordination capacity (SCC) and
𝐾(𝐫, 𝑡)
the distributed stiffness (conductivity). The
conduction-inspired macroscopic
is
managed through controlling traffic inflows at the NOIR
boundary nodes. The paper defines a distributed traffic rate
(speed) 𝑉: ℝ2 × ℝ → ℝ+ over the NOIR. 𝑉(𝐫, 𝑡), specifying
the number of vehicles passing from NOIR position 𝐫 at time
𝑡, has the following properties:
traffic coordination
1.
2.
It is a positive quantity everywhere across the NOIR
at any time 𝑡.
𝑉(𝐫, 𝑡) is related to 𝜙(𝐫, 𝑡) by 𝑉(𝐫, 𝑡)= − ∇𝜙(𝐫, 𝑡).
3. Because 𝑉(𝐫, 𝑡) is positive everywhere in the NOIR,
𝜙(𝐫, 𝑡) is decreasing, if we move along the motion
direction in a NOIR road (See Figure 3 (a)).
To model the traffic coordination, the governing Eq. (1) is
spatially discretized using the finite element method (FEM).
The BC traffic network 𝒢( 𝒱, ℰ) is defined over the NOIR,
where 𝒱 = {1, ⋯ , 𝑁} is the node set and ℰ ⊂ 𝒱 × 𝒱 defines
edges of 𝒢. It is assumed that NOIR roads are filled by serially-
connected road elements where 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 represents a unique road
element. The node set 𝒱 can be expressed as
𝒱 = 𝒱𝑖𝑛⋃𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡⋃𝒱𝐼
where 𝒱𝑖𝑛 = {1, ⋯ , 𝑁𝑖𝑛}, 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡 = {𝑁𝑖𝑛 + 1, ⋯ , 𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡}, and
𝒱𝐼 = {𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 + 1, ⋯ , 𝑁} define index numbers of inlet, outlet,
and interior road elements, respectively. Every node 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 has
a neighbor set ℐ𝑖 defined as follows:
ℐ𝑖 = {ℐ𝑖,𝑖𝑛, ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡},
(2)
where ℐ𝑖,𝑖𝑛 and ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡 specify node i's in-neighbor and out-
neighbor nodes. Traffic enters 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 from an in-neighbor node
belonging to ℐ𝑖,𝑖𝑛 and it exits from 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 towards an out-
neighbor node belonging to ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡. 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 is a regular node, if
ℐ𝑖,𝑖𝑛 = ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡 = 1. Otherwise, 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 is a connection node.
Schematic of regular and connection road elements are shown
in Figure 3 (b).
For the traffic LBRC, the microscopic traffic coordination is
treated as a mass conservation problem governed by the
continuity PDE. The switching LBRC graph 𝒢LBRC,𝜆( 𝒱, ℰ𝜆) is
used to spatially discretize continuity PDE when 𝜆 ∈ Λ defines
the
the
conservationbased traffic dynamics is modeled by a stochastic
linear system and the Receding Horizon Optimization (RHO)
[42] is used to optimize the discrete actions (movement phases)
commanded by the traffic lights.
topology. Consequently,
network
traffic
IV. TRAFFIC COORDINATION MODEL
A conduction-inspired traffic model will be developed in
Section IV-A and used to control the traffic coordination
through the NOIR boundary nodes. Section IV-B models traffic
coordination by a discrete-time dynamics inspired by the mass
conservation
law. The relation between parameters of
conduction-based and conservation-based dynamics is also
discussed in Section IV-B.
A. Macroscopic Traffic Coordination as a Conduction
Problem
Consider the schematic of road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 shown in Fig.
4. Every road element i has a unique specific coordination
capacity (SCC) 𝑐𝑖 > 0. Let 𝜙𝑖 be the potential value of the
element 𝑖, 𝑉𝑖,𝑖𝑛 > 0 denote the weighted inflow traffic rate,
and 𝑉𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡 > 0 denote the weighted outflow traffic rate. The
inflow and outflow traffic rates are defined as the number of
vehicles entering and leaving the bar element in a certain
amount of time (See Figure 4). It is assumed that the
conduction-based traffic coordination satisfies the following
four rules:
Rule 1: 𝑐𝑖
𝑑𝜙𝑖
𝑑𝑡
= 𝑉𝑖,𝑖𝑛 − 𝑉𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡
Rule 2: 𝑉𝑖,𝑖𝑛 = {
∑
𝑗∈ℐ𝑖,𝑖𝑛
𝜅𝑖,𝑗(𝜙𝑗(𝑡) − 𝜙𝑖(𝑡))
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 ∖ 𝒱𝑖𝑛
given
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛
4
(3)
Rule 3: 𝑉𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡 = {
∑
𝑖∈ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡
𝜅𝑖,ℎ(𝜙𝑖(𝑡) − 𝜙ℎ(𝑡))
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 ∖ 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡
given
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡
Rule 4: 𝜙𝑖(𝑡) = 0, ∀𝑡, ∀𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡,
where 𝜅𝑖,𝑗 > 0 is the stiffness between road elements 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 and
𝑗 ∈ ℐ𝑖,𝑖𝑛. Rule 4 implies that the potential values of those road
elements defined by 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡 are all zero.
(a)
(b)
Figure 4: (a) Example road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱. Rules 1, 2, and 3 for
obtaining the conduction-inspired traffic coordination. (b) Traffic
flow inspired by mass conservation law.
Relation Between non-weighted Outflow and Potential
𝑇]𝑇 ∈ ℝ(𝑁−𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑁𝑖𝑛)×1 define
Value: Let 𝚽(𝑡) = [𝚽𝑖𝑛
nodal potential values, where 𝚽𝑖𝑛 = [𝜙1 ⋯ 𝜙𝑁𝑖𝑛]𝑇 and 𝚽𝐼
= [𝜙𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡+1 ⋯ 𝜙𝑁]𝑇. Defining non-weighted traffic outflow
inlet
𝑇 𝚽𝐼
𝑉𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡 = {
∑ (𝜙𝑖(𝑡) − 𝜙ℎ(𝑡))
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 ∖ 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡
ℎ∈ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡
given
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡
,
𝐕(𝑡) = [𝑉1,𝑜𝑢𝑡 ⋯ 𝑉𝑁𝑖𝑛,𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝑉𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡+1,𝑜𝑢𝑡 ⋯ 𝑉𝑁,𝑜𝑢𝑡] and
𝚽(𝑡) can be related by
𝐕(𝑡) = 𝐋𝚽(𝑡).
(4)
This paper assumes that 𝑉𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡 measurement is available at
every road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 at all times 𝑡. Defining 𝜁𝑖 = 𝑖 +
𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 − 𝑁𝑖𝑛, 𝐋 = [𝐿𝑖𝑗] ∈ ℝ(𝑁−𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑁𝑖𝑛)×(𝑁−𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑁𝑖𝑛)
is
given by
𝐿𝑖𝑗 =
{
∑
1
𝑗∈ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡
(𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛 ∧ 𝑗 = 𝑖) ∨ (𝜁𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐼 ∧ 𝑗 = 𝑖)
−1 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛 ∧ 𝑗 = ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡
−1 𝜁𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐼 ∧𝜁𝑗 ∈ ℐ𝜁𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡 ∖ (ℐ𝜁𝑗,𝑜𝑢𝑡⋂𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡)
0 otherwise.
(5)
5
It is assumed that every inlet road element is connected to a
single interior node, therefore, 𝐿𝑖𝑗 = ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡 = 1, if 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛.
Proposition 1: Matrix 𝐋 is nonsingular with the eigenvalues
that are all located on the right-hand side of the 𝑠-plane.
Then, 𝐊𝑅 is negative definite. Define positive input vector
𝐮(𝑡) = [𝑉1,𝑜𝑢𝑡 ⋯ 𝑉𝑁𝑖𝑛,𝑜𝑢𝑡]𝑇,
] ∈
ℝ(𝑁−𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑁𝑖𝑛)×𝑁𝑖𝑛. Assuming matrices 𝐂 and 𝐊𝑅 are piecewise
constant, the network traffic coordination dynamics is given by
𝐖 = [
and
𝐈
𝟎
to
1
𝐿𝑖𝑖
converted
𝐋 = 𝚪𝐋 where
Proof: Because 𝐋 is defined by Eq. (5), it is diagonally
dominant. Diagonal entries of 𝐋 are all positive, therefore, 𝐋 can
𝚪 = [𝛤𝑖𝑗] ∈
be
ℝ(𝑁−𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑁𝑖𝑛)×(𝑁−𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑁𝑖𝑛) is positive definite and diagonal,
and 𝛤𝑖𝑖 =
(𝑖 = 1,· · · , 𝑁 + 𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 − 𝑁𝑖𝑛). While sum of the
row elements is 0 in N −Nout −Nin rows of 𝐋 , the remaining
rows of 𝐋 are negative sum rows. Therefore, Furthermore, 𝐋 =
𝐈 − 𝐃 is non-singular M-matrix where spectral radius of matrix
𝐃 is less than 1. Consequently, eigenvalues of 𝐋 are all placed
on the right-hand side of the 𝑠-plane which in turn implies that
the real part of all eigenvalues of matrix 𝐋 are positive.
Proposition 2: Matrix 𝐋−𝟏 is non-negative.
𝐋 𝑎 = [𝐈
Proof: While diagonal entries of matrix L are all positive,
off-diagonal entries of 𝐋 are either 0 or negative. Using the
Gauss-Jordan elimination method, the augmented matrix 𝐋𝑎 =
𝐈] ∈ ℝ(𝑁−𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑁𝑖𝑛)×2(𝑁−𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑁𝑖𝑛) can be converted to
[𝐋 ⋮
⋮ 𝐋−𝟏] ∈ ℝ(𝑁−𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑁𝑖𝑛)×2(𝑁−𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑁𝑖𝑛)
matrix
only by performing row algebraic operations. Every entry of the
lower triangle of matrix 𝐋 can be converted to 0 if a top row is
multiplied by a positive scalar and the outcome is added to the
other rows. Elements of the upper triangle of matrix 𝐋 can be
similarly vanished, if a bottom row is multiplied by a positive
scalar and the outcome is added to the other rows. Therefore, 𝐋
−1 , obtained by performing these row operations on 𝐋, is non-
negative.
Remark 1: Because 𝐋−𝟏 is non-negative and nonsingular and
𝐕(𝑡) ≥ 𝟎 at any time 𝑡, nodal potential vector 𝚽 is nonnegative
which in turn implies that 𝜙𝑖(𝑡) ≥ 0 at any node 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐼⋃𝒱𝑖𝑛 at
all times 𝑡.
Traffic Network Dynamics: Assuming SCC parameter 𝑐𝑖 is
known at every road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱, the SCC matrix
𝐂 = diag(𝑐1, ⋯ , 𝑐𝑁𝑖𝑛, 𝑐𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡+1, ⋯ . 𝑐𝑁)
is positive-definite and diagonal. Furthermore, it is assumed
that stiffness 𝜅𝑖,𝑗 > 0 is known for every element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 with
in-neighbor element 𝑗 ∈ ℐ𝑖; stiffness matrix 𝐊 = [𝐾𝑖𝑗] ∈ ℝ𝑁×𝑁
is assigned as follows:
𝐾𝑖𝑗 =
𝜅𝑖,𝑗
− ∑ 𝜅𝑖,𝑗
{
𝑗∈ℐ𝑖
0
𝑗 ∈ ℐ𝑖 ∧ 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱
𝑗 = 𝑖 ∧ 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱
otherwise.
(6)
{𝚽 = 𝐀𝚽 + 𝐁𝐮
𝐕 = 𝐋𝚽
,
(7)
where 𝐀 = 𝐂−𝟏𝐊𝑅 and 𝐁 = 𝐂−𝟏𝐖.
B. Microscopic Traffic Coordination as a Mass Conservation
Problem
Let 𝜌𝑖(𝑡) denote the number of vehicles in road element 𝑖 ∈
𝒱 at time 𝑡. The switching LBRC network is defined by graph
𝒢LBRC,𝜆( 𝒱, ℰ𝜆), where 𝜆 ∈ Λ, and Λ is a finite set defining all
possible movement phases commanded by traffic lights at
NOIR intersections defined by 𝒱C = {mB + 1,· · · , m} ⊂
𝒱NOIR. As shown in Figure 4 (b), a road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 can be
considered as a control volume. 𝑉𝑖,𝑖𝑛,𝜆 and 𝑉𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝜆 are the
average traffic inflow and outflow, if 𝜆 ∈ Λ specifies the
topology of the traffic network. To develop the traffic
coordination dynamics, it is assumed that the traffic flow obeys
the following rules:
Rule 1: Traffic coordination satisfies the conservation law at
every road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱. Therefore
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱, 𝜆 ∈ Λ,
𝑑𝜌𝑖
𝑑𝑡
= 𝑉𝑖,𝑖𝑛,𝜆(𝑡) − 𝑉𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝜆(𝑡).
(8)
Rule 2: 𝑝𝑖,𝜆 is the fraction of the existing vesicles leaving
NOIR road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 at time 𝑡 when 𝜆 ∈ Λ specifies the
movement phases at time 𝑡. Therefore,
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱, 𝜆 ∈ Λ, 𝑉𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝜆(𝑡) = 𝑝𝑖,𝜆𝜌𝑖(𝑡).
(9)
Rule 3: Let 𝑗 ∈ ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝜆be an out-neighbor node of the road
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 ∖ 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡 and 𝑞𝑗,𝑖,𝜆 be the fraction of traffic flow entering
𝑗 ∈ ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝜆 from 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 ∖ 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡 when 𝜆 ∈ Λ is active. Then,
∑ 𝑞𝑗,𝑖,𝜆 = 1
𝑗∈ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡
and the traffic inflow rate is given by
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛, 𝜆 ∈ Λ, 𝑉𝑖,𝑖𝑛,𝜆(𝑡) = given, (a)
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 ∖ 𝒱𝑖𝑛, 𝜆 ∈ Λ, 𝑉𝑖,𝑖𝑛,𝜆(𝑡) =
𝑗∈ℐ𝑖,𝑖𝑛,𝜆
𝑞𝑖,𝑗,𝜆𝑉𝑗,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝜆(𝑡)
𝑗∈ℐ𝑖,𝑖𝑛,𝜆
= ∑
𝑞𝑖,𝑗,𝜆𝑝𝑗,𝜆𝜌𝑗
∑
(b)
(10)
,
at road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱. Note that ∑
> 0 but it is not
necessarily equal to 1. By substituting (9), (10) into (8), the
traffic coordination dynamics is given by the following first-
order dynamics:
𝑗∈ℐ𝑖,𝑖𝑛,𝜆
𝑞𝑖,𝑗,𝜆
Matrix 𝐊 is negative semi-definite. The first eigenvalue of 𝐊 is
0 while the remaining 𝐊 eigenvalues are all negative. Let
𝑑𝜌𝑖
𝑑𝑡
= {
∑
𝑉𝑖,𝑖𝑛,𝜆 − 𝑝𝑖,𝜆𝜌𝑖
𝑞𝑖,𝑗,𝜆𝑝𝑗,𝜆𝜌𝑗
− 𝑝𝑖,𝜆𝜌𝑖
𝑗∈ℐ𝑖,𝑖𝑛,𝜆
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 ∖ 𝒱𝑖𝑛
.
(11)
𝐊 = [
𝐊𝑖𝑛,𝑜𝑢𝑡
𝐊𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛
𝐊𝑖𝑛,𝐼
𝐊𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝑖𝑛 𝐊𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝐊𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝐼
𝐊𝐼,𝑖𝑛
𝐊𝐼,𝐼
𝐊𝐼,𝑜𝑢𝑡
] , 𝐊𝑅 = [
𝐊𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛 𝐊𝑖𝑛,𝐼
𝐊𝐼,𝑖𝑛
𝐊𝐼,𝐼
].
for 𝜆 ∈ Λ.
Theorem 1: Assume 𝑉𝑖,𝑖𝑛,𝜆 > 0 at every road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛,
𝜌𝑖 is updated by dynamics (11), 𝑝𝑖,𝜆 ≥ 0 at every road element
6
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱, and 𝜌𝑖(𝑡0) ≥ 0 at every road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 at initial
time 𝑡0. Then, 𝜌𝑖(𝑡) ≥ 0 at any time 𝑡 ≥ 𝑡0.
− ) > 0, and (iii) 𝜌𝑖(𝑡𝑛,𝑖
Proof: The number of cars at road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 can become
negative, if there exists a time 𝑡𝑛,𝑖 ≥ 𝑡0 such that (i) 𝜌𝑖(𝑡𝑛,𝑖) =
+ ) < 0. This situation never
0, (ii) 𝜌𝑖(𝑡𝑛,𝑖
happens if 𝝆𝒊 is updated by dynamics (11). If 𝑝𝑖,𝜆 = 0,
𝜌𝑖(𝑡) > 0 at any time 𝑡 ≥ 𝑡0 which in turn implies that
𝜌𝑖(𝑡) ≥ 0 assuming 𝜌𝑖(𝑡0) ≥ 0 at every road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱.
If 𝑝𝑖,𝜆 > 0 and 𝜌𝑖(𝑡0) ≥ 0, 𝑉𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝜆(𝑡) = 𝑝𝑖,𝜆𝜌𝑖(𝑡), defined by
− ) ≥ 0 for
(9), vanishes, only if 𝜌𝑖(𝑡𝑛,𝑖
every other road element 𝑗 ∈ 𝒱 (𝑗 ≠ 𝑖), 𝑉𝑖,𝑖𝑛,𝜆(𝑡𝑛,𝑖) ≥ 0 for
+ ) = 𝑉𝑖,𝑖𝑛,𝜆(𝑡𝑛,𝑖
+ ) −
every road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱. Therefore, 𝜌𝑖(𝑡𝑛,𝑖
𝑉𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝜆(𝑡𝑛,𝑖
turn implies that
𝜌𝑖(𝑡) ≥ 0 at any time 𝑡.
− ) = 0. Because 𝜌𝑗(𝑡𝑛,𝑖
+ ) ≥ 0 which in
+ )=𝑉𝑖,𝑖𝑛,𝜆(𝑡𝑛,𝑖
4.
specifies the percentage of the vehicles at node 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 ∖
𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡 moving towards 𝑗 ∈ ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝜆.
If 𝑝𝑖,𝜆 = 1 for every "inlet" road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛,
𝜆 = 𝟎 ∈ ℝ𝑁𝑖𝑛×𝑁𝑖𝑛. This assumption
then, 𝐏𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛
implies that no vehicles are stored at the inlet road
= 𝟎 ∈ ℝ𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡×𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡, if
elements. Similarly, 𝐏𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝑜𝑢𝑡
𝑝𝑖,𝜆 = 1 for every outlet node 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡,. The latter
assumption implies that no vehicles are stored at the
outlet road elements.
𝜆
5. 𝐏𝑖𝑛,𝐼
𝜆 = 𝟎 ∈ ℝ𝑁𝑖𝑛×(𝑁−𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑁𝑖𝑛) because no vehicle
moves from 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐼 towards 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛, i.e. ℐ𝑖,𝑖𝑛,𝜆 = ∅, if
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛.
𝜆 = 𝟎 ∈ ℝ(𝑁−𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑁𝑖𝑛)×𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 and 𝐏𝑖𝑛,𝑜𝑢𝑡
= 𝟎 ∈
ℝ𝑁𝑖𝑛×𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 because no vehicle moves for 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡
toward 𝑗 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛⋃𝒱𝐼, i.e. ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝜆 = ∅, if 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡.
𝜆
6. 𝐏𝐼,𝑜𝑢𝑡
Remark 2: A first-order traffic dynamic, inspired by mass
flow conservation was previously developed in [39], [40]. In
Refs. [39], [40], the traffic density is updated by
By admitting the above properties and assumptions, matrix 𝐏𝜆
simplifies to
𝑑𝜌𝑖
𝑑𝑡
= ∑ 𝑞𝑖,𝑗𝜌𝑗 − 𝜌𝑖
𝑗∈ℐ𝑖,𝑖𝑛
𝑗∈ℐ𝑖,𝑖𝑛
𝑞𝑖,𝑗 = 1
. This model does not include the traffic
where ∑
outflow rate to update the number of vehicles in road element
(cell) 𝑖 at a time 𝑡. The proposed IPBTC applies new rules to
determine the conservation-based traffic dynamics which in
turn yields the new traffic dynamics (11) with a different
structure. Note that Eq. (11) includes both traffic inflow and
outflow rates for modeling of the traffic coordination at every
road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱.
Defining 𝜌(𝑡) = [𝜌1 · · · 𝜌𝑁 ]𝑇 , the LBRC dynamics is given
by
𝜆 ∈ Λ, 𝐏𝜆 = [
𝜆
𝐏𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛
𝟎
𝜆
𝐏𝐼,𝑖𝑛
𝟎
𝜆
𝟎
𝟎 𝐏𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝐼
𝜆
𝟎
𝐏𝐼,𝐼
].
Proposition 3: Sum of the entries of column 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡of 𝐏𝜆 is
zero but sum of the entries is 1 in the remaining column of
matrix 𝐏𝜆.
Proof: As aforementioned, ∑
(∀𝜆 ∈ Λ), if
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛⋃𝒱𝐼 . Sum of the elements of every column 𝑖 ∈
{1, ⋯ , 𝑁𝑖𝑛, 𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 + 1, ⋯ , 𝑁} of matrix 𝐏𝜆 is 1 because
𝑞𝑗,𝑖,𝜆 = 1
𝑗∈ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝜆
𝑁
𝜆
∑ 𝑃𝑖𝑗
𝑗=1
= (1 − 𝑝𝑖,𝜆) + 𝑝𝑖,𝜆 ∑ 𝑞𝑗,𝑖,𝜆
= 1.
𝑗∈ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝜆
𝜆 ∈ Λ,
𝑑𝜌
𝑑𝑡
= (−𝐈 + 𝐏𝜆)𝜌 + 𝐖𝐮.
(12)
Defining
where 𝐖 and 𝐮 were previously introduced in Section IV.A and
𝐏𝜆 and be partitioned as follows:
𝜆 ∈ Λ, 𝐏𝜆 = [
𝜆
𝐏𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛
𝜆
𝐏𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝑖𝑛
𝐏𝐼,𝑖𝑛
𝜆
𝜆
𝐏𝑖𝑛,𝑜𝑢𝑡
𝜆
𝐏𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝑜𝑢𝑡
𝐏𝐼,𝑜𝑢𝑡
𝜆
𝜆
𝐏𝑖𝑛,𝐼
𝜆
𝐏𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝐼
𝜆
𝐏𝐼,𝐼
].
𝜆 of 𝐏𝜆 specifies the fraction of traffic flow
Then, partition 𝐏𝒳,𝒴
moving from 𝒱𝒴 towards 𝒱𝒳, where 𝒳, 𝒴 ∈ {"𝑖𝑛" , "𝑜𝑢𝑡" , "𝐼"}
are linguistic subscripts. For example, 𝐏𝑖𝑛,𝑜𝑢𝑡
(𝒳 ="in" and 𝒴
="out") specifies the percentage of traffic flow from 𝒱out
toward 𝒱in. 𝐏𝜆 = [𝑃𝑖𝑗
𝜆] ∈ ℝ𝑁×𝑁 has the following properties:
𝜆
1.
It is non-negative, i.e. every element of matrix 𝐏𝜆 is
non-negative.
2. Diagonal
𝑃𝑖𝑖
entry
𝜆 = 1 − 𝑝𝑖,𝜆 specifies
the
percentage of vehicles remaining at road element 𝑖 ∈
𝜆 = 1 − 𝑝𝑖,𝜆 ∈ [0,1], for
𝒱. Because 𝑝𝑖,𝜆 ∈ [0,1], 𝑃𝑖𝑖
𝑖 = 1,· · · , 𝑁.
3. Off-diagonal entry
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱 ∖ 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡, 𝑗 ≠ 𝑖 , 𝑃𝑖𝑗
𝜆 = {
𝑞𝑗,𝑖,𝜆𝑝𝑗,𝜆
0
𝐗(𝑡) = [𝜌1 ⋯ 𝜌𝑁𝑖𝑛 𝜌𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡+1 ⋯ 𝜌𝑁]
𝑇
,
the traffic dynamics (12) simplifies to
𝐗 = 𝐐𝜆𝐗 + 𝐖𝐮,
(13)
where 𝐖 and 𝐮 were previously introduced in Section IV-A.
𝐐𝜆 = −𝐈 + 𝐏𝑟
𝜆 where
𝜆 = [
𝐏𝑟
𝜆
𝐏𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛
𝐏𝐼,𝑖𝑛
𝜆
𝟎
𝜆 ].
𝐏𝐼,𝐼
Matrix 𝐐𝜆 has the following properties:
1. Columns of 𝐐𝜆 either sum to 0 or sum to a negative
number.
2. Column 𝑗 of 𝐐𝜆 sums to a negative number, if 𝑗 ∈
ℐ𝑖,𝑖𝑛,𝜆 and 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡. Otherwise, column 𝑗 sums to 0.
Theorem 2: If graph 𝒢LBRC,𝜆( 𝒱, ℰ𝜆) contains a path from
every boundary node 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛 to each interior node j∈ 𝒱𝐼, then,
matrix 𝐐𝜆 is Hurwitz.
𝑗 ∈ ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝜆
𝑗 ∉ ℐ𝑖,𝑜𝑢𝑡,𝜆
Proof: Because there exists a path from each boundary node
𝜆 is irreducible.
to every interior node of graph 𝒢LBRC,𝜆, matrix 𝐏𝑟
Sum of the column entries is negative in at least one column of
7
𝜆, denoted by 𝑟𝜆, is less than 1.
𝐐𝜆, the spectral radius of 𝐏𝑟
Therefore, eigenvalues of 𝐐𝜆 are all located inside a disk with
radius 𝑟𝜆 < 1 with a center positioned at −1 + 0𝑗 and 𝐐𝜆 is
Hurwitz [43], [44].
Remark 3: The outflow traffic rate (speed) vector
𝐕(𝑡) = [𝑉1,𝑜𝑢𝑡 ⋯ 𝑉𝑁𝑖𝑛,𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝑉𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡+1,𝑜𝑢𝑡 ⋯ 𝑉𝑁,𝑜𝑢𝑡]
can be related to X (t) by
𝐕(𝑡) = 𝐃𝐗(t),
(14)
where 𝐃 = diag(𝑝1, ⋯ , 𝑝𝑁𝑖𝑛, 𝑝𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡+1, ⋯ 𝑝𝑁) is a positive
definite and diagonal matrix. Note that
𝑝𝑖 =
∑
𝑝𝑖,𝜆
𝜆∈Λ
Λ
> 0
for every road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛⋃𝒱𝐼. Defining
𝐐 =
∑
𝐐𝜆
𝜆∈Λ
Λ
the average conservation-based dynamics is given by
𝐗 = 𝐐𝐗 + 𝐖𝐮,
(15)
Theorem 3: Let 𝑝𝑖 be known at every road element 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛.
Then, conservation dynamics matrices 𝐐 is related to the
conduction-based matrix 𝐀 using
𝐀 = 𝐋−𝟏𝐃𝐐𝐃−𝟏𝐋.
Furthermore, SCC parameter 𝑐𝑖 and 𝑝𝑖 are related by
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛, 𝑐𝑖 =
1
𝑝𝑖
(16)
(17)
V. TRAFFIC CONGESTION CONTROL
This paper offers an interactive physics-inspired control to
efficiently manage congestion through the NOIR boundary and
intersection nodes. A MPC-based boundary control will be
developed in Section V-A to manage the macroscopic traffic
coordination
inlet boundary nodes.
Furthermore, Section V-B formulates a receding horizon
optimization model for assigning optimal actions commanded
by the traffic lights at the NOIR intersections.
the NOIR
through
A. Macroscopic Boundary Control
Assuming the traffic coordination dynamics is given by (15),
the following difference equation is used to model the
macroscopic traffic dynamics
𝐗[𝑘 + 1] = 𝐐 𝐷𝐗[𝑘] + 𝐖 𝐷𝐮[𝑘],
where 𝐐 𝐷 = 𝐈 + ΔT𝐐, 𝐖 𝐷 = ΔT𝐖, and time increment ΔT is
fixed. The optimization cost is defined by
1
Cost[k] =
𝜏]𝐮[𝑘 + 𝜏]),
2
𝑛𝜏
𝜏=1
∑ (𝐗𝑇[𝑘 + 𝜏]𝐗[𝑘 + 𝜏] + 𝛽𝐮𝑇[𝑘 +
(19)
subject to equality constraint 𝐮[𝑘] = 𝑢0 and 𝐮[𝑘] > 0 at any
discrete time 𝑘, where 𝛽 > 0 is a scaling factor and 𝑛𝑡 is
constant. The first term in (19) is considered in order to penalize
non-uniform vehicle coordination across the NOIR. The second
term penalizes the non-uniform traffic inflow at the NOIR inlet
road
above
optimization problem can be formulated by the following
quadratic programming problem:
elements. Mathematically
speaking,
the
min (
1
2
𝐔𝑇𝚪1𝐔 + Γ2),
(20)
(21)
(22)
Proof: Considering Eq. (4), 𝚽 can be expressed as 𝚽 =
𝐋−𝟏𝐕 where 𝐕 = 𝐃𝐗 (See Remark 3). Substituting 𝚽 =
𝐋−𝟏𝐃𝐗 into dynamics (7) yields
subject to inequality constraint
𝐔 > 𝟎,
𝐗 = (𝐃−𝟏𝐋𝐂−𝟏𝐊𝐑𝐋−𝟏𝐃)
⏟
𝐗 + (𝐃−𝟏𝐋𝐂−𝟏𝐖)
⏟
𝐮
(18)
and equality constraint
𝐐
𝐖
‖𝐔‖1 = 𝑢0𝟏𝑛𝜏,
Consequently, 𝐀 can be uniquely specified based on the
traffic tendency probabilities defined in Section IV-B. Let 𝐖 =
𝐈
[
𝟎
𝐂𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛
𝐋𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛 𝐋𝑖𝑛,𝐼
𝐋𝐼,𝐼
𝐋𝐼,𝑖𝑛
and 𝐂 =
], 𝐃 = [
], 𝐋 = [
𝟎
𝐃𝐼,𝐼
𝐃𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛
],
𝟎
𝐃𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛 = diag(𝑝1, ⋯ , 𝑝𝑁𝑖𝑛),
𝐃𝐼,𝐼 =
[
𝟎
𝟎
𝐂𝐼,𝐼
],
diag(𝑝𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡+1, ⋯ , 𝑝𝑁), 𝐂𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛 = diag(𝑐1, ⋯ , 𝑐𝑁𝑖𝑛), and 𝐂𝐼,𝐼 =
diag(𝑐𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡+1, ⋯ , 𝑐𝑁) are positive definite and diagonal.
𝐃−𝟏𝐋𝐂−𝟏𝐖 = [
𝐃𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛
𝐃𝐼,𝐼
−𝟏𝐋𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛𝐂𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛
−𝟏𝐋𝐼,𝑖𝑛𝐂𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛
−𝟏
−𝟏 ].
−𝟏𝐋𝐼,𝑖𝑛𝐂𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛
Because traffic does not flow from any interior node toward an
inlet node, 𝐋𝐼,𝑖𝑛 = 𝟎 which
that
−𝟏 = 𝐈.
𝐃𝐼,𝐼
Because an inlet node is only connected to one interior node,
𝐋𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛 = 𝐈 and I and 𝑐𝑖 is related to 𝑝𝑖 using relation (17) for
every inlet node 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝑖𝑛.
turn
implies
−𝟏𝐋𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛𝐂𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛
−𝟏 = 𝟎. Therefore, 𝐃𝑖𝑛,𝑖𝑛
in
where 𝟏𝑛𝑡 ∈ ℝ𝑛𝜏 ×1 is the one vector, 𝑢0 > 0 is a constant
scalar, and
𝚪1 = 𝛽𝐈𝑛𝜏𝑁𝑖𝑛 + 𝐇𝑇𝐇, (a)
Γ2 = 𝐇𝑇(𝐆𝐗 + 𝐅𝐔) (b)
(23)
𝟎
𝐖
⋮
𝐇 = [
𝐐
𝑛𝜏−2𝐖 𝐐
𝐷
𝟎
𝟎
⋮
⋯ 𝟎
⋯ 𝟎
⋱
⋮
𝑛𝜏−3𝐖 ⋯ 𝟎
𝐷
], (c)
𝐖
𝐐𝐷𝐖
⋮
𝐅 = [
], (d)
𝐐
𝑛𝜏−1𝐖
𝐷
𝐐𝐷
𝐐𝐷
2
. (e)
⋮
𝑛𝜏]
𝐐
[
𝐷
𝐅 =
B. Microscopic Light-Based Responsive Control
The traffic responsive control is modeled as a receding
horizon optimization (RHO) defined by the following fourtuple
(𝐗, 𝒯, 𝒜, 𝒥 ), where state vector 𝐗 and transition function
𝒯 (𝐗, 𝜆) = 𝐐𝜆𝐗 + 𝐖𝐮 were previously defined in Section IV-
B, 𝒜 is a discrete action set, and 𝒥 defines the RHO cost
function. The movement cycle transition, defined by a
nondeterministic finite state automaton, is fixed at every NOIR
intersection 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶. However, the time interval of a movement
phases can be optimally planned by the traffic lights.
The traffic actions are defined by set
𝒜 = {(𝑎𝑚𝐵+1, ⋯ , 𝑎𝑚)𝑎𝑖 ∈ {S, C}, 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶},
(24)
where S and C are the abbreviations for "Switch" and
"Continue", respectively, if 𝑎𝑖 = C, the traffic light does not
update the current movement phase at intersection 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶.
Otherwise, 𝑎𝑖 = S selects the next movement phase which is
unique and defined by a deterministic movement cycle graph
(See the example movement cycle graph previously shown in
Figure 2 (b)). A constant threshold time 𝑇𝐿,𝑖 assigns an upper
limit for the duration of command C at NOIR node 𝑖, i.e. C is
overridden if the phase duration 𝜏𝑖,𝑗 exceeds 𝑇𝐿,𝑖 at NOIR node
𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶 when 𝜆𝑖,𝑗 is active (See Figure 2 (b)).
The 𝑁𝜏-step expected cost is defined as follows:
𝑁𝜏
𝒥 = ∑(𝐗𝑇[𝑘 + 𝜏]𝚪𝐗[𝑘 + 𝜏])
,
𝜏=1
(25)
where 𝚪 ∈ ℝ(𝑁−𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑁𝑖𝑛)×(𝑁−𝑁𝑜𝑢𝑡 +𝑁𝑖𝑛) is a positive definite
diagonal matrix. The matrix 𝚪 can encapsulate interaction of
pedestrians and environment with the traffic flow. In particular,
the ii entry of 𝚪 (𝛤𝑖𝑖 > 0) is a scaling factor incorporating
pedestrian tendency probabilities, as well as real-time traffic
information including construction condition, road enclosures,
traffic speed, special events, and incidents into planning.
Figure 5: The functionality of the interactive BC-LBRC traffic
control.
Remark 4: The functionality of the proposed IPBTC is
shown in Figure 5 where an interface layer has been specified
between the boundary and light-based controls. The interface
layer has two main responsibilities. The first responsibility is to
update the parameters of the conduction based dynamics using
relation (16) given the probability matrix 𝐐. Note that 𝐐 is
8
defined based on the tendency probabilities; 𝐐 is continuously
updated and
into planning. The second
responsibility is to specify the MPC constraints given in (20)
and (21) based on the outflow traffic rates.
incorporated
VI. SIMULATION RESULTS
This section presents the simulation results for the example
NOIR shown in Figure 6. The NOIR can be specified by
GNOIR with boundary node set 𝒱𝐵 = {1, ⋯ ,17} and
connection nodes defined by 𝒱𝐶 = {14, ⋯ ,30}. The NOIR is
heterogeneous consisting of unidirectional and bidirectional
roads. This heterogeneous NOIR can be represented by a
network with 53 unidirectional
roads, where every
unidirectional road is filled out by five serially-connected road
elements. Elements in road 𝑖 are identified by the unique
numbers 5(𝑖 − 1) + 𝑗 ∈ 𝒱 where 𝑗 = 1,· · · ,5. The BC
traffic graph is defined by 𝒢( 𝒱, ℰ) where 𝒱 = {1, ⋯ ,265} =
𝒱𝑖𝑛⋃𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡⋃𝒱𝐼, 𝒱𝑖𝑛 = {1,· · · ,8}, 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡 = {45,50, ⋯ ,85}, and
𝒱𝐼 = 𝒱 \ (𝒱𝑖𝑛 ⋃ 𝒱𝑜𝑢𝑡).
Figure 6: Example NOIR with 53 unidirectional roads. Every road
is filled by five serially-connected road elements.
For the simulation, 𝑢0 = 54 is selected. Therefore, the
number of vehicles entering the NOIR is restricted to be 54 at
any time. It is assumed that the number of movement phases at
an intersection 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶 is the same as the number of incident
roads to the intersection. Therefore, 𝜆27 = 𝜆28 = 𝜆29 =
𝜆30 = 1, 𝜆15 = 𝜆20 = 𝜆21 = 𝜆22 = 2, 𝜆14 =
𝜆16 = 𝜆17 = 𝜆18 = 𝜆19 = 𝜆23 = 𝜆25 =
3, 𝜆24 = 𝜆26 = 4,
𝛬 = 𝜆1 × · · · 𝜆30 =
559872 is the total number of all movement phases defined by
set Λ. It is assumed that there is no traffic light located at
intersection node 𝑖 ∈ {27,28,29,30} ⊂ 𝒱𝐶 as only one road is
incident to these intersections.
and
Choosing 𝑇𝐿,𝑖 = 3, a road element cannot be active more
than three time-steps, if it is incident to an NOIR connection
node 𝑖 ∈ 𝒱𝐶 (Green light duration cannot exceed 𝑇𝐿,𝑖 = 3
time steps at every NOIR connection node). The optimal traffic
light actions at junctions 14 through 26 are given in Figure 7
for 𝑘 = 1,· · · ,30. Boundary control velocity inputs 𝑉1,𝑖𝑛
through 𝑉8,𝑖𝑛 are plotted versus discrete time 𝑘 for 𝑘 = 1,· · ·
,30 in Figure 8. Moreover, the potential values of all road
elements are illustrated in Figure 9 at sample time 𝑘 = 50. As
shown in Figure 9, the potential value of every upstream node
is greater than the potential value of its adjacent downstream
element. Furthermore, 𝜙𝑖[50] = 0 for outlet road elements
45, 50,· · ·, 85.
Figure 7: (a) Optimal movement phases at intersections 14 through
26 for 𝑘 = 1,· · · ,30. The number shown in the plot specifies the
active road element at time 𝑘.
Figure 8: Boundary control input 𝑉1,𝑖𝑛[𝑘] through 𝑉8,𝑖𝑛[𝑘] for 𝑘 =
1,· · · ,30.
Figure 9: Potential values of all NOIR road elements at discrete time
𝑘 = 50.
Figure 10 plots the potential value of the road element 162
versus time. It is seen that the average potential value stably
decreases as 𝑘 increases.
9
Figure 10: Traffic potential value of the road element 162 versus
discrete time 𝑘 for 𝑘 = 1,· · · ,200.
VII. CONCLUSION
This paper develops physics-inspired approaches to model
and control traffic congestion in a heterogeneous NOIR
consisting of unidirectional and bidirectional roads. By
developing an interactive physics-based traffic control, traffic
congestion can be managed with minimal computation cost
through controlling inflow rates at the NOIR boundary nodes as
well as the NOIR intersections. This paper proposes a novel
analogy between traffic coordination in a transportation system
and the heat diffusion in a thermal system. This analogy offers
several benefits that include but not limited to (i) consistent
model-based learning of the macroscopic traffic parameters, (ii)
developing a high-fidelity traffic coordination model, (iii)
incorporating microscopic properties of a traffic system into
planning, and (iv) enhancing the resilience of the traffic
congestion control. The proposed IPBTC is computationally-
efficient as it can successfully control the traffic congestion
only by imposing constraints on the boundary control input,
without imposing a constraint on the traffic state.
REFERENCES
[1] H. K. Lo and A. H. Chow, "Control strategies for oversaturated traffic,"
Journal of Transportation Engineering, vol. 130, no. 4, pp. 466 -- 478, 2004.
[2] M. J. Rosenblatt, "Multi-item inventory system with budgetary constraint:
A comparison between the lagrangian and the fixed cycle approach," The
International Journal Of Production Research, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 331 -- 339,
1981.
[3] M. A. Penic and J. Upchurch, "Transyt-7f: enhancement for fuel
consumption, pollution emissions, and user costs," Transportation Research
Record, no. 1360, 1992.
[4] C. E. Wallace, K. Courage, D. Reaves, G. Schoene, and G. Euler, "Transyt-
7f user's manual," tech. rep., 1984.
[5] P. Mannion, J. Duggan, and E. Howley, "An experimental review of
reinforcement learning algorithms for adaptive traffic signal control," in
Autonomic Road Transport Support Systems, pp. 47 -- 66, Springer, 2016.
[6] L. Li, Y. Lv, and F.-Y. Wang, "Traffic signal timing via deep reinforcement
learning," IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 247 -- 254,
2016.
[7] M. Abdoos, N. Mozayani, and A. L. Bazzan, "Traffic light control in non-
stationary environments based on multi agent q-learning," in 2011 14th
International IEEE conference on intelligent transportation systems (ITSC), pp.
1580 -- 1585, IEEE, 2011.
[8] I. Arel, C. Liu, T. Urbanik, and A. Kohls, "Reinforcement learningbased
multi-agent system for network traffic signal control," IET Intelligent Transport
Systems, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 128 -- 135, 2010.
10
for bi-directional
traffic management
controllers," Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 42, no. 13, pp. 5403 -- 5415,
2015.
[32] G. Pau, T. Campisi, A. Canale, A. Severino, M. Collotta, and G. Tesoriere,
"Smart pedestrian crossing management at traffic light junctions through a
fuzzy-based approach," Future Internet, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 15, 2018.
[33] N. Yusupbekov, A. Marakhimov, H. Igamberdiev, and S. X. Umarov, "An
adaptive fuzzy-logic traffic control system in conditions of saturated transport
stream," The Scientific World Journal, vol. 2016, 2016.
[34] F. Moretti, S. Pizzuti, S. Panzieri, and M. Annunziato, "Urban traffic flow
forecasting through statistical and neural network bagging ensemble hybrid
modeling," Neurocomputing, vol. 167, pp. 3 -- 7, 2015.
[35] J. Tang, F. Liu, Y. Zou, W. Zhang, and Y. Wang, "An improved fuzzy
neural network for traffic speed prediction considering periodic characteristic,"
IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 18, no. 9, pp.
2340 -- 2350, 2017.
[36] S. Akhter, R. Rahman, and A. Islam, "Neural network (nn) based route
weight computation
system,"
International Journal of Applied Evolutionary Computation (IJAEC), vol. 7, no.
4, pp. 45 -- 59, 2016.
[37] K. Kumar, M. Parida, and V. K. Katiyar, "Short term traffic flow prediction
in heterogeneous condition using artificial neural network," Transport, vol. 30,
no. 4, pp. 397 -- 405, 2015.
[38] E. Christofa, I. Papamichail, and A. Skabardonis, "Person-based traffic
responsive signal control optimization," IEEE Transactions on Intelligent
Transportation Systems, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 1278 -- 1289, 2013.
[39] G. Como, E. Lovisari, and K. Savla, "Convexity and robustness of dynamic
traffic assignment and freeway network control," Transportation Research Part
B: Methodological, vol. 91, pp. 446 -- 465, 2016.
[40] S. Jafari and K. Savla, "On structural properties of feedback optimal
control of traffic flow under the cell transmission model," arXiv preprint
arXiv:1805.11271, 2018.
[41] M. V. Lawson, Finite automata. Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2003.
[42] H. Rastgoftar and E. M. Atkins, "Unmanned vehicle mission planning
given limited sensory information," in 2017 American Control Conference
(ACC), pp. 4473 -- 4479, IEEE, 2017.
[43] Z. Qu, Cooperative control of dynamical systems: applications to
autonomous vehicles. Springer Science & Business Media, 2009.
[44] H. Rastgoftar, Continuum deformation of multi-agent systems. Springer,
2016.
in
the B.Sc. degree
Dr. Hossein Rastgoftar is an Assistant Research
the Department of Aerospace
Scientist
Engineering at the University of Michigan. He
received
in mechanical
engineering-thermo-fluids from Shiraz University,
Shiraz, Iran, the M.S. degrees in mechanical systems
and solid mechanics from Shiraz University and the
University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA,
and the Ph.D. degree in mechanical engineering
from Drexel University, Philadelphia, in 2015. His
current research interests include dynamics and control, multi-agent systems,
cyber-physical systems, and optimization and Markov decision processes.
[9] B. Abdulhai, R. Pringle, and G. J. Karakoulas, "Reinforcement learning for
true adaptive traffic signal control," Journal of Transportation Engineering, vol.
129, no. 3, pp. 278 -- 285, 2003.
[10] E. Bingham, "Reinforcement learning in neurofuzzy traffic signal control,"
European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 131, no. 2, pp. 232 -- 241, 2001.
[11] M. Wiering, "Multi-agent reinforcement learning for traffic light control,"
in Machine Learning: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference
(ICML'2000), pp. 1151 -- 1158, 2000.
[12] T. Nishi, K. Otaki, K. Hayakawa, and T. Yoshimura, "Traffic signal
control based on reinforcement learning with graph convolutional neural nets,"
in 2018 21st International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems
(ITSC), pp. 877 -- 883, IEEE, 2018.
[13] Q. Ba and K. Savla, "On distributed computation of optimal control of
traffic flow over networks," in 2016 54th Annual Allerton Conference on
Communication, Control, and Computing (Allerton), pp. 1102 -- 1109, IEEE,
2016.
[14] G. Como, E. Lovisari, and K. Savla, "Convex formulations of dynamic
network traffic assignment for control of freeway networks," in 2015 53rd
Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing
(Allerton), pp. 755 -- 762, IEEE, 2015.
[15] J. McCrea and S. Moutari, "A hybrid macroscopic-based model for traffic
flow in road networks," European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 207,
no. 2, pp. 676 -- 684, 2010.
[16] P. Zhang, C.-X. Wu, and S. Wong, "A semi-discrete model and its
approach to a solution for a wide moving jam in traffic flow," Physica A:
Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, vol. 391, no. 3, pp. 456 -- 463, 2012.
[17] C. F. Daganzo, "The cell transmission model, part ii: network traffic,
Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 79 -- 93,
1995.
[18] C. F. Daganzo, "The cell transmission model: A dynamic representation of
highway traffic consistent with the hydrodynamic theory," Transportation
Research Part B: Methodological, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 269 -- 287, 1994.
[19] L. Munoz, X. Sun, R. Horowitz, and L. Alvarez, "Traffic density
estimation with the cell transmission model," in Proceedings of the 2003
American Control Conference, 2003., vol. 5, pp. 3750 -- 3755, IEEE, 2003.
[20] L. Prashanth and S. Bhatnagar, "Reinforcement learning with function
approximation for traffic signal control," IEEE Transactions on Intelligent
Transportation Systems, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 412 -- 421, 2010.
[21] H. Y. Ong and M. J. Kochenderfer, "Markov decision process-based
distributed conflict resolution for drone air traffic management," Journal of
Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, pp. 69 -- 80, 2016.
[22] R. Haijema and J. van der Wal, "An mdp decomposition approach for
traffic control at isolated signalized intersections," Probability in the
Engineering and Informational Sciences, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 587 -- 602, 2008.
[23] L. D. Baskar, B. De Schutter, and H. Hellendoorn, "Traffic management
for automated highway systems using model-based predictive control," IEEE
Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 838 -- 847,
2012.
[24] T. Tettamanti, I. Varga, B. Kulcsar, and J. Bokor, "Model predictive ´
control in urban traffic network management," in 2008 16th Mediterranean
Conference on Control and Automation, pp. 1538 -- 1543, IEEE, 2008.
[25] L. D. Baskar, B. De Schutter, and H. Hellendoorn, "Model-based
predictive traffic control for intelligent vehicles: Dynamic speed limits and
dynamic lane allocation," in 2008 IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium, pp.
174 -- 179, IEEE, 2008.
[26] E. Kural, S. Jones, A. F. Parrilla, and A. Grauers, "Traffic light assistant
system for optimized energy consumption in an electric vehicle," in 2014
International Conference on Connected Vehicles and Expo (ICCVE), pp. 604 --
611, IEEE, 2014.
[27] T. Le, H. L. Vu, Y. Nazarathy, B. Vo, and S. Hoogendoorn,
"Linearquadratic model predictive control for urban traffic networks,"
ProcediaSocial and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 80, pp. 512 -- 530, 2013.
[28] C. R. Vazquez, H. Y. Sutarto, R. Boel, and M. Silva, "Hybrid petri ´ net
model of a traffic intersection in an urban network," in 2010 IEEE International
Conference on Control Applications, pp. 658 -- 664, IEEE, 2010.
[29] L. Riegger, M. Carlander, N. Lidander, N. Murgovski, and J. Sjoberg,
"Centralized mpc for autonomous intersection crossing," in 2016 IEEE 19th
international conference on intelligent transportation systems (ITSC), pp.
1372 -- 1377, IEEE, 2016.
[30] H. M. Kammoun, I. Kallel, J. Casillas, A. Abraham, and A. M. Alimi,
"Adapt-traf: An adaptive multiagent road traffic management system based on
hybrid ant-hierarchical fuzzy model," Transportation Research Part C:
Emerging Technologies, vol. 42, pp. 147 -- 167, 2014.
[31] M. Collotta, L. L. Bello, and G. Pau, "A novel approach for dynamic traffic
lights management based on wireless sensor networks and multiple fuzzy logic
|
1811.06206 | 1 | 1811 | 2018-11-15T06:54:41 | Time-Varying Formation Control of a Collaborative Multi-Agent System Using Negative-Imaginary Systems Theory | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.RO"
] | The movement of cooperative robots in a densely cluttered environment may not be possible if the formation type is invariant. Hence, we investigate a new method for time-varying formation control for a group of heterogeneous autonomous vehicles, which may include Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGV) and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV). We have extended a Negative-Imaginary (NI) consensus control approach to switch the formation shape of the robots whilst only using the relative distance between agents and between agents and obstacles. All agents can automatically create a new safe formation to overcome obstacles based on a novel geometric method, then restore the prototype formation once the obstacles are cleared. Furthermore, we improve the position consensus at sharp corners by achieving yaw consensus between robots. Simulation and experimental results are then analyzed to validate the feasibility of our proposed approach. | cs.MA | cs | Time-Varying Formation Control of a Collaborative
Multi-Agent System Using Negative-Imaginary
Systems Theory
Vu Phi Tran, Matthew Garratt and Ian R.Petersen
8
1
0
2
v
o
N
5
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
6
0
2
6
0
.
1
1
8
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract -- The movement of cooperative robots in a densely
cluttered environment may not be possible if the formation type
is invariant. Hence, we investigate a new method for time-varying
formation control for a group of heterogeneous autonomous
vehicles, which may include Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGV)
and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV). We have extended a
Negative-Imaginary (NI) consensus control approach to switch
the formation shape of the robots whilst only using the relative
distance between agents and between agents and obstacles. All
agents can automatically create a new safe formation to overcome
obstacles based on a novel geometric method, then restore the
prototype formation once the obstacles are cleared. Furthermore,
we improve the position consensus at sharp corners by achieving
yaw consensus between robots. Simulation and experimental
results are then analyzed to validate the feasibility of our
proposed approach.
Index Terms -- Time-Varying Formation Control, Consen-
sus Algorithm, UAV-UGV Coordination, Obstacle Avoidance,
Negative-Imaginary Theory.
I. INTRODUCTION
M ULTI-VEHICLE coordination has been attracting in-
creasing attention from researchers as it provides much
enhanced capability for applications such as search and rescue
or mapping. Cooperation between multiple vehicles can lead to
faster and more effective missions. For example, a cooperating
UAV can fly above obstacles and travel faster than a UGV,
whilst providing sensor coverage for a much wider area than
that accessible to the UGV. Meanwhile the UGV can inspect
the environment more closely and precisely than the UAV,
which flies at altitude and may have a partially blocked view.
Supporting ground transportation task is a potential application
of the UAV-UGV cooperation [7, 8]. In this task, a UAV can
be fitted with a camera to capture the visual pose of UGVs
moving on the ground, helping to localize the UGVs and guide
them along a safe path. In summary, the cooperation of UAVs-
UGVs is beneficial in many autonomous missions.
There are two control strategies for a multi-vehicle sys-
tem: centralized or decentralized. In the former approach,
a ground station (GS) collects all required data (posture,
velocity, acceleration) and transmits proper control signals to
each agent. However, centralized control depends on perfect
communication which can be an issue if data dropouts occur
Vu Phi Tran and Matthew Garratt are with the School of Engineer-
ing and Information Technology, University of New South Wales, Aus-
tralia and Ian R.Petersen is with the Research School of Engineer-
ing, Australian National University, Australia. [email protected],
[email protected] and [email protected]
due to overloaded networks or when communication range
constraints are challenged [1, 2]. With decentralized control,
a local controller is designed for each robot, and the control
signals are provided by only using local information about
agents and their neighbors [4, 5]. This approach significantly
reduces the amount of transmission data,
time delay and
is more robust against communication failures. Therefore,
we base our consensus control approach on a decentralized
strategy where the agents know only their own velocities,
accelerations, Euler angles, and their relative position from
other agents.
Within the application of multi-vehicle systems, forming
and maintaining a prescribed formation is a real challenge.
A large body of work related to multi-robot systems can be
found in the literature [12-14, 16]. More consensus results are
shown in [13, 14, 18, 19]. These papers pay much attention
to formation stabilization problems, but the internal stability
of each vehicle based on these cooperative methodologies is
not sufficiently addressed. Furthermore, as seen in [14, 20-22],
agents in a cooperative network are often treated as second-
order systems to solve the formation tracking problems. How-
ever, the position and velocity tracking loops of the UAV or
the UGV are actually represented by a higher order transfer
function. For example, the closed-loop velocity control of a
quadrotor leads to at least a fourth-order model [10, 11]. Using
an improvement in NI consensus theory, our method can solve
this problem by considering simultaneously the stability of the
formation control and dynamics of agents.
More and more researchers have realized that formation
control problems can be handled using consensus-based ap-
proaches. For example, the relevant works in [3, 30] proposed
time invariant formation controllers for multiple UAVs. How-
ever, in most practical tasks, multi-robot systems should also
be able to vary their formation over time so that they can make
progress towards the goal position while avoiding obstacles in
an unknown environment.
The shortcoming of using a fixed formation has been
overcome recently by a few researchers. In [13, 14], a time-
varying formation controller was tested and validated on five
quadrotors. For this method to work, each agent must be
able to sense the absolute position and orientation of its
neighbor. As a result, time delays or data drop during inter-
agent communication may occur as the number of agents
increases dramatically. Similarly, a time-varying formation
control approach for a UAV based on a virtual leader structure
is illustrated in [15], where the follower vehicles maintain a
relative position from a simulated leader represented by an
idealized trajectory. Compared to these methodologies [13-
15], our slave agents only utilize measurements of the relative
distances from their master and each other, such that no data
need to be exchanged during the concensus process.
One of the practical applications of time-varying formation
control approaches for avoiding unexpected obstacles, has
been considered in [15, 28, 29]. Once a potential collision
between the robots and an obstacle is predicted, the robots in
[15] will automatically produce a queuing formation for safely
avoiding the corresponding obstacle. However, this strategy
cannot be used to avoid multiple obstructions. This issue was
solved in [29]. Whenever an obstacle is detected inside the
repulsion zone, an escape angle is determined by the robot
orientation relative to the real target and the disposition of
ultrasonic sensors in the ring, in relation to the axis of robot
movement. It is pointed out from the simulation results that
the stability of the obstacle avoidance algorithm was not
examined. Besides, the control output command pairs based
on the behavioral control approach, including turn left/turn
right and forward/backward, coincide in some cases since the
working area of each control layer is not adaptive. A better
formation control strategy for obstacle avoidance was devel-
oped by Dai, Y., et al [28] in 2015. In this work, a safe path
for the leader was planned by a Geometric Obstacle Avoidance
Control Method (GOACM) where the slaves are moved into a
safe formation relative to the leader. Unfortunately, because of
sudden changes in the velocity setpoints and control saturation
while switching into a safe triangle formation, this method
suffers from oscillations in robot position. Moreover,
this
method is based on the real surface boundary of an obstacle
to formulate the rotation angle, making it not applicable
for practical situations where obstacles often have arbitrarily
complicated shapes.
This paper researches time-varying formation control ap-
proaches for multi-robot systems based on the Negative Imag-
inary (NI) consensus systems theory. Since it was first intro-
duced in 2010 [23], NI systems theory is becoming popular
in many high technology applications, especially in nano-
positioning control [24], vibration control of flexible structures
[26] and multi-DOF robotic arms. According to [20] and [21],
closed-loop multi-systems can achieve high robustness with
respect to external disturbances when certain conditions of
NI theory are met in the plant and controllers. However, in
practice,
the cooperative architecture of this theory shows
four disadvantages, which is proven by our simulation as
shown in Fig. 1: (1) the NI-consensus-based formation control
architecture is not developed in this literature, (2) all agents
are controlled to reach one unique rendezvous point, resulting
in position consensus at the same point which would lead to
collision, (3) the asymmetrical consensus equations between
master and slave can cause practical difficulties in tuning the
gain values of the SNI controllers, and (4) the input setpoints
of each agent such as position/velocity set points are not men-
tioned in the overall network plant of this theory. To handle
these problems, we have previously proposed and tested a new
NI architecture for multi-UAV operation [30]. Nevertheless,
our previous paper presented only the experimental results of
2
Fig. 1. The position consensus between two UAVs via the original NI
consensus protocol.
a homogeneous UAV system with an invariant formation and
did not mention any potential application for the NI formation
control protocol.
Therefore, the significant contributions of this paper com-
pared to our earlier results are four folds: (1) providing an
improved formation control protocol via a more effective
strategy using next-position prediction of the master and
relative distance between agents; (2) simultaneously guar-
anteeing both stability of distributed time-variant formation
and obstacle avoidance control, relative distance modification
and velocity control loops via the NI stability criteria; (3)
developing a distributed time-varying formation controller for
multi-vehicles system using NI systems theory; (4) presenting
a new obstacle avoidance approach by varying the formation
shape; and (5) considering necessary and sufficient conditions
for all obstacle avoidance situations and proposing effective
solutions. An additional contribution of our work is introduc-
ing a practical strategy for UAV-UGV coordination since not
many recent studies consider a consensus methodology for
these two different types of unmanned robots.
In order to test our new methodology, three indoor ex-
periments implementing our enhanced NI-systems cooperative
approach are conducted using both UAV and UGV platforms.
The first test is carried out using two UGVs and one UAV.
The autonomous vehicles must maintain a small
invariant
triangular pattern while the UGV (master) follows a pre-
defined rectangular trajectory. The purpose of this test
is
to prove the effectiveness and stabilization of our proposed
method when two types of robots coordinate to perform
an indoor exploration task. The second test, which is more
complicated than the first one, is used to show the obstacle
avoidance capability of our varying formation method in case
the master (UAV) predicts a collision with an obstacle and
the master (UGV) predicts a collision with multiple obstacles
on either side of its desired path. The final test involves three
UGVs with randomly located obstacles.
Moreover, in outdoor cooperative scenarios, where the UAV
and UGVs are tasked to explore uncertain environment, sit-
uations may occur when an absolute position sensor (like
GPS) is only available to one vehicle at a time. Because
the absolute position navigation may not be available to all
vehicles (e.g. GPS interference caused by urban canyon effect),
we assume the other vehicles are only able to measure their
relative distance using sensors such as machine vision sensors
or radio beacons. Therefore, the relative distances between the
autonomous robots are used as key components in our coop-
erative method during indoor experiments. This information is
simulated and measured by a Vicon Motion Capture system.
Finally, due to the sharp interior angle vertexes of a rectangle
(generally being 90 degree), yaw angle consensus among the
UGVs is also considered in this paper. This additional angle
consensus allows the UGVs to perform smoother movement
following a trajectory with sharp corners like a rectangle by
rotating simultaneously around the vertical (Z) axis, especially
when the master UGV reaches a vertex of the rectangle.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: Section II in-
troduces the hardware/software configuration and architecture
design for the formation experiment. Preliminary graph theory
and the NI theory is reviewed in Section III. The dynamic
models of the UAV and UGV are analyzed in Section IV.
The formation tracking control architecture for an autonomous
team (UAVs and UGVs) is studied in Section V. Stability of the
whole system is verified in Section VI. Simulation results from
implementing the NI formation control architecture in a team
of multi-vehicles are shown in Section VII. The geometrical
approach for obstacle avoidance is illustrated in Section VIII.
Finally, experimental results are presented in Section IX,
followed by conclusions drawn in Section X.
Throughout this paper, for simplicity of notation, we let 1n
represent a column vector of size n with all elements being
1. Let ⊗ represent the Kronecker product and [P(s), Ps(s)]
denote the positive feedback interconnection between transfer
functions P(s) and Ps(s).
II. EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS
A. Hardware/Software Configuration
One UAV (F450 quadrotor platform), three UGVs (Pioneer
P3-AT and P3-DX) and four obstacles (plastic packing boxes)
are used to conduct our experiments. The dimension of each
packing box is 36cmW×36cmD×36cmH. The size of each
UAV or UGV is approximately 30cmW×30cmD. The position
and orientation of each robot are broadcasted continuously
from a ground station (GS) where the movements of the UAV
and UGVs in three dimensions are analyzed by the Vicon
Motion Capture System software that is installed in the station
facilities. The master UAV/UGV utilizes this information to
correct its trajectory relative to the next waypoint while the
two slaves (UGVs or UAV) predict the next position of the
master from its estimated velocity and recalculate the relative
distance between the master and the slave before adjusting its
position to preserve the determined formation in real time. The
information exchange protocol between the GS and the robots
is achieved using a WiFi network and the Robot Operating
System (ROS) framework.
B. Overall Architecture
Our control architecture is separated into two layers (Fig.
2): UGV-Leader layer and Leader-Follower layer. The func-
tionality and the control design of each layer will be described
in the next sections.
III. PRELIMINARIES OF GRAPH THEORY AND
NEGATIVE-IMAGINARY THEORY
A. The Basics of Graph Theory
Graph theory can be used to effectively describe the inter-
agent communication including N unmanned robots. Each
3
Fig. 2. Overall architecture of the UAV-UGV and UGV-UGV formation.
is represented as a vertex. Let G = (ϑ,ε) denote a
robot
directed graph with N vertexes and L edges (N×L matrix),
such that ϑ = (v1, v2,..., vN ) and ε ⊆{(vi,vj): vi,vj ∈ ϑ, vi
(cid:54)= vj} mathematically describe the finite vertexes set and the
ordered edges set, respectively. Suppose that each edge of G
is assigned an orientation, which is arbitrary but fixed. The
(vertex-edge) incidence matrix of G, denoted by Q(i), is a
N×L matrix defined as follows:
qve = 1
qve = −1
qve = 0
Qi =
if vi is the head of edge evi,vj ,
if vi is the tail of edge evi,vj ,
if vi is not connected to evi,vj .
(1)
Note that the incidence matrix has a column sum equal to
zero, which is assumed from the fact that every edge must
have exactly one head and one tail. Extending this graph
theory, given an arbitrary oriented set of the edge ε, the graph
Laplacian, L(G), is defined as L(G)= Q(G)Q(G)T .
For convenience in interpreting further the UAV-UGV coop-
erative theory, some mathematical information graph matrices
are newly described.
1) The consensus matrix: Let the N×L matrix Qc represent
a consensus matrix which corresponds to a graph (ϑc,εc)
that has N vertexes and L is the number of communication
orientations. This N×L matrix indicates which robot at vertex
vi in ϑc will send its consensus information to the adjacent
vertexes vj in εc.
Qc =
Cij = 0
Cij = −1
Cij = 0
if Roboti is the head of evi,vj
for consensus,
if Roboti is the tail of evi,vj
for consensus,
otherwise.
(2)
2) The reference matrix: The (N×L) reference matrix Qr
i=1Ri describes which node or UAV in the group will
= diagn
directly follow to the reference trajectories:
Ri = 1 if Roboti directly follows the reference
Qr =
path,
Ri = 0 if Roboti does not directly follow the
reference path.
(3)
B. NI Systems Theory
The definition of an SNI system was firstly introduced in
[23]. According to Lemma 3.1, its Nyquist plot should start
from an arbitrary point on the real axis, curve below this axis
and end at the center point (0,0). Similarly, with a less strict
criteria as compared to an SNI system, the definition of an NI
system is presented in Lemma 3.2.
Lemma 3.1 (Petersen, I.R. and Lanzon, A.,2010): For a
single input/single output (SISO) case, a transfer function P(s)
is called strictly negative imaginary (SNI) if its Nyquist plot is
located strictly below the real axis for all positive frequencies
in s domain; i.e, P(s) ∈ SNI if j(P(jω)-P∗(jω))>0 for all ω>0.
Lemma 3.2 (Petersen, I.R. and Lanzon, A.,2010): P(s) is
negative imaginary (NI) if its Nyquist plot for ω (cid:62) 0 is
contained in the lower half of the complex plane. This Nyquist
plot can touch, but not cross the real axis; i.e, P(s) ∈ NI if
j(P(jω)-P∗(jω))(cid:62)0
when a SNI/NI plant system is achieved, the internal stabil-
ity of a positive feedback interconnection between this plant
and its NI/SNI controller is illustrated as in Lemma 3.3.
Lemma 3.3 (Petersen, I.R. and Lanzon, A.,2010): Con-
sidering the case in which an SNI/NI plant M(s) and an
NI/SNI controller N(s) such that M(∞)N(∞) = 0 and N(∞)
0 are interconnected by a positive feedback, it follows that
the corresponding loop transfer function L(s) = M(s)N(s) is
internally stable if the DC gain condition at zero frequency
M(0)N(0) < 1 is satisfied.
Remark 1: Since the (-1,0) critical point is never enclosed
by the Nyquist plot of a SNI or NI system, it is assumed that
any SNI/NI system has a robust stability.
The major concept of this theory can be extended further
to MIMO and cooperative control applications [20] and [21].
Given a group of SNI/NI systems or a multi-input multi-
output (MIMO) system, the collaboration of SNI/NI agents
is achieved when these systems are connected to their SNI
controllers via a cooperative information graph. The SNI/NI-
agents cooperation is formulated as follows:
¯y = ¯P (s)¯u = (QT
i=1Pi(s)(Qi ⊗ In)¯u
(4)
i ⊗ In)diagn
¯u = ¯Ps(s)¯y
(5)
where u ∈ Rln×1 and y ∈ Rln×1 are the input and output
of the overall network plant, respectively. ¯Ps(s) ∈ Rln×ln is
the group of SNI/NI consensus controllers for the multiple
NI/SNI systems, indicated as Pi(s) ∈ Rmi×1. Thus Pi(s)
is a column vector of size M which contains a set of mi
coordinated outputs.
Based on the consensus theory of Wang [20, 21], an NI-
systems consensus architecture for the multi-UAV systems was
proposed in [30]. A reference matrix, consensus matrix as
well as an offset distance between the UAVs are added to the
original structure to solve existing formation and consensus
problems as shown in Fig. 3. The overall formulas for the
whole cooperative structure are given as:
Xr = 1n ⊗ r,
(6)
4
(7)
(8)
(9)
Fig. 3. The origin NI-system consensus architecture.
Fig. 4. A PID controller structure for controlling the velocity of robots.
ei = yi + Xr,
¯y = ([Qi Qr] ⊗ Im)ei,
ef = ¯y + Xf ,
u = ([Qc Qr] ⊗ Im)diagn
i=1Ps(s)ef
(10)
where r ∈ R2×1 denotes the reference position on the plane
of the master, Xr ∈ R2n×1 is the reference matrix, and xf
corresponds to the relative position between the slave UAVs
and the master UAV in the configured formation. u ∈ Rm×1
is the velocity set point input of each UAV on x and y axes
while the output y ∈ Rm×1 is the current position of each UAV.
u ∈ Rlm×1 and y ∈ Rlm×1 are the input and output of overall
network plant. er is the error between the desired position of
the master and its current one, while ef is the error between
the desired relative position and the current one among the
UAVs. Ps(s) ∈ Rlm×lm is the group of SNI consensus and
tracking controllers for the group of UAVs.
The simple formation experiment conducted in this paper
shows that consensus based on NI-systems cooperative control
between UAVs is guaranteed, but the position response of the
remaining UAVs is somewhat slow. This small delay in the
position response causes an unsatisfactory formation shape
which is also discussed in the conclusion of the Section VII.
In an effort to improve the UAV-UGV formation perfor-
mance based on the consensus algorithm, we will outline an
innovative architecture in the next sections.
IV. DYNAMIC MODELING FOR VELOCITY CONTROL OF
THE UAV AND THE UGV
First, the linear velocities of the UAV/UGV in the x and y
axes are stabilized by using a PID controller, which is tuned to
satisfy the closed-loop SNI system requirement. The proposed
velocity control structure is illustrated in Fig. 4.
During experimental tests, all relevant data of the master and
the slaves (position, linear velocity, acceleration, Euler angles)
were automatically collected by the ground station to serve the
purpose of finding the closed-loop velocity transfer functions
in the lateral and longitudinal directions. In the next step, this
THE UGV TRANSFER FUNCTIONS BETWEEN VELOCITY X/VELOCITY Y
SET POINT AND ACTUAL POSITION X/ POSITION Y
TABLE I
Transfer function
−0.043s3+5.16s2−1860.11s+54489.05
velxsp/posx=
velysp/posy= −0.043s3+4.24s2−1494.74s+48347.83
s4+86.155s3+54490.53s2+29510.63s+1481.6
s4+88.9s3+54883.91s2+49242.03s+1266.25
Velx
Vely
THE UAV TRANSFER FUNCTIONS BETWEEN VELOCITY X/VELOCITY Y SET
POINT AND ACTUAL POSITION X/ POSITION Y
TABLE II
Transfer function
Velx
Vely
velxsp/posx=
velysp/posy=
−0.0426s3+6.76s2−153.90s+33206.86
−0.05s3+−0.52s2−1144.04s+29990.15
s4+86.15s3+54490.53s2+24730.20s+1161.87
s4+101.06s3+52978.06s2+23472.45s+2291.96
data was analyzed using MATLAB to determine the closed-
loop transfer functions between the velocity set point input
(velxsp/velysp) and the absolute position output (posx/posy)
for the UAV/UGV on the x and y axes (Table I, II). We use an
ARMAX model to represent the performance of these transfer
functions. The overall dynamic equations for the UAV and the
UGV in the z domain have a general form as follows:
A(z)y(k) = B(z)u(k − n) + e(k)
(11)
where u(k) is the system input, y(k) is the system output,
n is the system delay, k is the present time and e(k) is the
disturbance in the system.
Based on the transfer functions found, the Nyquist diagrams
of the UAV and UGVs are plotted to identify if the transfer
functions are SNI. As seen in Fig. 5, the linear velocity transfer
functions for both the UAV and the UGVs satisfy the SNI
conditions.
Similarly, the yaw rate transfer functions for UGVs are also
shown to be SNI systems using their Nyquist plots.
V. ARCHITECTURE DESIGN
In this section, an architecture for the NI-system formation
and consensus control is newly designed. Firstly, all of the
SNI velocity transfer functions for the x and y axes, found
5
Fig. 6. Multiple SNI plants.
Fig. 7. Overall network plant.
in the previous section, are combined to form an SNI plant.
The inputs of this plant are the velocity set points of the
SNI systems (Vxsp, Vysp) while its outputs correspond to the
current locations of the vehicles on the x and y axes as shown
in Fig. 6. In the next step, the network matrix ([Qi Qr]⊗Im)
is appended to the output of plant in order to calculate the
relative distances between the robots and the position error
between the master and the slaves (dx;dy;dx1r;dy1r). Similarly,
the matrix ([Qc Qr]⊗Im) is appended to the input of the plant
to determine the desired velocity values for each robot via the
NI consensus controller gains K, the desired relative distance
between robots (Xf , Yf ) and the next position prediction of
the master (pxf , pyf ). This control architecture is referred to
as the overall network plant for consensus (Fig. 7).
The distance between the current position of the master and
its next position (pxf , pyf ) in Fig. 8 is predicted from its
current velocity on the horizontal plane. The corresponding
equations are as follows:(cid:20)pxf
(cid:21)
(cid:20) Vxm(dt)
(cid:21)
Vym(dt)
=
pyf
(12)
where Vxm and Vym are the master horizontal and vertical
velocities, respectively. This data is sent continuously to every
slave agent. Here, dt represents the sample time for the whole
system.
Finally, the overall network plant is then combined with the
remaining parts of the consensus controller, including the NI
controllers, the relative positions and the future position pre-
diction, to create a new formation consensus control method
as shown in Fig. 8.
Based on the desired distance and traveling time between
the former and latter formation, the velocity setpoints sent to
Fig. 5. The Nyquist plots of the UGV and UAV velocity transfer functions
for the x and y axes.
Fig. 8. The consensus and formation control architecture for SNI multi-
vehicle systems with a corresponding communication graph.
6
Fig. 9. Time-varying formation of three robots
Fig. 10. SNI property of a positive connection between an SNI system and
an NI system
each robot can be formulated as shown in Equation 13 and
Fig. 9.
n(cid:88)
n(cid:88)
(V xspi, V yspi) =
(disx(t)
i /t, disy(t)
i /t)
(13)
i=1
i=1
where n is the number of agents participating in formation
transformation. (disx(t)
i ) are the relative distances
i
between the old and new formation on the x and y axes. t
is the desired time interval to reach a new formation.
, disy(t)
As a result, the consensus and reference gain should be
adaptive to obtain the given velocity.
Theorem 5.1: Multi-agent systems can obtain a time-varying
formation tracking on the x-y plane if for any given bounded
initial states, the following condition holds:
i − p(t)
i − dis(t)
´p(t)
i ) = 02×1
n(cid:88)
(14)
lim
(
t→dest
i=1
i
, ´p(t)
where dest is the expected traveling time to achieve a new
formation. p(t)
are expressed as the current and desired
i
position of each robot in the varying formation.
(cid:80)n
sumed from Eq. (14) that limt→dest((cid:80)n
i = 02×1, it is as-
i ) = 02×1.
this theorem becomes the definition of targets
Therefore,
pursuing problems intended for multi-agent systems.
In the case where limt→dest
i=1 dis(t)
i=1 ´p(t)
- p(t)
i
Based on this new strategy, the multi-vehicles under the
control of the adaptive NI controllers and the information
network topology will be guaranteed not only to maintain
a desired spatial pattern but also successfully modify their
formation over time.
Fig. 11. The stability result of the NI formation control protocol
Lemma 6.1 (Petersen, I.R. and Lanzon, A.,2010): A positive
connection between an NI plant and an SNI plant results in
an SNI structure.
Lemma 6.2 (Ghallab, et al., 2017): Lyapunov-based stability
proof verifies that the results given in Lemma 3.3 for the
internal stability of feedback interconnections of NI systems
is still correct.
Furthermore, it is mentioned in Lemma 3.3 that the con-
dition of internal stability for the whole structure with the
positive feedback interconnection is M(0)N(0) < 1. The DC
1161.872 ≈ 28.58 while that of N(s) is
gain of M(0) equals to 33206.861
a constant gain of -0.7 as presented in Test 2. It is seen that the
DC gain condition of M(s)N(s) is guaranteed to be less than
1 due to the negative constant gain value in N(s) controller.
As a result, M(s) under the control of N(s) is internally stable.
Moreover, a Nyquist plot of whole architecture is drawn, and
the result of stability is the same as in Lemma 3.3 since its
figure never encircles the critical point (1+j0) as shown in
Fig. 11.
Similarly, the stability of the Y axis SNI velocity transfer
function and its NI controller as well as that of whole NI
formation control structure are proved by the same approach.
VI. STABILITY PROOF OF THE ENHANCED NI FORMATION
VII. SIMULATION RESULTS
CONTROL ARCHITECTURE
We assume that M(s) and N(s) are the SNI velocity transfer
function and its NI controller for one slave UAV on the x axis
respectively. As presented in Table II and Fig. 5, the M(s)
transfer function (TF1) is an SNI system. Unfortunately, the
position prediction term is only an NI system (TF2) as shown
in Lemma 3.2. It is outlined in Lemma 6.1 that the whole
structure is still SNI if two systems are linked together by
a positive connection. As presented in the Fig. 7, we may
conclude that the complete plant (TF3) is SNI as shown in
Fig. 10.
To validate the effectiveness of the proposed architecture
and controllers, we simulated four consensus schemes. The
NI controller used for the master UAV will receive reference
points from the rectangular path planner and convert them into
linear velocity set points. During the time the master navigates
to each next waypoint, the slaves maintain its relative distance
from the predicted future position of the master. Case 1 shows
a complicated consensus and formation for the combination
of one UAV and two UGVs with the time-varying formation
while the yaw angle consensus is also presented in Case 2 to
solve the position consensus problem at each vertex of the
rectangular trajectory. Thanks to this approach, UGVs can
make the position consensus better, especially at the sharp
corner of two trajectories which has not been mentioned in
recent studies [13] [30]. The overall equations describing the
consensus and formation control for one master UAV and
two slave UGVs, using the enhanced NI systems theory are
summarized as follows:
1
−1
0
1
0
− 1
Qi =
([Qi Qr] ⊗ I2) =
([Qc Qr] ⊗ I2) =
; Qr =
1
0
−1
0
−1
−1
1
0
0
1
0
− 1
0
0
0
−1
−1
; Qc =
0
⊗
(cid:20)1
⊗
(cid:20)1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
Vxsp(t)
Vysp(t)
Vxsp(t)
Vysp(t)
Vxsp(t)
Vysp(t)
2
3
2
3
u =
=
=
Krx(Xr + X1)
Kry(Yr + Y1)
Kcx1[Xf + X1 - X2 + (Vx1dt)]
Kcy1[Yf + Y1 - Y2 + (Vy1dt)]
Kcx2[Xf + X1 - X3 + (Vx1dt)]
Kcy2[Yf + Y1 - Y3 + (Vy1dt)]
Krx(Xr + X1)
Kry(Yr + Y1)
Kcx1[Xf + dx1]
Kcy1[Yf + dy1]
Kcx2[Xf + dx2]
Kcy2[Yf + dy2]
k =
=
Krx
Kry
Kcx1
Kcy1
Kcx2
Kcy2
disx(t)
disy(t)
disx(t)
disy(t)
disx(t)
disy(t)
1 /t*(Xr + X1)
1 /t*(Yr + Y1)
x2 /t*[Xf + dx1]
y2 /t*[Yf + dy1]
x3 /t*[Xf + dx2]
y3 /t*[Yf + dy2]
(15)
(cid:21)
(cid:21)
(16)
(17)
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
(18)
(19)
7
Fig. 12. Simulation results obtained for a varied formation of the UAV-UGVs
system on the plane for Case 1.
n(cid:88)
where Kr and Kc are the reference and consensus gain
values of the NI controllers for velocity control on the x and
y axes and the angular rate control around the z axis. Let ωsp1
and ωsp2 represent the angular rate set point of the UGVs. dx
and dy are the relative positions between the leader and the
follower on the x and y axes while Ωl is the relative angle
between the leader UGV and the follower UGVs.
The output equation of the SNI plant is:
y =
(Xi, Yi, ωi) = P (s)u
(23)
i=1
where P(s) is the SNI velocity transfer function matrix of
the two UAVs on the x and y axes. n is the number of agents.
Case 1: The distances between robots on the x and y
axes are varied at each vertex of the master's rectangular
trajectory. Xf = [Xf1, Xf2]. Xf1 is chosen as [100,50], [50,50],
[100,50], [100,0] and Xf2 is [-100,50], [-50,50], [-100,50],
[-100,0]. The communication topology is given in Fig. 13.
The Xr parameter will be assigned with the waypoints of the
rectangular trajectory. The four vertexes of this rectangle in the
x-y coordinate plane are [0, 100], [0, 0], [80, 0], [80, 100].
Desired time interval for formation variation is 2 seconds.
Therefore, the initial values for NI controllers are selected as
(-0.002, -0.5, -0.5, -0.5, -0.5, -0.5). As seen in Fig. 12, UAV1,
UGV2 and UGV3 well maintains the varied formation over
time under the control of NI controllers. The UGVs obtain the
newly desired relative distance in approximately 2 seconds.
Case 2: The communication topology is given in Fig. 13.
The NI controllers are the constant gains (-0.066, -0.02),
Xf =(0, 0) degree, Qi = [1; -1], Qc= [0; -1], Qr= [1; 0], the Xr
term is [90; 90] degree. These parameter settings are used to
synchronize the yaw angle for the UGVs. The corresponding
consensus result is depicted in Fig. 14.
The simulation results have verified that our proposed
algorithm can overcome the problem existing in time-varying
formation control. Once the expected relative distances on the
In order to generate a rotation at the sharp corner for UGVs,
the yaw angle of the follower is controlled to follow the
yaw angle of the leader (Eq. 20) instead of being determined
by the position vectors on the x and y axes during the
consensus, avoiding and returning processes (Eq. 21 and Eq.
22). Meanwhile, the position consensus is completely turned
off during the turns.
(cid:21)
(cid:20)ωsp1
ωsp2
(cid:20)
(cid:20)
=
=
u =
Kryaw(Ωr + Ω1)
Kcyaw[Ωf + Ω1 - Ω2 + (ω1dt)]
Kryaw(Ωr + Ω1)
Kcyaw[Ωf + Ωl + (ω1dt)]
(cid:21)
ωspm = atan2(Yspm − Ym, Xspm − Xm)
ωspl = atan2(disYsps − disYs, disXsps − disXs)
(cid:21)
(20)
(21)
(22)
Fig. 13. Communication Graph for Case1 and Case2.
Fig. 14. Simulation results for a yaw angle consensus involving the master
UGV and the slave UGV.
x and y axes are able to be altered at each vertex of the
rectangular trajectory, our robots will take approximately 2
seconds to reach the new distance offset and to stabilize around
this value. Additionally, the consensus of robots is performed
successfully at each vertex of rectangle owing to our yaw angle
consensus approach.
VIII. THE GEOMETRY METHOD TO AVOID OBSTACLES
After verifying the feasibility of our NI varying formation
control method in a simulation environment, it is necessary
to indicate a new obstacle avoidance algorithm for the two
avoiding cases: one obstacle alone and two obstacles in
opposite sides.
A. Identification of obstacles and robots
Each robot is assumed to be equipped with a sensor (e.g.
RGB-Depth camera) to determine the real obstacle boundaries.
In a cluttered environment, the shape of real obstructions is
intricate. Therefore, other studies, which compute the escape
angle via actual border of the obstructions, often show the
results within acceptable limits. Similarly, other approaches
are implemented in a simple environment in which only some
obstacles of simple shape exist. We solve this problem via two
steps: (1) finding the center point of the real boundary parts
within the Field of View (FOV) of the camera by using integral
formula and geometric decomposition, and (2) generating a
virtual circle that surrounds the recognized obstruction. The
radius of this circle is equal
to the distance between the
center point and the furthest point of the observed obstacle
boundary. By using the virtual circles to cover the obstacle
boundaries, any computation based on the circle border line is
more accurate. Each time the robot goes through the identified
area, the calculating process will be repeated.
In Fig. 15,
the light-green colored regions which have
polygon shapes are the overlapping ones between the camera's
FOV and the top sections of the obstacle. Moreover, OC1 and
OC2 are the geometric centers of the two polygons mentioned
above and are also the centers of virtual circles which represent
the viewable obstacle regions detected by the camera.
Occasionally, the obstacle boundary within the observation
view is a discontinuity, which results in small spaces being
created between the obstacles. It would be unacceptable if
the avoiding algorithm drives our robot to pass through these
8
Fig. 15. Generating the obstacle circles within the FOV of camera.
Fig. 16. Necessary and sufficient conditions to group or separate obstacles.
narrow gaps. To overcome this obstruction, we group or
separate these obstacles via the following conditions:
(cid:40)
group-obstacle
separate-obstacle
if dis12 < d+r1+r2,
if dis12 >= d+r1+r2.
(24)
where dis12 is the distance between the two obstacle
centers. r1 and r2 are the radii of the obstacle circle 1 and
2 respectively. d is the diameter of the robot circumscribed
circle.
As presented in Fig. 16, if the distance between the two
centers of OC1 and OC2 is less than the diameter of the
robot's virtual circle plus the two radii, a grouping is executed;
otherwise, the separation is applied. The center coordinate and
radius of the grouped circle OC12 is computed as shown in
Fig. 17.
These computations can be extended for multi-obstacles
situations if there are more than two obstacles whose locations
satisfy the grouping condition. However, in case of using
a laser rangefinder sensor; e.g., 3D LiDAR, which brings
powerful 360-degree and 6-meter distance sensing capabilities,
the obstacle circle radius and the number of grouped obstacles
must be limited. The primary reason is that the larger area of
the obstacle boundary this sensor can recognize, the smaller
the space between obstacles which the robots can bypass is.
Finally, by considering the size of each robot in our ob-
stacle avoidance approach, each robot is also geometrically
circumscribed by a virtual circle. Once the robot's virtual
Fig. 17. New obstacle circle design
circle intersects with the obstacle circle, a potential collision
is detected.
B. Avoiding one obstacle
9
We obtain the necessary and sufficient conditions of this
mode as follows:
1
if ob ∈ F OV, ob (cid:51) OB,
if SP1orSP2 ∈ SD1SD2,
if dis(OC1OC2) > F OV
,
2
0 Otherwise.
mode =
(25)
where SP1 and SP2 denote the coordinates of two projection
points projected from the center line of two opposite obstacles.
SD1 and SD2 illustrate the intersection points between the
robot virtual circles and the center lines of two opposite robots.
FOV is the Field of View of a camera. OC1 and OC2 present
the center location of each obstacle while SC1 and SC2 present
the center location of each robot.
After the requirements of the one-obstacle avoidance mode
are determined, two strategies to transform the robots' forma-
tion will be designed. When one of the slaves predicts a po-
tential collision with the obstacle (Strategy 1) via the distance
between the obstacle and the robot, this robot will calculate
the updated relative distance from the master position and
will execute the avoiding process with the following steps: (1)
calculating an intersection point A between the obstacle circle
and OA3; (2) finding a projected point SP1 on SC1-SC2 line
segment; (3) recomputing the relative distance dis SP1MC1
between the master and the corresponding slave; (4) the slave
travels into the safe place; and (5) after avoiding process, the
three robots reach the destination. Similarly, when the master
detects a potential collision with the obstacle (Strategy 2), the
methods for determining the projected point SP1 are the same
as those mentioned in Strategy 1. However, in the third step
(3), the SP1 coordinate is used as the position reference for
the master while the slaves attempt to maintain their former
orientation by storing its last position on the horizontal axis.
All processes for two strategies are depicted as in Fig. 18.
C. Avoiding two facing obstacles
Regarding the evasion for obstacles located at two opposite
there are three situations which are mathematically
sides,
illustrated as below:
(1),
if dis(SP1SP2) > dis(SC1SC2) + R2 + R3(1),
&dis(OC1OC2) < F OV
2
if D1 + R1 + R2 < dis(SP1SP2),
&dis(SP1SP2) < dis(SC1SC2) + R2 + R3(2),
&dis(OC1OC2) < F OV
2
if D1 < dis(SP1SP2)(3),
&dis(SP1SP2) < D1 + R2 + R3(3),
&dis(OC1OC2) < F OV
2
(2),
(3),
0 Otherwise.
(26)
2
mode =
Fig. 18. The two strategies for one obstacle-avoidance problem.
where D1 is the master robot's virtual circle diameter
In Case 1 (1), the three robots are able to maintain the
configured formation and move to the target without being
blocked by any obstruction due to a large clearance between
two obstacles. In Case 2 (2) and Case 3 (3), the three robots
are forced to alter their formation pattern while there are two
opposite obstacles blocking their path and the relative distance
between the master and the obstacles is 1 meter. The former
will modify the distance between robots while the latter will
shift from the original formation to the queuing formation. In
the scope of this paper, we will concentrate on solving the
problems arising from the first and second cases.
When the conditions of Case 1 are met, no action is required
by the robots. However, when the conditions of Case 2 are
satisfied, our robots will be guided following five steps as
shown in Fig. 19: (1) creating the centers line SC1-SC2
between the two slaves; (2) finding the two intersection points
A and B between the obstacle's boundary circles and the
connecting line OC1-OC2; (3) determining their two projected
points SP1 and SP2 on the SC1-SC2 line; (4) computing the
new desired relative distance that the two slaves must follow
while the master robot is driven to the middle point C of OC1-
OC2; and (5) the former formation pattern will be restored
right after the master robot moves out of FOV of the master's
camera.
IX. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Three experiments have been presented to illustrate the main
results of this research. Test 1 introduces the ability of invariant
formation control via the NI consensus strategy applied to
multi-vehicle systems. In contrast, Test 2 demonstrates the
transformation of robots' time-variant formation pattern with
the main purpose of keeping away from obstacles in two
various situations: one obstacle and two group of obstacles
10
Fig. 20. Communication Graph for Test 2.
Fig. 21. Experimental results for the triangular formation control based on a
position consensus involving the two UGVs and the UAV.
In order to provide more clear proof of this improvement, the
formation experiments using our former NI architecture for
three UGVs [30] are conducted in a similar way as those in
Test 1. Fig. 24 and Fig. 25 show the performances of the
three UGVs over time. Compared with the old architecture in
stabilizing the desired distance of 100 cm between the UGVs,
the actual relative distance between the UGVs in Fig. 24 is up
to 95 cm while that in Fig. 25 is only 30 cm. This verifies that
the enhanced NI architecture for formation control is better
than the ordinary one.
Finally, the rectangular trajectory of the two UGVs in Fig.
21 is extremely smooth, especially at the four vertexes. Such
performance is achieved thanks to strong yaw angle consensus
as shown in Fig. 14 and Fig. 22.
Test 2: Two avoidance schemes mentioned in Section VIII
are implemented separately in an indoor environment using the
UAV-UGV/UGVs systems. These systems are integrated in our
NI time-varying formation control protocol. In experiment 1,
the master UAV attempts to evade the obstacle by changing
its waypoints. Meanwhile, the two slave UGVs maintain their
pre-defined formation. Different from the first test, experiment
2 concentrates on how the three UGVs can overcome the two
groups of obstacles located at two opposite sides.
All settings of two experiments are as per those of Test 1.
The radius of the robot circumscribed circles is 32 cm, and
that of the obstacle's boundary circles is 35 cm. The FOV of
the camera is roughly 2.2 m. The coordinate of the destination
point in the experiment 1 is [-100, 170] while it is [-100, 220]
in the experiment 2.
Test 3: In the final experiment, an uncertain environment,
containing two opposite-side obstacles and a single obstacle, is
Fig. 22. Experimental results for a yaw angle consensus involving two UGVs.
Fig. 19. The strategy for two-facing-obstacles avoidance problem.
in parallel. The final test is conducted for an overall situation
in which obstacles are placed randomly.
Test 1: Test 1 aims at validating the efficiency of both
consensus and formation control for multi-robot systems,
including two UGVs and one UAV. The master UGV (system
1 in Fig. 20) will receive the waypoints on the rectangular
trajectory path while the slaves, involving one UGV (system3)
and one UAV (system2), follow the master and maintain
a relative distance, determined by the pre-defined triangular
formation. The geometrical distance between the master and
each slave is 100 cm. This term is configured by the Xf
parameter in the enhanced NI formation control diagram. The
communication topology is given in Fig. 20. The NI controllers
are the constant gains (-0.0028, -0.0028, -0.7, -0.7, -0.0069, -
0.0069), Xf =(100, -100, 100, 100, 0, 0) cm. The Xr parameter
is the location matrix for the four vertexes of the rectangle.
The coordinates of four vertexes are [100, -150], [100, 10],
[-150, 10], [-150, -150]. Moreover, the yaw angles of the two
UGVs are also synchronized with each other using the same
approach. The NI controllers used for yaw angle consensus
are the constant gains (-0.0056, -0.0107). Similarly, Xf =(0, 0)
degrees. The Xr parameter is referred to as the desired angle
setpoints set and is calculated using the rotation matrix and
the next vertex location. All experimental results are shown in
Fig. 21 and Fig. 22.
For more details, Fig. 23 illustrates graphically a triangle
shape-shifting in space produced by virtual connections made
by the central poses of the two UGVs and the UAV (the
different line types and colors) based on the enhanced NI
formation control strategy with varying time steps.
As seen in Fig. 21 and Fig. 23, good formation and con-
sensus for a group of UAV and UGVs are guaranteed. Based
on the desired relative distance information with the master
position, the two slaves, including the UAV and the UGV,
together with the master UGV, have generated an inverted-V-
shaped formation (green-colored lines) and moved along the
rectangular paths (green, blue and black-colored lines). The
maximum error of position is approximately 15 cm for the
UAV and 7 cm for the UGVs.
Moreover, response time of systems under the control of the
enhanced NI formation architecture is improved dramatically.
11
Fig. 23. Formation control experimentation. The eight images represent the
linear displacement of the triangle pattern generated by the two UGVs and
the UAV. The robots preserve this pattern and travel along the rectangular
path simultaneously.
Fig. 26. Experimental results for the varying horizontal-line formation and
obstacle avoidance control based on the NI consensus architecture involving
the leader UAV and the two slaves UGV.
Fig. 24. Experimental results for the triangular formation control based on a
position consensus involving the three UGVs.
explored by a team of 3 UGVs. The target is assigned at the
coordinate [-100, 240]. The task of this team is to preserve
the triangle-formation as best as possible while avoiding
unexpected obstacles and moving to the target simultaneously.
Fig. 26 shows the significant results of the straight-line
shaped formation and the master-obstacle collision avoidance.
The initial objectives of this experiment are achieved. The
straight-line shaped formation is preserved perfectly by the
two UGVs even though the leader must avoid the obstacle.
Similarly, Fig. 27 indicates that the three UGVs are driven
appropriately according to the first strategy of avoiding two
groups of opposite obstacles (Section VIII) while maintaining
their triangular formation.
Following the success of Test 2, Test 3 is conducted without
any constraints. The three UGVs easily pass through any
obstacles on their path and reach the target despite the two
facing arrays of multiple obstacles and a single obstacle are
placed randomly in indoor environment.
Fig. 27. Experimental results for the triangle varying formation and obstacle
avoidance control based on the NI consensus architecture involving the three
UGVs.
In each test, the position consensus errors made by the
robots are approximately 10 cm on the x and y axes. Since
there are not any oscillations occurring in the real robot
trajectories, it is pointed out that our formation methodology
is better than that of authors in [28]. Besides, our approach
also pays attention to the size of each robot. It is noted that the
distance between the real avoiding path of all examined robots
and the obstacle circle OC12 is roughly 31 cm with respect
to the desired radius of 32 cm as shown in Fig. 26 to Fig. 28.
Moreover, the formation regrouping takes place smoothly via
the robots' steering behavior. The boundary of the restoration
trajectory is the total of the robot radius and the border line
of the obstacle's virtual circle. Finally, thanks to the relative
distance calculation via the boundary of the obstacle's virtual
circle, the safe path generated is better and smoother than that
of the traditional GOACM method which entirely depends on
the real boundary of the complex-shaped obstacle.
As seen in Fig. 21 and Fig. 26, there is no problem when
the master is either the UAV or the UGV although two systems
Fig. 25. Position response of the three UGVs to the original NI consensus
strategy.
Fig. 28. Experimental results for the triangle varying formation and obstacle
avoidance control based on the NI consensus architecture involving the three
UGVs in an uncertain environment.
have very different dynamics. The UAV's outer-loop velocity
controller sends attitude commands to the inner-loop attitude
controller which commands the motors driving the rotors. In
contrast, the UGV's velocity controller controls the velocity of
four wheels directly. This control is achieved by converting the
formation control into the velocity stabilization of each robot
on the x and y axes via the NI-systems control algorithm.
X. CONCLUSION
A time-varying formation control scheme based on the
enhanced NI systems consensus theory for two popular types
of mobile robots (UAVs-UGVs) has been introduced in this
paper. In this consensus problem, the master corrects its state
in space upon receiving waypoints from the path planner,
while the slaves predict the next position of the master and
will respond to its movement with an offset distance that is
determined by the formation planner. In the obstacle avoidance
problem, comprehensive situations are considered, and the
experiments in simulation and real tests present the positive
results of the proposed method compared to the recent studies.
Some position errors at the sharp corners are experienced
by the UAV as shown in Fig. 21. The distance reference with
the leader UGV when this leader rotates at a sharp corner
and the lack of a real velocity sensor are the major causes for
these errors. In future, to handle these problems, the measured
distance between the master UGV and the slave UAV should
be neglected during the rotational motion of the UGVs. To deal
with the second issue, the UAV platform should be equipped
with a velocity sensor (e.g. optical flow based sensor) to
measure the real velocities on the x and y axes.
In future work, other applications generated by formation
control architecture such as distributed consensus protocols,
leaderless formation or group control of UAVs-UGVs using
NI theory will also be studied; notably, the robot alignment,
the V-shape formation control problem or the actual formation
of cooperative groups.
REFERENCES
[1] Milutinovic, D., Lima, P. (2006). Modeling and optimal centralized
control of a large-size robotic population. IEEE Transactions on Robotics,
22(6), 1280-1285.
[2] Huang, M., Caines, P. E., Malham, R. P. (2012). Social optima in
mean field LQG control: centralized and decentralized strategies. IEEE
Transactions on Automatic Control, 57(7), 1736-1751.
[3] Turpin, M., Michael, N., Kumar, V. (2012, May). Decentralized formation
control with variable shapes for aerial robots. In Robotics and Automation
(ICRA), 2012 IEEE International Conference on (pp. 23-30). IEEE.
[4] Sahraei, B. R., Shabaninia, F. (2010, August). A robust H control design
for swarm formation control of multi-agent systems: A decentralized
adaptive fuzzy approach. In Resilient Control Systems (ISRCS), 2010
3rd International Symposium on (pp. 79-84). IEEE.
[5] de Lope, J., Maravall, D., Quionez, Y. (2013). Response threshold models
and stochastic learning automata for self-coordination of heterogeneous
multi-task distribution in multi-robot systems. Robotics and Autonomous
Systems, 61(7), 714-720.
[6] Parker, L. E. (2008). Multiple mobile robot systems. In Springer Hand-
book of Robotics (pp. 921-941). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
[7] Forster, C., Pizzoli, M., Scaramuzza, D. (2013, November). Air-ground
localization and map augmentation using monocular dense reconstruction.
In Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2013 IEEE/RSJ International
Conference on (pp. 3971-3978). IEEE.
12
[8] Vidal, R., Shakernia, O., Kim, H. J., Shim, D. H.,Sastry, S. (2002). Prob-
abilistic pursuit-evasion games: theory, implementation, and experimental
evaluation. IEEE transactions on Robotics and Automation, 18(5), 662-
669.
[9] Michael, N., Shen, S., Mohta, K., Mulgaonkar, Y., Kumar, V., Nagatani,
K., Ohno, K. (2012). Collaborative mapping of an earth quakedamaged
building via ground and aerial robots. Journal of Field Robotics, 29(5),
832-841.
[10] Li, J., Li, Y. (2011, August). Dynamic analysis and PID control for a
quadrotor. In Mechatronics and Automation (ICMA), 2011 International
Conference on (pp. 573-578). IEEE.
[11] Zhang, X., Li, X., Wang, K., Lu, Y. (2014). A survey of modelling and
identification of quadrotor robot. In Abstract and Applied Analysis (Vol.
2014). Hindawi.
[12] Yan, Z., Jouandeau, N., Cherif, A. A. (2013). A survey and analysis
of multi-robot coordination. International Journal of Advanced Robotic
Systems, 10(12), 399.
[13] Dong, X., Zhou, Y., Ren, Z., Zhong, Y. (2017). Time-varying formation
tracking for second-order multi-agent systems subjected to switching
topologies with application to quadrotor formation flying. IEEE Transac-
tions on Industrial Electronics, 64(6), 5014-5024
[14] Dong, X., Yu, B., Shi, Z., Zhong, Y. (2015). Time-varying formation
control for unmanned aerial vehicles: Theories and applications. IEEE
Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 23(1), 340-348.
[15] Rahimi, R., Abdollahi, F., Naqshi, K. (2014). Time-varying formation
control of a collaborative heterogeneous multi agent system. Robotics and
autonomous systems, 62(12), 1799-1805.
[16] Su, Y., Hong, Y., Huang, J. (2013). A general result on the robust
cooperative output regulation for linear uncertain multi-agent systems.
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 58(5), 1275-1279.
[17] Beard, R. W., Lawton, J., Hadaegh, F. Y. (2001). A coordination ar-
chitecture for spacecraft formation control. IEEE Transactions on control
systems technology, 9(6), 777-790.
[18] Seo, J., Kim, Y., Kim, S., Tsourdos, A. (2012). Consensus-based
reconfigurable controller design for unmanned aerial vehicle formation
flight. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G:
Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 226(7), 817-829.
[19] Qu, Y., Zhu, X., Zhang, Y. M. (2012, October). Cooperative control
for UAV formation flight based on decentralized consensus algorithm. In
International Conference on Intelligent Robotics and Applications (pp.
357-366). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
[20] Wang, J., Lanzon, A., Petersen, I. R. (2015). Robust cooperative control
of multiple heterogeneous Negative-Imaginary systems. Automatica, 61,
64-72.
[21] Wang, J., Lanzon, A., Petersen, I. R. (2015). Robust output feedback
consensus for networked negative-imaginary systems. IEEE Transactions
on Automatic Control, 60(9), 2547-2552.
[22] Dong, X., Zhou, Y., Ren, Z., Zhong, Y. (2017). Time-varying formation
tracking for second-order multi-agent systems subjected to switching
topologies with application to quadrotor formation flying. IEEE Transac-
tions on Industrial Electronics, 64(6), 5014-5024.
[23] Petersen, I. R., Lanzon, A. (2010). Feedback control of negative-
imaginary systems. IEEE Control Systems, 30(5), 54-72.
[24] Mabrok, M. A., Kallapur, A. G., Petersen, I. R., Lanzon, A. (2014).
Spectral conditions for negative imaginary systems with applications to
nanopositioning. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 19(3), 895-
903.
[25] Ghallab, A. G., Mabrok, M. A., Petersen, I. R. (2017). Lyapunov-based
Stability of Feedback Interconnections of Negative Imaginary Systems.
IFAC-PapersOnLine, 50(1), 3424-3428.
[26] Abdullahi, A. M., Mohamed, Z., Abidin, M. Z., Akmeliawati, R.,
Husain, A. R., Bature, A. A. (2015, May). LMI-based state feedback
controller design for vibration control of a negative imaginary system. In
Control Conference (ASCC), 2015 10th Asian (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
[27] Mercado, D. A., Castro, R., Lozano, R. (2013, July). Quadrotors
flight formation control using a leader-follower approach. In Control
Conference (ECC), 2013 European (pp. 3858-3863). IEEE.
[28] Dai, Y., Kim, Y., Wee, S., Lee, D., Lee, S. (2015). A switching formation
strategy for obstacle avoidance of a multi-robot system based on robot
priority model. ISA transactions, 56, 123-134.
[29] Lee, G., Chwa, D. (2018). Decentralized behavior-based formation
control of multiple robots considering obstacle avoidance. Intelligent
Service Robotics, 11(1), 127-138.
[30] Tran, V. P., Garratt, M., Petersen, I. R. (2017, December). Formation
control of multi-UAVs using negative-imaginary systems theory. In Con-
trol Conference (ASCC), 2017 11th Asian (pp. 2031-2036). IEEE.
|
1903.01373 | 4 | 1903 | 2019-10-04T15:22:09 | $\alpha$-Rank: Multi-Agent Evaluation by Evolution | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.GT"
] | We introduce $\alpha$-Rank, a principled evolutionary dynamics methodology for the evaluation and ranking of agents in large-scale multi-agent interactions, grounded in a novel dynamical game-theoretic solution concept called Markov-Conley chains (MCCs). The approach leverages continuous- and discrete-time evolutionary dynamical systems applied to empirical games, and scales tractably in the number of agents, the type of interactions, and the type of empirical games (symmetric and asymmetric). Current models are fundamentally limited in one or more of these dimensions and are not guaranteed to converge to the desired game-theoretic solution concept (typically the Nash equilibrium). $\alpha$-Rank provides a ranking over the set of agents under evaluation and provides insights into their strengths, weaknesses, and long-term dynamics. This is a consequence of the links we establish to the MCC solution concept when the underlying evolutionary model's ranking-intensity parameter, $\alpha$, is chosen to be large, which exactly forms the basis of $\alpha$-Rank. In contrast to the Nash equilibrium, which is a static concept based on fixed points, MCCs are a dynamical solution concept based on the Markov chain formalism, Conley's Fundamental Theorem of Dynamical Systems, and the core ingredients of dynamical systems: fixed points, recurrent sets, periodic orbits, and limit cycles. $\alpha$-Rank runs in polynomial time with respect to the total number of pure strategy profiles, whereas computing a Nash equilibrium for a general-sum game is known to be intractable. We introduce proofs that not only provide a unifying perspective of existing continuous- and discrete-time evolutionary evaluation models, but also reveal the formal underpinnings of the $\alpha$-Rank methodology. We empirically validate the method in several domains including AlphaGo, AlphaZero, MuJoCo Soccer, and Poker. | cs.MA | cs |
α-Rank: Multi-Agent Evaluation by Evolution
Shayegan Omidshafiei∗1, Christos Papadimitriou∗3, Georgios Piliouras∗2, Karl Tuyls∗1,
Mark Rowland1, Jean-Baptiste Lespiau1, Wojciech M. Czarnecki1, Marc Lanctot1, Julien
Perolat1, and Remi Munos1
1DeepMind, 6 Pancras Square, London, UK
2Singapore University of Technology and Design, Singapore
3Columbia University, New York, USA
*Equal contributors, ordered alphabetically. Corresponding author: Karl Tuyls <[email protected]>.
ABSTRACT
We introduce α-Rank, a principled evolutionary dynamics methodology, for the evaluation and ranking of agents in large-scale
multi-agent interactions, grounded in a novel dynamical game-theoretic solution concept called Markov-Conley chains (MCCs).
The approach leverages continuous-time and discrete-time evolutionary dynamical systems applied to empirical games, and
scales tractably in the number of agents, in the type of interactions (beyond dyadic), and the type of empirical games (symmetric
and asymmetric). Current models are fundamentally limited in one or more of these dimensions, and are not guaranteed to
converge to the desired game-theoretic solution concept (typically the Nash equilibrium). α-Rank automatically provides a
ranking over the set of agents under evaluation and provides insights into their strengths, weaknesses, and long-term dynamics
in terms of basins of attraction and sink components. This is a direct consequence of the correspondence we establish to the
dynamical MCC solution concept when the underlying evolutionary model's ranking-intensity parameter, α, is chosen to be
large, which exactly forms the basis of α-Rank. In contrast to the Nash equilibrium, which is a static solution concept based
solely on fixed points, MCCs are a dynamical solution concept based on the Markov chain formalism, Conley's Fundamental
Theorem of Dynamical Systems, and the core ingredients of dynamical systems: fixed points, recurrent sets, periodic orbits,
and limit cycles. Our α-Rank method runs in polynomial time with respect to the total number of pure strategy profiles, whereas
computing a Nash equilibrium for a general-sum game is known to be intractable. We introduce mathematical proofs that
not only provide an overarching and unifying perspective of existing continuous- and discrete-time evolutionary evaluation
models, but also reveal the formal underpinnings of the α-Rank methodology. We illustrate the method in canonical games and
empirically validate it in several domains, including AlphaGo, AlphaZero, MuJoCo Soccer, and Poker.
1 Introduction
This paper introduces a principled, practical, and descriptive methodology, which we call α-Rank. α-Rank enables evaluation
and ranking of agents in large-scale multi-agent settings, and is grounded in a new game-theoretic solution concept, called
Markov-Conley chains (MCCs), which captures the dynamics of multi-agent interactions. While much progress has been
made in learning for games such as Go [1, 2] and Chess [3], computational gains are now enabling algorithmic innovations in
domains of significantly higher complexity, such as Poker [4] and MuJoCo soccer [5] where ranking of agents is much more
intricate than in classical simple matrix games. With multi-agent learning domains of interest becoming increasingly more
complex, we need methods for evaluation and ranking that are both comprehensive and theoretically well-grounded.
Evaluation of agents in a multi-agent context is a hard problem due to several complexity factors: strategy and action spaces
of players quickly explode (e.g., multi-robot systems), models need to be able to deal with intransitive behaviors (e.g., cyclical
best-responses in Rock-Paper-Scissors, but at a much higher scale), the number of agents can be large in the most interesting
applications (e.g., Poker), types of interactions between agents may be complex (e.g., MuJoCo soccer), and payoffs for agents
may be asymmetric (e.g., a board-game such as Scotland Yard).
This evaluation problem has been studied in Empirical Game Theory using the concept of empirical games or meta-games,
and the convergence of their dynamics to Nash equilibria [6 -- 9]. A meta-game is an abstraction of the underlying game, which
considers meta-strategies rather than primitive actions [6, 8]. In the Go domain, for example, meta-strategies may correspond
to different AlphaGo agents (e.g., each meta-strategy is an agent using a set of specific training hyperparameters, policy
representations, and so on). The players of the meta-game now have a choice between these different agents (henceforth
synonymous with meta-strategies), and payoffs in the meta-game are calculated corresponding to the win/loss ratio of these
agents against each other over many rounds of the full game of Go. Meta-games, therefore, enable us to investigate the strengths
and weaknesses of these agents using game-theoretic evaluation techniques.
Figure 1. Paper at a glance. Numerical ordering of the concept boxes corresponds to the paper flow, with sections and/or
theorems indicated where applicable. The methods and ideas used herein may be classified broadly as either game-theoretic
solution concepts (namely, static or dynamic) and evolutionary dynamics concepts (namely, continuous- or discrete-time). The
insights gained by analyzing existing concepts and developing new theoretical results carves a pathway to the novel
combination of our general multi-agent evaluation method, α-Rank, and our game-theoretic solution concept, Markov-Conley
Chains.
Existing meta-game analysis techniques, however, are still limited in a number of ways: either a low number of players
or a low number of agents (i.e., meta-strategies) may be analyzed [6, 8 -- 10]. Specifically, on the one hand continuous-time
meta-game evaluation models, using replicator dynamics from Evolutionary Game Theory [11 -- 15], are deployed to capture the
micro-dynamics of interacting agents. These approaches study and visualize basins of attraction and equilibria of interacting
agents, but are limited as they can only be feasibly applied to games involving few agents, exploding in complexity in the case
of large and asymmetric games. On the other hand, existing discrete-time meta-game evaluation models (e.g., [16 -- 20]) capture
the macro-dynamics of interacting agents, but involve a large number of evolutionary parameters and are not yet grounded in a
game-theoretic solution concept.
To further compound these issues, using the Nash equilibrium as a solution concept for meta-game evaluation in these
dynamical models is in many ways problematic: first, computing a Nash equilibrium is computationally difficult [21, 22];
second, there are intractable equilibrium selection issues even if Nash equilibria can be computed [23 -- 25]; finally, there is an
inherent incompatibility in the sense that it is not guaranteed that dynamical systems will converge to a Nash equilibrium [26],
or, in fact, to any fixed point. However, instead of taking this as a disappointing flaw of dynamical systems models, we see it as
an opportunity to look for a novel solution concept that does not have the same limitations as Nash in relation to these dynamical
systems. Specifically, exactly as J. Nash used one of the most advanced topological results of his time, i.e., Kakutani's fixed
point theorem [27], as the basis for the Nash solution concept, in the present work, we employ Conley's Fundamental Theorem
of Dynamical Systems [28] and propose the solution concept of Markov-Conley chains (MCCs). Intuitively, Nash is a static
solution concept solely based on fixed points. MCCs, by contrast, are a dynamic solution concept based not only on fixed
points, but also on recurrent sets, periodic orbits, and limit cycles, which are fundamental ingredients of dynamical systems.
The key advantages are that MCCs comprehensively capture the long-term behaviors of our (inherently dynamical) evolutionary
2/45
Discrete-time𝛼-Rank: Multi-agent Evaluation by EvolutionStaticSolution ConceptsEvolutionary Dynamics34[Theorem 2.1.3] Single-population macro-model: special case of our generalized model, only applies to symmetric pairwise interaction gamesDynamic7896Conley's Theorem and Chain Components: capture the irreducible behaviors of a continuous-time dynamical system51[Sec 2.1.1] Nash equilibrium: a long-established yet static solution concept for gamesContinuous-time2[Sec 2.1.3]Micro-model (replicator dynamics): provides low-level insights into agent interactions, but effectively limited to 3 to 4 agents only[Sec. 3.1]𝛼-Rank: an efficient and general ranking method, which uses our generalized macro-model to resolve the MCC equilibrium selection problem[Sec 2.4.1] [Sec. 2.4.3] Markov-Conley Chain (MCC) solution concept: a discrete approximation of the chain components of a continuous dynamical system[Theorems 2.4.24, 2.5.1] Compatible with dynamics: MCCs theoretically linked with dynamical models, but cannot directly be used for ranking due to equilibrium selection problem[Sec. 2.3]Incompatibility of nash and dynamics: mathematical and complexity reasons prevent dynamics from converging to Nash equilibria[Sec. 2.1.4] Generalized macro-model: a generalization of previous discrete models that applies even to many-player games and asymmetric interactions systems, and our associated α-Rank method runs in polynomial time with respect to the total number of pure strategy profiles
(whereas computing a Nash equilibrium for a general-sum game is PPAD-complete [22]).
Main contributions: α-Rank and MCCs While MCCs do not immediately address the equilibrium selection problem, we
show that by introducing a perturbed variant that corresponds to a generalized multi-population discrete-time dynamical model,
the underlying Markov chain containing them becomes irreducible and yields a unique stationary distribution. The ordering
of the strategies of agents in this distribution gives rise to our α-Rank methodology. α-Rank provides a summary of the
asymptotic evolutionary rankings of agents in the sense of the time spent by interacting populations playing them, yielding
insights into their evolutionary strengths. It both automatically produces a ranking over agents favored by the evolutionary
dynamics and filters out transient agents (i.e., agents that go extinct in the long-term evolutionary interactions).
Paper Overview Due to the interconnected nature of the concepts discussed herein, we provide in Fig. 1 an overview of the
paper that highlights the relationships between them. Specifically, the paper is structured as follows: we first provide a review
of preliminary game-theoretic concepts, including the Nash equilibrium (box 1 in Fig. 1), which is a long-standing yet static
solution concept. We then overview the replicator dynamics micro-model ( 2 ), which provides low-level insights into agent
interactions but is limited in the sense that it can only feasibly be used for evaluating three to four agents. We then introduce a
generalized evolutionary macro-model ( 3 ) that extends previous single-population discrete-time models ( 4 ) and (as later
shown) plays an integral role in our α-Rank method. We then narrow our focus on a particular evolutionary macro-model ( 3 )
that generalizes single-population discrete-time models ( 4 ) and (as later shown) plays an integral role in our α-Rank method.
Next, we highlight a fundamental incompatibility of the dynamical systems and the Nash solution concept ( 5 ), establishing
fundamental reasons that prevent dynamics from converging to Nash. This limitation motivates us to investigate a novel solution
concept, using Conley's Fundamental Theorem of Dynamical Systems as a foundation ( 6 ).
Conley's Theorem leads us to the topological concept of chain components, which do capture the irreducible long-term
behaviors of a continuous dynamical system, but are unfortunately difficult to analyze due to the lack of an exact characterization
of their geometry and the behavior of the dynamics inside them. We, therefore, introduce a discrete approximation of these
limiting dynamics that is more feasible to analyze: our so-called Markov-Conley chains solution concept ( 7 ). While we
show that Markov-Conley chains share a close theoretical relationship with both discrete-time and continuous-time dynamical
models ( 8 ), they unfortunately suffer from an equilibrium selection problem and thus cannot directly be used for computing
multi-agent rankings. To address this, we introduced a perturbed version of Markov-Conley chains that resolves the equilibrium
selection issues and yields our α-Rank evaluation method ( 9 ). α-Rank computes both a ranking and assigns scores to agents
using this perturbed model. We show that this perturbed model corresponds directly to the generalized macro-model under a
particular setting of the latter's so-called ranking-intensity parameter α. α-Rank not only captures the dynamic behaviors of
interacting agents, but is also more tractable to compute than Nash for general games. We validate our methodology empirically
by providing ranking analysis on datasets involving interactions of state-of-the-art agents including AlphaGo [1], AlphaZero [3],
MuJoCo Soccer [5], and Poker [29], and also provide scalability properties and theoretical guarantees for the overall ranking
methodology.
2 Preliminaries and Methods
In this section, we concisely outline the game-theoretic concepts and methods necessary to understand the remainder of the
paper. For a detailed discussion of the concepts we refer the reader to [8, 13, 30, 31]. We also introduce a novel game-theoretic
concept, Markov-Conley chains, which we use to theoretically ground our results in.
2.1 Game Theoretic Concepts
2.1.1 Normal Form Games
k=1 Mk), where each player k ∈ {1, . . . ,K}
A K-wise interaction Normal Form Game (NFG) G is defined as (K,∏K
k=1 Sk,∏K
i=1 Si → R. We henceforth denote the joint strategy
chooses a strategy sk from its strategy set Sk and receives a payoff Mk : ∏K
space and payoffs, respectively, as ∏k Sk and ∏k Mk. We denote the strategy profile of all players by s = (s1, . . . ,sK) ∈ ∏k Sk, the
strategy profile of all players except k by s−k, and the payoff profile by (M1(s1,s−1), . . . ,MK(sK,s−K)). An NFG is symmetric
if the following two conditions hold: first, all players have the same strategy sets (i.e., ∀k,l Sk = Sl); second, if a permutation
is applied to the strategy profile, the payoff profile is permuted accordingly. The game is asymmetric if one or both of these
conditions do not hold. Note that in a 2-player (K = 2) NFG the payoffs for both players (M above) are typically represented by
a bi-matrix (A,B), which gives the payoff for the row player in A, and the payoff for the column player in B. If S1 = S2 and
A = BT , then this 2-player game is symmetric.
Naturally the definitions of strategy and payoff can be extended in the usual multilinear fashion to allow for randomized
(mixed) strategies. In that case, we usually overload notation in the following manner: if xk is a mixed strategy for each
3/45
player k and x−k the mixed profile excluding that player, then we denote by Mk(xk,x−k) the expected payoff of player k,
Esk∼xk,s−k∼x−k [Mk(sk,s−k)]. Given these preliminaries, we are now ready to define the Nash equilibrium concept:
Definition 2.1.1 (Nash equilibrium). A mixed strategy profile x = (x1, . . . ,xK) is a Nash equilibrium if for all players k:
maxx(cid:48)k Mk(x(cid:48)k,x−k) = Mk(xk,x−k).
Intuitively, a strategy profile x is a Nash equilibrium of the NFG if no player has an incentive to unilaterally deviate from its
current strategy.
2.1.2 Meta-games
A meta-game (or an empirical game) is a simplified model of an underlying multi-agent system (e.g., an auction, a real-time
strategy game, or a robot football match), which considers meta-strategies or 'styles of play' of agents, rather than the full
set of primitive strategies available in the underlying game [6 -- 8]. In this paper, the meta-strategies considered are learning
agents (e.g., different variants of AlphaGo agents, as exemplified in Section 1). Thus, we henceforth refer to meta-games and
meta-strategies, respectively, as 'games' and 'agents' when the context is clear. For example, in AlphaGo, styles of play may be
characterized by a set of agents {AG(r),AG(v),AG(p)}, where AG stands for the algorithm and indexes r, v, and p stand for
rollouts, value networks, and policy networks, respectively, that lead to different play styles. The corresponding meta-payoffs
quantify the outcomes when players play profiles over the set of agents (e.g., the empirical win rates of the agents when played
against one another). These payoffs can be calculated from available data of the agents' interactions in the real multi-agent
systems (e.g., wins/losses in the game of Go), or they can be computed from simulations. The question of how many such
interactions are necessary to have a good approximation of the true underlying meta-game is discussed in [8]. A meta-game
itself is an NFG and can, thus, leverage the game-theoretic toolkit to evaluate agent interactions at a high level of abstraction.
2.1.3 Micro-model: Replicator Dynamics
Dynamical systems is a powerful mathematical framework for specifying the time dependence of the players' behavior (see the
Supplementary Material for a brief introduction).
For instance, in a two-player asymmetric meta-game represented as an NFG (2,S1 × S2,M = (A,B)), the evolution of
players' strategy profiles under the replicator dynamics [32, 33] is given by,
xi = xi((Ay)i − xT Ay)
y j = y j((xT B) j − xT By)
∀(i, j) ∈ S1 × S2,
(1)
where xi and y j are, respectively, the proportions of strategies i ∈ S1 and j ∈ S2 in two infinitely-sized populations, each
corresponding to a player. This system of coupled differential equations models the temporal dynamics of the populations'
strategy profiles when they interact, and can be extended readily to the general K-wise interaction case (see Supplementary
Material Section 5.2.2 for more details).
The replicator dynamics provide useful insights into the micro-dynamical characteristics of games, revealing strategy
flows, basins of attraction, and equilibria [34] when visualized on a trajectory plot over the strategy simplex (e.g, Fig. 4). The
accessibility of these insights, however, becomes limited for games involving large strategy spaces and many-player interactions.
For instance, trajectory plots may be visualized only for subsets of three or four strategies in a game, and are complex to analyze
for multi-population games due to the inherently-coupled nature of the trajectories. While methods for scalable empirical
game-theoretic analysis of games have been recently introduced, they are still limited to two-population games [8, 9].
2.1.4 Macro-model: Discrete-time Dynamics
This section presents our main evolutionary dynamics model, which extends previous single-population discrete-time models
and is later shown to play an integral role in our α-Rank method and can also be seen as an instantiation of the framework
introduced in [20].
A promising alternative to using the continuous-time replicator dynamics for evaluation is to consider discrete-time
finite-population dynamics. As later demonstrated, an important advantage of the discrete-time dynamics is that they are not
limited to only three or four strategies (i.e., the agents under evaluation) as in the continuous-time case. Even though we lose
the micro-dynamical details of the strategy simplex, this discrete-time macro-dynamical model, in which we observe the flows
over the edges of the high-dimensional simplex, still provides useful insights into the overall system dynamics.
To conduct this discrete-time analysis, we consider a selection-mutation process but with a very small mutation rate
(following the small mutation rate theorem, see [35]). Before elaborating on the details we specify a number of important
concepts used in the description below and clarify their respective meanings in Fig. 2a. Let a monomorphic population denote a
population wherein all individuals play identical strategies, and a monomorphic population profile is a set of monomorphic
populations, where each population may be playing a different strategy (see Fig. 2b). Our general idea is to capture the overall
dynamics by defining a Markov chain over states that correspond to monomorphic population profiles. We can then calculate the
transition probability matrix over these states, which captures the fixation probability of any mutation in any given population
4/45
Concept
K-wise meta-game
Strategy
Individual
Population
Player
Monomorphic Population
Monomorphic Population Profile A set of monomorphic populations.
Focal Population
Meaning
An NFG with K player slots.
The agents under evaluation (e.g., variants of AlphaGo agents) in the meta-game.
A population member, playing a strategy and assigned to a slot in the meta-game.
A finite set of individuals.
An individual that participates in the meta-game under consideration.
A finite set of individuals, playing the same strategy.
A previously-monomorphic population wherein a rare mutation has appeared.
(a)
(b)
(d)
(c)
(e)
Figure 2. Overview of the discrete-time macro-model. (a) Evolutionary concepts terminology. (b) We have a set of
individuals in each population k, each of which is programmed to play a strategy from set Sk. Under the mutation rate µ → 0
assumption, at most one population is not monomorphic at any time. Each individual in a K-wise interaction game has a
corresponding fitness f k(sk,s−k) dependent on its identity k, its strategy sk, and the strategy profile s−k of the other players. (c)
Let the focal population denote a population k wherein a rare mutant strategy appears. At each timestep, we randomly sample
two individuals in population k; the strategy of the first individual is updated by either probabilistically copying the strategy of
the second individual, mutating with a very small probability to a random strategy, or sticking with its own strategy. (d)
Individual in the focal population copies the mutant strategy. (e) The mutant propagates in the focal population, yielding a new
monomorphic population profile.
(i.e., the probability that the mutant will take over that population). By computing the stationary distribution over this matrix
we find the evolutionary population dynamics, which can be represented as a graph. The nodes of this graph correspond to the
states, with the stationary distribution quantifying the average time spent by the populations in each node [17, 36].
A large body of prior literature has conducted this discrete-time Markov chain analysis in the context of pair-wise interaction
5/45
...s1sKsk.........f(sK,s-K)f(sk,s-k).........s1sKsk.........f(s1,s-1)f(sK,s-K)f(sk,s-k)K-wise InteractionMonomorphic Population ProfileMonomorphic PopulationIndividualFitnessesf(s1,s-1)...s1sKsk.........f(sK,s-K)f(sk,s-k).........s1sKsk.........f(s1,s-1)f(sK,s-K)f(sk,s-k)f(s1,s-1)RareMutationFitness-based SelectionFocalPopulation............ games with symmetric payoffs [17 -- 19, 36, 37]. Recent work applies the underlying assumption of small-mutation rates [35] to
propose a general framework for discrete-time multi-player interactions [20], which applies to games with asymmetric payoffs.
In our work, we formalize how such an evolutionary model, in the micro/macro dynamics spectrum, should be instantiated to
converge to our novel and dynamical solution concept of MCCs. Additionally, we show (in Theorem 2.1.3) that in the case of
identical per-population payoffs (i.e., ∀k,Mk = M) our generalization reduces to the single-population model used by prior
works. For completeness, we also detail the single population model in the Supplementary Material (see Section 5.3). We now
formally define the generalized discrete-time model.
Recall from Section 2.1.1 that each individual in a K-wise interaction game receives a local payoff Mk(sk,s−k) dependent
on its identity k, its strategy sk, and the strategy profile s−k of the other K − 1 individuals involved in the game. To account for
the identity-dependent payoffs of such individuals, we consider the interactions of K finite populations, each corresponding to a
specific identity k ∈ {1, . . . ,K}.
In each population k, we have a set of strategies Sk that we would like to evaluate for their evolutionary strength. We also
have a set of individuals A in each population k, each of which is programmed to play a strategy from the set Sk. Without loss
of generality, we assume all populations have m individuals.
Individuals interact K-wise through empirical games. At each timestep t, one individual from each population is sampled
uniformly, and the K resulting individuals play a game. Let pk
sk denote the number of individuals in population k playing
strategy sk and p denote the joint population state (i.e., vector of states of all populations). Under our sampling protocol, the
fitness of an individual that plays strategy sk is,
Mk(sk,s−k) ∏
(2)
f k(sk, p−k) = ∑
s−k∈S−k
pc
sc
m .
c∈{1,...,K}\k
We consider any two individuals from a population k, with respective strategies τ,σ ∈ Sk and respective fitnesses f k(τ, p−k)
and f k(σ , p−k) (dependent on the values of the meta-game table). We introduce here a discrete-time dynamics, where the
strategy of the first individual (playing τ) is then updated by either mutating with a very small probability to a random strategy
(Fig. 2c), probabilistically copying the strategy σ of the second individual (Fig. 2d), or sticking with its own strategy τ. The
idea is that strong individuals will replicate and spread throughout the population (Fig. 2e). While one could choose other
variants of discrete-time dynamics [38], we show that this particular choice both yields useful closed-form representations of
the limiting behaviors of the populations, and also coincides with the MCC solution concept we later introduce under specific
conditions.
As individuals from the same population never directly interact, the state of a population k has no bearing on the fitnesses of
its individuals. However, as evident in (2), each population's fitness may directly be affected by the competing populations'
states. The complexity of analyzing such a system can be significantly reduced by making the assumption of a small mutation
rate [35]. Let the 'focal population' denote a population k wherein a mutant strategy appears. We denote the probability
for a strategy to mutate randomly into another strategy sk ∈ Sk by µ and we will assume it to be infinitesimally small (i.e.,
we consider a small-mutation limit µ → 0). If we neglected mutations, the end state of this evolutionary process would be
monomorphic. If we introduce a very small mutation rate this means that either the mutant fixates and takes over the current
population, or the current population is capable of wiping out the mutant strategy [35]. Therefore, given a small mutation
rate, the mutant either fixates or disappears before a new mutant appears in the current population. This means that any given
population k will never contain more than two strategies at any point in time. We refer the interested reader to [20] for a more
extensive treatment of these arguments.
Applying the same line of reasoning, in the small-mutation rate regime, the mutant strategy in the focal population will
either fixate or go extinct much earlier than the appearance of a mutant in any other population [35]. Thus, at any given time,
there can maximally be only one population with a mutant, and the remaining populations will be monomorphic; i.e., in each
competing population c ∈ {1, . . . ,K}\ k, pc
sc
m = 1 for a single strategy and 0 for the rest. As such, given a small enough mutation
rate, analysis of any focal population k needs only consider the monomorphic states of all other populations. Overloading the
notation in (2), the fitness of an individual from population k that plays sk then considerably simplifies to
f k(sk,s−k) = Mk(sk,s−k),
(3)
where s−k denotes the strategy profile of the other populations.
Let pk
τ and pk
σ respectively denote the number of individuals playing τ and σ in focal population k, where pk
σ = m. Per
(3), the fitness of an individual playing τ in the focal population while the remaining populations play monomorphic strategies
s−k is given by f k(τ,s−k) = Mk(τ,s−k). Likewise, the fitness of any individual in k playing σ is, f k(σ ,s−k) = Mk(σ ,s−k).
We randomly sample two individuals in population k and consider the probability that the one playing τ copies the other
individual's strategy σ. The probability with which the individual playing strategy τ will copy the individual playing strategy σ
τ + pk
6/45
can be described by a selection function P(τ → σ ,s−k), which governs the dynamics of the finite-population model. For the
remainder of the paper, we focus on the logistic selection function (aka Fermi distribution),
P(τ → σ ,s−k) =
eα f k(σ ,s−k)
eα f k(τ,s−k) + eα f k(σ ,s−k)
=
(cid:16)
1 + eα( f k(τ,s−k)− f k(σ ,s−k))(cid:17)−1
,
(4)
with α determining the selection strength, which we call the ranking-intensity (the correspondence between α and our ranking
method will become clear later). There are alternative definitions of the selection function that may be used here, we merely
focus on the Fermi distribution due to its extensive use in the single-population literature [17 -- 19].
Based on this setup, we define a Markov chain over the set of strategy profiles ∏k Sk with ∏k Sk states. Each state
corresponds to one of the strategy profiles s ∈ ∏k Sk, representing a multi-population end-state where each population is
monomorphic. The transitions between these states are defined by the corresponding fixation probabilities (the probability of
overtaking the population) when a mutant strategy is introduced in any single monomorphic population k. We now define the
Markov chain, which has (∏k Sk)2 transition probabilities over all pairs of monomorphic multi-population states. Denote by
σ ,τ (s−k) the probability of mutant strategy τ fixating in a focal population k of individuals playing σ, while the remaining
ρk
K − 1 populations remain in their monomorphic states s−k. For any given monomorphic strategy profile, there are a total of
∑k(Sk− 1) valid transitions to a subsequent profile where only a single population has changed its strategy. Thus, letting
σ ,τ (s−k) is the probability that the joint population state transitions from (σ ,s−k) to state (τ,s−k) after
η =
the occurrence of a single mutation in population k. The stationary distribution over this Markov chain tells us how much time,
on average, the dynamics will spend in each of the monomorphic states.
∑k(Sk−1), then ηρk
The fixation probabilities (of a rare mutant playing τ overtaking the focal population k) can be calculated as follows. The
1
probability that the number of individuals playing τ decreases/increases by one in the focal population is given by,
T k(∓1)(pk,τ,σ ,s−k) =
pk
τ pk
σ
Then, the fixation probability ρk
(5)
m(m− 1)
σ ,τ (s−k) of a single mutant with strategy τ in a population k of m− 1 individuals playing σ is,
.
(cid:16)
1 + e±α( f k(τ,s−k)− f k(σ ,s−k))(cid:17)−1
−1
−1
(cid:33)−1
T k(−1)(pk,τ,σ ,s−k)
T k(+1)(pk,τ,σ ,s−k)
e−α( f k(τ,s−k)− f k(σ ,s−k))
∏
pk
τ =1
e−lα( f k(τ,s−k)− f k(σ ,s−k))
l
l
l=1
m−1
∑
m−1
∑
∏
pk
τ =1
1 +
1 +
(cid:32)
1−e−α( f k (τ,s−k )− f k (σ ,s−k ))
1−e−mα( f k (τ,s−k )− f k (σ ,s−k ))
1
m
l=1
m−1
∑
1 +
l=1
σ ,τ (s−k) =
ρk
=
=
=
if f k(τ,s−k) (cid:54)= f k(σ ,s−k)
if f k(τ,s−k) = f k(σ ,s−k)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
This corresponds to the computation of an m-step transition in the Markov chain corresponding to P(τ → σ ,s−k) [39]. The
quotient T k(−1)(pk,τ,σ ,s−k)
expresses the likelihood (odds) that the mutation process in population k continues in either direction:
T k(+1)(pk,τ,σ ,s−k)
if it is close to zero then it is very likely that the number of mutants (individuals with strategy τ in population k) increases; if it
is very large it is very likely that the number of mutants will decrease; and if it close to one then the probabilities of increase
and decrease of the number of mutants are equally likely. This yields the following Markov transition matrix corresponding to
the jump from strategy profile si ∈ ∏k Sk to s j ∈ ∏k Sk,
Ci j =
(s−k
ηρk
i )
sk
i ,sk
j
1− ∑ j(cid:54)=iCi j
0
i (cid:54)= sk
j and s−k
i = s−k
j
if ∃k such that sk
if si = s j
otherwise
(10)
for all i, j ∈ {1, . . . ,S}, where S = ∏k Sk.
The following theorem formalizes the irreducibility of this finite-population Markov chain, a property that is well-known in
the literature (e.g., see [35, Theorem 2] and [20, Theorem 1]) but stated here for our specialized model for completeness.
7/45
Theorem 2.1.2. Given finite payoffs, the Markov chain with transition matrix C is irreducible (i.e., it is possible to get to any
state starting from any state). Thus a unique stationary distribution π (where πTC = πT and ∑i πi = 1) exists.
Proof. Refer to the Supplementary Material Section 5.4.1 for the proof.
This unique π provides the evolutionary ranking, or strength of each strategy profile in the set ∏k Sk, expressed as the
average time spent in each state in distribution π.
This generalized discrete-time evolutionary model, as later shown, will form the basis of our α-Rank method. We would
like to clarify the application of this general model to the single population case, which applies only to symmetric 2-player
games and is commonly used in the literature (see Section 5.1).
Application to Single-Population (Symmetric Two-Player) Games For completeness, we provide a detailed outline of the
single population model in Supplementary Material Section 5.3.
Theorem 2.1.3 (Multi-population model generalizes the symmetric single-population model). The general multi-population
model inherently captures the dynamics of the single population symmetric model.
Proof. (Sketch) In the pairwise symmetric game setting, we consider only a single population of interacting individuals (i.e.,
K = 1), where a maximum of two strategies may exist at any time in the population due to the small mutation rate assumption.
At each timestep, two individuals (with respective strategies τ,σ ∈ S1) are sampled from this population and play a game
using their respective strategies τ and σ. Their respective fitnesses then correspond directly to their payoffs, i.e., fτ = M(τ,σ )
and fσ = M(σ ,τ). With this change, all other derivations and results follow directly the generalized model. For example, the
probability of decrease/increase of a strategy of type sτ in the single-population case translates to,
T (∓1)(p,τ,σ ) =
pτ pσ
m(m− 1)
(cid:16)
1 + e±α( fτ− fσ )(cid:17)−1
,
(11)
and likewise for the remaining equations.
In other words, the generalized model is general in the sense that one can not only simulate symmetric pairwise interaction
dynamics, but also K-wise and asymmetric interactions.
Linking the Micro- and Macro-dynamics Models We have introduced, so far, a micro- and macro-dynamics model, each
with unique advantages in terms of analyzing the evolutionary strengths of agents. The formal relationship between these two
models remains of interest, and is established in the limit of a large population:
Theorem 2.1.4 (Discrete-Continuous Edge Dynamics Correspondence). In the large-population limit, the macro-dynamics
model is equivalent to the micro-dynamics model over the edges of the strategy simplex. Specifically, the limiting model is a
variant of the replicator dynamics with the caveat that the Fermi revision function takes the place of the usual fitness terms.
Proof. Refer to the Supplementary Material Section 5.4.2 for the proof.
Therefore, a correspondence exists between the two models on the 'skeleton' of the simplex, with the macro-dynamics
model useful for analyzing the global evolutionary behaviors over this skeleton, and the micro-model useful for 'zooming into'
the three- or four-faces of the simplex to analyze the interior dynamics.
In the next sections, we first give a few conceptual examples of the generalized discrete-time model, then discuss the need
for a new solution concept and the incompatibility between Nash equilibria and dynamical systems. We then directly link the
generalized model to our new game-theoretic solution concept, Markov-Conley chains (in Theorem 2.5.1).
2.2 Conceptual Examples
We present two canonical examples that visualize the discrete-time dynamics and build intuition regarding the macro-level
insights gained using this type of analysis.
8/45
Player 2
P
−1
0
1
S
1
−1
0
R
R
0
P
1
S −1
Player 1
Player 2
M
O
Player 1
O (3,2)
M (0,0)
(0,0)
(2,3)
(a) Payoffs (top) and single-population discrete-time dynamics
(bottom) for Rock-Paper-Scissors game. Graph nodes correspond to
monomorphic populations R, P, and S.
(b) Payoffs (top) and multi-population discrete-time dynamics
(bottom) for Battle of the Sexes game. Strategies O and M
respectively correspond to going to the Opera and Movies. Graph
nodes correspond to monomorphic population profiles (s1,s2). The
stationary distribution π has 0.5 mass on each of profiles (O,O) and
(M,O), and 0 mass elsewhere.
Figure 3. Conceptual examples of finite-population models, for population size m = 50 and ranking-intensity α = 0.1.
2.2.1 Rock-Paper-Scissors
We first consider the single-population (symmetric) discrete-time model in the Rock-Paper-Scissors (RPS) game, with the
payoff matrix shown in Fig. 3a (top). One can visualize the discrete-time dynamics using a graph that corresponds to the
Markov transition matrix C defined in (10), as shown in Fig. 3a (bottom).
Nodes in this graph correspond to the monomorphic population states. In this example, these are the states of the population
where all individuals play as agents Rock, Paper, or Scissors. To quantify the time the population spends as each agent, we
indicate the corresponding mass of the stationary distribution π within each node. As can be observed in the graph, the RPS
population spends exactly 1
3 of its time as each agent.
Edges in the graph correspond to the fixation probabilities for pairs of states. Edge directions corresponds to the flow of
individuals from one agent to another, with strong edges indicating rapid flows towards 'fitter' agents. We denote fixation
probabilities as a multiple of the neutral fixation probability baseline, ρm = 1
m, which corresponds to using the Fermi selection
function with α = 0. To improve readability of the graphs, we also do not visualize edges looping a node back to itself, or
edges with fixation probabilities lower than ρm. In this example, we observe a cycle (intransitivity) involving all three agents in
the graph. While for small games such cycles may be apparent directly from the structure of the payoff table, we later show that
the graph visualization can be used to automatically iterate through cycles even in K-player games involving many agents.
2.2.2 Battle of the Sexes
Next we illustrate the generalized multi-population (asymmetric) model in the Battle of the Sexes game, with the payoff matrix
shown in Fig. 3b (top). The graph now corresponds to the interaction of two populations, each representing a player type, with
each node corresponding to a monomorphic population profile (s1,s2). Edges, again, correspond to fixation probabilities, but
occur only when a single population changes its strategy to a different one (an artifact of our small mutation assumption). In
9/45
9.06ρm9.06ρm9.06ρm12.96ρm9.06ρm12.96ρm9.06ρms1=Os2=Os1=Os2=Ms1=Ms2=Os1=Ms2=M this example, it is evident from the stationary distribution that the populations spend an equal amount of time in profiles (O,O)
and (M,M), and a very small amount of time in states (O,M) and (M,O).
2.3 The Incompatibility of Nash Equilibrium and Dynamical Systems
Continuous- and discrete-time dynamical systems have been used extensively in Game Theory, Economics, and Algorithmic
Game Theory. In the particular case of multi-agent evaluation in meta-games, this type of analysis is relied upon for revealing
useful insights into the strengths and weaknesses of interacting agents [8]. Often, the goal of research in these areas is to
establish that, in some sense and manner, the investigated dynamics actually converge to a Nash equilibrium; there has been
limited success in this front, and there are some negative results [40 -- 42]. In fact, all known dynamics in games (the replicator
dynamics, the many continuous variants of the dynamics used in the proof of Nash's theorem, etc.) do cycle. To compound this
issue, meta-games are often large, extend beyond pair-wise interactions, and may not be zero-sum. While solving for a Nash
equilibrium can be done in polynomial time for zero-sum games, doing so in general-sum games is known to be PPAD-complete
[22], which severely limits the feasibility of using such a solution concept for evaluating our agents.
Of course, some dynamics are known to converge to relaxations of the Nash equilibrium, such as the correlated equilibrium
polytope or the coarse correlated equilibria [43]. But unfortunately, this "convergence" is typically considered in the sense of
time average; time averages can be useful for establishing performance bounds for games, but tell us little about actual system
behavior -- which is a core component of what we study through games. For certain games, dynamics may indeed converge to
a Nash equilibrium, but they may also cycle. For example, it is encouraging that in all 2× 2 matrix games these equilibria,
cycles, and slight generalizations thereof are the only possible limiting behaviors for continuous-time dynamics (i.e., flows).
But unfortunately this clean behavior (convergence to either a cycle or, as a special case, to a Nash equilibrium) is an artifact of
the two-dimensional nature of 2× 2 games, a consequence of the Poincar´e -- Bendixson theorem [44]. There is a wide range of
results in different disciplines arguing that learning dynamics in games tend to not equilibrate to any Nash equilibrium but
instead exhibit complex, unpredictable behavior (e.g., [45 -- 50]). The dynamics of even simple two-person games with three or
more strategies per player can be chaotic [51], that is, inherently difficult to predict and complex. Chaos goes against the core
of our project; there seems to be little hope for building a predictive theory of player behavior based on dynamics in terms of
Nash equilibrium.
2.4 Markov-Conley chains: A Dynamical Solution Concept
Recall our overall objective: we would like to understand and evaluate multi-agent interactions using a detailed and realistic
model of evolution, such as the replicator dynamics, in combination with a game-theoretic solution concept. We start by
acknowledging the fundamental incompatibility between dynamics and the Nash equilibrium: dynamics are often incapable of
reaching the Nash equilibrium. However, instead of taking this as a disappointing flaw of dynamics, we see it instead as an
opportunity to look for a novel solution concept that does not have the same limitations as Nash in relation to these dynamical
systems. We contemplate whether a plausible algorithmic solution concept can emerge by asking, what do these dynamics
converge to? Our goal is to identify the non-trivial, irreducible behaviors of a dynamical system (i.e., behaviors that cannot be
partitioned more finely in a way that respects the system dynamics) and thus provide a new solution concept -- an alternative to
Nash's -- that will enable evaluation of of multi-agent interactions using the underlying evolutionary dynamics. We carve a
pathway towards this alternate solution concept by first considering the topology of dynamical systems.
2.4.1 Topology of Dynamical Systems and Conley's Theorem
Dynamicists and topologists have been working hard throughout the past century to find a way to extend to higher dimensions
the benign yet complete limiting dynamical behaviors described in Section 2.3 that one sees in two dimensions: convergence
to cycles (or equilibria as a special case). That is, they have been trying to find an appropriate relaxation of the notion of a
cycle such that the two-dimensional picture is restored. After many decades of trial and error, new and intuitive conceptions of
"periodicity" and "cycles" were indeed discovered, in the form of chain recurrent sets and chain components, which we define
in this section. These key ingredients form the foundation of Conley's Fundamental Theorem of Dynamical Systems, which in
turn leads to the formulation of our Markov-Conley chain solution concept and associated multi-agent evaluation scheme.
Definitions To make our treatment formal, we require definitions of the following set of topological concepts, based primarily
on the work of Conley [28]. Our chain recurrence approach and the theorems in this section follow from [52]. We also provide
the interested reader a general background on dynamical systems in Supplementary Material 5.2 in an effort to make our work
self-contained.
Definition 2.4.1 (Flow). A flow on a topological space X is a continuous mapping φ : R× X → X such that:
(i) φ (t,·) : X → X is a homeomorphism for each t ∈ R.
(ii) φ (0,x) = x for all x ∈ X.
10/45
Player 2
H
H (1,−1)
(−1,1)
T
T
(−1,1)
(1,−1)
Player 1
Player 1
A
B
(1,1)
(−1,−1)
Player 2
A
B
(−1,−1)
(1,1)
(a) Matching Pennies game.
(b) Partnership, coordination game.
Figure 4. Canonical game payoffs and replicator dynamics trajectories. Each point encodes the probability assigned by the
players to their first strategy. The matching pennies replicator dynamics have one chain component, consisting of the whole
domain. The coordination game dynamics have five chain components (corresponding to the fixed points, four in the corners
and one mixed, which are recurrent by definition), as was formally shown by [26].
(iii) φ (s +t,x) = φ (s,φ (t,x)) for all s,t ∈ R and all x ∈ X.
Depending on the context, we sometimes write φ t (x) for φ (t,x) and denote a flow φ : R× X → X by φ t : X → X, where
t ∈ R.
Definition 2.4.2 ((ε,T )-chain). Let φ be a flow on a metric space (X,d). Given ε > 0, T > 0, and x,y ∈ X, an (ε,T )-chain from
x to y with respect to φ and d is a pair of finite sequences x = x0,x1, . . . ,xn−1,xn = y in X and t0, . . . ,tn−1 in [T,∞), denoted
together by (x0, . . . ,xn;t0, . . . ,tn−1) such that,
d(φ ti(xi),xi+1) < ε,
(12)
for i = 0,1,2, . . . ,n− 1.
Intuitively, an (ε,T ) chain corresponds to the forward dynamics under flow φ connecting points x,y ∈ X, with slight
perturbations allowed at each timestep (see Fig. 5 for an example). Note these deviations are allowed to occur at step-sizes T
bounded away from 0, as otherwise the accumulation of perturbations could yield trajectories completely dissimilar to those
induced by the original flow [53].
Definition 2.4.3 (Forward chain limit set). Let φ be a flow on a metric space (X,d). The forward chain limit set of x ∈ X with
respect to φ and d is the set,
(cid:92)
Ω+(φ ,x) =
{y ∈ X ∃ an (ε,T )-chain from x to y with respect to φ}.
(13)
ε,T >0
Definition 2.4.4 (Chain equivalent points). Let φ be a flow on a metric space (X,d). Two points x,y ∈ X are chain equivalent
with respect to φ and d if y ∈ Ω+(φ ,x) and x ∈ Ω+(φ ,y).
Definition 2.4.5 (Chain recurrent point). Let φ be a flow on a metric space (X,d). A point x ∈ X is chain recurrent with respect
to φ and d if x is chain equivalent to itself; i.e., there exists an (ε,T )-chain connecting x to itself for every ε > 0 and T > 0.
Chain recurrence can be understood as an orbit with slight perturbations allowed at each time step (see Fig. 5), which
constitutes a new conception of "periodicity" with a very intuitive explanation in Computer Science terms: Imagine Alice is
11/45
Figure 5. Topology of dynamical systems: an (ε,T )-chain from x0 to x4 with respect to flow φ is exemplified here by the
solid arrows and sequence of points x0,x1,x2,x3,x4. If the recurrent behavior associated with point x0 (indicated by the dashed
arrow) holds for all ε > 0 and T > 0, then it is a chain recurrent point.
using a computer to simulate the trajectory of a dynamical system that induces a flow φ. Every time she computes a single
iteration of the dynamical process with a minimum step-size T , there is a rounding error ε. Consider an adversary, Bob, who
can manipulate the result at each timestep within the ε-sphere of the actual result. If, regardless of ε or minimum step-size T ,
Bob can persuade Alice that her dynamical system starting from a point x returns back to this point in a finite number of steps,
then this point is chain recurrent.
This new notion of "periodicity" (i.e., chain recurrence) leads to a corresponding notion of a "cycle" captured in the concept
of chain components, defined below.
Definition 2.4.6 (Chain recurrent set). The chain recurrent set of flow φ, denoted R(φ ), is the set of all chain recurrent points
of φ .
Definition 2.4.7 (Chain equivalence relation ∼). Let the relation ∼ on R(φ ) be defined by x ∼ y if and only if x is chain
equivalent to y. This is an equivalence relation on the chain recurrent set R(φ ).
Definition 2.4.8 (Chain component). The equivalence classes in R(φ ) of the chain equivalence relation ∼ are called the chain
components of φ.
In the context of the Alice and Bob example, chain components are the maximal sets A such that for any two points x,y ∈ A,
Bob can similarly persuade Alice that the flow φ induced by her dynamical system can get her from x to y in a finite number
of steps. For example the matching pennies replicator dynamics (shown in Fig. 4a) have one chain component, consisting of
the entire domain; in the context of the Alice and Bob example, the cyclical nature of the dynamics throughout the domain
means that Bob can convince Alice that any two points may be connected using a series of finite perturbations ε, for all ε > 0
and T > 0. On the other hand, the coordination game replicator dynamics (shown in Fig. 4b) has five chain components
corresponding to the fixed points (which are recurrent by definition): four in the corners, and one mixed strategy fixed point in
the center. For a formal treatment of these examples, see [26].
Points in each chain component are transitive by definition. Naturally, the chain recurrent set R(φ ) can be partitioned into a
(possibly infinitely many) number of chain components. In other words, chain components cannot be partitioned more finely in
a way that respects the system dynamics; they constitute the fundamental topological concept needed to define the irreducible
behaviors we seek.
Conley's Theorem We now wish to characterize the role of chain components in the long-term dynamics of systems, such
that we can evaluate the limiting behaviors of multi-agent interactions using our evolutionary dynamical models. Conley's
Fundamental Theorem of Dynamical Systems leverages the above perspective on "periodicity" (i.e., chain recurrence) and
"cycles" (i.e., chain components) to decompose the domain of any dynamical system into two classes: 1) chain components, and
2) transient points. To introduce Conley's theorem, we first need to define the notion of a complete Lyapunov function. The
game-theoretic analogue of this idea is the notion of a potential function in potential games. In a potential game, as long as we
are not at an equilibrium, the potential is strictly decreasing and guiding the dynamics towards the standard game-theoretic
12/45
𝑥0𝑥1𝑥2𝑥3𝑥4𝜙(t0,𝑥0)𝜙(t1,𝑥1)𝜙(t3,𝑥3)𝜙(t2,𝑥2)ε𝜙(t4,𝑥4) solution concept, i.e., equilibria [54]. The notion of a complete Lyapunov function switches the target solution concept from
equilibria to chain recurrent sets. More formally:
Definition 2.4.9 (Complete Lyapunov function). Let φ be a flow on a metric space (X,d). A complete Lyapunov function for φ
is a continuous function γ : X → R such that,
1. γ(φ t (x)) is a strictly decreasing function of t for all x ∈ X \ R(φ ),
2. for all x,y ∈ R(φ ) the points x, y are in the same chain component if and only if γ(x) = γ(y),
3. γ(R(φ )) is nowhere dense.
Conley's Theorem, the important result in topology that will form the basis of our solution concept and ranking scheme, is as
follows:
Theorem 2.4.10 (Conley's Fundamental Theorem of Dynamical Systems [28], informal statement). The domain of any
dynamical system can be decomposed into its (possibly infinitely many) chain components; the remaining points are transient,
each led to the recurrent part by a Lyapunov function.
The powerful implication of Conley's Theorem is that complete Lyapunov functions always exist.
Theorem 2.4.11 ([28]). Every flow on a compact metric space has a complete Lyapunov function.
In other words, the space X is decomposed into points that are chain recurrent and points that are led to the chain recurrent
part in a gradient-like fashion with respect to a Lyapunov function that is guaranteed to exist. In game-theoretic terms, every
game is a "potential" game, if only we change our solution concept from equilibria to chain recurrent sets.
2.4.2 Asymptotically Stable Sink Chain Components
Our objective is to investigate the likelihood of an agent being played in a K-wise meta-game by using a detailed and realistic
model of multi-agent evolution, such as the replicator dynamics. While chain components capture the limiting behaviors
of dynamical systems (in particular, evolutionary dynamics that we seek to use for our multi-agent evaluations), they can
be infinite in number (as mentioned in Section 2.4.1); it may not be feasible to compute or use them in practice within our
evaluation scheme. To resolve this, we narrow our focus onto a particular class of chain components called asymptotically
stable sink chain components, which we define in this section. Asymptotically stable sink chain components are a natural
target for this investigation as they encode the possible "final" long term system; by contrast, we can escape out of other chain
components via infinitesimally small perturbations. We prove in the subsequent section (Theorem 2.4.24, specifically) that, in
the case of replicator dynamics and related variants, asymptotically stable sink chain components are finite in number; our
desired solution concept is obtained as an artifact of this proof.
We proceed by first showing that the chain components of a dynamical system can be partially ordered by reachability
through chains, and we focus on the sinks of this partial order. We start by defining a partial order on the set of chain components:
Definition 2.4.12. Let φ be a flow on a metric space and A1,A2 be chain components of the flow. Define the relation A1 ≤C A2
to hold if and only if there exists x ∈ A2 and y ∈ A1 such that y ∈ Ω+(φ ,x).
Intuitively, A1 ≤C A2, if we can reach A1 from A2 with (ε,T )-chains for arbitrarily small ε and T .
Theorem 2.4.13 (Partial order on chain components). Let φ be a flow on a metric space and A1,A2 be chain components of the
flow. Then the relation defined by A1 ≤C A2 is a partial order.
Proof. Refer to the Supplementary Material Section 5.4.3 for the proof.
We will be focusing on minimal elements of this partial order, i.e., chain components A such that there does not exist any
chain component B such that B ≤C A. We call such chain components sink chain components.
Definition 2.4.14 (Sink chain components). A chain component A is called a sink chain component if there does not exist any
chain component B (cid:54)= A such that B ≤C A.
We can now define the useful notion of asymptotically stable sink chain components, which relies on the notions of
Lyapunov stable, asymptotically stable, and attracting sets.
Definition 2.4.15 (Lyapunov stable set). Let φ be a flow on a metric space (X,d). A set A ⊂ X is Lyapunov stable if for every
neighborhood O of A there exists a neighborhood O(cid:48) of A such that every trajectory that starts in O(cid:48) is contained in O; i.e., if
x ∈ O(cid:48) then φ (t,x) ∈ O for all t ≥ 0.
13/45
Definition 2.4.16 (Attracting set). Set A is attracting if there exists a neighborhood O of A such that every trajectory starting in
O converges to A.
Definition 2.4.17 (Asymptotically stable set). A set is called asymptotically stable if it is both Lyapunov stable and attracting.
Definition 2.4.18 (Asymptotically stable sink chain component). Chain component A is called an asymptotically stable sink
chain component if it is both a sink chain component and an asymptotically stable set.
2.4.3 Markov-Conley chains
Although we wish to study asymptotically stable sink chain components, it is difficult to do so theoretically as we do not have
an exact characterization of their geometry and the behavior of the dynamics inside them. This is a rather difficult task to
accomplish even experimentally. Replicator dynamics can be chaotic both in small and large games [51, 55]. Even when their
behavior is convergent for all initial conditions, the resulting equilibrium can be hard to predict and can be highly sensitive
to initial conditions [56]. It is, therefore, not clear how to extract any meaningful information even from many trial runs of
the dynamics. These issues are exacerbated especially when games involve more than three or four strategies, where even
visualization of trajectories becomes difficult. While studies of these dynamics have been conducted for these low-dimensional
cases [57, 58], very little is known about the geometry and topology of the limit behavior of replicator dynamics for general
games, making it hard to even make informed guesses about whether the dynamics have, for practical reasons, converged to an
invariant subset (i.e., a sink chain component).
Instead of studying the actual dynamics, a computationally amenable alternative is to use a discrete-time discrete-space
approximation with similar limiting dynamics, but which can be directly and efficiently analyzed. We will start off by the most
crude (but still meaningful) such approximations: a set of Markov chains whose state-space is the set of pure strategy profiles
of the game. We refer to each of these Markov chains as a Markov-Conley chain, and prove in Theorem 2.4.24 that a finite
number of them exist in any game under the replicator dynamics (or variants thereof).
Let us now formally define the Markov-Conley chains of a game, which relies on the notions of the response graph of a
game and its sink strongly connected components.
Definition 2.4.19 (Strictly and weakly better response). Let si,s j ∈ ∏k Sk be any two pure strategy profiles of the game, which
differ in the strategy of a single player k. Strategy s j is a strictly (respectively, weakly) better response than si for player k if her
payoff at s j is larger than (respectively, at least as large as) her payoff at si.
Definition 2.4.20 (Response graph of a game). The response graph of a game G is a directed graph whose vertex set coincides
with the set of pure strategy profiles of the game, ∏k Sk. Let si,s j ∈ ∏k Sk be any two pure strategy profiles of the game. We
include a directed edge from si to s j if s j is a weakly better response for player k as compared to si.
Definition 2.4.21 (Strongly connected components). The strongly connected components of a directed graph are the maximal
subgraphs wherein there exists a path between each pair of vertices in the subgraph.
Definition 2.4.22 (Sink strongly connected components). The sink strongly connected components of a directed graph are the
strongly connected components with no out-going edges.
The response graph of a game has a finite number of sink strongly connected components. If such a component is a
singleton, it is a pure Nash equilibrium by definition.
Definition 2.4.23 (Markov-Conley chains (MCCs) of a game). A Markov-Conley chain of a game G is an irreducible Markov
chain, the state space of which is a sink strongly connected component of the response graph associated with G. Many MCCs
may exist for a given game G. In terms of the transition probabilities out of a node si of each MCC, a canonical way to define
them is as follows: with some probability, the node self-transitions. The rest of the probability mass is split between all strictly
and weakly improving responses of all players. Namely, the probability of strictly improving responses for all players are set
equal to each other, and transitions between strategies of equal payoff happen with a smaller probability also equal to each
other for all players.
When the context is clear, we sometimes overload notation and refer to the set of pure strategy profiles in a sink strongly
connected component (as opposed to the Markov chain over them) as an MCC. The structure of the transition probabilities
introduced in Definition 2.4.23 has the advantage that it renders the MCCs invariant under arbitrary positive affine transfor-
mations of the payoffs; i.e., the resulting theoretical and empirical insights are insensitive to such transformations, which is a
useful desideratum for a game-theoretic solution concept. There may be alternative definitions of the transition probabilities
that may warrant future exploration.
MCCs can be understood as a discrete approximation of the chain components of continuous-time dynamics (hence the
connection to Conley's Theorem). The following theorem formalizes this relationship, and establishes finiteness of MCCs:
Theorem 2.4.24. Let φ be the replicator flow when applied to a K-person game. The number of asymptotically stable sink
chain components is finite. Specifically, every asymptotically stable sink chain component contains at least one MCC; each
MCC is contained in exactly one chain component.
14/45
Proof. Refer to the Supplementary Material Section 5.4.4 for the proof.
The notion of MCCs is thus used as a stepping stone, a computational handle that aims to mimic the long term behavior of
replicator dynamics in general games. Similar results to Theorem 2.4.24 apply for several variants of replicator dynamics [13]
as long as the dynamics are volume preserving in the interior of the state space, preserve the support of mixed strategies, and
the dynamics act myopically in the presence of two strategies/options with fixed payoffs (i.e., if they have different payoffs
converge to the best, if they have the same payoffs remain invariant).
2.5 From Markov-Conley chains to the Discrete-time Macro-model
The key idea behind the ordering of agents we wish to compute is that the evolutionary fitness/performance of a specific strategy
should be reflected by how often it is being chosen by the system/evolution. We have established the solution concept of
Markov-Conley chains (MCCs) as a discrete-time sparse-discrete-space analogue of the continuous-time replicator dynamics,
which capture these long-term recurrent behaviors for general meta-games (see Theorem 2.4.24). MCCs are attractive from a
computational standpoint: they can be found efficiently in all games by computing the sink strongly connected components of
the response graph, addressing one of the key criticisms of Nash equilibria. However, similar to Nash equilibria, even simple
games may have many MCCs (e.g., five in the coordination game of Fig. 4b). The remaining challenge is, thus, to solve the
MCC selection problem.
One of the simplest ways to resolve the MCC selection issue is to introduce noise in our system and study a stochastically
perturbed version, such that the overall Markov chain is irreducible and therefore has a unique stationary distribution that can
be used for our rankings. Specifically, we consider the following stochastically perturbed model: we choose an agent k at
random, and, if it is currently playing strategy sk
j at random and set the new system state to
be ε(sk,s−k) + (1− ε)(sk
j,s−k). Remarkably, these perturbed dynamics correspond closely to the macro-model introduced in
Section 2.1.4 for a particularly large choice of ranking-intensity value α:
Theorem 2.5.1. In the limit of infinite ranking-intensity α, the Markov chain associated with the generalized multi-population
model introduced in Section 2.1.4 coincides with the MCC.
i , we choose one of its strategies sk
Proof. Refer to the Supplementary Material Section 5.4.5 for the proof.
A low ranking-intensity (α (cid:28) 1) corresponds to the case of weak selection, where a weak mutant strategy can overtake
a given population. A large ranking-intensity, on the other hand, ensures that the probability that a sub-optimal strategy
overtakes a given population is close to zero, which corresponds closely to the MCC solution concept. In practice, setting the
ranking-intensity to infinity may not be computationally feasible; in this case, the underlying Markov chain may be reducible
and the existence of a unique stationary distribution (which we use for our rankings) may not be guaranteed. To resolve the MCC
selection problem, we require a perturbed model, but one with a large enough ranking-intensity α such that it approximates an
MCC, but small enough such that the MCCs remain connected. By introducing this perturbed version of Markov-Conley chains,
the resulting Markov chain is now irreducible (per Theorem 2.1.2). The long-term behavior is thus captured by the unique
stationary distribution under the large-α limit. Our so-called α-Rank evaluation method then corresponds to the ordering of
the agents in this particular stationary distribution. The perturbations introduced here imply the need for a sweep over the
ranking-intensity parameter α -- a single hyperparameter -- which we find to be computationally feasible across all of the
large-scale games we analyze using α-Rank.
The combination of Theorem 2.4.24 and Theorem 2.5.1 yields a unifying perspective involving a chain of models of
increasing complexity: the continuous-time replicator dynamics is on one end, our generalized discrete-time concept is on the
other, and MCCs are the link in between.
3 Results
In the following we summarize our generalized ranking model and the main theoretical and empirical results. We start by
outlining how the α-Rank procedure exactly works. Then we continue with illustrating α-Rank in a number of canonical
examples. We continue with some deeper understanding of α-Rank's evolutionary dynamics model by introducing some further
intuitions and theoretical results, and we end with an empirical validation of α-Rank in various domains.
3.1 α-Rank: Evolutionary Ranking of Strategies
We first detail the α-Rank algorithm, then provide some insights and intuitions to further facilitate the understanding of our
ranking method and solution concept.
15/45
3.1.1 Algorithm
Based on the dynamical concepts of chain recurrence and MCCs established, we now detail a descriptive method, titled α-Rank,
for computing strategy rankings in a multi-agent interaction:
1. Construct the meta-game payoff table Mk for each population k from data of multi-agent interactions, or from running
game simulations.
2. Compute the transition matrix C as outlined in Section 2.1.4. Per the discussions in Section 2.5, one must use a
sufficiently large ranking-intensity value α in (4); this ensures that α-Rank preserves the ranking of strategies with closest
correspondence to the MCC solution concept. As a large enough value is dependent on the domain under study, a useful
heuristic is to conduct a sweep over α, starting from a small value and increasing it exponentially until convergence of
rankings.
3. Compute the unique stationary distribution, π, of transition matrix C. Each element of the stationary distribution
corresponds to the time the populations spend in a given strategy profile.
4. Compute the agent rankings, which correspond to the ordered masses of the stationary distribution π. The stationary
distribution mass for each agent constitutes a 'score' for it (as might be shown, e.g., on a leaderboard).
3.1.2 α-Rank and MCCs as a Solution Concept: A Paradigm Shift
The solution concept of MCCs is foundationally distinct from that of the Nash equilibrium. The Nash equilibrium is rooted in
classical game theory, which not only models the interactions in multi-agent systems, but is also normative in the sense that it
prescribes how a player should behave based on the assumption of individual rationality [13, 15, 59]. Besides classical game
theory making strong assumptions regarding the rationality of players involved in the interaction, there exist many fundamental
limitations with the concept of a Nash equilibrium: intractability (computing a Nash is PPAD-complete), equilibrium selection,
and the incompatibility of this static concept with the dynamic behaviors of agents in interacting systems. To compound these
issues, even methods that aim to compute an approximate Nash are problematic: a typical approach is to use exploitability to
measure deviation from Nash and as such use it as a method to closely approximate one; the problem with this is that it is also
intractable for large games (typically the ones we are interested in), and there even still remain issues with using exploitability
as a measure of strategy strength (e.g., see [60]). Overall, there seems little hope of deploying the Nash equilibrium as a solution
concept for the evaluation of agents in general large-scale (empirical) games.
The concept of an MCC, by contrast, embraces the dynamical systems perspective, in a manner similar to evolutionary
game theory. Rather than trying to capture the strategic behavior of players in an equilibrium, we deploy a dynamical system
based on the evolutionary interactions of agents that captures and describes the long-term behavior of the players involved in the
interaction. As such, our approach is descriptive rather than prescriptive, in the sense that it is not prescribing the strategies that
one should play; rather, our approach provides useful information regarding the strategies that are evolutionarily non-transient
(i.e., resistant to mutants), and highlights the remaining strategies that one might play in practice. To understand MCCs requires
a shift away from the classical models described above for games and multi-agent interactions. Our new paradigm is to allow
the dynamics to roll out and enable strong (i.e., non-transient) agents to emerge and weak (i.e, transient) agents to vanish
naturally through their long-term interactions. The resulting solution concept not only permits an automatic ranking of agents'
evolutionary strengths, but is powerful both in terms of computability and usability: our rankings are guaranteed to exist,
can be computed tractably for any game, and involve no equilibrium selection issues as the evolutionary process converges
to a unique stationary distribution. Nash tries to identify static single points in the simplex that capture simultaneous best
response behaviors of agents, but comes with the range of complications mentioned above. On the other hand, the support of
our stationary distribution captures the strongest non-transient agents, which may be interchangeably played by interacting
populations and therefore constitute a dynamic output of our approach.
Given that both Nash and MCCs share a common foundation in the notion of a best response (i.e., simultaneous best
responses for Nash, and the sink components of a best response graph for MCCs), it is interesting to consider the circumstances
under which the two concepts coincide. There do, indeed, exist such exceptional circumstances: for example, for a potential
game, every better response sequence converges to a (pure) Nash equilibrium, which coincides with an MCC. However,
even in relatively simple games, differences between the two solution concepts are expected to occur in general due to the
inherently dynamic nature of MCCs (as opposed to Nash). For example, in the Biased Rock-Paper-Scissors game detailed in
Section 3.2.2, the Nash equilibrium and stationary distribution are not equivalent due to the cyclical nature of the game; each
3 , 1
3 , 1
player's symmetric Nash is ( 1
16 ), whereas the stationary distribution is ( 1
3 ). The key difference here is that whereas
Nash is prescriptive and tells players which strategy mixture to use, namely ( 1
16 , 5
8 , 5
16 ), assuming rational opponents, α-Rank
is descriptive in the sense that it filters out evolutionary transient strategies and yields a ranking of the remaining strategies
in terms of their long-term survival. In the Biased Rock-Paper-Scissors example, α-Rank reveals that all three strategies are
16 , 5
8 , 5
16/45
equally likely to persist in the long-term as they are part of the same sink strongly connected component of the response graph.
In other words, the stationary distribution mass (i.e., the α-Rank score) on a particular strategy is indicative of its resistance to
being invaded by any other strategy, including those in the distribution support. In the case of the Biased Rock-Paper-Scissors
game, this means that the three strategies are equally likely to be invaded by a mutant, in the sense that their outgoing fixation
probabilities are equivalent. In contrast to our evolutionary ranking, Nash comes without any such stability properties (e.g.,
consider the interior mixed Nash in Fig. 4b). Even computing Evolutionary Stable Strategies (ESS) [13], a refinement of Nash
equilibria, is intractable [61, 62]. In larger games (e.g., AlphaZero in Section 3.4.2), the reduction in the number of agents that
are resistant to mutations is more dramatic (in the sense of the stationary distribution support size being much smaller than the
total number of agents) and less obvious (in the sense that more-resistant agents are not always the ones that have been trained
for longer). In summary, the strategies chosen by our approach are those favored by evolutionary selection, as opposed to the
Nash strategies, which are simultaneous best-responses.
3.2 Conceptual Examples
We revisit the earlier conceptual examples of Rock-Paper-Scissors and Battle of the Sexes from Section 2.2 to illustrate the
rankings provided by the α-Rank methodology. We use a population size of m = 50 in our evaluations.
3.2.1 Rock-Paper-Scissors
In the Rock-Paper-Scissors game, recall the cyclical nature of the discrete-time Markov chain (shown in Fig. 6a) for a fixed
value of ranking-intensity parameter, α. We first investigate the impact of the ranking-intensity on overall strategy rankings, by
plotting the stationary distribution as a function of α in Fig. 6b. The result is that the population spends 1
3 of its time playing
each strategy regardless of the value of α, which is in line with intuition due to the cyclical best-response structure of the
game's payoffs. The Nash equilibrium, for comparison, is also ( 1
3 ). The α-Rank output Fig. 6c, which corresponds to a
high value of α, thus indicates a tied ranking for all three strategies, also in line with intuition.
3 , 1
3 , 1
3.2.2 Biased Rock-Paper-Scissors
Consider now the game of Rock-Paper-Scissors, but with biased payoffs (shown in Fig. 7a). The introduction of the bias moves
the Nash from the center of the simplex towards one of the corners, specifically ( 1
16 ) in this case. It is worthwhile to
investigate the corresponding variation of the stationary distribution masses as a function of the ranking-intensity α (Fig. 7c) in
this case. As evident from the fixation probabilities (9) of the generalized discrete-time model, very small values of α cause
the raw values of payoff to have a very low impact on the dynamics captured by discrete-time Markov chain; in this case,
any mutant strategy has the same probability of taking over the population, regardless of the current strategy played by the
population. This corresponds well to Fig. 7c, where small α values yield stationary distributions close to π = ( 1
16 , 5
8 , 5
As α increases, payoff values play a correspondingly more critical role in dictating the long-term population state; in Fig. 7c,
the population tends to play Paper most often within this intermediate range of α. Most interesting to us, however, is the case
where α increases to the point that our discrete-time model bears a close correspondence to the MCC solution concept (per
Theorem 2.5.1). In this limit of large α, the striking outcome is that the stationary distribution once again converges to ( 1
3 , 1
3 ).
Thus, α-Rank yields the high-level conclusion that in the long term, a monomorphic population playing any of the 3 given
strategies can be completely and repeatedly displaced by a rare mutant, and as such assigns the same ranking to all strategies
(Fig. 7d). This simple example illustrates perhaps the most important trait of the MCC solution concept and resulting α-Rank
methodology: they capture the fundamental dynamical structure of games and long-term intransitivities that exist therein, with
the rankings produced corresponding to the dynamical strategy space consumption or basins of attraction of strategies.
3 , 1
3 , 1
3 , 1
3 ).
3.2.3 Battle of the Sexes
We consider next an example of α-Rank applied to an asymmetric game -- the Battle of the Sexes. Figure 8b plots the stationary
distribution against ranking-intensity α, where we again observe a uniform stationary distribution corresponding to very low
values of α. As α increases, we observe the emergence of two sink chain components corresponding to strategy profiles (O,O)
and (M,M), which thus attain the top α-Rank scores in Fig. 8c. Note the distinct convergence behaviors of strategy profiles
(O,M) and (M,O) in Fig. 8b, where the stationary distribution mass on the (M,O) converges to 0 faster than that of (O,M) for
an increasing value of α. This is directly due to the structure of the underlying payoffs and the resulting differences in fixation
probabilities. Namely, starting from profile (M,O), if either player deviates, that player increases their local payoff from 0 to 3.
Likewise, if either player deviates starting from profile (O,M), that player's payoff increases from 0 to 2. Correspondingly, the
fixation probabilities out of (M,O) are higher than those out of (O,M) (Fig. 8a), and thus the stationary distribution mass on
(M,O) converges to 0 faster than that of (O,M) as α increases. We note that these low-α behaviors, while interesting, have no
impact on the final rankings computed in the limit of large α (Fig. 8c). We refer the interested reader to [63] for a detailed
analysis of the non-coordination components of the stationary distribution in mutualistic interactions, such as the Battle of the
Sexes.
17/45
Domain
Results
Symmetric?
# of Populations
# of Strategies
Rock-Paper-Scissors
Biased Rock-Paper-Scissors
Battle of the Sexes
AlphaGo
AlphaZero Chess
MuJoCo Soccer
Kuhn Poker
Leduc Poker
Section 3.2.1
Section 3.2.2
Section 3.2.3
Section 3.4.1
Section 3.4.2
Section 3.4.3
Section 3.4.4
Section 3.4.4
Section 3.4.5
1
1
2
1
1
1
3
4
2
[3]
[3]
[2,2]
[7]
[56]
[10]
[4,4,4]
[4,4,4,4]
[3,3]
Table 1. Overview of multi-agent domains evaluated in this paper. These domains are extensive across multiple axes of
complexity, and include symmetric and asymmetric games with different numbers of populations and ranges of strategies.
We conclude this discussion by noting that despite the asymmetric nature of the payoffs in this example, the computational
techniques used by α-Rank to conduct the evaluation are essentially identical to the simpler (symmetric) Rock-Paper-Scissors
game. This key advantage is especially evident in contrast to recent evaluation approaches that involve decomposition of a
asymmetric game into multiple counterpart symmetric games, which must then be concurrently analyzed [9].
3.3 Theoretical Properties of α-Rank
This section presents key theoretical findings related to the structure of the underlying discrete-time model used in α-Rank, and
computational complexity of the ranking analysis. Proofs are presented in the Supplementary Material.
Property 3.3.1 (Structure of C). Given strategy profile si corresponding to row i of C, the number of valid profiles it can
transition to is 1 + ∑k(Sk− 1) (i.e., either si self-transitions, or one of the populations k switches to a different monomorphic
strategy). The sparsity of C is then,
.
S2
1− S(1 + ∑k(Sk− 1))
Therefore, for games involving many players and strategies, transition matrix C is large (in the sense that there exist S
states), but extremely sparse (in the sense that there exist only 1 + ∑k(Sk− 1) outgoing edges from each state). For example,
in a 6-wise interaction game where agents in each population have a choice over 4 strategies, C is 99.53% sparse.
Property 3.3.2 (Computational complexity of solving for π). The sparse structure of the Markov transition matrix C (as
identified in Property 3.3.1) can be exploited to solve for the stationary distribution π efficiently; specifically, computing the
stationary distribution can be formulated as an eigenvalue problem, which can be computed in cubic-time in the number of total
pure strategy profiles.
(14)
The α-Rank method is, therefore, tractable, in the sense that it runs in polynomial time with respect to the total number of
pure strategies. This yields a major computational advantage, in stark contrast to conducting rankings by solving for Nash
(which is PPAD-complete for general-sum games [22], which our meta-games may be).
3.4 Experimental Validation
In this section we provide a series of experimental illustrations of α-Rank in a varied set of domains, including AlphaGo,
AlphaZero Chess, MuJoCo Soccer, and both Kuhn and Leduc Poker. As evident in Table 1, the analysis conducted is extensive
across multiple axes of complexity, as the domains considered include symmetric and asymmetric games with different numbers
of populations and ranges of strategies.
3.4.1 AlphaGo
In this example we conduct an evolutionary ranking of AlphaGo agents based on the data reported in [1]. The meta-game
considered here corresponds to a 2-player symmetric NFG with 7 AlphaGo agents: AG(r), AG(p), AG(v), AG(rv), AG(rp),
AG(vp), and AG(rvp), where r, v, and p respectively denote the combination of rollouts, value networks, and/or policy networks
used by each variant. The corresponding payoffs are the win rates for each pair of agent match-ups, as reported in Table 9 of [1].
In Fig. 9c we summarize the rankings of these agents using the α-Rank method. α-Rank is quite conclusive in the sense
that the top agent, AG(rvp), attains all of the stationary distribution mass, dominating all other agents. Further insights into the
pairwise agent interactions are revealed by visualizing the underlying Markov chain, shown in Fig. 9a. Here the population
18/45
flows (corresponding to the graph edges) indicate which agents are more evolutionarily viable than others. For example,
the edge indicating flow from AG(r) to AG(rv) indicates that the latter agent is stronger in the short-term of evolutionary
interactions. Moreover, the stationary distribution (corresponding to high α values in Fig. 9b) reveals that all agents but
AG(rvp) are transient in terms of the long-term dynamics, as a monomorphic population starting from any other agent node
eventually reaches AG(rvp). In this sense, node AG(rvp) constitutes an evolutionary stable strategy. We also see in Fig. 9a that
no cyclic behaviors occur in these interactions. Finally, we remark that the recent work of [8] also conducted a meta-game
analysis on these particular AlphaGo agents and drew similar conclusions to ours. The key limitation of their approach is
that it can only directly analyze interactions between triplets of agents, as they rely on visualization of the continuous-time
evolutionary dynamics on a 2-simplex. Thus, to draw conclusive results regarding the interactions of the full set of agents, they
must concurrently conduct visual analysis of all possible 2-simplices (35 total in this case). This highlights a key benefit of
α-Rank as it can succinctly summarize agent evaluations with minimal intermediate human-in-the-loop analysis.
3.4.2 AlphaZero
AlphaZero is a generalized algorithm that has been demonstrated to master the games of Go, Chess, and Shogi without
reliance on human data [3]. Here we demonstrate the applicability of the α-Rank evaluation method to large-scale domains
by considering the interactions of a large number of AlphaZero agents playing the game of chess. In AlphaZero, training
commences by randomly initializing the parameters of a neural network used to play the game in conjunction with a general-
purpose tree search algorithm. To synthesize the corresponding meta-game, we take a 'snapshot' of the network at various
stages of training, each of which becomes an agent in our meta-game. For example, agent AZ(27.5) corresponds to a snapshot
taken at approximately 27.5% of the total number of training iterations, while AZ(98.7) corresponds to one taken approximately
at the conclusion of training. We take 56 of these snapshots in total. The meta-game considered here is then a symmetric
2-player NFG involving 56 agents, with payoffs again corresponding to the win-rates of every pair of agent match-ups. We note
that there exist 27720 total simplex 2-faces in this dataset, substantially larger than those investigated in [8], which quantifiably
justifies the computational feasibility of our evaluation scheme.
We first analyze the evolutionary strengths of agents over a sweep of ranking-intensity α (Fig. 10b). While the overall
rankings are quite invariant to the value of α, we note again that a large value of α dictates the final α-Rank evaluations attained
in Fig. 10c. To gain further insight into the inter-agent interactions, we consider the corresponding discrete-time evolutionary
dynamics shown in Fig. 10a. Note that these interactions are evaluated using the entire 56-agent dataset, though visualized only
for the top-ranked agents for readability. The majority of top-ranked agents indeed correspond to snapshots taken near the end
of AlphaZero training (i.e., the strongest agents in terms of training time). Specifically, AZ(99.4), which is the final snapshot in
our dataset and thus the most-trained agent, attains the top rank with a score of 0.39, in contrast to the second-ranked AZ(93.9)
agent's score of 0.22. This analysis does reveal some interesting outcomes, however: agent AZ(86.4) is not only ranked 5-th
overall, but also higher than several agents with longer training time, including AZ(88.8), AZ(90.3), and AZ(93.3).
We also investigate here the relationship between the α-Rank scores and Nash equilibria. A key point to recall is the
equilibrium selection problem associated with Nash, as multiple equilibria can exist even in the case of two-player zero-sum
meta-games. In the case of zero-sum meta-games, Balduzzi et al. show that there exists a unique maximum entropy (maxent)
Nash equilibrium [64], which constitutes a natural choice that we also use in the below comparisons. For general games,
unfortunately, this selection issue persists for Nash, whereas it does not for α-Rank due to the uniqueness of the associated
ranking (see Theorem 2.1.2).
We compare the α-Rank scores and maxent Nash by plotting each throughout AlphaZero training in Fig. 11a and Fig. 11b,
respectively; we also plot their difference in Fig. 11c. At a given training iteration, the corresponding horizontal slice in each
plot visualizes the associated evaluation metric (i.e., α-Rank, maxent Nash, or difference of the two) computed for all agent
snapshots up to that iteration. We first note that both evaluation methods reach a consensus that the strengths of AlphaZero
agents generally increase with training, in the sense that only the latest agent snapshots (i.e., the ones closest to the diagonal)
appear in the support of both α-Rank scores and Nash. An interesting observation is that less-trained agents sometimes reappear
in the support of the distributions as training progresses; this behavior may even occur multiple times for a particular agent.
We consider also the quantitative similarity of α-Rank and Nash in this domain. Figure 11c illustrates that differences do
exist in the sense that certain agents are ranked higher via one method compared to the other. More fundamentally, however,
we note a relationship exists between α-Rank and Nash in the sense that they share a common rooting in the concept of
best-response: by definition, each player's strategy in a Nash equilibrium is a best response to the other players' strategies;
in addition, α-Rank corresponds to the MCC solution concept, which itself is derived from the sink strongly-connected
components of the game's response graph. Despite the similarities, α-Rank is a more refined solution concept than Nash in
the sense that it is both rooted in dynamical systems and a best-response approach, which not only yields rankings, but also
the associated dynamics graph (Fig. 10a) that gives insights into the long-term evolutionary strengths of agents. Beyond this,
the critical advantage of α-Rank is its tractability for general-sum games (per Property 3.3.2), as well as lack of underlying
equilibrium selection issues; in combination, these features yield a powerful empirical methodology with little room for user
19/45
confusion or interpretability issues. This analysis reveals fundamental insights not only in terms of the benefits of using α-Rank
to evaluate agents in a particular domain, but also an avenue of future work in terms of embedding the evaluation methodology
into the training pipeline of agents involved in large and general games.
3.4.3 MuJoCo Soccer
We consider here a dataset consisting of complex agent interactions in the continuous-action domain of MuJoCo soccer [5].
Specifically, this domain involves a multi-agent soccer physics-simulator environment with teams of 2 vs. 2 agents in the
MuJoCo physics engine [65]. Each agent, specifically, uses a distinct variation of algorithmic and/or policy parameterization
component (see [5] for agent specifications). The underlying meta-game is a 2-player NFG consisting of 10 agents, with payoffs
corresponding to Figure 2 of [5].
We consider again the variation of the stationary distribution as a function of ranking-intensity α (Fig. 12b). Under the large
α limit, only 6 agent survive, with the remaining 4 agents considered transient in the long-term. Moreoever, the top 3 α-Ranked
agents (C, A, and B, as shown in Fig. 12c) correspond to the strongest agents highlighted in [5], though α-Rank highlights 3
additional agents (G, J, and F) that are not in the top-rank set outlined in their work. An additional key benefit of our approach
is that it can immediately highlight the presence of intransitive behaviors (cycles) in general games. Worthy of remark in this
dataset is the presence of a large number of cycles, several of which are identified in Fig. 13. Not only can we identify these
cycles visually, these intransitive behaviors are automatically taken into account in our rankings due to the fundamental role
that recurrence plays in our underlying solution concept. This is in contrast to the Elo rating (which is incapable of dealing with
intransitivities), the replicator dynamics (which are limited in terms of visualizing such intransitive behaviors for large games),
and Nash (which is a static solution concept that does not capture dynamic behavior).
3.4.4 Kuhn Poker
We next consider games wherein the inherent complexity is due to the number of players involved. Specifically, we consider
Kuhn poker with 3 and 4 players, extending beyond the reach of prior meta-game evaluation approaches that are limited to
pairwise asymmetric interactions [8]. Kuhn poker is a small poker game where each player starts with 2 chips, antes 1 chip
to play, and receives one card face down from a deck of size n + 1 (one card remains hidden). Players proceed by betting
(raise/call) by adding their remaining chip to the pot, or passing (check/fold) until all players are either in (contributed as all
other players to the pot) or out (folded, passed after a raise). The player with the highest-ranked card that has not folded wins the
pot. The two-player game is known to have a continuum of strategies, which could have fairly high support, that depends on a
single parameter: the probability that the first player raises with the highest card [66]. The three-player game has a significantly
more complex landscape [67]. The specific rules used for the three and four player variants can be found in [68, Section 4.1].
Here, our meta-game dataset consists of several (fixed) rounds of extensive-form fictitious play (specifically, XFP from [69]):
in round 0, the payoff corresponding to strategy profile (0,0,0) in each meta-game of 3-player Kuhn corresponds to the estimated
payoff of each player using uniform random strategies; in fictitious play round 1, the payoff entry (1,1,1) corresponds to each
player playing an approximate best response to the other players' uniform strategies; in fictitious play round 2, entry (2,2,2)
corresponds to each playing an approximate best response to the other players' uniform mixtures over their round 0 strategies
(uniform random) and round 1 oracle strategy (best response to random); and so on. Note, especially, that oracles at round 0 are
likely to be dominated (as they are uniform random). In our dataset, we consider two asymmetric meta-games, each involving 3
rounds of fictitious play with 3 and 4 players (Fig. 14 and Fig. 15, respectively).
Of particular note are the total number of strategy profiles involved in these meta-games, 64 and 256 respectively for the 3
and 4 player games -- the highest considered in any of our datasets. Conducting the evaluation using the replicator-dynamics
based analysis of [8] can be quite tedious as all possible 2-face simplices must be considered for each player. Instead, here the
α-Rankings follow the same methodology used for all other domains, and are summarized succinctly in Figs. 14c and 15c.
In both meta-games, the 3-round fictitious play strategies ((3,3,3) and (3,3,3,3), respectively) are ranked amongst the top-5
strategies.
3.4.5 Leduc Poker
The meta-game we consider next involves agents generated using the Policy Space Response Oracles (PSRO) algorithm [29].
Specifically, PSRO can be viewed as a generalization of fictitious play, which computes approximate responses ("oracles")
using deep reinforcement learning, along with arbitrary meta-strategy solvers; here, PSRO is applied to the game of Leduc
poker. Leduc poker involves a deck of 6 cards (jack, queen, and king in two suits). Players have a limitless number of chips.
Each player antes 1 chip to play and receives an initial private card; in the first round players can bet a fixed amount of 2 chips,
in the second round can bet 4 chips, with a maximum of two raises in each round. Before the second round starts, a public card
is revealed. The corresponding meta-game involves 2 players with 3 strategies each, which correspond to the first three epochs
of the PSRO algorithm. Leduc poker is a commonly used benchmark in the computer poker literature [70]: our implementation
contains 936 information states (approximately 50 times larger then 2-player Kuhn poker), and is non-zero sum due to penalties
imposed by selecting of illegal moves, see [29, Appendix D.1] for details.
20/45
We consider in Fig. 16a the Markov chain corresponding to the PSRO dataset, with the corresponding α-Rank yielding
profile (0,0) as the top-ranked strategy, which receives 1.0 of the stationary distribution mass and essentially consumes the
entire strategy space in the long-term of the evolutionary dynamics. This corresponds well to the result of [8], which also
concluded that this strategy profile consumes the entire strategy space under the replicator dynamics; in their approach, however,
an equilibrium selection problem had to be dealt with using human-in-the-loop intervention due to the population-wise dynamics
decomposition their approach relies on. Here, we need no such intervention as α-Rank directly yields the overall ranking of all
strategy profiles.
4 Discussion
We introduced a general descriptive multi-agent evaluation method, called α-Rank, which is practical and general in the sense
that it is easily applicable in complex game-theoretic settings, including K-player asymmetric games that existing meta-game
evaluation methods such as [8, 9] cannot feasibly be applied to. The techniques underlying α-Rank were motivated due to
the fundamental incompatibility identified between the dynamical processes typically used to model interactions of agents
in meta-games, and the Nash solution concept typically used to draw conclusions about these interactions. Using the Nash
equilibrium as a solution concept for meta-game evaluation in these dynamical models is in many ways problematic: computing
a Nash equilibrium is not only computationally difficult [21, 22], and there are also intractable equilibrium selection issues
even if Nash equilibria can be computed [23 -- 25]. α-Rank, instead, is theoretically-grounded in a novel solution concept called
Markov-Conley chains (MCCs), which are inherently dynamical in nature. A key feature of α-Rank is that it relies on only a
single hyperparameter, its ranking-intensity value α, with sufficiently high values of α (as determined via a parameter sweep)
yielding closest correspondence to MCCs.
The combination of MCCs and α-Rank yields a principled methodology with a strong evolutionary interpretation of
agent rankings, as outlined in Fig. 17; this overarching perspective considers a spectrum of evolutionary models of increasing
complexity. On one end of the spectrum, the continuous-time dynamics micro-model provides detailed insights into the simplex,
illustrating flows, attractors, and equilibria of agent interactions. On the other end, the discrete-time dynamics macro-model
provides high-level insights of the time limit behavior of the system as modeled by a Markov chain over interacting agents. The
unifying link between these models is the MCC solution concept, which builds on the dynamical theory foundations of Conley
[28] and the topological concept of chain components. We provided both scalability properties and theoretical guarantees for
our ranking method. Finally, we evaluated the approach on an extensive range of meta-game domains including AlphaGo [1],
AlphaZero [3], MuJoCo Soccer [5], and Poker [29], which exhibit a range of complexities in terms of payoff asymmetries,
number of players, and number of agents involved. We strongly believe that the generality of α-Rank will enable it to play an
important role in evaluation of AI agents, e.g., on leaderboards. More critically, we believe that the computational feasibility of
the approach, even when many agents are involved (e.g., AlphaZero), makes its integration into the agent training pipeline a
natural avenue for future work.
References
1. Silver, D. et al. Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nat. 529, 484 -- 489 (2016).
2. Silver, D. et al. Mastering the game of Go without human knowledge. Nat. 550, 354 -- 359 (2017).
3. Silver, D. et al. A general reinforcement learning algorithm that masters chess, shogi, and go through self-play. Sci. 362,
1140 -- 1144 (2018).
4. Moravc´ık, M. et al. DeepStack: Expert-level artificial intelligence in heads-up no-limit poker. Sci. 356, 508 -- 513 (2017).
5. Liu, S. et al. Emergent coordination through competition. In International Conference on Learning Representations
(2019). URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=BkG8sjR5Km.
6. Walsh, W. E., Das, R., Tesauro, G. & Kephart, J. Analyzing complex strategic interactions in multi-agent games. In
AAAI-02 Workshop on Game Theoretic and Decision Theoretic Agents, 2002. (2002).
7. Wellman, M. P. Methods for empirical game-theoretic analysis. In Proceedings, The Twenty-First National Conference
on Artificial Intelligence and the Eighteenth Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, July 16-20,
2006, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, 1552 -- 1556 (2006).
8. Tuyls, K., Perolat, J., Lanctot, M., Leibo, J. Z. & Graepel, T. A Generalised Method for Empirical Game Theoretic
Analysis. In AAMAS, Stockholm, Sweden (2018).
21/45
9. Tuyls, K. et al. Symmetric decomposition of asymmetric games. Sci. Reports 8, 1015 (2018).
10. Tuyls, K. & Parsons, S. What evolutionary game theory tells us about multiagent learning. Artif. Intell. 171, 406 -- 416
(2007).
11. Zeeman, E. Population dynamics from game theory. Lect. Notes Math. Glob. theory dynamical systems 819 (1980).
12. Zeeman, E. Dynamics of the evolution of animal conflicts. Theor. Biol. 89, 249 -- 270 (1981).
13. Weibull, J. Evolutionary game theory. MIT press (1997).
14. Hofbauer, J. Evolutionary dynamics for bimatrix games: A Hamiltonian system? J. Math. Biol. 34, 675 -- 688 (1996).
15. Gintis, H. Game theory evolving (2nd edition). Univ. Press. Princet. NJ (2009).
16. Traulsen, A., Claussen, J. C. & Hauert, C. Coevolutionary dynamics: from finite to infinite populations. Phys. review
letters 95, 238701 (2005).
17. Traulsen, A., Nowak, M. A. & Pacheco, J. M. Stochastic dynamics of invasion and fixation. Phys. Rev. E 74, 011909
(2006).
18. Santos, F. C., Pacheco, J. M. & Skyrms, B. Co-evolution of pre-play signaling and cooperation. J. Theor. Biol. 274,
30 -- 35 (2011).
19. Segbroeck, S. V., Pacheco, J. M., Lenaerts, T. & Santos, F. C. Emergence of fairness in repeated group interactions. Phys.
Rev. Lett. 108, 158104 (2012).
20. Veller, C. & Hayward, L. K. Finite-population evolution with rare mutations in asymmetric games. J. Econ. Theory 162,
93 -- 113 (2016).
21. von Stengel, B. Computing equilibria for two-person games. In Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,
vol. 3, 1723 -- 1759 (Elsevier, 2002).
22. Daskalakis, C., Goldberg, P. W. & Papadimitriou, C. H. The complexity of computing a Nash equilibrium. In Proceedings
of the 38th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Seattle, WA, USA, May 21-23, 2006, 71 -- 78 (ACM Press,
2006).
23. Harsanyi, J. & Selten, R. A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games, vol. 1 (The MIT Press, 1988), 1 edn.
24. Avis, D., Rosenberg, G., Savani, R. & von Stengel, B. Enumeration of nash equilibria for two-player games. Econ.
Theory 42, 9 -- 37 (2010).
25. Goldberg, P. W., Papadimitriou, C. H. & Savani, R. The complexity of the homotopy method, equilibrium selection, and
Lemke-Howson solutions. ACM Transactions on Econ. Comput. 1, 9 (2013).
26. Papadimitriou, C. & Piliouras, G. From Nash equilibria to chain recurrent sets: Solution concepts and topology. In
Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science, ITCS '16, 227 -- 235 (ACM,
New York, NY, USA, 2016).
27. Kakutani, S. A generalization of Brouwer's fixed point theorem. Duke Math. J. 8, 457 -- 459 (1941).
28. Conley, C. C. Isolated invariant sets and the Morse index. 38 (American Mathematical Soc., 1978).
29. Lanctot, M. et al. A unified game-theoretic approach to multiagent reinforcement learning. In Advances in Neural
Information Processing Systems 30, 4190 -- 4203 (2017).
30. J. Hofbauer, J. & Sigmund, K. Evolutionary games and population dynamics. Camb. Univ. Press. (1998).
31. Cressman, R. Evolutionary Dynamics and Extensive Form Games (The MIT Press, 2003).
32. Taylor, P. & Jonker, L. Evolutionarily stable strategies and game dynamics. Math. Biosci. 40, 145 -- 156 (1978).
33. Schuster, P. & Sigmund, K. Replicator dynamics. J. Theor. Biol. 100, 533 -- 538 (1983). URL http://www.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0022519383904459. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-
5193(83)90445-9.
22/45
34. Bloembergen, D., Tuyls, K., Hennes, D. & Kaisers, M. Evolutionary dynamics of multi-agent learning: A survey. J. Artif.
Intell. Res. (JAIR) 53, 659 -- 697 (2015).
35. Fudenberg, D. & Imhof, L. A. Imitation processes with small mutations. J. Econ. Theory 131, 251 -- 262 (2006).
36. Nowak, M. A. & Sigmund, K. Evolutionary dynamics of biological games. Sci. 303, 793 -- 799 (2004).
37. Traulsen, A., Pacheco, J. M. & Imhof, L. A. Stochasticity and evolutionary stability. Phys. Rev. E 74, 021905 (2006).
38. Claussen, J. C. Discrete stochastic processes, replicator and Fokker-Planck equations of coevolutionary dynamics in finite
and infinite populations. arXiv preprint arXiv:0803.2443 (2008).
39. Taylor, H. M. & Karlin, S. An Introduction To Stochastic Modeling (Academic Press, 1998), third edition edn.
40. Daskalakis, C., Frongillo, R., Papadimitriou, C. H., Pierrakos, G. & Valiant, G. On learning algorithms for Nash equilibria.
In International Symposium on Algorithmic Game Theory, 114 -- 125 (Springer, 2010).
41. Hart, S. & Mas-Colell, A. Uncoupled dynamics do not lead to nash equilibrium. Am. Econ. Rev. 93, 1830 -- 1836 (2003).
42. Viossat, Y. The replicator dynamics does not lead to correlated equilibria. Games Econ. Behav. 59, 397 -- 407 (2007).
43. Piliouras, G. & Schulman, L. J. Learning dynamics and the co-evolution of competing sexual species. arXiv preprint
arXiv:1711.06879 (2017).
44. Sandholm, W. Population Games and Evolutionary Dynamics. Economic Learning and Social Evolution (MIT Press,
2010).
45. Gaunersdorfer, A. & Hofbauer, J. Fictitious play, shapley polygons, and the replicator equation. Games Econ. Behav. 11,
279 -- 303 (1995).
46. Daskalakis, C., Frongillo, R., Papadimitriou, C., Pierrakos, G. & Valiant, G. On learning algorithms for Nash equilibria.
Algorithmic Game Theory 114 -- 125 (2010).
47. Kleinberg, R., Ligett, K., Piliouras, G. & Tardos, ´E. Beyond the Nash equilibrium barrier. In Symposium on Innovations
in Computer Science (ICS) (2011).
48. Sandholm, W. H. Population games and evolutionary dynamics (MIT press, 2010).
49. Wagner, E. The explanatory relevance of nash equilibrium: One-dimensional chaos in boundedly rational learning. Philos.
Sci. 80, 783 -- 795 (2013).
50. Palaiopanos, G., Panageas, I. & Piliouras, G. Multiplicative weights update with constant step-size in congestion games:
Convergence, limit cycles and chaos. In NIPS (2017).
51. Sato, Y., Akiyama, E. & Farmer, J. D. Chaos in learning a simple two-person game. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 99, 4748 -- 4751
(2002).
52. Alongi, J. M. & Nelson, G. S. Recurrence and Topology, vol. 85 (American Mathematical Soc., 2007).
53. Norton, D. E. The fundamental theorem of dynamical systems. Commentationes Math. Univ. Carol. 36, 585 -- 597 (1995).
54. Monderer, D. & Shapley, L. S. Potential Games. Games Econ. Behav. 14, 124 -- 143 (1996).
55. Galla, T. & Farmer, J. D. Complex dynamics in learning complicated games. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 110, 1232 -- 1236
(2013).
56. Panageas, I. & Piliouras, G. Average case performance of replicator dynamics in potential games via computing regions
of attraction. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, 703 -- 720 (ACM, 2016).
57. Bomze, I. M. Lotka-volterra equation and replicator dynamics: a two-dimensional classification. Biol. cybernetics 48,
201 -- 211 (1983).
58. Bomze, I. M. Lotka-volterra equation and replicator dynamics: new issues in classification. Biol. Cybern. 72, 447 -- 453
(1995).
23/45
59. Shoham, Y., Powers, R. & Grenager, T. If multi-agent learning is the answer, what is the question? Artif. Intell. 171,
365 -- 377 (2007).
60. Davis, T., Burch, N. & Bowling, M. Using response functions to measure strategy strength. In Proceedings of the
Twenty-Eighth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, July 27 -31, 2014, Qu´ebec City, Qu´ebec, Canada., 630 -- 636
(2014).
61. Conitzer, V. The exact computational complexity of evolutionarily stable strategies. CoRR abs/1805.02226 (2018).
62. Etessami, K. & Lochbihler, A. The computational complexity of evolutionarily stable strategies. Int. J. Game Theory
(2008).
63. Veller, C., Hayward, L. K., Hilbe, C. & Nowak, M. A. The red queen and king in finite populations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
114, E5396 -- E5405 (2017).
64. Balduzzi, D., Tuyls, K., Perolat, J. & Graepel, T. Re-evaluating Evaluation. arXiv (2018).
65. Todorov, E., Erez, T. & Tassa, Y. Mujoco: A physics engine for model-based control. In IROS (2012).
66. Southey, F., Hoehn, B. & Holte, R. C. Effective short-term opponent exploitation in simplified poker. Mach. Learn. 74,
159 -- 189 (2009).
67. Szafron, D., Gibson, R. & Sturtevant, N. A parameterized family of equilibrium profiles for three-player Kuhn poker. In
Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), 247 -- 254
(2013).
68. Lanctot, M. Further developments of extensive-form replicator dynamics using the sequence-form representation. In
Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS),
1257 -- 1264 (2014).
69. Heinrich, J., Lanctot, M. & Silver, D. Fictitious self-play in extensive-form games.
International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 2015) (2015).
In Proceedings of the 32nd
70. Southey, F. et al. Bayes' bluff: Opponent modelling in poker.
Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI 2005) (2005).
In Proceedings of the Twenty-First Conference on
71. Walsh, W. E., Parkes, D. C. & Das, R. Choosing samples to compute heuristic-strategy Nash equilibrium. In Proceedings
of the Fifth Workshop on Agent-Mediated Electronic Commerce (2003).
72. Vorobeychik, Y., Wellman, M. P. & Singh, S. Learning payoff functions in infinite games. Mach. Learn. 67, 145 -- 168
(2007).
73. Wah, E., Hurd, D. & Wellman, M. Strategic market choice: Frequent call markets vs. continuous double auctions for fast
and slow traders. In Proceedings of the Third EAI Conference on Auctions, Market Mechanisms, and Their Applications
(2015).
74. Brinkman, E. & Wellman, M. Shading and efficiency in limit-order markets. In Proceedings of the IJCAI-16 Workshop
on Algorithmic Game Theory (2016).
75. Wah, E., Wright, M. & Wellman, M. Welfare effects of market making in continuous double auctions. J. Artif. Intell. Res.
59, 613 -- 650 (2017).
76. Wang, X., Vorobeychik, Y. & Wellman, M. A cloaking mechanism to mitigate market manipulation. In Proceedings of
the 27th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 541 -- 547 (2018).
77. Ponsen, M. J. V., Tuyls, K., Kaisers, M. & Ramon, J. An evolutionary game-theoretic analysis of poker strategies.
Entertain. Comput. 1, 39 -- 45 (2009).
78. Wellman, M., Kim, T. & Duong, Q. Analyzing incentives for protocol compliance in complex domains: A case study of
introduction-based routing. In Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on the Economics of Information Security (2013).
79. Hennes, D., Claes, D. & Tuyls, K. Evolutionary advantage of reciprocity in collision avoidance. In Proceedings of the
AAMAS 2013 Workshop on Autonomous Robots andMultirobot Systems (ARMS 2013) (2013).
24/45
80. Prakash, A. & Wellman, M. Empirical game-theoretic analysis for moving target defense. In Proceedings of the Second
ACM Workshop on Moving Target Defense (2015).
81. Wright, M., Venkatesan, S., Albenese, M. & Wellman, M. Moving target defense against DDoS attacks: An empirical
game-theoretic analysis. In Proceedings of the Third ACM Workshop on Moving Target Defense (2016).
82. Nguyen, T., Wright, M., Wellman, M. & Singh, S. Multi-stage attack graph security games: Heuristic strategies, with
empirical game-theoretic analysis. In Proceedings of the Fourth ACM Workshop on Moving Target Defense (2017).
83. Nowak, M. A. Evolutionary Dynamics: Exploring the Equations of Life (Harvard University Press, 2006).
84. Liu, L., Wang, S., Chen, X. & Perc, M. Evolutionary dynamics in the public goods games with switching between
punishment and exclusion. Chaos 28, 103105 (2018).
85. Szolnoki, A. & Perc, M. Evolutionary dynamics of cooperation in neutral populations. New J. Phys. 20, 013031 (2018).
86. Young, H. P. The evolution of conventions. Econom. J. Econom. Soc. 57 -- 84 (1993).
87. Basu, K. & Weibull, J. W. Strategy subsets closed under rational behavior. Econ. Lett. 36, 141 -- 146 (1991).
88. Goemans, M., Mirrokni, V. & Vetta, A. Sink equilibria and convergence. In Foundations of Computer Science, 2005.
FOCS 2005. 46th Annual IEEE Symposium on, 142 -- 151 (IEEE, 2005).
89. Candogan, O., Menache, I., Ozdaglar, A. & Parrilo, P. A. Flows and decompositions of games: Harmonic and potential
games. Math. Oper. Res. 36, 474 -- 503 (2011).
90. Japkowicz, N. & Shah, M. Evaluating learning algorithms: a classification perspective (Cambridge University Press,
2011).
91. Hern´andez-Orallo, J. Evaluation in artificial intelligence: from task-oriented to ability-oriented measurement. Artif. Intell.
Rev. 48, 397 -- 447 (2017).
92. Hern´andez-Orallo, J. The measure of all minds: evaluating natural and artificial intelligence (Cambridge University
Press, 2017).
93. Page, L., Brin, S., Motwani, R. & Winograd, T. The pagerank citation ranking: Bringing order to the web. Tech. Rep.,
Stanford InfoLab (1999).
94. Elo, A. E. The Rating of Chess players, Past and Present (Ishi Press International, 1978).
95. Hvattum, L. M. & Arntzen, H. Using ELO ratings for match result prediction in association football. Int. J. Forecast. 26,
460 -- 470 (2010). Sports Forecasting.
96. Manuela, C., Cristiano, V. & David, F. Dynamic Bradley -- Terry modelling of sports tournaments. J. Royal Stat. Soc. Ser.
C (Applied Stat. 62, 135 -- 150 (2013).
97. Aldous, D. Elo ratings and the sports model: A neglected topic in applied probability? Stat. Sci. 32, 616 -- 629 (2017).
DOI 10.1214/17-STS628.
98. Sullivan, C. & Cronin, C. Improving Elo rankings for sports experimenting on the english premier league. In Virginia
Tech CSx824/ECEx424 technical report (2016).
99. F, W. & D, M. The Betting Odds Rating System: Using soccer forecasts to forecast soccer. PLoS ONE 6, e0198668
(2018).
100. Mnih, V. et al. Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning. Nat. 518, 529 -- 533 (2015).
101. Poincar´e, H. Sur le probl`eme des trois corps et les ´equations de la dynamique. Acta Math 13 (1890).
102. Barreira, L. Poincare recurrence: old and new. In XIVth International Congress on Mathematical Physics. World
Scientific., 415 -- 422 (2006).
103. Bendixson, I. Sur les courbes d´efinies par des ´equations diff´erentielles. Acta Math. 24, 1 -- 88 (1901).
25/45
104. Teschl, G. Ordinary differential equations and dynamical systems, vol. 140 (American Mathematical Soc., 2012).
105. Meiss, J. Differential Dynamical Systems (SIAM, 2007).
106. Piliouras, G. & Shamma, J. S. Optimization despite chaos: Convex relaxations to complex limit sets via Poincar´e
recurrence. In Symposium of Discrete Algorithms (SODA) (2014).
107. Piliouras, G., Nieto-Granda, C., Christensen, H. I. & Shamma, J. S. Persistent patterns: Multi-agent learning beyond
equilibrium and utility. In AAMAS, 181 -- 188 (2014).
Acknowledgements
We are very grateful to G. Ostrovski, T. Graepel, E. Hughes, Y. Bachrach, K. Kavukcuoglu, D. Silver, T. Hubert, J. Schrittwieser,
S. Liu, G. Lever, and D. Bloembergen, for helpful comments, discussions, and for making available datasets used in this
document.
Christos Papadimitriou acknowledges NSF grant 1408635 "Algorithmic Explorations of Networks, Markets, Evolution, and
the Brain", and NSF grant 1763970 to Columbia University. Georgios Piliouras acknowledges SUTD grant SRG ESD 2015
097, MOE AcRF Tier 2 Grant 2016-T2-1-170, grant PIE-SGP-AI-2018-01 and NRF 2018 Fellowship NRF-NRFF2018-07.
26/45
(a) Discrete-time dynamics.
(b) Ranking-intensity sweep
Figure 6. Rock-Paper-Scissors game.
Agent Rank
Score
RR
PP
SS
11
11
11
0.330.33
0.330.33
0.330.33
(c) α-Rank results.
27/45
9.06ρm9.06ρm9.06ρm10-410-310-210-1100101102Ranking intensity α0.000.050.100.150.200.250.300.350.40Strategy mass in stationary distribution πRPS Player 1
Player 2
P
R
−0.5
R
0
P
0
0.5
S −1
0.1
(a) Payoff matrix.
S
1
−0.1
0
(b) Discrete-time dynamics.
(c) Ranking-intensity sweep.
Figure 7. Biased Rock-Paper-Scissors game.
Agent Rank
Score
RR
PP
SS
11
11
11
0.330.33
0.330.33
0.330.33
(d) α-Rank results.
28/45
50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm10-410-310-210-1100101102Ranking intensity α0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8Strategy mass in stationary distribution πRPS (a) Discrete-time dynamics (see (c) for node-wise scores corresponding to stationary distribution masses).
(b) Ranking-intensity sweep.
Figure 8. Battle of the Sexes.
Agent
Rank
Score
(O,O)
(O,O)
(M,M)
(M,M)
(O,M)
(O,M)
(M,O)
(M,O)
11
11
22
22
0.50.5
0.50.5
0.00.0
0.00.0
(c) α-Rank results.
29/45
12.96ρm9.06ρm12.96ρm9.06ρms1=Os2=Os1=Os2=Ms1=Ms2=Os1=Ms2=M10-410-310-210-1Ranking-intensity α0.00.10.20.30.40.5Strategy mass in stationary distribution π(O,O)(O,M)(M,O)(M,M) (a) Discrete-time dynamics.
(b) Ranking-intensity sweep.
Figure 9. AlphaGo (Nature dataset).
Agent
Rank
Score
AG(rvp)
AG(rvp)
AG(vp)
AG(vp)
AG(rp)
AG(rp)
AG(rv)
AG(rv)
AG(r)
AG(r)
AG(v)
AG(v)
AG(p)
AG(p)
11
22
22
22
22
22
22
1.01.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
(c) α-Rank results.
30/45
50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm49.08ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm10-410-310-210-1100101102Ranking-intensity α0.00.20.40.60.81.0Strategy mass in stationary distribution πAG(rvp)AG(vp)AG(rp)AG(rv)AG(r)AG(v)AG(p) (a) Discrete-time dynamics.
(b) Ranking-intensity sweep.
Figure 10. AlphaZero dataset.
Agent
Rank
Score
AZ(99.4)
AZ(99.4)
AZ(93.9)
AZ(93.9)
AZ(98.7)
AZ(98.7)
AZ(94.7)
AZ(94.7)
AZ(86.4)
AZ(86.4)
AZ(88.8)
AZ(88.8)
AZ(90.3)
AZ(90.3)
AZ(93.3)
AZ(93.3)
···
11
22
33
44
55
66
77
88
···
0.390.39
0.220.22
0.190.19
0.140.14
0.050.05
0.010.01
0.00.0
0.00.0
···
(c) α-Rank results.
31/45
50.0ρm49.96ρm49.97ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm10-410-310-210-1100101102Ranking-intensity α0.00.10.20.30.40.50.6Strategy mass in stationary distribution πAZ(99.4)AZ(93.9)AZ(98.7)AZ(94.7)AZ(86.4)AZ(88.8)AZ(90.3)AZ(93.3)... (a) α-Score vs. Training Time.
(b) Maximum Entropy Nash vs. Training Time.
(c) α-Score - Maximum Entropy Nash difference.
Figure 11. AlphaZero (chess) agent evaluations throughout training.
32/45
01020304050Agent α-Rank Scores01020304050Training iteration0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.001020304050Agent Maxent Nash Probabilities01020304050Training iteration0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.001020304050Agent α-Rank Scores - Maxent Nash01020304050Training iteration0.240.180.120.060.000.060.120.180.24 (a) Discrete-time dynamics.
(b) Ranking-intensity sweep.
Figure 12. MuJoCo soccer dataset.
Agent Rank
Score
CC
AA
BB
GG
JJ
FF
DD
EE
···
11
22
33
44
55
66
77
77
···
0.420.42
0.170.17
0.160.16
0.140.14
0.070.07
0.040.04
0.00.0
0.00.0
···
(c) α-Rank results.
33/45
50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm49.98ρm50.0ρm10-410-310-210-1100101102Ranking-intensity α0.00.10.20.30.40.5Strategy mass in stationary distribution πCABGJFDE... (a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Figure 13. Example cycles in the MuJoCo soccer domain.
34/45
50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm49.98ρm50.0ρm1.00.50.00.51.01.00.50.00.51.050.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm49.98ρm50.0ρm1.00.50.00.51.01.00.50.00.51.050.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm49.98ρm50.0ρm1.00.50.00.51.01.00.50.00.51.050.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm49.98ρm50.0ρm1.00.50.00.51.01.00.50.00.51.0 (a) Discrete-time dynamics.
Agent
Rank
Score
(2,3,3)
(2,3,3)
(3,3,3)
(3,3,3)
(3,2,3)
(3,2,3)
(2,2,3)
(2,2,3)
(3,1,3)
(3,1,3)
(2,1,3)
(2,1,3)
(1,2,3)
(1,2,3)
(2,3,1)
(2,3,1)
(2,3,2)
(2,3,2)
(3,1,1)
(3,1,1)
(3,3,2)
(3,3,2)
(3,3,1)
(3,3,1)
···
11
22
33
44
55
66
77
88
99
1010
1111
1212
···
0.220.22
0.140.14
0.120.12
0.090.09
0.080.08
0.050.05
0.040.04
0.020.02
0.020.02
0.020.02
0.020.02
0.020.02
···
(c) α-Rank results.
(b) Ranking-intensity sweep.
Figure 14. 3-player Kuhn poker (ranking conducted on all 64 pure strategy profiles).
35/45
50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm49.99ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρms1=3s2=2s3=3s1=2s2=1s3=3s1=2s2=2s3=3s1=2s2=3s3=1s1=2s2=3s3=2s1=2s2=3s3=3s1=3s2=1s3=1s1=3s2=1s3=3s1=1s2=2s3=3s1=3s2=3s3=1s1=3s2=3s3=2s1=3s2=3s3=310-410-310-210-1100101102Ranking-intensity α0.00.10.20.30.40.50.6Strategy mass in stationary distribution π(2,3,3)(3,3,3)(3,2,3)(2,2,3)(3,1,3)(2,1,3)(1,2,3)(2,3,1)(2,3,2)(3,1,1)(3,3,2)(3,3,1)... (a) Discrete-time dynamics.
Agent
Rank
Score
(3,3,3,2)
(3,3,3,2)
(2,3,3,1)
(2,3,3,1)
(2,3,3,2)
(2,3,3,2)
(3,3,3,1)
(3,3,3,1)
(3,3,3,3)
(3,3,3,3)
(3,2,3,3)
(3,2,3,3)
(2,3,2,1)
(2,3,2,1)
(2,3,2,2)
(2,3,2,2)
(2,2,3,1)
(2,2,3,1)
(2,2,3,3)
(2,2,3,3)
(2,2,2,1)
(2,2,2,1)
(2,2,2,2)
(2,2,2,2)
···
11
22
33
44
55
66
77
88
99
1010
1111
1212
···
0.080.08
0.070.07
0.070.07
0.060.06
0.060.06
0.050.05
0.040.04
0.040.04
0.040.04
0.030.03
0.030.03
0.030.03
···
(c) α-Rank results.
(b) Ranking-intensity sweep.
Figure 15. 4-player Kuhn poker (ranking conducted on all 256 pure strategy profiles).
36/45
50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm49.95ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm43.23ρm50.0ρm50.0ρms1=2s2=2s3=2s4=1s1=2s2=2s3=2s4=2s1=2s2=2s3=3s4=1s1=2s2=2s3=3s4=3s1=3s2=3s3=3s4=1s1=3s2=3s3=3s4=2s1=2s2=3s3=2s4=1s1=2s2=3s3=2s4=2s1=3s2=2s3=3s4=3s1=2s2=3s3=3s4=1s1=2s2=3s3=3s4=2s1=3s2=3s3=3s4=310-410-310-210-1100101102Ranking-intensity α0.000.050.100.150.20Strategy mass in stationary distribution π(3,3,3,2)(2,3,3,1)(2,3,3,2)(3,3,3,1)(3,3,3,3)(3,2,3,3)(2,3,2,1)(2,3,2,2)(2,2,3,1)(2,2,3,3)(2,2,2,1)(2,2,2,2)... (a) Discrete-time dynamics (top 8 agents shown only).
Agent Rank
Score
(0,0)
(0,0)
(0,1)
(0,1)
(0,2)
(0,2)
(1,0)
(1,0)
(1,1)
(1,1)
(1,2)
(1,2)
(2,0)
(2,0)
(2,1)
(2,1)
(2,2)
(2,2)
11
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
1.01.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
0.00.0
(c) α-Rank strategy rankings and scores (top
8 agents shown only).
37/45
(b) Ranking-intensity sweep.
Figure 16. PSRO poker dataset.
50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρm50.0ρms1=0s2=0s1=0s2=1s1=0s2=2s1=1s2=0s1=1s2=1s1=1s2=2s1=2s2=0s1=2s2=1s1=2s2=210-410-310-210-1100101102Ranking-intensity α0.00.20.40.60.81.0Strategy mass in stationary distribution π(0,0)(0,1)(0,2)(1,0)(1,1)(1,2)(2,0)(2,1)(2,2) Figure 17. A retrospective look on the paper contributions. We introduced a general descriptive multi-agent evaluation
method, called α-Rank, which is practical in the sense that it is easily applicable in complex game-theoretic settings, and
theoretically-grounded in a solution concept called Markov-Conley chains (MCCs). α-Rank has a strong theoretical and
specifically evolutionary interpretation; the overarching perspective considers a chain of models of increasing complexity, with
a discrete-time macro-dynamics model on one end, continuous-time micro-dynamics on the other end, and MCCs as the link in
between. We provided both scalability properties and theoretical guarantees for the overall ranking methodology.
38/45
𝛼-Rank: Multi-agent Evaluation by EvolutionInfinite population modelPerturbed model[Sec. 2.4 & 3] Unifying ranking model: Markov Conley Chains & 𝛼-RankFoundations:●Conley's Fundamental Theorem●Chain recurrent sets and componentsAdvantages:●Captures dynamic behavior●More tractable to compute than Nash●Filters out transient agents●Involves only a single hyperparameter, 𝛼 Ranking-intensity parameter 𝛼AgentRanking𝛼-Rank[Sec. 2.1.3] Micro-model: Continuous-time Dynamics Analytical toolkit:●Flow diagrams sub-graph●Attractors, equilibriaApplicability:●3 to 4 agents max●Symmetric games and 2-population asymmetric games●Existence and uniqueness of ranking [Theorem 2.1.2]●AlphaRank correspondence to Markov Conley Chain solution concept [Theorem 2.5.1]●Practical applicability of ranking to large-scale interactions [Properties 3.3.1, 3.3.2]AlphaRank GuaranteesAnalytical toolkit:●Markov chain●Stationary distribution●Fixation probabilitiesApplicability:●K-wise interactions●Symmetric/asymmetric games[Sec. 2.1.4] Macro-model: Discrete-time Dynamics ●Correspondence of Markov Conley Chains & continuous dynamics [Theorem 2.4.24]●Correspondence of Markov Conley Chains & discrete dynamics [Theorem 2.5.1] ●Correspondence of discrete & continuous dynamics [Theorem 2.1.4]Unifying Model GuaranteesAnalyticalFormulationScalablePractical Formulation 5 Supplementary Material
5.1 Most Closely Related Work
We describe related work revolving around Empirical Game Theory analysis (EGTA), discrete-time dynamics models and
multi-agent interactions in evolution of cooperation research, and precursors to our new solution concept of MCC.
The purpose of the first applications of EGTA was to reduce the complexity of large economic problems in electronic
commerce, such as continuous double auctions, supply chain management, market games, and automated trading [6, 7, 71, 72].
While these complex economic problems continue to be a primary application area of these methods [73 -- 76], the general
techniques have been applied in many different settings. These include analysis of interactions among heuristic meta-strategies
in poker [77], network protocol compliance [78], collision avoidance in robotics [79], and security games [80 -- 82].
Evolutionary dynamics have often been presented as a practical tool for analyzing interactions among meta-strategies
found in EGTA [6, 34, 79], and for studying the change in policies of multiple learning agents [34], as the EGTA approach is
largely based on the same assumptions as evolutionary game-theory, viz. repeated interactions among sub-groups sampled
independently at random from an arbitrarily-large population of agents.
From the theoretical biology perspective, researchers have additionally deployed discrete-time evolutionary dynamics
models [83]. These models typically provide insights in the macro-dynamics of the overall behavior of agents in strategy space,
corresponding to flow rates at the edges of a manifold [17 -- 19, 36, 37]. These studies usually focus on biological games, the
evolution of cooperation and fairness in social dilemma's like the iterated prisoner's dilemma or signalling games, deploying,
amongst others, imitation dynamics with low mutation rates [20, 35]. Similar efforts investigating evolutionary dynamics
inspired by statistical physics models have been taken as well [84, 85].
In the framework of the evolution of conventions [86], a repeated game is played by one-time players who learn from
past plays and are subject to noise and mistakes. Essentially algorithmic, and in the same line of thought as our formalism, it
solves the equilibrium selection problem of weakly acyclic games (in our terminology explained in Section 2.4.3: games whose
sink strongly connected components happen to be singletons), and in this special case it aligns very well with our proposed
solution concept. Another equilibrium selection concept related to MCC is the concept of closed under rational behavior
(CURB) set of strategies [87]. The notion of a sink equilibrium, defined by [88] for the purpose of exploring new variants of
the price of anarchy, is also similar to our MCC -- despite differences in mathematical detail, style, and use. A method for
decomposing games was introduced in [89], based on properties of game dynamics on the graph of pure strategy profiles by
exploiting conceptually similarities to the structure of continuous vector fields. Researchers have also carried out studies of
evaluation metrics in the fields of computer science, machine learning, and artificial intelligence [90 -- 92]. PageRank [93], an
algorithm used for ranking webpages, uses a Markov chain where states are webpages and transitions capture links between
these pages; though the Markov chain foundations are related to those used in our work, they are not rooted in an evolutionary
dynamical system nor in a game-theoretic solution concept, and as such are quite different to the method presented here which
also generalizes across several dimensions. The Elo rating system has ubiquitously been used for ranking and predicting
outcomes in board games [94], sports [95 -- 99], and artificial intelligence [3, 100]. This rating system, however, comes with two
key limitations [64]: first, it has no predictive power in games with intransitive (cyclic) relations in the set of evaluated agents
(e.g., in Rock-Paper-Scissors); second, the rating of a given agent can be artificially inflated by including duplicate copies of
weaker agents in the set.
5.2 Background in Dynamical Systems
Definition 5.2.1 (Flow). A flow on a topological space X is a continuous mapping φ : R× X → X such that
(i) φ(t,·): X → X is a homeomorphism for each t ∈ R.
(ii) φ (0,x) = x for all x ∈ X.
(iii) φ (s +t,x) = φ (s,φ (t,x)) for all s,t ∈ R and all x ∈ X.
The second property is known as the group property of the flows. The topological space X is called the phase (or state)
space of the flow.
Definition 5.2.2. Let X be a set. A map (or discrete dynamical system) is a function f : X → X.
Typically, we write φ t (x) for φ (t,x) and denote a flow φ : R× X → X by φ t : X → X, where the group property appears as
φ t+s(x) = φ s(φ t (x)) for all x ∈ X and s,t ∈ R. Sometimes, depending on context, we use the notation φ t to also signify the
map φ (t,·) for a fixed real number t. The map φ 1 is useful to relate the behavior of a flow to the behavior of a map.
Definition 5.2.3. If φ (t,·) is a flow on a topological space X, then the function φ 1 defines the time-one map of φ.
Since our state space is compact and the replicator vector field is Lipschitz-continuous, we can present the unique solution
of our ordinary differential equation by a flow φ : R× S → S . Fixing starting point x ∈ S defines a function of time which
39/45
captures the trajectory (orbit, solution path) of the system with the given starting point. This corresponds to the graph of
φ (·,x) : R → S , i.e., the set {(t,y) : y = φ (t,x) for some t ∈ R}.
If the starting point x does not correspond to an equilibrium then we wish to capture the asymptotic behavior of the system
(informally the limit of φ (t,x) when t goes to infinity). Typically, however, such functions do not exhibit a unique limit point
so instead we study the set of limits of all possible convergent subsequences. Formally, given a dynamical system (R, S ,φ )
with flow φ : S × R → S and a starting point x ∈ S , we call point y ∈ S an ω-limit point of the orbit through x if there
exists a sequence (tn)n∈N ∈ R such that limn→∞ tn = ∞, limn→∞ φ (tn,x) = y. Alternatively the ω-limit set can be defined as:
ωΦ(x) = ∩t∪τ≥tφ (τ,x).
We denote the boundary of a set S as bd(S) and the interior of S as int(S). In the case of the replicator dynamics where
the state space S corresponds to a product of agent (mixed) strategies we will denote by φi(x,t) the projection of the state
on the simplex of mixed strategies of agent i. In our replicator system we embed our state space with the standard topology
and the Euclidean distance metric. Since our state space is compact, we can present the solution of our system as a map
Φ : S × R → S called flow of the system. Fixing starting point x ∈ S defines function of time which captures the solution
path (orbit, trajectory) of the system with the given starting point. On the other hand, by fixing time t, we obtain a smooth
map of the state space to itself Φt : S → S . The resulting family of mappings exhibits the standard group properties such as
identity (Φ0) and existence of inverse (Φ−t ), and closure under composition Φt1 ◦ Φt2 = Φt1+t2.
Finally, the boundary of a subset S is the set of points in the closure of S, not belonging to the interior of S. An element of
the boundary of S is called a boundary point of S. We denote the boundary of a set S as bd(S) and the interior of S as int(S).
Liouville's Formula
Liouville's formula can be applied to any system of autonomous differential equations with a continuously differentiable vector
field ξ on an open domain of S ⊂ Rk. The divergence of ξ at x ∈ S is defined as the trace of the corresponding Jacobian at
x, i.e., div[ξ (x)] = ∑k
(x). Since divergence is a continuous function we can compute its integral over measurable sets
A ⊂ S . Given any such set A, let A(t) = {Φ(x0,t) : x0 ∈ A} be the image of A under map Φ at time t. A(t) is measurable and
A(t) dx. Liouville's formula states that the time derivative of the volume A(t) exists and is equal to the
is volume is vol[A(t)] =(cid:82)
∂ξi
∂ xi
i=1
integral of the divergence over A(t): d
A(t) div[ξ (x)]dx.
A vector field is called divergence free if its divergence is zero everywhere. Liouville's formula trivially implies that volume
dt [A(t)] =(cid:82)
is preserved in such flows.
Volume preservation is a useful property that allows us to argue about recurrent (i.e., cycle-like) behavior of the dynamics.
Poincar´e's recurrence theorem
Poincar´e [101] proved that in certain systems almost all trajectories return arbitrarily close to their initial position infinitely
often.
Theorem 5.2.4. [101, 102] If a flow preserves volume and has only bounded orbits then for each open set there exist orbits that
intersect the set infinitely often.
5.2.1 Poincar´e-Bendixson theorem
A periodic orbit is called a limit cycle if it is the ω-limit set of some point not on the periodic orbit. The Poincar´e-Bendixson
theorem allows us to prove the existence of limit cycles in two dimensional systems. The main idea is to find a trapping region,
i.e., a region from which trajectories cannot escape. If a trajectory enters and does not leave such a closed and bounded region
of the state space that contains no equilibria then this trajectory must approach a periodic orbit as time goes to infinity. Formally,
we have:
Theorem 5.2.5. [103, 104] Given a differentiable real dynamical system defined on an open subset of the plane, then every
non-empty compact ω-limit set of an orbit, which contains only finitely many fixed points, is either a fixed point, a periodic
orbit, or a connected set composed of a finite number of fixed points together with homoclinic and heteroclinic orbits connecting
these.
Homeomorphisms and conjugacy of flows
A function f between two topological spaces is called a homeomorphism if it has the following properties: f is a bijection, f is
continuous, and f has a continuous inverse. A function f between two topological spaces is called a diffeomorphism if it has
the following properties: f is a bijection, f is continuously differentiable, and f has a continuously differentiable inverse. Two
flows Φt : A → A and Ψt : B → B are conjugate if there exists a homeomorphism g : A → B such that for each x ∈ A and t ∈ R:
g(Φt (x)) = Ψt (g(x)). Furthermore, two flows Φt : A → A and Ψt : B → B are diffeomorhpic if there exists a diffeomorphism
g : A → B such that for each x ∈ A and t ∈ R g(Φt (x)) = Ψt (g(x)). If two flows are diffeomorphic then their vector fields are
related by the derivative of the conjugacy. That is, we get precisely the same result that we would have obtained if we simply
transformed the coordinates in their differential equations [105].
40/45
Stability of sets of states
Let A ⊂ X be a closed set. We define a set O ⊂ X a neighborhood of A if it is open relative to X and contains A. We say that A
is (Lyapunov) stable if for every neighborhood O of A there exists a neighborhood O(cid:48) of A such that every trajectory that starts
in O(cid:48) is contained in O, i.e., of x(0) ∈ O(cid:48) then x(t) ∈ O for all t ≥ 0. Set A is attracting if there exists a neighborhood S of A
such that every trajectory starting in S converges to A. A set is called asymptotically stable if it is both Lyapunov stable and
attracting.
Definition 5.2.6 (Sink chain recurrent points). Chain recurrent points that belong to a sink chain component are called sink
chain recurrent points.
Definition 5.2.7 (Lyapunov stable set). Let φ be a flow on a metric space (X,d). A set A ⊂ X is Lyapunov stable if for every
neighborhood O of A there exists a neighborhood O(cid:48) of A such that every trajectory that starts in O(cid:48) is contained in O; i.e., if
x ∈ O(cid:48) then φ (t,x) ∈ O for all t ≥ 0.
Definition 5.2.8 (Attracting set). Set A is attracting if there exists a neighborhood S of A such that every trajectory starting in S
converges to A.
Definition 5.2.9 (Asymptotically stable set). A set is called asymptotically stable if it is both Lyapunov stable and attracting.
5.2.2 Multi-population Replicator Dynamics
For a K-player NFG, one may use a set of K populations with Sk denoting the finite set of pure strategies available to each
agent in population k ∈ {1, . . . ,K}. The mass of players in a given population k that use strategy i ∈ Sk is denoted xk
i , where
∑i∈Sk xk
i = 1. Let S denote the set of all populations' pure strategy profiles, and x represent the joint population state. Let the
payoff matrix for a given population k be denoted Mk : S → R. The fitness of an agent in population k playing pure strategy i
given state x is then,
i (x) = ∑
f k
s−k∈S−k
Mk(i,s−k)∏
c(cid:54)=k
xc
sc.
(15)
Namely, the fitness is the expected payoff the agent playing strategy i receives given every competitor population's state xc. The
k-th population's average fitness given state x is then,
¯f k(x) = ∑
i
i (x)xk
f k
i ,
with the corresponding K-population replicator dynamics,
∀k ∈ {1, . . . ,K} ∀i ∈ sk.
i (x)− ¯f k(x))
xk
i = xk
i ( f k
(16)
(17)
5.3 Single-population discrete-time model
We have a set of strategies (or agents under evaluation) S = {s1, ..,sn}, with S = n, which we would like to evaluate for their
evolutionary strength. We also have a population of individuals A = {a1, ..,am}, with A = m, that are programmed to play a
strategy from the set S. Individuals interact pairwise through empirical games.
We start from a finite well-mixed population of m individuals, in which p individuals are playing τ. At each timestep t we
randomly choose two individuals τ and σ, with respective strategies sτ and sσ . The strategy of individual τ is then updated by
either probabilistically copying the strategy sσ of individual σ it is interacting with, mutating with a very small probability into
another strategy, or sticking with its own strategy sτ. The idea is that strong individuals will replicate and spread throughout the
population. The probability with which individual τ (playing sτ) will copy strategy sσ from individual σ can be described by a
selection function P(τ → σ ), which governs the dynamics of the finite-population model.
Individual τ will thus copy the behavior of individual σ with probability pτ→σ and stick to its own strategy with probability
1− P(τ → σ ). We denote the probability for a strategy to mutate randomly into another strategy s ∈ S by µ and we will
assume it to be infinitesimally small, (i.e., we consider a small-mutation limit µ → 0). If we neglected mutations, the end state
of this evolutionary process would be monomorphic. If we introduce a very small mutation rate this means that either the
mutant fixates and takes over the current population, or the current population is capable of wiping out the mutant strategy [35].
Therefore, given a small mutation rate, the mutant either fixates or disappears before a new mutant appears. This means that the
population will never contain more than two strategies at any point in time.
We now proceed as follows. At any moment in time when two strategies (sτ and ss) are present in the population, we can
calculate the fitness of an individual τ playing strategy sτ in a population of p individuals playing sτ and m− p individuals
playing ss. Fitnesses may be calculated using either knowledge of the global population state (i.e., where every individual is
aware of the number of other individuals playing each strategy, which may be a strong assumption) or local knowledge (i.e., only
41/45
the current opponent's strategy) [16]. The corresponding fitness for the local case, which we focus on here, is f (τ,σ ) = Mτ,σ ,
where Mτ,σ is obtained from the meta-game payoff matrix. Analogously, the simultaneous payoff of an individual σ playing sσ
against sτ is f (σ ,τ) = Mσ ,τ, For the remainder of the paper, we focus on the logistic selection function (aka Fermi distribution),
P(τ → σ ) =
eα f (σ ,τ)
eα f (τ,σ ) + eα f (σ ,τ)
= (1 + eα( f (τ,σ )− f (σ ,τ)))−1,
(18)
with α determining the selection intensity. While the subsequent empirical methodology extends to general selection functions,
the choice of Fermi selection function enables closed-form characterization of certain properties of the discrete-time model.
Based on this setup, we define a Markov chain over the set of strategies S with n states. Each state represents a monomorphic
population end-state, corresponding to one of the strategies sτ with τ ∈ {1, ..,n}. The transitions between these states are
defined by the corresponding fixation probabilities when a mutant strategy is introduced in a monomorphic population. The
stationary distribution over this Markov chain will tell us how much time on average the dynamics will spend in each of the
monomorphic states.
Considering our set S of n strategies, we define the Markov chain with n2 transition probabilities over the monomorphic
states. Let η = 1
n−1 and denote by ρσ ,τ the probability of mutant strategy sτ fixating (taking over) in a resident population of
individuals playing sσ . So ηρσ ,τ is the probability that a population which finds itself in state sσ will end up in state sτ after
the occurrence of a single mutation. This yields the following Markov transition matrix,
ηρ1,2
1− η(ρ2,1 + ρ2,3 + ... + ρ2,n)
...
...
...
... 1− η(ρn,1 + ρn,2 + ... + ρn,n−1)
ηρ1,n
ηρ2,n
...
(19)
C =
ηρ2,1
...
ηρn,1
1− η(ρ1,2 + ρ1,3 + ... + ρ1,n)
(cid:16)
1 + e±α( f (τ,σ )− f (σ ,τ))(cid:17)−1
...
...
p(m− p)
m(m− 1)
T (∓1)(p,τ,σ ) =
(cid:32)
(cid:32)
ρσ ,τ =
1 +
T (−1)(p,τ,σ )
T (+1)(p,τ,σ )
l
∏
p=1
=
1 +
e−α( f (τ,σ )− f (σ ,τ))
m−1
∑
l=1
m−1
∑
l=1
l
∏
p=1
(cid:33)−1
(cid:33)−1
The fixation probabilities ρσ ,τ can be calculated as follows. Assume we have a population of p individuals playing sτ and
m− p individuals playing sσ . The probability that the number of type sτ individuals decreases/increases by one is given by,
Now we can compute the fixation probability ρσ ,τ of a mutant with strategy sτ in a population of m− 1 individuals programmed
to playing sσ as follows,
.
(20)
(21)
(22)
This corresponds to the computation of an m-step transition in the Markov chain [39].The quotient T (−1)(p,τ,σ )
expresses the
T (+1)(p,τ,σ )
likelihood (odds) that the mutation process continues in either direction: if it is close to zero then it is very likely that the
number of mutants sτ increases; if it is very large it is very likely that the number of mutants will decrease; and if it close to one
then the probabilities of increase and decrease of the number of mutants are equally likely.
Property 5.3.1. Given finite payoffs, fixation probabilities ρσ ,τ under the Fermi imitative protocol (18) are positive for all σ
and τ; i.e., any single mutation can cause a transition from any state to another. Markov chain C is, therefore, irreducible, and a
unique stationary distribution π (where πTC = πT and ∑i πi = 1) exists.
This unique π provides the evolutionary ranking, or strength of each strategy in the set S, expressed as the time the population
spends in each state in distribution π. This single population model has been widely studied (see, e.g., [17 -- 19, 36, 37]), both
theoretically and empirically, but is limited to both pairwise interactions and symmetric games.
5.4 Proofs
5.4.1 Proof of Theorem 2.1.2
Theorem 2.1.2. Given finite payoffs, the Markov chain with transition matrix C is irreducible (i.e., it is possible to get to any
state starting from any state). Thus a unique stationary distribution π (where πTC = πT and ∑i πi = 1) exists.
42/45
Proof. Consider any two states (i.e., strategy profiles) si and s j of the K-population Markov chain with transition matrix (10).
Under finite payoffs f k(τ, p) and f k(σ , p), fixation probabilities ρk
σ ,τ under the Fermi imitative protocol (18) are positive.
Let R(s,k,sx) denote the operation of replacing the k-th strategy in a strategy profile s with a different pure strategy sx.
Thus, state s j is accessible from any state si (namely, consider the chain {s0 = si,s1 = R(s0,1,s1
j ) . . . ,sK−1 =
R(sK−2,K − 1,sK−1
j ) = s j} connecting strategies si to s j with non-zero probability). The Markov chain is,
therefore, irreducible and a unique stationary distribution exists.
),sK = R(sK−1,K,sK
j ),s2 = R(s1,2,s2
j
5.4.2 Proof for Theorem 2.1.4
Theorem 2.1.4 (Discrete-Continuous Edge Dynamics Correspondence). In the large-population limit, the macro-dynamics
model is equivalent to the micro-dynamics model over the edges of the strategy simplex. Specifically, the limiting model is a
variant of the replicator dynamics with the caveat that the Fermi revision function takes the place of the usual fitness terms.
Proof. To simplify notation, we prove the theorem for the single-population case without loss of generality. Let xi(t) represent
the fraction of individuals in the population that are playing strategy si at timestep t. Rather than consider the underlying
stochastic evolutionary equations directly, we consider the mean dynamics. An alternative proof path for the single population
case is presented in [16] and may be applied here as well. The mean dynamics constitute a deterministic process governing the
expected evolution of state xi(t), and provide a close approximation of the underlying system over finite time spans under a
large-population limit [44, Chapters 4 and 10]. For a general finite population game, the mean dynamics correspond to the
difference of the expected influx and outflux of individuals playing a strategy i against individuals playing any strategy j ∈ S
given the underlying selection function P(i → j)(x),
xi(t) = ∑
j∈S
x jxiP( j → i)(x)− xi ∑
j∈S
x jP(i → j)(x).
(23)
Under the low-mutation rate assumption, the finite population model considers only the transitions between pairs of monomor-
phic states sτ and sσ , where xτ + xσ = 1. This yields simplified mean dynamics,
xτ = xσ xτ P(σ → τ)− xτxσ P(τ → σ )(xτ )
= (1− xτ )xτ [P(σ → τ)− P(τ → σ )]
= xτ [P(σ → τ)− (xτ P(σ → τ) + (1− xτ )P(τ → σ ))]
= xτ [P(σ → τ)− ¯p]
where,
P(τ → σ ) = (1 + eα( f (τ,σ )− f (σ ,τ)))−1
P(σ → τ) = (1 + e−α( f (τ,σ )− f (σ ,τ)))−1
¯p = xτ P(σ → τ) + (1− xτ )P(τ → σ )
(24)
(25)
(26)
(27)
(28)
(29)
(30)
We, therefore, observe that the discrete large-population mean dynamics (27) correspond to the replicator equations (with the
caveat that Fermi revision protocol takes the place of the usual fitness terms).
Moreover, one can branch off after (25) to yield,
xτ = (1− xτ )xτ [P(σ → τ)− P(τ → σ )]
(cid:20)(cid:16)
1 + e−α( f (τ,σ )− f (σ ,τ))(cid:17)−1 −(cid:16)
1 + eα( f (τ,σ )− f (σ ,τ))(cid:17)−1(cid:21)
= xτ (1− xτ )
= xτ (1− xτ )tanh
α( f (τ,σ )− f (σ ,τ))
2
(31)
(32)
(33)
which matches the Ito calculus based derivation of [17] under the large-population limit.
5.4.3 Proof for Theorem 2.4.13
We start by introducing the notion of chain transitivity, which will be useful in the proof of the theorem.
Definition 5.4.1 (Chain transitive). Let φ be a flow on a metric space (X,d). A set A ⊂ X is chain transitive with respect to φ if
for any x,y ∈ A and any ε > 0 and T > 0 there exists an (ε,T )-chain from x to y.
Next we state the following properties of chain components,
43/45
Property 5.4.2 ([52]). Every chain component of a flow on a compact metric space is closed, connected, and invariant with
respect of the flow. Moreover,
• Every chain component of a flow on a metric space is chain transitive with respect to the flow.
• Every chain transitive set with respect to a flow on a metric space is a subset of a unique chain component of the flow.
• If A and B are chain transitive with respect to a flow on a metric space, A ⊂ B and C is the unique chain component containing
A, then B ⊂ C.
Theorem 2.4.13 (Partial order on chain components). Let φ be a flow on a metric space and A1,A2 be chain components of the
flow. Then the relation defined by A1 ≤C A2 is a partial order.
Proof. We will show that the binary relation ≤C is reflective, antisymmetric and transitive.
• A1 ≤C A1. Since any chain component is chain transitive then we have that for any x,y ∈ A1: x ∼ y.
• If A1 ≤C A2 and A2 ≤C A1 then A1 = A2. By chain transitivity of A1, A2 we have that for any x,x(cid:48) ∈ A1, x ∼ x(cid:48) and for any
y,y(cid:48) ∈ A2, y ∼ y(cid:48). Hence if x ∼ y then x(cid:48) ∼ y(cid:48) for any x(cid:48) ∈ A1 and any y(cid:48) ∈ A2. Hence, A1 ∪ A2 is a chain transitive set and thus
by Theorem 5.4.2 must be a subset of a unique chain component of the flow C such that A1 ∪ A2 ⊂ C. However, we assumed
that A1,A2 are chain components themselves. Thus, A1 = A1 ∪ A2 = A2.
• If A1 ≤C A2 and A2 ≤C A3 then A1 ≤C A3. If there exist x ∈ A1 and y ∈ A2 such that x ∈ Ω+(φ ,y), as well as y(cid:48) ∈ A2 and z ∈ A3
such that y(cid:48) ∈ Ω+(φ ,z) then by chain transitivity of A2 we have that y ∈ Ω+(φ ,y(cid:48)) and thus x ∈ Ω+(φ ,z), implying A1 ≤C A3.
5.4.4 Proof for Theorem 2.4.24
We first present several results necessary for the proof.
Lemma 5.4.3. A chain recurrent (CR) point x is a sink CR point if and only if for any CR point y if y ∈ Ω+(φ ,x) then
x ∈ Ω+(φ ,y), i.e., the two points are chain equivalent.
Proof. We will argue the forward direction by contradiction. Suppose not. That is, suppose that x is a sink CR point and there
exists a CR point y such that y ∈ Ω+(φ ,x) and x /∈ Ω+(φ ,y), then if Cx,Cy are the equivalence classes/chain components of x,y
respectively we have that Cy ≤C Cx and Cy,Cx are clearly distinct chain components since x /∈ Ω+(φ ,y). Thus, Cx is not a sink
chain component and x is not a sink chain recurrent point, contradiction.
For the reverse direction, once again by contradiction we have that for any CR point y with y ∈ Ω+(φ ,x), x ∈ Ω+(φ ,y) and
x is a non-sink CR point. Then there exists another chain component A with A ≤C Cx where Cx is the equivalence class/chain
component of x. Hence, there exists y ∈ A such that y ∈ Ω+(φ ,x). Since y is a CR point which does not belong to Cx, we have
x /∈ Ω+(φ ,y), contradiction.
Lemma 5.4.4. If a sink chain component contains a single vertex si then it contains any vertex s j which is reachable from si via
(weakly)-better response moves. Specifically, it contains an MCC.
Proof. Any state/vertex s j is a chain recurrent (CR) point because it is a fixed point of the replicator dynamics. If s j is
reachable by si via a weakly-better response path, then s j ∈ Ω+(φ ,si) for the replicator flow. In the case of edges that are
strictly improving it suffices to use the ε correction to introduce the improving strategy and replicator will converge to the better
outcome. In the case of edges between outcomes of equal payoff all convex combinations of these strategies are fixed points for
the replicator and we can traverse this edge with (cid:100)1/ε(cid:101) hops of size ε.
But if s j ∈ Ω+(φ ,si) and si is a sink CR point (since it belongs to a CR component) then by Lemma 5.4.3 si ∈ Ω+(φ ,s j).
Therefore, state/vertex s j also belongs to the same sink chain component. The set of reachable vertices includes a strongly
connected component with no outgoing edges and thus a MCC.
Theorem 2.4.24. Let φ be the replicator flow when applied to a K-person game. The number of asymptotically stable sink
chain components is finite. Specifically, every asymptotically stable sink chain component contains at least one MCC; each
MCC is contained in exactly one chain component.
44/45
Proof. Since solutions in the neighborhood of an asymptotically stable set, all approach the set, volume is contracted in
this neighborhood, however, replicator dynamics is volume preserving in the interior of the state space [44, 106, 107]; the
formal argument works by transforming the system induces by the replicator dynamics over the interior of the state space
into a conjugate dynamical system that is divergence-free. Any asymptotically stable set cannot lie in the interior of the
simplex, i.e., it cannot consist only of fully mixed strategies. Hence, there must exist some product of subsimplices with
a non-empty intersection with this set. The intersection of the original asymptotically stable set with this subspace is still
asymptotically stable for this invariant subspace and thus we can continue the argument inductively. The intersection of the
attracting neighborhood with this subspace is an attracting neighborhood for the dynamics on this invariant subspace. We
deduce that any asymptotically stable chain component must contain at least one vertex of the simplex (pure strategy profile).
Let si be this vertex. By Lemma 5.4.4, this sink chain component must also include all other vertices reachable from si via
weakly-better replies. Specifically, it must include at least one MCC. Finally, a MCC is a chain transitive set for the replicator
flow via the same argument of the ε hops as in Lemma 5.4.4. By Theorem 5.4.2, it is a subset of a unique chain component of
the flow.
5.4.5 Proof for Theorem 2.5.1
Theorem 2.5.1. In the limit of infinite ranking-intensity α, the Markov chain associated with the generalized multi-population
model introduced in Section 2.1.4 coincides with the MCC.
Proof. Recall from the MCC definition that the probability of strictly improving responses for all players are set equal to each
other, and transitions between strategies of equal payoff happen with a smaller probability also equal to each other for all
players. Let the ratio of the two probabilities be denoted ε for all players. The transition probabilities of the Markov chain of
the macro-model when taking taking the limit of α → ∞ are equal to the transitions probabilities of the Markov chain of the
Markov-Conley chains when setting ε equal to 1
m, where m is the size of the population in the macro-model. Let Asi(k) be the
number of strictly improving moves for player k in state/vertex si. Similarly, let Bsi(k) be the number of deviating moves for
player k in state/vertex si that do not affect her payoff. It suffices to set the probability of a node si self-transitioning equal to
1− ∑k Asi (k)+ε ∑k Bsi (k)
.
∑k(Sk−1)
45/45
|
1905.01365 | 1 | 1905 | 2019-05-02T13:12:13 | A multi-agent system approach in evaluating human spatio-temporal vulnerability to seismic risk using social attachment | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI"
] | Social attachment theory states that individuals seek the proximity of attachment figures (e.g. family members, friends, colleagues, familiar places or objects) when faced with threat. During disasters, this means that family members may seek each other before evacuating, gather personal property before heading to familiar exits and places, or follow groups/crowds, etc. This hard-wired human tendency should be considered in the assessment of risk and the creation of disaster management plans. Doing so may result in more realistic evacuation procedures and may minimise the number of casualties and injuries. In this context, a dynamic spatio-temporal analysis of seismic risk is presented using SOLACE, a multi-agent model of pedestrian behaviour based on social attachment theory implemented using the Belief-Desire-Intention approach. The model focuses on the influence of human, social, physical and temporal factors on successful evacuation. Human factors considered include perception and mobility defined by age. Social factors are defined by attachment bonds, social groups, population distribution, and cultural norms. Physical factors refer to the location of the epicentre of the earthquake, spatial distribution/layout and attributes of environmental objects such as buildings, roads, barriers (cars), placement of safe areas, evacuation routes, and the resulting debris/damage from the earthquake. Experiments tested the influence of time of the day, presence of disabled persons and earthquake intensity. Initial results show that factors that influence arrivals in safe areas include (a) human factors (age, disability, speed), (b) pre-evacuation behaviours, (c) perception distance (social attachment, time of day), (d) social interaction during evacuation, and (e) physical and spatial aspects, such as limitations imposed by debris (damage), and the distance to safe areas. To validate the results, scenarios will be designed with stakeholders, who will also take part in the definition of a serious game. The recommendation of this research is that both social and physical aspects should be considered when defining vulnerability in the analysis of risk. | cs.MA | cs | A MULTI-AGENT SYSTEM APPROACH IN EVALUATING
HUMAN SPATIO-TEMPORAL VULNERABILITY TO
SEISMIC RISK USING SOCIAL ATTACHMENT
JULIUS BAÑGATE1,2,3, JULIE DUGDALE1,3, ELISE BECK2,3 & CAROLE ADAM1,3
1Laboratoire d'Informatique de Grenoble (LIG)
2Politiques publiques, Action politique, Territoires (PACTE)
3University Grenoble-Alps, Grenoble, FRANCE
ABSTRACT
Social attachment theory states that individuals seek the proximity of attachment figures (e.g. family
members, friends, colleagues, familiar places or objects) when faced with threat. During disasters, this
means that family members may seek each other before evacuating, gather personal property before
heading to familiar exits and places, or follow groups/crowds, etc. This hard-wired human tendency
should be considered in the assessment of risk and the creation of disaster management plans. Doing
so may result in more realistic evacuation procedures and may minimise the number of casualties and
injuries. In this context, a dynamic spatio-temporal analysis of seismic risk is presented using
SOLACE, a multi-agent model of pedestrian behaviour based on social attachment theory
implemented using the Belief-Desire-Intention approach. The model focuses on the influence of
human, social, physical and temporal factors on successful evacuation. Human factors considered
include perception and mobility defined by age. Social factors are defined by attachment bonds, social
groups, population distribution, and cultural norms. Physical factors refer to the location of the
epicentre of the earthquake, spatial distribution/layout and attributes of environmental objects such as
buildings, roads, barriers (cars), placement of safe areas, evacuation routes, and the resulting
debris/damage from the earthquake. Experiments tested the influence of time of the day, presence of
disabled persons and earthquake intensity. Initial results show that factors that influence arrivals in
safe areas include (a) human factors (age, disability, speed), (b) pre-evacuation behaviours, (c)
perception distance (social attachment, time of day), (d) social interaction during evacuation, and (e)
physical and spatial aspects, such as limitations imposed by debris (damage), and the distance to safe
areas. To validate the results, scenarios will be designed with stakeholders, who will also take part in
the definition of a serious game. The recommendation of this research is that both social and physical
aspects should be considered when defining vulnerability in the analysis of risk.
Keywords: agent-based social simulation, seismic crisis, social attachment, belief-desire-intention
1 INTRODUCTION
Human vulnerability during disasters is subject to the complex confluence of dynamic
individual, social, spatial and temporal elements. The mobility of people in space and time
is influenced by societal structure, norms, and individual capacities (human factors). Social
attachment theory describes the social nature of human behaviour during disasters and
states that individuals will seek the proximity of attachment figures [1]. This influences the
choices and actions that individuals make during evacuations. This paper describes how
social attachment has been implemented in a multi-agent model using a belief-desire-
intention (BDI) approach. The model, called SOLACE for SOciaL Attachment & Crisis
Evacuations, was coded using the GAMA platform [2]. SOLACE aims to provide a
realistic model of human behaviour during seismic crisis. The novelty of the model is the
integration of social attachment and GIS data. This paper presents initial results evaluating
different spatial and temporal scenarios influencing human vulnerability to seismic risk
when applied to two districts of the city of Grenoble in the French Alps.
This paper is organised as follows: Section 2 presents related work. Section 3 provides a
brief description of the model. Section 4 details the experiments. Section 5 describes initial
results. Section 6 discusses the results, presents the conclusions and describes future work.
2 RELATED WORK
Research on seismic risk and vulnerability has largely focused on physical aspects such as
damage to structures and the prediction/forecasting of future events. Seismic crisis
management plans in general are top-down institutional responses (command and control)
and are geared towards logistics and supply chain. Evacuation plans for seismic events are
based on expected, rather than actual, human behaviours and lack realism.
The need for more research on human behaviour during crisis (moderate earthquakes in
particular) has been noted in several studies [3][4]. In order to prepare and respond to
largely unpredictable events it is essential that more is known about how people really
behave in a crisis situation. In addition existing earthquake models (maps, algorithms)
need calibration and robust testing. Furthermore the structural, geological, and geotechnical
data that are needed by models lack detail, completeness and coverage. These facts
illustrate the big gap in the required knowledge for developing preparedness and resilience.
Social theories on human behaviour during disasters are presented in [1], [5]. Mawson's
social attachment theory posits that when individuals are under threat they seek the
proximity of attachment figures. Attachment figures include family members, friends, pets,
colleagues, authorities and even strangers. Familiar objects, places, and information present
within the sphere of social interaction are also considered as attachment figures. During a
threat, affiliation to attachment figures is activated and can lead to pre-evacuation
behaviours such as seeking family members, milling, herding, protecting property, seeking
pets, helping others/strangers, etc. Such attachments can influence an individual's
decisions, destinations (goals), social interactions, and speed/direction of movement.
Humans fundamentally desire and maintain interpersonal attachments [6]. However the
strength of bonds varies depending on the attachment figure, e.g. a person may be more
strongly attached to their mother than their pet. The strength of emotional bonds for
different relationships (partner, parents, kin, friends, acquaintance, strangers) in a social
network in different European countries has been quantified in Suvilehto, et al [7]. Touch
(in different bodily areas) was used to quantify bond strength. Social situations that involve
touch include greeting, parting, giving attention, helping, consoling, calming, and giving
pleasure. It should be noted that variations in bond strength and in ordering/priority may be
due to cultural differences. Table 1 shows some results for France.
Table 1: Mean strength of emotional bonds for France derived from Suviletho et al, 2015
Partner
8.82
Parent
7.77
3.84
Sibling Kin
7.51
5.29
Relation
Bond
Familiarity and bond strength mean that we are more able to perceive and recognise
attachment figures from a distance, within a group or in a complex environment. The
perception distance refers to what one sees (facial expression, body language, posture,
gesture, actions, signals/signs), hears (voice, sound, calling by name, call for help, screams,
warnings) [8] [9] and cognitive representations (knowledge, memory). The perception
Friend Acquaintance
7.57
Stranger
2.17
distance can differ for each context and varies for each individual. This can be due to
psychosocial bias (due to attachment, cognitive capacity, emotions), sensory limitations
(due to age, disability), and/or environmental constraints such as location/proximity,
occlusion due to barriers, diminished signals due to physical laws (speed of light/sound), or
environmental conditions (foggy, night, blackout).
The perception of shaking intensity during an earthquake depends on the ground motion
and the building's response [10]. Also, [10] found that there is a relationship between peak
seismic intensities and human behaviour. Human responses to different earthquake shaking
intensities have been reported in [11] [12] [13]. Similar to the findings of [11], variations in
resulting behaviours in different intensities have also been observed in [14], [15], and [16].
The psychological and social responses to disasters in general are reported by [17].
Spatial configuration of the built environment limits movement, especially after a
disaster [16] [18] 19], and the visual perception range of pedestrians to open spaces (parks
or wide streets) that constitute safe areas following an earthquake. The urban morphology
channels pedestrian movement and facilitates social interaction. The volume of people in
public areas changes, depending on the economic and social activities during different
times of the day or week (urban pulse) [20]. Barriers to movement include fixed structures
(buildings or fences), natural features (rivers/streams or bodies of water), and dynamic
objects (cars or other people). Debris from damaged structures during disasters also block
normal passageways [21] [4]. The increasing population in cities presents a large design
challenge to planners and policy makers in building safe and disaster resilient cities.
Agent based modelling (ABM) provides the opportunity to develop models of crisis
situations at the micro-, meso- and macro- scale, and to test them using computer
simulation. A trend in ABM is the integration of psychological and social aspects of human
behaviour into agents in order to create more realistic models. The goal is to enhance
current models with agents that are social, have the capability to decide, can identify and
associate themselves with a group. Previous models have integrated some attachment
figures for crisis evacuations, e.g. EPES, ESCAPES and EXITUS. A complete review of
previous models is given in [5].
Finally, in the field of ABM, the BDI approach is useful to reproduce human behaviour
[22]. It attempts to capture how humans reason with beliefs (internal knowledge), desires
(what it likes to achieve), and intentions (actions, guided by a library of plans).
3 DESCRIPTION OF THE MODEL
3.1 Multi-disciplinary approach
The SOLACE model has been developed by drawing upon social, computer and geospatial
sciences (Fig. 1). Earthquake crisis evacuation behaviours are gathered from reports, video-
recordings and literature. Social concepts and theories on human behaviour during crises
are used as a lens for analysing the data, developing the conceptual model, validating the
results with stakeholders, and the use of serious games. Formalization of the agent-based
model using BDI with GAMA used a variety of computer science techniques. In particular
the realistic spatial context of the simulated environment includes integrating different
datasets concerning to urban layout, seismic risk and vulnerability, mobility, demography,
etc. This spatial context was developed using geospatial data processing workflows in GIS.
Figure 1: Multidisciplinary methodology
3.2 Social model
Social attachment is the social theory that has been implemented in SOLACE and which
drives an individual's goals and social behaviours. This is expressed as bond strength,
social distance, and perception distance. Following Fig. 2 a social distance from 1 to 10 is
used to set the priority in perceiving attachment figures from a reference adult/individual.
For example for an adult, a priority of 1 is given to their child; priority 2 to their partner,
and 3 to their parents (from the data in table 1). However these priorities may be changed in
the simulator interface. Since data from [7] did not include children it has been assumed
that they have a higher priority than a partner. Note that the social distance to oneself is 0.
Details of these priority rankings are discussed in [2]. Adopting usual social norms for
relationships, the attachment bond strength is strongest for the nearest social distance; as is
the case for an altruistic scenario. In an egoistic scenario, the social bond strength is 0 for
oneself and there is no social bond to other agents; there is no social interaction. Thus
egoistical agents will only perceive themselves, give themselves priority, and try to protect
and preserve only themselves.
3.3 Perception distance
Figure 2: Social attachment network
Social attachment is implemented in SOLACE by the affective perception distance
(PDBond). This acts as a spatial filter in sensing nearby agents. Familiarity with attachment
figures (strength of social distance bond, SDbond,,10 point rating scale) tends to facilitate
faster perception (detection and recognition), thereby effectively boosting the normal
perception distance (PDNormal) range (i.e. familiar persons can be recognized even when far
away). This is formalised below by equation 1.
∗ 1+ !!"∗𝑆𝐷!"#$ . (1)
𝑃𝐷!"#$=𝑃𝐷!"#$%&
!
A constant k defines the bias imposed by the environment (i.e. visibility, audibility).
For full visibility during daytime, k = 1; in low visibility during night time, k = 0.2 and in
reduced visibility due to fog/snow, k = 0.8.
Equation (1) produces the following graph for perception distance influenced by bond
strength (Fig. 3). Data used include 50 meters [23] as the reference perception distance
(PDNormal), and the emotional bond strength data of Suviletho et al, 2015 for the French
case. The calculated perception distance for a partner at night is 4.1 meters, which is
consistent with the findings in [24] for comfortable fixation distance during night time.
Figure 3: Perception distance influenced by social bond strength.
3.4 Physical model environment and UML diagram
The links between the main elements of the model are shown in Fig. 4. There are 5 types of
physical environment objects: (1) Buildings, which have different typologies defined by
their construction material, use, and height. When buildings are damaged they can produce
debris inside a danger zone, which is the area around the building. (2) Soil, the type of
which has a huge effect on the seismic intensity; (3) Safe areas, which can be designated
shelters, open areas or empty road sections, (4) The earthquake, which can occur at a
particular magnitude, duration and intensity, and (5) The individual human agents, with
different characteristics and different possible behaviours induced by the earthquake (e.g.
move to safe area, seek family members, follow a leader, etc.).
Figure 4: Reduced UML diagram of SOLACE
3.5 Decision, behaviours and BDI
A probabilistic approach is applied in choosing pre-evacuation behaviour. During
pedestrian evacuation, agent decision-making, behaviour and social interaction are
implemented using the BDI approach. Table 2 illustrates several examples of an individual
agent's beliefs, desires and possible actions in different contexts. Please note that desires
can be contradictory with each other, for instance seeking a family member involves
putting oneself in danger. The agent will select the highest priority desire to become its
intention, and choose a plan of action to achieve that selected intention.
Table 2: Examples of BDI implemented with social attachment
BELIEFS
CONTEXT
Normal situation None
During extreme
earthquake
I'm not safe
DESIRES
None
Be safe
None
ACTIONS
None
Seek attachment
figures/objects, protect
self, egress, evacuate
None
Stay safe
Stay
I'm safe, my
building is safe
I'm safe
During moderate
earthquake
At safe area with
family
At safe area but
missing family
member
I'm safe, my family
member is unsafe
Stay safe, family
member is safe
Seek family member,
call, return to danger
area
3.6 Simulation environment
The SOLACE 3D GIS simulation environment and graphical user interface (GUI),
developed using the GAMA platform, is shown in Fig. 5. Parameters can be changed in the
GUI. Spatial layers (attributes, shape) can be modified with a GIS tool and called directly
by the model. It is also possible to change the probability distributions for assigning
attributes to model elements. Fig. 5 displays a map of the crisis scenario showing how
social attachment drives social interaction and navigation of the synthetic human agents.
The chart on the right hand side of the figure shows the progress of evacuation at every
simulation time-step. Simulation outputs are saved directly to text (*.csv) files and may be
further analysed.
Figure 5: SOLACE interface showing agent social interaction in the crisis environment
4 EXPERIMENTS
The study area is Grenoble, French Alps, an area with moderate seismicity. Earthquakes are
rare, which may have led to the population having a low awareness of seismic risk [25]. A
large historic sector lies at city centre that contains many old structures. Two districts,
Grenette and Crequi-Victor Hugo, in the historic centre were chosen for the experiment.
The geographic data used include (a) buildings from IGN BDTOPO(c) [26], and (b) roads
and points of interests from OpenStreetMap [27]. Vulnerability and damage probabilities
assigned to buildings are from [28]. Population related data from the national census [30].
Table 3: Scenarios tested
Scenario 1
Scenario 2
Scenario 3
Scenario 4
Time
Day
Night
Day
Day
Intensity
6
6
6
8
Disabled agents included
No
No
Yes
No
Four earthquake scenarios were tested (Table 3). The parameters for the human agents in
the model are: (a) perception distance as in Fig. 3.; (b) agent evacuation speeds (maximum
velocity in m/sec) from [5]; (c) population of different age groups in the study area: child
(0-2 and 3-14), adult (15-29 and 30-59) and elderly (60+). Disabled agents are present in all
age categories, except for children since no data was available in [29]. The percentages in
Table 4 are used as probabilities. The distribution of agents (absolute numbers) at different
times and locations in Table 4 are derived from [30]. Depending on the scenario, agents are
initially generated indoors at home, work, school or outdoors. Parent and teacher roles are
assigned to adults in the 30-59 age group.
Table 4: Population distribution at initialization derived from national census statistics [30]
% disabled Speed (m/s) Home
0
0
Age group
Child (0-2)
Child (3-14)
1.2 - 2.8
Adult (15-29)
Adult (30-59)
1.3 - 12.3
Elderly (60+) 10.2 - 36.1
0
0 - 2.23
0 - 3.83
0 - 3.83
0 - 1.11
75/83
0/331
209/1842
0/1243
553/853
Public Outdoors
Number per Location (day/night)
Work
0/0
0/0
547/0
1119/0
215/0
School
0/0
298/0
902/0
0/0
0/0
0/0
0/0
0/0
0/0
0/0
8/0
33/0
184/0
124/0
85/0
5 RESULTS
The simulation results are shown in Figure 6. Graphs show arrivals (in % of the population
for each category) of the adult, elderly, child, and disabled agents over 1000 seconds
(16min 40sec). The short duration in observation time (in seconds) seeks to capture effects
of pre-evacuation behaviours, and evacuations just after a sudden earthquake. This is
analogous to the 90 second requirement for commercial aircraft evacuations [31] and
escape time (RSET) during building fires [32]. Graphs a and b in figure 6 show the trends
for scenarios 1, 2 and 4 respectively for able individuals. Overall arrivals in scenario 1 are
greater than scenario 2, followed by scenario 4. The night evacuation in scenario 2 with
agents having shorter perception distances may have caused this difference. The fewer
number of arrivals in scenario 4 can be attributed to the greater amount of debris from the
intensity 8 earthquake, trapping or delaying agents. In Figure 6-c, there are few child
arrivals because of the long distance to safe areas, and because of the long distance to safe
areas, and because of the extra time that it takes for pre-evacuation behaviours such as
teachers trying to search for, and group together the children. The terraced appearance of
the graphs indicates long delays in the arrivals of child agents. Figure 6-d, shows results for
scenario 3, where arrivals of able-bodied agents are greater than for disabled agents.
Figure 6: Simulation results
It can be seen that factors that influence arrivals in safe areas include (a) human factors
(age, disability, speed), (b) pre-evacuation behaviours, (c) perception distance (social
attachment, time of day), (d) social interaction during evacuation, and (e) physical and
spatial aspects, such as limitations imposed by debris, and the distance to safe areas.
6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The complexity of crisis situations provides a big challenge for modellers to make
simulations realistic. It entails the recreation of time sensitive interactions of dynamic
physical and social aspects that define vulnerability in real geographic space. Data from
many sources (national, census, and building data) were useful in model development.
These include total population counts or descriptions, presented as percentages. Spatial data
on buildings was available with height information. Characterization of buildings used a
probabilistic approach to assign attributes, e.g. assigning typology, vulnerability and
damage probabilities from [28]. Although qualitative data were available, the challenge was
in scaling the data, in percentages, to the level of discrete individual units (e.g. human
agents, buildings). A weighted-probabilistic approach was used. Reported populations
defined limits and percentages were used as probabilities. This method is promising and
can be used to scale datasets (especially field data from surveys) for use in ABM. The
experiments showed that many factors must be accounted for to simulate crisis evacuations.
Human factors and behaviour are particularly important and the decision to evacuate is
critical. Delays in the initial evacuation of agents are governed by pre-evacuation
behaviours [33]. A probabilistic approach was used to generate the pre-evacuation
behaviour choices and establish an evacuation time delay for each agent. The choice and
number of actions undertaken by an agent can delay evacuation. The time of day influences
the distribution of people in the city, e.g. at night time most people will be at home. Social
attachment bonds typically mean more social interaction between agents, which may delay
evacuation, e.g. parents trying to find their children. Similar studies have also shown that
social attachment normally results in evacuation delays. The following limitations of the
work will be investigated in future: (a) using real mobility data to account for the increase
in day time working population, (b) using survey results to define attachment bonds and
probabilities for pre-evacuation behaviour, (c) increasing the spatial scale to cover the
entire city. However this would also increase the number of agent interactions and would
require the use of a high-performance computing (HPC) infrastructure (grid or cluster). To
conclude, the model integrates social attachment and spatial elements of evacuation
behaviour in simulating seismic crisis. Although numerous data are included in the model,
more calibration from survey data is needed. This research finds that integrating both social
and physical aspects lead to a more realistic representation of vulnerability in risk analysis.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work acknowledges funding from ARC7 (Région Rhône-Alpes) and IXXI. Stéphane
Cartier, Philippe Guéguen, Christelle Salameh, Cecile Cornou, Sonia Chardonnel, Bertrand
Guillier and Mahfoud Boudis provided invaluable inputs.
[1] Mawson, A. (2005), Understanding mass panic and other collective responses to threat
REFERENCES
and disaster, Psychiatry, vol. 68, no. 2, 2005.
[2] Bañgate, J., Dugdale, J., Beck, E., & Adam, C., SOLACE a multi-agent model of
human behaviour driven by social attachment during seismic crisis. ICT-DM 2017.
[3] Bernardini, G., D'Orazio, M.D., Quagliarini, E., & Spalazzi, L., An agent-based model
for earthquake pedestrians' evacuation simulation in urban scenarios. Pedestrian and
Evacuation Dynamics Conf. Transportation Research Procedia 2 255-263, 2014.
[4] Rojo, M. B., Beck, E., & Lutoff, C., The street as an area of human exposure in an
earthquake aftermath: the case of Lorca, Spain, 2011. Natural Hazards and Earth
System Sciences, 17, 581-594, 2017.
[5] Bañgate, J., Dugdale, J., Beck, E., & Adam, C., A review on the influence of social
attachment on human mobility during crises. Proc. 14th ISCRAM Conf. 2017.
[6] Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R., The need to belong: a desire for interpersonal
attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psych. Bull. Vol 117 (3). 1995.
[7] Suvilehto, J. T., Glerean, E., Dunbar, R. I., Hari, R., & Nummenmaa, L. (2015).
Topography of social touching depends on emotional bonds between humans.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(45), 13811-13816.
[8] Meeren, H. K. M., van Heijnsbergen, C. C. R. J., & de Gelder, B. Rapid perceptual
integration of facial expressions and emotional body language. PNAS, Vol. 102, No.
45, 16518 -- 16523, 2005.
[9] ven Stock, J. V., Righart, R., & de Gelder, B., Body expressions influence recognition
of emotions in the face and voice. Emotion, Vol. 7, No. 3, 487-494. 2007.
[10] Kuwata, Y. and Takada, S., Instantaneous instrumental seismic intensity and
evacuation. Journal of Natural Disaster Science, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp35-42, 2002.
[11] Ohta, Y., & Omote, S., An investigation into human psychology and behaviour during
an earthquake. Proc. of 6th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering. 1977. 702 -- 708.
[12] Japan Meteorological Agency, Tables Explaining the JMA Seismic Intensity Scale.
http://www.jma.go.jp/jma/en/Activities/inttable.html, Accessed: 12 Feb. 2018.
[13] Grünthal, G. (Ed.), European Macroseismic Scale 1998. European Seismological
Commission, sub com. on Eng.Seismology, Work Group, Macroseismic Scales.
[14] Lambie, E. S., Human response to earthquake shaking, Analysis of video footage of
the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence, MSc Thesis, Univ. Canterbury. 2014.
[15] Ohta, Y., & Ohashi, H., Field Survey on occupant behaviour in an earthquake.
International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 1975.
[16] Srinurak, N., Mishima, N., Fuchikami, T., & Duangthima, W. (2016). Analysis of
urban morphology and accessibility character to provide evacuation route in historic
area. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 216, 460-469.
[17] Mikami, S. and Ikeda, K., Human Response to Disasters. International Journal of Mass
Emergencies and Disasters, 1985.
[18] Beck, E., Dugdale, J., Truong, H. V., Adam, C., & Colbeau-Justin, L. Crisis mobility
of pedestrians: from survey to modelling, lessons from Lebanon and Argentina,
ISCRAM-MED, 2014
[19] Wang, Q., & Taylor, J. E..Patterns and limitations of urban human mobility resilience
under the influence of multiple types of natural disaster. PLoS ONE 11(1): e0147299.
[20] Yin, L. & Shaw, S.-L., Exploring space-time paths in physical and social closeness
spaces: a space-time GIS approach. Journal of Geographical Info. Sci. 29:5, 742-761.
[21] Dan, M. B., & Armas, I., Earthquake impact on settlements: the role of urban and
structural morphology. Nat. Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 15, 2283-2297, 2015.
[22] Adam C., and Gaudou, B. BDI agents in social simulations: a survey. Knowl. Eng.
Rev., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 207 -- 238, 2016
[23] Fotios, S., Yang, B., & Uttley, J., Observing other pedestrians: Investigating the
typical distance and duration of fixation. Lighting Res. Tech., Vol. 47: 548-564, 2015.
[24] Fujiyama, T, Childs, C., Boampong, D., & Tyler N., Investigation of Lighting Levels
for Pedestrians. Proc.6th Int. Conf. of Walking in the 21st Century. Zurich.
[25] Beck, E., Andre-Poyaud, I., Davoine, P-A, Chardonnel, S., & Lutoff, C. Risk
perception and social vulnerability to earthquakes in Grenoble (French Alps), Journal
of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis (Routledge), 15 (10), pp.1245-1260. 2012
[26] IGN, "Bdtopo institut national de l'information geographique et forestiere," shapefile,
[28] Riedel, I., Gueguen, P., Mura, M. D., Pathier, E. Leduc, T. & Chanussot, J. Seismic
vulnerability assessment of urban environments in moderate-to-low seismic hazard
regions using association rule learning and support vector machine methods. Natural
Hazards, vol. 76, no. 2, pp. 1111 -- 1141, 2015.
[29] Drees, L'etat de
santé de
la population
en France, Rapport 2017,
http://www.santepubliquefrance.fr/Actualites/Etat-de-sante-de-la-population-en-
France-rapport-2017
[30] Insee. Recensement de
la Population 2013 -- Base
infra-communales.
https://www.insee.fr/fr/statistiques/2386737 (and…/2386631)
[31] NTSB. Safety Study, Emergency Evacuation of Commercial Airplanes. NTSB/SS-
00/01, PB2000-917002, Notation 7266, Adopted June 27, 2000.
[32] CFPA. European Guideline No 19. Fire safety engineering concerning evacuation
from buildings. 2009.
[33] van der Wal C.N., Formolo D., Robinson M.A., Minkov M., Bosse T., Simulating
Crowd Evacuation with Socio-Cultural, Cognitive, and Emotional Elements. Trans. on
Computational Collective Intelligence XXVII. 139-177. Springer, 2017.
2017. http://professionnels.ign.fr/bdtopo.
[27] OpenStreetMap.
Planet
dump
https://openstreetmap.org, shapefile, 2017.
retrieved
from
https://planet.osm.org
|
1104.2939 | 1 | 1104 | 2011-04-14T22:29:19 | Subexponential convergence for information aggregation on regular trees | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.IT",
"cs.IT",
"math.ST",
"math.ST"
] | We consider the decentralized binary hypothesis testing problem on trees of bounded degree and increasing depth. For a regular tree of depth t and branching factor k>=2, we assume that the leaves have access to independent and identically distributed noisy observations of the 'state of the world' s. Starting with the leaves, each node makes a decision in a finite alphabet M, that it sends to its parent in the tree. Finally, the root decides between the two possible states of the world based on the information it receives.
We prove that the error probability vanishes only subexponentially in the number of available observations, under quite general hypotheses. More precisely the case of binary messages, decay is subexponential for any decision rule. For general (finite) message alphabet M, decay is subexponential for 'node-oblivious' decision rules, that satisfy a mild irreducibility condition. In the latter case, we propose a family of decision rules with close-to-optimal asymptotic behavior. | cs.MA | cs | Subexponential convergence for information aggregation on regular trees
Yashodhan Kanoria and Andrea Montanari
1
1
0
2
r
p
A
4
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
9
3
9
2
.
4
0
1
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract -- We consider the decentralized binary hypothesis
testing problem on trees of bounded degree and increasing
depth. For a regular tree of depth t and branching factor
k ≥ 2, we assume that the leaves have access to independent
and identically distributed noisy observations of the 'state of the
world' s. Starting with the leaves, each node makes a decision
in a finite alphabet M, that it sends to its parent in the tree.
Finally, the root decides between the two possible states of the
world based on the information it receives.
We prove that the error probability vanishes only subexpo-
nentially in the number of available observations, under quite
general hypotheses. More precisely the case of binary messages,
decay is subexponential for any decision rule. For general
(finite) message alphabet M, decay is subexponential for 'node-
oblivious' decision rules,
that satisfy a mild irreducibility
condition. In the latter case, we propose a family of decision
rules with close-to-optimal asymptotic behavior.
I. INTRODUCTION
Let G = (V, E) be a (possibly infinite) network rooted at
node ø. Assume that independent and identically distributed
noisy observations of an hidden random variable s ∈ {0, 1}
are available at a subset U ⊆ V of the vertices. Explicitly,
each i ∈ U has access to a private signal xi ∈ X
where {xi}i∈U are independent and identically distributed,
conditional on s. The 'state of the world' s is drawn from
a prior probability distribution π = (π0, π1). The objective
is to aggregate information about s at the root node under
communication constraints encoded by the network structure,
while minimizing the error probability at ø.
We ask the following question:
How much does the error probability at the root
node ø increase due to these communication con-
straints?
In order to address this question, consider a sequence of
information aggregation problems indexed by t. Information
is revealed in a subset of the vertices Ut ⊆ V . There are
t rounds in which information aggregation occurs. In each
round, a subset of the nodes in V make 'decisions' that are
broadcasted to their neighbors. In the initial round, nodes i ∈
Ut with distance d(ø, i) = t (with d(· , · ) being the graph
distance) broadcast a decision σi ∈ M to their neighbors,
with M a finite alphabet. In the next round, nodes i ∈ V
with distance d(ø, i) = t− 1 broadcast a decision σi ∈ M to
their neighbors. And so on, until the neighbors of ø announce
their decisions in round t. Finally, the root makes its decision.
The decision of any node i is a function of decisions of i's
Department of Electrical Engineering and Department of Statistics,
Stanford University. Supported by 3Com Corporation Stanford Graduate
Fellowship, and NSF grants CCF-0743978 and CCF-0915145.
Clearly,
neighbors in earlier rounds, and, if i ∈ U , on the private
signal xi received by i.
the root can possibly access only the private
information available at nodes i ∈ V with d(ø, i) ≤ t
(with d(· , · ) the graph distance). We can therefore assume,
without loss of generality, that Ut ⊆ {i ∈ V : d(ø, i) ≤ t}.
It is convenient to think of Ut as the information horizon at
time t.
Consider first the case in which communication is un-
constrained. This can be modeled by considering the graph
with vertices V = {ø, 1, 2, 3, . . .} and edges E =
{(ø, 1), (ø, 2), (ø, 3), . . .}. In other words, this is a star net-
work, with the root at the center. Without loss of generality,
we take Ut = {1, . . . ,Ut}, with Ut ↑ ∞ as t → ∞.
A simple procedure for information aggregation would
work as follows. Each node i computes the log-likelihood
ratio (LLR) ℓ(xi) corresponding to the observed signal, and
quantizes it to a value σi. The root adds up the quantized
LLRs and decides on the basis of this sum. It follows from
basic large deviation theory [1] that, under mild regularity
assumptions, the error probability decreases exponentially in
the number of observations
P{σø 6= s} = exp(cid:8) − Θ(Ut)} .
(1)
This result is extremely robust:
(1) It holds for any non-trivial alphabet M ≥ 2;
(2) Using concentration-of-measure arguments [2], [3] it
is easy to generalize it to families of weakly dependent
observations [4];
(3) It can be generalized to network structures G with weak
communications constrains. For instance, [5] proved that
the error probability decays exponentially in the number
of observations for trees of bounded depth. The crucial
observation here is that such networks have large degree
diverging with the number of vertices. In particular, for a
tree of depth t, the maximum degree is at least n1/t.
At the other extreme, Hellmann and Cover [6] considered
the case of a line network. In our notations, we have V =
{ø, 1, 2, 3, . . .}, E = {(ø, 1), (1, 2), (2, 3), . . .}, and Ut =
{1, 2, . . . , t}. In [6] they proved that, as long as the LLRs
are bounded (namely ℓ(xi) ≤ C almost surely for some
constant C), and the decision rule is independent of the node,
the error probability remains bounded away from 0 as t →
∞.
If the decision rule is allowed to depend on the node, the
error probability can vanish as t → ∞ provided M ≥ 3
[7], [8]. Despite this, even if the probability of error decays
to 0, it does so much more slowly than for highly connected
networks. Namely, Tay, Tsitsiklis and Win [9] proved that
In the latter case, one expects that exponential convergence
is recovered as the message set gets large. Indeed we prove
that the optimal exponent in Eq. (2) obeys
(2)
P{σø 6= s} = exp(cid:8) − O(Utρ)(cid:9)
for some ρ < 1. In other words,
the communication
constraint is so severe that, after t steps, the amount of
information effectively used by the root is equivalent to a
vanishingly small fraction of the one within the 'information
horizon'.
These limit cases naturally lead to the general question:
Given a rooted network (G, ø), a sequence of information
horizons {Ut}t≥1 and a finite alphabet M, can information
the error
be aggregated at
probability decays exponentially in Ut? The question is
wide open, in particular for networks of with average degree
bounded or increasing slowly (e.g. logarithmically) with the
system size.
in such a way that
the root
Networks with moderate degree arise in a number of prac-
tical situations. Within decentralized detection applications,
moderate degree is a natural assumption for interference-
limited wireless networks. In particular, systems in which a
single root node communicates with a significant fraction of
the sensors are likely to scale poorly because of interference
at the root. Standard models for wireless ad hoc networks
[10] are indeed based on random geometric graphs whereby
each node is connected to a logarithmic number of neighbors.
A different domain of applications for models of decen-
tralized decision making is social learning [11]. In this case,
each node corresponds to an agent, and the underlying graph
is the social network across which information is exchanged.
Also in this case, it is reasonable to assume that each agent
has a number of neighbors which is bounded, or diverges
slowly as the total number of agents grows. In many graph-
theoretic models of social networks [12], although a small
number of nodes can have large degree, the average degree
is bounded or grows logarithmically with the network size.
Given the slow progress with extreme network structures
(line networks and highly-connected networks), the study
of general moderate degree networks appears extremely
challenging. In this paper we focus on regular trees. More
precisely, we let G be the (infinite) regular tree with branch-
ing factor k, rooted at ø (each node has k descendants and,
with the exception of the root, one parent). The information
horizon Ut is formed by all the nodes at distance t from the
root, hence Ut = kt. Under a broad set of assumptions, we
prove that the probability of error decays subexponentially
in the size of the information set, cf. Eq. (2), where ρ =
ρM < 1 depends on the size of the alphabet M = m.
in the following cases:
1) For binary messages M = 2 and any choice of the de-
cision rule. In fact, we obtain a precise characterization
of the smallest possible error probability in this case.
2) For general message alphabet 3 ≤ M < ∞ provided
the decision rule does not depend on the node, and
satisfies a mild 'irreducibility' condition (see Section
IV-B for a definition).
More precisely, we establish subexponential convergence
(3)
1 −
C1
M ≤ ρM ≤ 1 − exp(cid:8) − C2M(cid:9) .
The upper bound follows from our general proof for irre-
ducible decision rules, while the lower bound is obtained by
constructing an explicit decision rule that achieves it.
Our investigation leaves several interesting open problems.
First, it would be interesting to compute the optimal exponent
ρ = ρ(k,M) for given degree of the tree and size of
the alphabet. Even the behavior of the exponent for large
alphabet sizes is unknown at
the moment (cf. Eq. (3)).
Second, the question of characterizing the performance limits
of general, node-dependent decision rules remains open for
M ≥ 3. Third, it would be interesting to understand the
case where non-leaf nodes also get private signals, e.g.,
Ut = {i : i ∈ V, d(ø, i) ≤ t}. Finally, this paper focuses
on tree of bounded degree. It would be important to explore
generalization to other graph structures, namely trees with
slowly diverging degrees (which could be natural models for
the local structure of preferential attachment graphs [13]),
and loopy graphs. Our current results can be extended to trees
of diverging degree only in the case of binary signals. In this
case we obtain that the probability of error is subexponential
(4)
P{σø 6= s} = exp(cid:8) − o(Ut)}
as soon as the degree is sub-polynomial, i.e. k = o(na) for
all a > 0.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section
II defines formally the model for information aggregation.
Section III presents our results for binary messages M = 2.
Section IV treats the case of decision rules that do not depend
on the node, with general M.
II. MODEL DEFINITION
As mentioned in the introduction, we assume the network
G = (V, E) to be an (infinite) rooted k-ary tree, i.e. a tree
whereby each node has k descendants and one parent (with
the exception of the root, that has no parent). Independent
noisy observations ('private signals') of the state of the world
s are provided to the nodes at all the nodes at t-th generation
Ut = {i ∈ V : d(ø, i) = t}. These will be also referred to
as the 'leaves'. Define n ≡ Ut = kt. Formally, the state of
the world s ∈ {0, 1} is drawn according to the prior π and
for each i ∈ Ut an independent observation xi ∈ X is drawn
with probability distribution p0(· ) (if s = 0) or p1(· ) (if
s = 1). For notational simplicity we assume that X is finite,
and that p0(x), p1(x) > 0 for all x ∈ X . Also, we exclude
degenerate cases by taking π0, π1 > 0. We refer to the refer
to the two events {s = 0} and {s = 1} as the hypotheses
H0 and H1.
In round 0, each leaf i sends a message σi ∈ M to its
parent at level 1. In round 1, the each node j at level 1
sends a message σj ∈ M to its parent at level 2. Similarly
up to round t. Finally, the root node ø makes a decision σø ∈
{0, 1} based on the k messages it receives. The objective is
to minimize Perr ≡ P(σø 6= s). We call a set of decision
rules optimal if it minimizes Perr.
We will denote by ∂i the set of children of node i. We
denote the probability of events under H0 by P0(·), and the
probability of events under H1 by P1(·). Finally, we denote
by fi the decision rule at node i in the tree. If i is not a
leaf node and i 6= ø, then fi : Mk → M. The root makes
a binary decision fø : Mk → {0, 1}. If i is a leaf node,
it maps its private signal to a message, fi : X → M. In
general, fi's can be randomized.
III. BINARY MESSAGES
case of binary messages.
In this section, we consider the case M = {0, 1}, i.e., the
Consider the case π0 = π1 = 1/2, X = {0, 1} and
ps(x) = (1 − δ)I(x = s) + δI(x 6= s) for s = 0, 1; where
δ ∈ (0, 1/2). Define the majority decision rule at non-leaf
node i as follows: σi takes the value of the majority of σ∂i
(ties are broken uniformly at random).
It is not hard to see that if we implement majority updates
at all non-leaf nodes, we achieve
Pmaj(σø 6= s) = exp(cid:8)−Ω(cid:0)⌊(k + 1)/2⌋t(cid:1)(cid:9)
Note that this is an upper bound on error probability under
majority updates.
(5)
Our main result shows that, in fact, this is essentially the
best that can be achieved.
Theorem 3.1: Fix the private signal distribution, i.e., fix
p0(·) and p1(·). There exists C < ∞ such that for all k ∈ N
and t ∈ N, for any combination of decision rules at the
nodes, we have
P(σø 6= s) ≥ exp(−C(cid:18) k + 1
2 (cid:19)t)
(6)
In particular, the error probability decays subexponentially
in the number of private signals n = kt, even with the
optimal protocol.
A. Proof of Theorem 3.1
We prove the theorem for the case π0 = π1 = 1/2, X =
{0, 1} and ps(x) = (1− δ)I(x = s)+ δI(x 6= s) for s = 0, 1;
where δ ∈ (0, 1/2). The proof easily generalizes to arbitrary
π,X , p0 and p1.
Also, without loss of generality we can assume that, for
every node i,
P(s = 1σi = 1)
P(s = 0σi = 1) ≥
P(s = 1σi = 0)
P(s = 0σi = 0)
(7)
(otherwise simply exchange the symbols and modify the
decision rules accordingly).
Denote by ηI
i the (negative) logarithm of the 'type I error'
i the
i ≡
The following is the key lemma in our proof of Theorem
i ≡ − log(P(s = 0, σi = 1)). Denote by ηII
in σi, i.e. ηI
(negative) logarithm of the 'type II error' in σi, i.e. ηII
− log(P(s = 1, σi = 0)).
3.1.
Lemma 3.2: Given δ > 0, there exists C ≡ C(δ) > 0
such that for any k we have the following: There exists an
optimal set of decision rules such that for any node i at level
τ ∈ N,
i ≤ C2((k + 1)/2)2τ .
ηI
iηII
the root ø, we see that min(ηI
result follows immediately.
(8)
Proof: [Proof of Theorem 3.1] Applying Lemma 3.2 to
ø) ≤ C((k + 1)/2)t. The
there is an
optimal set of decision rules that correspond to deterministic
likelihood ratio tests (LRTs) at the non-leaf nodes.
Lemma 3.2 is proved using the fact
ø, ηII
that
Definition 3.3: Choose a node i. Fix the decision
i. Define Li(σ∂i) =
functions of all descendants of
P(H1σ∂i)/P(H0σ∂i).
a) The decision function fi
likelihood ratio test if:
(i) It is deterministic.
(ii) There is a threshold θ such that
is a monotone deterministic
P(fi = 1, Li < θ) = 0
P(fi = 0, Li > θ) = 0
b) The decision function fi is a deterministic likelihood
is a monotone deterministic
is the Boolean complement
ratio test if either fi or f c
i
likelihood ratio test. Here f c
i
of fi.
Proof: Consider a set of decision rules that minimize
The next lemma is an easy consequence of a beautiful
result of Tsitsiklis [14]. Though we state it here only for
binary message alphabet, it easily generalizes to arbitrary
finite M.
Lemma 3.4: There is a set of monotone deterministic
likelihood ratio tests at the nodes that achieve the minimum
possible P(σø 6= s).
P(σø 6= s).
Fix the rule at every node except node i to the optimal
one. Now, the distributions P0(σ∂i) and P1(σ∂i) are fixed.
Moreover, P(σø 6= s) is a linear function of q(fi) ≡
(P0(σi), P1(σi)), where Ps(σi) denotes the distribution of
σi under hypothesis Hs. The set Q of achievable q's is
clearly convex, since randomized fi is allowed. From [14,
Proposition 3.1], we also know that Q is compact. Thus, there
exists an extreme point of Q that minimizes P(σø 6= s). Now
[14, Proposition 3.2] tells us that any extreme point of Q can
be achieved by a deterministic LRT. Thus, we can change
fi to a deterministic LRT without increasing P(σø 6= s). If
fi is not monotone (we know that i 6= ø in this case), then
i , σ∂j\i). Clearly,
we do fi ← f c
P(σø 6= s) is unaffected by this transformation, and fi is
now a monotone rule.
We do this at each of the nodes sequentially, starting at
level 0, then covering level 1 and so on until the root ø. Thus,
we change (if required) each decision rule to a monotone
deterministic LRT without increasing P(σø 6= s). The result
follows.
Clearly, if fi is a monotone LRT, Eq. (7) holds. In fact,
we argue that there is a set of deterministic monotone LRTs
i and fj(σi, σ∂j\i) ← fj(σc
with strict inequality in Eq. (7), i.e., such that
P(s = 1σi = 0)
P(s = 0σi = 0)
P(s = 1σi = 1)
P(s = 0σi = 1)
>
holds for all i, that are optimal.
(9)
Eq. (7) can only be written when P(σi = 0) > 0 and
P(σi = 1) > 0. Consider a leaf node i. Without loss of
generality we can take σi = xi for each leaf node i (since any
other rule can be 'simulated' by the concerned level 1 node).
So we have P(σi = 0) > 0 and P(σi = 1) > 0, Eq. (9) holds
and fi is a deterministic LRT. We can ensure these properties
inductively at all levels of the tree by moving from the leaves
towards the root. Consider any node i. If P(σi = 0) = 0, then
i 6= ø (else Perr = 1/2) and the parent of i is ignoring the
constant message received from i. We can do at least as well
by using any non-trivial monotone deterministic LRT at i.
Similarly, we can eliminate P(σi = 1) = 0. If P(σi = 0) > 0
and P(σi = 1) > 0, then Eq. (9) must hold for any monotone
deterministic LRT fi, using the inductive hypothesis.
Definition 3.5: Let α and β be binary vectors of the same
length τ. We say α (cid:23) β if αi ≥ βi for all i ∈ {1, 2, . . . , τ}.
We now prove Lemma 3.2.
Proof: [Proof of Lemma 3.2]
From Lemma 3.4 and Eq. (9), we can restrict attention to
monotone deterministic LRTs satisfying Eq. (9).
i = ηII
We proceed via induction on level τ. For any leaf node
i = − log(δ/2). Choosing C =
i, we know that ηI
− log(δ/2), Eq. (8) clearly holds for all nodes at level 0.
Suppose Eq. (8) holds for all nodes at level τ. Let i be a
node at level τ + 1. Let its children be ∂i = {c1, c2, . . . , ck}.
Without loss of generality, assume
c1 ≥ ηI
ηI
Claim: We can also assume
c2 ≥ . . . ≥ ηI
ck
(10)
c2
c2
ck
(11)
and ηII
c1 > ηII
c1 ≥ ηI
c1 ≥ ηII
c1 ≤ ηII
ηII
1) = Ps(σc2 = 1) for s = 1, 2. Thus, node i can use
c2 ≤ . . . ≤ ηII
c2 (so c1 is
Proof of Claim: Suppose, instead, ηII
doing better than c2 on both types of error). We can use
the protocol on the subtree of c1 also on the subtree of
c2. Call the message of c2 under this modified protocol
(both types of error
have only become less frequent), there exists a randomized
bσc2. Since, ηI
function F : {0, 1} → {0, 1}, such that Ps(F (bσc2 ) =
fi(σc1 , F (bσc2 ), σc3 , . . . , σck ) to achieve the original values
, where fi is decision rule being used at i
of ηI
c2
before. Clearly, the error probabilities at i, and hence at
the root, stay unchanged with this. Thus, we can safely
for
assume ηII
i = 2, 3, . . . , k − 1. Clearly, our transformations retained the
property that nodes at levels τ +1 and below use deterministic
LRTs satisfying Eq. (9). Similar to our argument for Eq. (9)
above, we can make appropriate changes in the decision rules
at levels above τ +1 so that they also use deterministic LRTs
satisfying Eq. (9), without increasing error probability. This
proves the claim.
. Similarly, we can assume ηII
c1 ≤ ηII
ci ≤ ηII
and ηII
c2
ci+1
c2
Recall that fi : {0, 1}k → {0, 1} is the decision rule at
node i. Assume the first bit in the input corresponds to σc1,
the second corresponds to σc2, and so on. Using Lemma 3.4,
we can assume that fi implements a deterministic likelihood
ratio test. Define the k-bit binary vectors ω0 = (111 . . . 1),
ω1 = (011 . . . 1), . . . , ωk = (00 . . . 0). From Lemma 3.4
and Eq. (9), it follows that fi(ωj) = I(j < j0) for some
j0 ∈ {0, 1, . . . , k, k + 1}.
Claim: Without loss of generality, we can assume that j0 6= 0
and j0 6= k + 1.
Proof of Claim: Suppose j0 = 0. It follows from Lemma
3.4 and Eq. (9) that fi(σ∂i) = 0 for every possible σ∂i. If
i = ø then we have Perr ≥ 1/2. Suppose i 6= ø. Then σi
is a constant and is ignored by the parent of i. We cannot
do worse by using an arbitrary non-trivial decision rule at i
instead. (The parent can always continue to ignorebσi.) The
case j0 = k + 1 can be similarly eliminated. This proves the
claim.
Thus, we can assume j0 ∈ {1, . . . , k} without loss of
generality. Now ω (cid:23) ωj0−1 contribute to type I error and
ω (cid:22) ωj0 contribute to type II error. It follows that
ηI
i ≤
ηII
i ≤
kXj=j0
j0Xj=1
cj ≤ (k − j0 + 1)ηI
ηI
cj0
,
cj ≤ j0ηII
ηII
cj0
,
(12)
(13)
(14)
where we have used the ordering on the error exponents
(Eqs. (10) and (11)). Eqs. (12) and (13) lead immediately to
ηI
i/ηI
cj0
+ ηII
i /ηII
cj0 ≤ (k + 1) .
Now, for any x, y ≥ 0, we have x + y ≥ 2√xy. Plugging
, we obtain from Eq. (14)
and y = ηII
x = ηI
i /ηII
cj0
i/ηI
cj0
ηI
iηII
2 (cid:19)2
i ≤(cid:18) k + 1
ηI
cj0
ηII
cj0
.
(15)
By our induction hypothesis ηI
Thus, ηI
completes the proof.
cj0 ≤ C2((k + 1)/2)2τ .
ηII
i ≤ C2((k + 1)/2)2(τ +1) as required. Induction
iηII
cj0
IV. 'NODE-OBLIVIOUS' RULES WITH NON-BINARY
MESSAGES
In this section we allow a general finite message alphabet
M that need not be binary. However, we restrict attention
to the case of node-oblivious rules: The decision rules fi at
all nodes in the tree, except the leafs and the root, must be
the same. We denote this 'internal node' decision rule by
f : Mk → M. Also, the decision rules used at each of the
leaf nodes should be same. We denote the leaf decision rule
by g : X → M. The decision rule at the root is denoted
by h = fø : Mk → {0, 1}. We call such (f, g, h) a node-
oblivious decision rule vector.
Define m ≡ M. In Section IV-A, we present a scheme
that achieves
P(σø 6= s) = expn−Ω(cid:16)(cid:8)k (1 − 1/m)(cid:9)t(cid:17)o ,
(16)
when the error probability in the private signals is sufficiently
small. Next, under appropriate assumptions, we show that
the decay of error probability must be sub-exponential in
the number of private signals kt.
A. An efficient scheme
For convenience, we label the messages as
M =(cid:26)−m + 1
2
, −m + 3
2
, . . . ,
m − 1
2 (cid:27)
(17)
The labels have been chosen so as to be suggestive (in a
quantitative sense, see below) of the inferred log-likelihood
ratio. Further, we allow the messages to be treated as real
numbers (corresponding to their respective labels) that can
well defined for a non-leaf node i.
The node-oblivious decision rule we employ at a non-leaf
be operated on. In particular, the quantity Si ≡Pc∈∂i σc is
node i 6= ø is
f (σ∂i) =
j Si/k+(m−1)/2
j Si/k−(m−1)/2
k − m−1
k + m−1
if Si ≤ 0
if Si > 0
Note that the rule is symmetric with respect to a inversion
of sign, except that Si = 0 is mapped to the message 1/2
when m is even.
(18)
1−1/m
1−1/m
2
2
The rule g(xi) used at the leafs is simply g(1) = (m−1)/2
and g(0) = −(m − 1)/2. The decision rule at the root is
,
,
h(σ∂ø) =(cid:26) 1 ,
if Sø ≥ 0
0 , otherwise.
(19)
If we associate H0 with negative quantities, and H1 with pos-
itive quantities, then again, the rule at the leafs is symmetric,
and the rule at the root is essentially symmetric (except for
the case Sø = 0).
Lemma 4.1: Consider the node-oblivious decision rule
vector (f, g, h) defined above. For k ≥ 2 and m ≥ 3, there
exists δ0 ≡ δ(m, k) > 0 such that the following is true for
all δ < δ0:
(i) Under H0, for node i at level τ ≥ 0, we have
− log P(cid:2)σi = −(m − 1)/2 + l(cid:3) ≥ (l/m)(cid:8)k (1 − 1/m)(cid:9)τ
for l = 1, 2, . . . , m − 1.
(ii) Under H1, for node i at level τ ≥ 0, we have
− log P(cid:2)σi = (m − 1)/2 − l(cid:3) ≥ (l/m)(cid:8)k (1 − 1/m)(cid:9)τ
for l = 1, 2, . . . , m − 1.
Proof: We prove (i) here. The proof of (ii) is analogous.
Assume H0. Define γ ≡ k (1 − 1/m) and C ≡
k log m/(k − 1). We show that, in fact, for suitable choice
of δ0 the following holds: If δ < δ0, then for any node i at
any level τ ≥ 0,
(21)
(20)
− log P(cid:2)σi = −(m − 1)/2 + l(cid:3) ≥
(l/m)γτ + C
(22)
We proceed by induction on τ. Consider i at level τ = 0.
We have P0(cid:2)σi = −(m−1)/2+l(cid:3) = 0 for l = 1, 2, . . . , m−2
and P0(cid:2)σi = (m − 1)/2] = δ. Choosing δ0 ≡ exp(−1− C),
we can ensure that Eq. (22) holds at level 0. Note that for
k ≫ 1, we have δ0 ≈ 1/(em).
Now suppose Eq. (22) holds at level τ. Consider node i
at level τ + 1. From Eq. (18), for σi = −(m − 1)/2 + l we
need
Si ≥ k[−(m − 1)/2 + l(1 − 1/m)]
(23)
For every σ∂i = (−(m − 1)/2 + l1,−(m − 1)/2 +
l2, . . . ,−(m − 1)/2 + lk) such that Eq. (23) holds, we have
Pk
j=1 lj ≥ kl(1 − 1/m). Thus,
(24)
Obviously, there are at most mk such σ∂i. Thus,
lj
P0(σ∂i) ≤ exp−kC − (1/m)γτ
kXj=1
≤ exp(cid:0)−kC − (1/m)lγτ +1(cid:1)
≤ mk exp(cid:0)−kC − (1/m)lγτ +1(cid:1)
= exp(cid:0)−C − (1/m)lγτ +1(cid:1)
P0[σi = −(m − 1)/2 + l]
Thus, Eq.(22) holds at level τ + 1. Induction completes the
proof.
Theorem 4.2: For k ≥ 2 and m ≥ 3, there exists δ0 ≡
δ0(m, k) > 0, and a node-oblivious decision rule vector, such
that the following is true: For any δ < δ0, we have
2m (cid:8)k (1 − 1/m)(cid:9)t(cid:27)
m − 1
P(cid:2)σø 6= s(cid:3) ≤ exp(cid:26)−
= exp(cid:26)−
m − 1
2m
with ρ ≡ 1 + log(1 − 1/m)/ log k.
root decision rule Eq. (19).
nρ(cid:27)
Proof: The theorem follows from Lemma 4.1 and the
(25)
Assume H0. For every σ∂ø = (−(m − 1)/2 + l1,−(m −
1)/2 + l2, . . . ,−(m − 1)/2 + lk) such that Sø ≥ 0, we have
Pk
j=1 lj ≥ k(1 − 1/m)(m − 1)/(2m). From Lemma 4.1(i),
P0(σ∂øH0) ≤ exp−kC − (1/m)γt−1
lj
kXj=1
≤ exp(cid:0)−kC − (m − 1)γt/(2m)(cid:1) ,
(26)
where γ ≡ k (1 − 1/m) and C ≡ k log m/(k − 1). Obvi-
ously, there are at most mk such σ∂ø. It follows that
P0(σø = 1H0) ≤ mk exp(cid:0)−kC − (m − 1)γt/(2m)(cid:1)
= exp(cid:0)−C − (m − 1)γt/(2m)(cid:1) .
P1(σø = 0H1) ≤ exp(cid:0)−C − (m − 1)γt/(2m)(cid:1)
P(σø 6= s) ≤ exp(cid:0)−C − (m − 1)γt/(2m)(cid:1)
Recall that C > 0. Thus, we have proved the result.
Combining, we arrive at
Similarly, we can show
B. Subexponential decay of error probability
Define n ≡ kt, i.e., n is the number of private signals
received, one at each leaf. The scheme presented in the
previous section allows us to achieve error probability that
decays like exp(−Ω({k (1 − 1/m)}t)) = exp(−Ω(nρ)),
where ρ = 1 + log(1 − 1/m)/ log k ≈ 1 − 1/(m log k)
for m ≫ 1. In this section we show that under appropriate
assumptions, error probability that decays exponentially in
n, i.e., exp(−Θ(n)), is not achievable with node-oblivious
rules.
In this section we call the letters of the message alphabet
M = {1, 2, . . . , m}. For simplicity, we consider only deter-
ministic node-oblivious rules, though our results and proofs
extend easily to randomized rules.
We define here a directed graph G with vertex set M
and edge set E that we define below. We emphasize that G
is distinct from the tree on which information aggregation
is occurring. There is a directed edge from node µi ∈ M
to node µj ∈ M in G if there exists α ∈ Mk such that
µj appears at least once in α and f (α) = µi. Informally,
(µi, µj) ∈ E if µi can be 'caused' by a message vector
received from children that
includes µj. We call G the
dependence graph.
We make the following irreducibility assumptions on the
node-oblivious decision rule vectors (f, g, h) under consid-
eration (along with leaf and root decision rules).
Assumption 1: The dependence graph G is strongly con-
nected. In other words, for any µi ∈ M and µj ∈ M such
that µj 6= µi, there is a directed path from µi to µj in G.
Assumption 2: There exists a level τp > 0 such that for
node i at level τp, we have P0(σi = µ) > 0 for all µ ∈ M.
Note that P0(σi = µ) > 0 implies P1(σi = µ) > 0 by
absolute continuity of P0(xi) w.r.t. P1(xi).
Assumption 3: There exists µ− ∈ M, µ+ ∈ M, η > 0
and τ∗ such that, for all τ > τd the following holds: For
node i at level τ, we have P0(σi = µ−) > η and P1(σi =
µ+) > η.
In other words, we assume there is one 'dominant' message
under each of the two possible hypothesis.
It is not hard to verify that for k ≥ 2, m ≥ 3 and δ <
δ0(m, k) (where δ0 is same as in Lemma 4.1 and Theorem
4.2), the scheme presented in the previous section satisfies
all four of our assumptions. In other words, the assumptions
are all satisfied in the regime where our scheme has provably
good performance.
Definition 4.3: Consider a directed graph G = (V,E) that
is strongly connected. For u, v ∈ V, let duv be the length
of the shortest path from u to v. Then the diameter of G is
defined as
diameter(G) ≡ max
u∈V
max
v∈V,v6=u
duv .
Theorem 4.4: Fix m and k. Consider any node-oblivious
decision rule vector (f, g, h) such that Assumptions 1, 2 and
3 are satisfied. Let d be the diameter of the dependence graph
G. Then, there exists C ≡ C(f, m, k) < ∞ such that we have
(27)
P(cid:2)σø 6= s(cid:3) ≥ exp(cid:8)−Cnρ(cid:9) ,
d log k < 1.
where ρ ≡ 1 + log(1−k−d)
Now G has m vertices, so clearly d ≤ m−1. The following
corollary is immediate.
Corollary 4.5: Fix m and k. Consider any node-oblivious
decision rule vector (f, g, h) such that Assumptions 1, 2 and
3 are satisfied. Then, there exists C ≡ C(f, m, k) < ∞ such
that we have
P(cid:2)σø 6= s(cid:3) ≥ exp{−Cnρ} ,
(28)
(m−1) log k < 1.
where ρ ≡ 1 + log(1−k−(m−1))
Thus, we prove that under the above irreducibility assump-
tions, the error must decay subexponentially in the number
of private signals available at the leaves.
Proof:
Remark 4.6: We have P0(σ∂ø = (µ−, µ−, . . . , µ−)) >
ηk. It follows that we must have fø(µ−, µ−, . . . , µ−) = 0
(else the probability of error is bounded below by ηk/2 for
any t). Similarly, we must have fø(µ+, µ+, . . . , µ+) = 1. In
particular, µ− 6= µ+.
Lemma 4.7: If Assumption 2 holds, then for a node i at
any level τ > τp, we have P0(σi = µ) > 0 for all µ ∈ M.
It follows from Assumption 2 that for any µ ∈
M, there is some α ∈ Mk such that f (αµ) = µ. We prove
the lemma by induction on the level τ. Let
Sτ ≡ For node i at level τ, P0(σi = µ) > 0 for all µ ∈ M.
By assumption, Sτp holds. Suppose Sτ holds. Consider node
i at
level τ + 1. Consider any µ ∈ M. By inductive
hypothesis, we have P0(σ∂i = αµ) > 0. It follows that
P0(σi = µ) > 0. Thus, Sτ +1 holds.
Lemma 4.8 can be thought of as a quantitative version of
Lemma 4.7, showing that the probability of the least frequent
message decays subexponentially.
Lemma 4.8: Suppose Assumptions 1, 2 and 3 are satisfied.
Fix s ∈ {0, 1}. Consider a node i at
level τ. Define
ζτ ≡ minµ∈M P(σi = µHs). Let τ∗ = max(τp, τd)
(cf. Assumptions 2, 3). Let d = diameter(G). There exists
C′ ≡ C′(f, m, k) < ∞ such that for any a ∈ N ∪ {0} and
b ∈ {0, 1, . . . , d − 1}, we have,
ζτ∗+ad+b ≥ exp(cid:8)−C′(kd − 1)a(cid:9)
(29)
Proof: Assume H0 holds, i.e. s = 0. The proof for
s = 1 is analogous.
We prove that, in fact, the following stronger bound holds:
− log(ζτ∗+ad+b) ≤ C′(kd − 1)a − log(1/η)/(kd − 2) .
(30)
We proceed via induction on a. First consider a = 0.
Consider a node i at level τ∗ + b for b ∈ {0, 1, . . . , d −
1}. Consider the descendants of node i at level τ∗. For any
µ ∈ M, we know from Lemma 4.7 that there must be some
assignment of messages to the descendants, such that σi = µ.
It follows that
ζτ∗+b ≥ ζkb
τ∗
(31)
Thus, choosing C′ = kd−1(− log ζτ∗ ) + log(1/η)/(kd − 2),
we can ensure that Eq. (30) holds for a = 0 and all b ∈
{0, 1, . . . , d − 1}.
Now suppose Eq. (30) holds for some a ∈ N ∪ {0}.
Consider a node i at level τ∗ + (a + 1)d + b. Let D be the
set of descendants of node i at level τ∗ + ad + b. Note that
D = kd. Consider any µ ∈ M. By Assumption 1, there is
a directed path in G of length at most d going from µ to µ−.
By Remark 4.6, we know that (µ−, µ−) ∈ E. It follows that
there is a directed path in G of length exactly d going from
µ to µ−. Thus, there must be an assignment of messages σD
to nodes in D, including at least one occurrence of µ−, such
that σi = µ. Using Assumption 3, we deduce that
ζτ∗+(a+1)d+b ≥ ηζkd−1
τ∗+ad+b
Rewriting as
− log ζτ∗+(a+1)d+b ≤
(kd − 1)(− log ζτ∗+ad+b) + log(1/η) ,
and combining with Eq. (30), we obtain
− log(ζτ∗+(a+1)d+b) ≤
C′(kd − 1)a+1 − log(1/η)/(kd − 2) .
Induction completes the proof.
Theorem 4.4 follows.
Proof: [Proof of Theorem 4.4] Assume H0. From
Lemma 4.8,
P0(σ∂ø = (µ+, µ+, . . . , µ+)) ≥ exp(cid:8)−C′kρad(cid:9)
≥ exp(cid:8)−Cnρ(cid:9)
for C ≡ C′kρ(τ∗+d−1). It follows that
(32)
(33)
Similarly,
P0(σø = 1) ≥ exp(cid:8)−Cnρ(cid:9) .
P1(σø = 0) ≥ exp(cid:8)−Cnρ(cid:9) .
The result follows.
Remark 4.9: For the scheme presented in Section IV-A,
we have d ≈ logk m, where d = diameter(G). For any ǫ > 0,
Theorem 4.4 provides a lower bound on error probability
with ρ ≤ 1 − C1/m1+ǫ for some C1 ≡ C1(k, ǫ) > 0. This
closely matches the m dependence of the upper bound on
error probability we proved in Theorem 4.2.
C. Discussion of the irreducibility assumptions
We already mentioned that the efficient node-oblivious
rule presented in Section IV-A satisfies all of Assumptions
1, 2 and 3. Moreover, it is natural to expect that similar
schemes based on propagation of quantized likelihood ratio
estimates should also satisfy our assumptions. In this section,
we further discuss our assumptions taking the cases of binary
and ternary messages as examples.
1) Binary messages: Binary messages are not the focus
of Section IV-B. However, we present here a short discussion
of Assumptions 1, 2 and 3 in the context of binary messages
for illustrative purposes.
Claim: If m = 2, each of the irreducibility assumptions
must be satisfied by any node-oblivious rule for which error
probability decays to 0 with t.
Proof of Claim: Call the messages M = {0, 1}. Consider a
node-oblivious decision rule vector (f, g, h) such that error
probability decays to 0 with t. Then g cannot be a constant
function (e.g., identically 0), since this leads to Perr ≥ 1/2.
Suppose Assumption 1 is violated. Without loss of gen-
erality, suppose (0, 1) /∈ E. Then f (α) = 1 for all α 6=
(0, 0, . . . , 0). It follows that for node i at level τ, we have
Ps(σi = 0) ≤ exp(−Θ(kτ )) t→∞−→ 0 ,
(34)
for both s = 0 and s = 1. In particular, Perr is bounded
away from 0. This is a contradiction.
Suppose Assumption 2 is violated. Then, wlog, all nodes
at level 1 transmit the message 1 almost surely, under either
hypothesis. Thus, all useful information is lost and Perr ≥
1/2. This is a contradiction.
Finally, we show that Assumption 3 must hold as well.
Define ξτ ≡ P0(σi = 0) for node i at level t. Wlog,
suppose ξτ ≥ 1/2 occurs infinitely often. Then we have
h(0, 0, . . . , 0) = 0, else Perr ≥ 2−k−1 for infinitely many
t. Define bξτ ≡ P1(σi = 0) for node i at level t. If bξτ ≥
1/2 occurs infinitely often, then it follows that P1(σ∂ø =
(0, 0, . . . , 0)) ≥ 2−k and hence P1(σø = 0) ≥ 2−k occur
for infinitely many t. So we can have bξτ ≥ 1/2 only
finitely many times. Also, h(1, 1, . . . , 1) = 1 must hold. It
follows that ξτ < 1/2 occurs only finitely many times. Thus,
Assumption 3 holds with η = 1/2.
2) Ternary messages: By Theorem 4.2, the scheme pre-
sented in Section IV-A achieves Perr = exp{−Ω({2k/3}t}
in the case of ternary messages.
We first show that if Assumption 2 is violated, then Perr =
exp{−O({(k + 1)/2}t)}. If Assumption 2 does not hold,
then only at most two letters are used at each level. It follows
that we can have a (possibly node-dependent) scheme with
binary messages that is equivalent to the original scheme at
levels 1 and higher. Our lower bound on Perr then follows
from Theorem 3.1. Thus, even in the best case, performance
is significantly worse than the scheme presented in Section
IV-A. So a good scheme for ternary messages must satisfy
Assumption 2.
Now consider Assumption 1. Let M = {−1, 0, 1}. Sup-
pose Assumption 1 is violated. Then wlog, there is no path
from letter 0 to one of the other letters. It follows that under
either hypothesis, we have Ps(σi = 0) = exp{−Ω(kτ )} for
node i at level τ. Thus, the letter 0 occurs with exponentially
small probability, irrespective of s. This should essentially
reduce, then, to the case of binary messages, and we expect
performance to be constrained as above.
Finally,
consider Assumption 3. We
cannot have
h(µ, µ, µ) = 0 for all µ ∈ M, since that will lead to
P1(σø 6= s) ≥ 1/9 for all t. Similarly, we can also exclude
the possibility h(µ, µ, µ) = 1 for all µ ∈ M. Wlog, suppose
h(−1,−1,−1) = 0 and h(1, 1, 1) = 1. Now consider the
problem of designing a good aggregation protocol. By the
above, we must have P1(σi = −1) and P0(σi = 1), for
node i at level τ, to each converge to 0 with increasing
τ. Further, it appears natural to use the message µ = 0
with an interpretation of 'not sure' in such a situation. We
would then like the probability of this intermediate symbol
to decay with τ, or at least be bounded in the limit, i.e.,
Ps(σi = 0) < 1 for each possible s. If this
lim supτ →∞
holds, we immediately have Assumption 3 (with µ− = −1
and µ+ = 1).
3) Need for assumptions: We argued above that our
irreducibility assumptions are quite reasonable in various cir-
cumstances. In fact, we expect the assumptions to be a proof
artifact, and conjecture that a subexponential convergence
bound holds for general node-oblivious rules. A possible
approach to eliminate our assumptions would be to prune the
message alphabet M, discarding letters that never appear, or
appear with probability bounded by exp(−Ω(kt)) (because
they require descendants from a strict subset of M).
REFERENCES
[1] A. Dembo and O. Zeitouni, Large Deviations Theory and Applications
Techniques and Applications, Springer 1998
[2] M. Ledoux, The Concentration of Measure Phenomenon, American
Mathematical Society, 2005
[3] D. P. Dubhashi and a. panconesi, Concentration of Measure for the
Analysis of Randomized Algorithms, Cambridge University Press,
2009
[4] Y. Kanoria and A. Montanari, unpublished (2011)
[5] W. P. Tay, J. N. Tsitsiklis, and M. Z. Win, Bayesian Detection
in Bounded Height Tree Networks, IEEE Transactions on Signal
Processing, vol. 57, no. 10, Oct. 2009.
[6] M. E. Hellman and T. M. Cover, Learning with Finite Memory, The
Annals of Mathematical Statistics, vol. 41, no. 3, Jun. 1970, 765-782
[7] T. M. Cover, Hypothesis testing with finite statistics, The Annals of
Mathematical Statistics, vol. 40, no. 3, Jun. 1969, 828-835
[8] J. Koplowitz, Necessary and sufficient memory size for m-hypothesis
testing, IEEE Trans. on Inform. Theory, vol. 21, no. 1, Jan. 1975,
44-46
[9] W. P. Tay, J. N. Tsitsiklis, and M. Z. Win, On the sub-exponential
decay of detection error probabilities in long tandems, IEEE Trans.
on Inform. Theory, vol. 54, no. 10, pp. 4767-4771, Oct. 2008.
[10] P. Gupta and P. R. Kumar, The capacity of wireless networks, IEEE
Trans. on Inform. Theory, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 388-404, Mar. 2000.
[11] D. Acemoglu, M.A. Dahleh, I. Lobel, and A. Ozdaglar, Bayesian
Learning in Social Networks, LIDS report 2780, to appear in Review
of Economic Studies, 2010.
[12] M. E. J. Newman, D. J. Watts and S. H. S. Strogatz, Random graph
models of social networks, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sciences, vol. 99, 2566-
2572, 2002
[13] N. Berger, C. Borgs, J. T. Chayes, A. Saberi, A Weak Local Limit for
Preferential Attachment Graphs, 2009
[14] J.N. Tsitsiklis, Extremal Properties of Likelihood-Ratio Quantizers,
IEEE Transactions on Communications, Vol. 41, No. 4, 1993, pp.
550-558.
|
1505.03996 | 2 | 1505 | 2016-04-21T08:30:04 | Norm Monitoring under Partial Action Observability | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI"
] | In the context of using norms for controlling multi-agent systems, a vitally important question that has not yet been addressed in the literature is the development of mechanisms for monitoring norm compliance under partial action observability. This paper proposes the reconstruction of unobserved actions to tackle this problem. In particular, we formalise the problem of reconstructing unobserved actions, and propose an information model and algorithms for monitoring norms under partial action observability using two different processes for reconstructing unobserved actions. Our evaluation shows that reconstructing unobserved actions increases significantly the number of norm violations and fulfilments detected. | cs.MA | cs | Norm Monitoring under Partial Action Observability
Natalia Criado and Jose M. Such, Member, IEEE
1
6
1
0
2
r
p
A
1
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
2
v
6
9
9
3
0
.
5
0
5
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract -- In the context of using norms for controlling multi-
agent systems, a vitally important question that has not yet been
addressed in the literature is the development of mechanisms for
monitoring norm compliance under partial action observability.
This paper proposes the reconstruction of unobserved actions to
tackle this problem. In particular, we formalise the problem of
reconstructing unobserved actions, and propose an information
model and algorithms for monitoring norms under partial action
observability using two different processes for reconstructing
unobserved actions. Our evaluation shows that reconstructing
unobserved actions increases significantly the number of norm
violations and fulfilments detected.
Index Terms -- Norm Monitoring, Action Observability.
I. INTRODUCTION
Within the Multi-agent System (MAS) area, norms are
understood as means to coordinate and regulate the activity
of autonomous agents interacting in a given social context
[19]. The existence of autonomous agents that are capable
of violating norms entails the development of norm control
mechanisms that implement norms in agent societies.
In the existing literature, several authors have proposed
infrastructures to observe agent actions and detect norm viola-
tions upon them [1], [21]. The majority of these proposals have
focused on providing efficient and scalable methods to monitor
norms in dynamic agent societies, but they assume that all
actions of agents are observable. However, this assumption is
too strong because it is not necessarily true that all actions to
be controlled can always be observed. One reason for this is
that observing actions usually entails high costs. For example,
the costs of setting, maintaining, and managing traffics radars
to detect car speeds are very high, so traffic authorities usually
decide to install a few of them in specific and critical locations.
Another reason is that illegal actions may take place outside
the institution controlled by the monitor; however, the effects
of these actions can still be detected within the institution.
For example, black market transactions cannot be directly
observed by legal authorities, yet the corresponding money
laundering transactions can be detected and sanctioned by
these authorities.
Very recent work on norm monitoring under partial action
observability proposes solutions to ensure complete action
observability by increasing the actions that are observed, either
by adding more monitors [5] or by adapting the norms to
what can be observed [2]. However, these solutions are not
always appropriate or feasible. For instance, in e-markets, such
as eBAY1 or Amazon2, it is not possible to change trading
N. Criado is with the School of Computing and Mathematical Sciences,
Liverpool John Moores University, UK, e-mail: [email protected].
J. M. Such is with the School of Computing and Communications Info-
lab21, Lancaster University, UK, email:[email protected].
1http://www.ebay.com
2http://www.amazon.com
laws to what can be observed. This paper goes beyond these
approaches by also considering actions that were not observed
but that can be reconstructed from what was observed.
The main contributions of this paper are: (i) a formalisation
of the problem of reconstructing unobserved actions from
observed actions for the purpose of norm monitoring; (ii) an
exhaustive and an approximation solution to this problem; and
(iii) an information model and algorithms used to monitor
norms under partial action observability. Through an extensive
empirical evaluation, we show that reconstructing unobserved
actions increases noticeably the number of norm violations
and fulfilments detected.
This paper is organised as follows: Section II contains the
preliminary definitions used in this paper. Section III describes
the information model of norm monitor proposed in this
paper. Section IV contains the algorithms executed by norm
monitors. Our proposal is evaluated in SectionV. Related word
is discussed in Section VI. Finally, conclusions are contained
in Section VII.
II. PRELIMINARY DEFINITIONS
L is a first-order language containing a finite set of predicate
and constant symbols, the logical connective ¬, the equality
(inequality) symbol = ((cid:54)=), the true ((cid:62)) and false propositions
(⊥), and an infinite set of variables. The predicate and con-
stant symbols are written as any sequence of alphanumeric
characters beginning with a lower case letter. Variables are
written as any sequence of alphanumeric characters beginning
with a capital letter. We also assume the standard notion of
substitution of variables [13]; i.e., a substitution σ is a finite
and possibly empty set of pairs Y /y where Y is a variable
and y is a term.
The set of grounded atomic formulas of L is built of a finite
set of predicates and objects that characterise the properties
of the world relevant to norm monitoring. By a situation,
we mean the properties that are true at a particular moment.
Some of these properties are static and not altered by action
execution, whereas other properties are dynamic and changed
due to agent actions. Specifically, we represent static properties
as a set3 of atomic grounded formulas of L, denoted by g. A
state s is a set of grounded atomic formulas of L, describing
dynamic properties which hold on state s. Thus, a situation is
built on a "closed assumption" and defined by a set of static
properties g and a state s. Moreover, there is a set of inference
rules ((cid:79)) representing domain knowledge.
EXAMPLE.
In this paper we will use a running example
in which there are three robots that should attend requests at
six offices in a building. The goal of the robots is to attend
these requests as soon as possible. Figure 1a depicts our initial
3In this paper sets are to be interpreted as the conjunction of their elements.
(a) Initial State s0
(b) State s1
(c) State s2
Fig. 1: Example Scenario. Offices are represented by squares,
agents are represented by circles and the corridors are rep-
resented by arrows. Black arrows correspond to corridors ob-
served by the Norm Monitor (NM) and grey arrows correspond
to corridors not observed by the NM.
scenario. In our example, the language L contains: 4 pred-
icate symbols (robot, office, in, corridor), used to represent
the robots and offices, the positions of the robots and the
connections between offices in the building; 3 constant symbols
to represent the robots (r1, r2, r3); and 6 constant symbols
to represent the offices (a, b, c, d, e, f). The information about
the robots, offices and corridors between offices is static and
represented as follows:
g = {robot(r1), robot(r2), robot(r3), office(a), ..., office(f ),
corridor(a, b), corridor(b, a), ..., corridor(e, a)}
The information about the location of the robots is dynamic.
Specifically, the initial state s0 is defined as follows:
s0 = {in(r1, a), in(r2, d), in(r3, e)}
In this domain there is an inference rule ((cid:79)) representing that
a robot cannot be in two different offices at the same time:
(cid:79) = {{in(R1, OA), in(R1, OB), OA (cid:54)= OB} (cid:96) ⊥}
A. Action Definitions
D is a finite set of action descriptions that induce state
transitions. An action description d is represented using pre-
conditions and postconditions. If a situation does not satisfy
the preconditions, then the action cannot be applied in this
situation. In contrast, if the preconditions are satisfied, then
the action can be applied transforming the current state into
a new state in which all negative literals appearing in the
postconditions are deleted and all positive literals in the
postconditions are added. Moreover, actions are executed in a
MAS and, as a consequence, we need to be able to represent
concurrent actions with interacting effects. For the sake of
simplicity, we will represent concurrent actions without an ex-
plicit representation of time4 as proposed in [4]. The main idea
beyond this representation is that individual agent actions do
interact (i.e., one action might only achieve the intended effect
if another action is executed concurrently). Specifically, each
action is also represented by a (possibly empty) concurrent
4An explicit representation of time may play a role on other problems like
scheduling concurrent actions, but is not strictly necessary for monitoring the
effects of interaction.
2
condition that describes the actions that must (or cannot) be
executed concurrently5.
Definition 1. An action description d is a tuple (cid:104)name,
pre, con, post(cid:105) where:
• name is the action name;
• pre is the precondition, i.e., a set of positive and negative
literals of L (containing both dynamic and static prop-
erties) as well as equality and inequality constraints on
the variables;
• con is the concurrent condition; i.e., a set of positive and
negative action schemata6, some of which can be partially
instantiated or constrained;
• post is the postcondition; i.e., a set of positive and
negative literals of L (containing dynamic properties
only).
Given an action description d, we denote by pre(d), con(d),
post(d) the action precondition, concurrent condition and
postcondition.
EXAMPLE.
(cid:28) move,{robot(R), office(O1), office(O2), in(R, O1),
In our example, there is only one action that
can be executed by robots:
corridor(O1, O2)},{},{¬in(R, O1), in(R, O2)}
(cid:29)
This action represents the movement of a robot from one office
to another. The parameters of this action are the robot (R),
the source office (O1), the destination office (O2). To execute
this action, the robot should be located at the source office
and the two offices should be connected. Once the operation
has been applied, the robot is no longer at the source office
and it is at the destination office.
Definition 2. Given a situation represented by the state s and
a set of static properties g, and an action description d =
(cid:104)name, pre, con, post(cid:105); an action instance (or action) is a
tuple (cid:104)name, pre(cid:48), con(cid:48), post(cid:48)(cid:105) such that:
• There is a substitution σ of variables in pre, such that the
precondition is satisfied (i.e., entalied by) the situation;
i.e., s, g (cid:96) σ · pre;
dynamic properties only;
• σ · pre, σ · post are grounded;
• pre(cid:48) is a set of grounded literals in σ · pre containing
• post(cid:48) = σ · post and con(cid:48) = σ · con.
Given an action a, we denote by actor(a) the agent
performing the action, and by pre(a), con(a), post(a) the
precondition, concurrent condition and postcondition.
office b. This is formalised as follows:
EXAMPLE. In state s0, the robot r1 moves from office a to
(cid:28) move,{robot(r1), office(a), office(b), in(r1, a),
(cid:29)
corridor(a, b)},{},{¬in(r1, a), in(r1, b)}
5A more sophisticated definition of the concurrent condition would allow
actions to have conditional effects according to the actions that are executed
concurrently. Without loss of expressiveness, we will not consider conditional
effects in action descriptions (note that any action with conditional effects can
be represented by a set of actions with non conditional effects).
6An action schema contains an action name and the parameters of this
action. Note that positive action schemata are implicitly existentially quantified
-- i.e., one instance of each positive schema must occur concurrently -- and
negative schemata are implicitly universally quantified.
abcdefr1r2r3abcdefr1r2r3abcdefr1r2r3 In a MAS, concurrent actions7 define state transitions. More
formally, a concurrent action A = {a1, ..., an} is a set of
individual actions. Given a set of actions A = {a1, ..., an},
we define pre(A) = (cid:83) pre(ai), post(A) = (cid:83) post(ai) and
actor(A) =(cid:83) actor(ai).
Given a concurrent action A = {a1, ..., an} we say that the
concurrent condition of an individual action ai of A is satisfied
when for all positive schema in the concurrent condition exists
an action aj (i (cid:54)= j) in A, such that aj is an instance of the
schema; and for all negative schema none of the elements in
A is an instance of the schema. For the sake of simplicity, we
assume that each agent performs one action at a time8.
Definition 3. (Consistency [4]) Given a concurrent action
A = {a1, ..., an} it is consistent if:
• pre(A) is consistent (i.e, pre(A) (cid:54)(cid:96) ⊥);
• post(A) is consistent (i.e, post(A) (cid:54)(cid:96) ⊥);
• the concurrent condition of each action is satisfied;
• the concurrent action is complete (i.e., each agent per-
forms one action in A).
move(r2, d, a), move(r3, e, a)}9 is consistent since:
EXAMPLE. The concurrent action A = {move(r1, a, b),
• pre(A) = {in(r1, a), in(r2, d), in(r3, e)} which is con-
• post(A) = {in(r1, b), in(r2, a), in(r3, a),¬in(r1, a),
sistent;
¬in(r2, d),¬in(r3, e)} which is consistent;
• the concurrent conditions of both actions are satisfied;
• each robot performs one action.
A concurrent action A = {a1, ..., an} is applicable in a
situation if A is consistent and each individual action ai ∈ A
is applicable in this situation.
Given a consistent action, we define its effects as the
postconditions of its individual actions and the preconditions
not invalidated by the postconditions. More formally, given
a concurrent action A = {a1, ..., an} its effects are a set of
grounded literals as follows:
(cid:91)
(cid:91)
(cid:91)
eff (A) = (
∀pre∈pre(A):
pre,post(A)(cid:54)(cid:96)⊥
pre)
(
∀post∈post(A)
post)
B. Norm Definitions
We consider norms as formal statements that define patterns
of behaviour by means of deontic modalities (i.e., obligations
and prohibitions). Specifically, our proposal is based on the
notion of norm as a conditional rule of behaviour that defines
under which circumstances a pattern of behaviour becomes
relevant and must be fulfilled [21], [29], [19], [11].
Definition 4. A norm is defined as a tuple (cid:104)deontic,
condition, action(cid:105), where:
• deontic ∈ {O,P} is the deontic modality of the norm,
determining if the norm is an obligation (O) or prohibi-
tion (P);
7Concurrent action means actions that occur at the same time and does not
necessarily imply agent cooperation or coordination.
8This limitation can be relaxed by decomposing agents into groups of agents
corresponding to agents' actuators [4].
9For simplicity, we represent actions by their schemata.
3
• condition is a set of literals of L as well as equality and
inequality constraints that represents the norm condition,
i.e., it denotes the situations in which the norm is relevant.
• action is a positive action schema that represents the
action controlled by the norm.
EXAMPLE.
In our example, there is a norm that avoids
collisions by forbidding any robot to move into an office when
the office is occupied by another robot:
(cid:104)P, in(R1, L2), move(R2, L1, L2)(cid:105)
This norm states that when a robot R1 is located in office O2
other robots are forbidden to move from any office L1 to L2.
In line with related literature [1], [20], [2], we consider a
closed legal system, where everything is considered permitted
by default, and obligation and prohibition norms define ex-
ceptions to this default permission rule. We also define that a
norm is relevant to a specific situation if the norm condition
is satisfied in the situation. Besides, we define that a norm
condition is satisfied in a given situation when there is a
substitution of the variables in the norm condition such that the
constraints in the norm condition are satisfied and the positive
(vs. negative) literals in the norm condition are true (vs. false)
in the situation.
Definition 5. Given a specific situation denoted by a state s
and a set of static properties g, and a norm (cid:104)deontic,
condition, action(cid:105);
a
(cid:104)deontic, action(cid:48)(cid:105) such as:
norm instance
tuple
is
a
satisfied in the situation; i.e., s, g (cid:96) σ · condition;
• There is a substitution σ such that
• action(cid:48) = σ · action.
EXAMPLE. In state s0 the norm that forbids robots to move
the condition is
into occupied offices is instantiated as follows:
(cid:104)P, move(R2, L1, d)(cid:105) where σ = {L2/d}
(cid:104)P, move(R2, L1, a)(cid:105) where σ = {L2/a}
(cid:104)P, move(R2, L1, e)(cid:105) where σ = {L2/e}
The semantics of instances (and norms in general) depends
on their deontic modality. An obligation instance is fulfilled
when the mandatory action is performed and violated other-
wise, while a prohibition instance is violated when the forbid-
den action is performed and fulfilled otherwise. We classify
detected violations (vs. fulfilments) into: identified violations
(vs. fulfilment), which refers to when the monitor knows the
specific action that an agent executed and violates (vs. fulfils)
an instance; and discovered violations (vs. fulfilment), which
refers to when the monitor knows that an agent violated (vs.
fulfilment) some instance but does not know the forbidden (vs.
mandatory) action executed by the agent.
III. NM INFORMATION MODEL
Let us assume a set of agents Ag to be monitored, a set
of norms N that regulate the actions of agents, and a set D
of action descriptions that represent the actions that can be
performed by agents. For the sake of simplicity, we assume
that there is a single Norm Monitor (NM) that observes the
actions performed by agents and monitors norm compliance10.
We also assume that actions are deterministic and that the
current state evolves due to action execution only11. The
goal of the NM is to analyse a partial sequence of action
observations to detect norm violations. The enforcement of
norms is out of the scope of this work and we assume that once
the NM detects a norm violation (vs. fulfilment), it applies the
corresponding sanction (vs. reward).
A. State Representation
As the NM only observes a subset of the actions performed
by agents, it has partial information about the state of the
world. The NM represents each partial state of the world,
denoted by p, using an "open world assumption" as a set
of grounded literals that are known in the state. Thus, a
partial state contains positive (vs. negative) grounded literals
representing dynamic properties known to be true (vs. false)
in the state. The rest of dynamic properties are unknown.
To begin with, assume that the NM monitor has complete
knowledge of the initial state (this will be relaxed later). Thus,
at t0 the NM knows which grounded atomic formulas are true
or false in the initial state (p0 ≡ s0). From that moment on,
the NM monitors the actions performed by agents at each
point in time. At time t0 the NM carries out a monitoring
activity and observes some of the actions performed by agents
(Act0). These actions have evolved s0 into a new state s1.
As previously mentioned, the NM has limited capabilities for
observing the actions performed by agents. Thus, it is possible
that
the NM observes a subset of the actions performed
by agents. Specifically,
if all actions have been observed
(Act0 = Ag), then the resulting partial state p1 can be
constructed by considering the effects of actions in Act0 on
p0 so p1 ≡ s1. A different case arises when the NM observes a
subset of the actions performed by the agents (Act0 < Ag).
In this case, the agent cannot be sure about the effects of un-
observed actions. Thus, the new partial state p1 is constructed
by assuming that the postconditions of the observed actions
must hold on state s1 (i.e., positive postconditions are positive
literals in p1 and negative postconditions are negative literals
in p1) and the rest of dynamic propositions are unknown. If
the NM takes into account the next sequence of actions that
it observes at time t1 (Act1), then the NM can also infer that
the preconditions of these actions must hold on state s1, and,
as a consequence, new propositions can be taken for sure in
the partial state p1, retrospectively. Partial states in the general
case are defined as:
Definition 6. Given a partial state description pt correspond-
ing to time t, and two consecutive sequences of observed
actions Actt and Actt+1 executed by agents at times t and
t + 1, respectively; the new partial state pt+1 resulting from
executing actions Actt in pt and actions Actt+1 in pt+1 is
obtained as follows:
(cid:26) post(Actt)(cid:83) pre(Actt+1)
(cid:83) eff (Actt)(cid:83) pre(Actt+1) otherwise
p∗
if Actt < Ag
pt+1 =
t
10However, our model can be used by a team of monitors as well.
11This assumption could be relaxed if NMs have capabilities for observing
both state changes and actions.
4
where p∗
t is the set of invariant literals; i.e., literals of pt that
have not been modified by the actions in Actt and it is defined
as follows:
(cid:91)
p∗
t =
l
∀l∈pt:
l,eff (Actt)(cid:54)(cid:96)⊥
EXAMPLE. In our example, the NM knows which grounded
atomic formulas are true or false in the initial state:
p0 = {in(r1, a),¬in(r1, b),¬in(r1, c),¬in(r1, d),¬in(r1, e),
¬in(r1, f ), in(r2, d),¬in(r2, a),¬in(r2, b),¬in(r2, c),
¬in(r2, e),¬in(r2, f ), in(r3, e),¬in(r3, a),¬in(r3, b),
¬in(r3, c),¬in(r3, d),¬in(r3, f )}
The NM has some surveillance cameras to monitor the move-
ment of robots in the building. Specifically, the corridors that
are monitored are the ones between offices: a and b; b and c;
and b and f. These corridors are represented by black arrows
in Figure 1, whereas non-monitored corridors are represented
by grey arrows. In the initial state (s0) depicted in Figure 1a,
the robots execute the actions move(r1, a, b), move(r2, d, a)
and move(r3, e, a) resulting in a new state (s1) depicted
in Figure 1b. However, the NM only observes the action of
robot r1, because this action takes place in a monitored
corridor; i.e., Act0 = {move(r1, a, b)}. In the next state
s1, the robots execute actions move(r1, b, c), move(r2, a, e)
and move(r3, a, b) resulting in a new state (s2) depicted in
Figure 1c. In this case the NM observes two actions; i.e.,
Act1 = {move(r1, b, c), move(r3, a, b)}. Considering these
two sets of observed actions the NM is able to infer the
dynamic propositions that are known in s1 as follows:
p1 = {in(r1, b),¬in(r1, a), in(r3, a)}
If the NM uses the information about the states and the
observed actions, then no violation of the norm is detected and
no robot is sanctioned. However, r2 and r3 have violated the
norm, since they have moved into an occupied office through
non-monitored corridors.
B. Action Reconstruction
NMs use Definition 6 to generate partial state descriptions
based on the observed actions. Additionally, we propose that
NMs reconstruct the actions that have not been observed. This
reconstruction process entails: (i) searching for the actions that
have been performed by unobserved agents; and (ii) using the
actions found to increase the knowledge about the state of
the world. The reconstruction process must be sound, e.g.,
it cannot indicate that a violation has occurred when it has
not in fact occurred. In the following, we introduce full and
approximate methods for reconstructing unobserved actions.
1) Full Reconstruction: Full reconstruction tries to find
exhaustively the actions performed by all
the agents that
have not been observed. To this aim, the full reconstruction
performs a search to identify all solutions to the reconstruction
problem.
Definition 7. Given a partial state description pt correspond-
ing to time t (named initial state), a set of observed actions
Actt at time t, and an partial resulting state pt+1 correspond-
ing to time t + 1 (named final state); we define search as a
function that computes sets of solutions S = {S1, ..., Sk} such
that each solution Si in S is a set of actions such that:
• the concurrent action Si ∪ Actt is consistent;
• the initial state induced by the concurrent action Si∪Actt
is consistent (i.e., g, pt, pre(Si ∪ Actt), (cid:79) (cid:54)(cid:96) ⊥);
• the final state induced by the concurrent action Si∪ Actt
is consistent (i.e., g, pt+1, post(Si ∪ Actt), (cid:79) (cid:54)(cid:96) ⊥).
Thus, a solution is a set of actions performed by the agents
that have not been observed12 that are consistent with the states
of the world before and after the execution of the actions.
Given that the NM has a partial knowledge of the states, we
do not require that the preconditions (vs. postconditions) of
actions in a solution are met in the initial (vs. final) state,
since it is possible that the preconditions (vs. postconditions)
are true, but the NM is unaware of it.
EXAMPLE. Given the partial state description p0,
the
set of observed actions Act0, and the partial resulting state
p1, the search function looks for actions of agents r2 and
r3 (since they are the agents that have not been observed).
According to the initial position of r2, the NM can infer that r2
may have performed two different actions move(r2, d, a) and
move(r2, d, e) -- these two actions are the only ones consistent
with p0. Similarly, the NM can infer that r3 may have per-
formed three different actions move(r3, e, a), move(r3, e, d)
and move(r3, e, f ) -- these three actions are the only ones
consistent with p0. However, the actions move(r3, e, d) and
move(r3, e, f ) are not consistent with the final state -- recall
that these two actions have as postcondition the fact that r3
is in offices d and f, respectively; that p1 defines that r3 is in
office a; and that (cid:79) defines as inconsistent states where any
robot is at two different locations. As a result, the solution set
for this problem is defined as:
S = {{move(r2, d, a), move(r3, e, a)},
{move(r2, d, e), move(r3, e, a)}}
Once all solutions are found, the NM uses this information
to extend the information about the actions performed by
unobserved agents and the state of the world. To ensure that
the reconstruction is sound, the NM calculates the intersection
of actions in the solutions to select actions it is completely sure
about (i.e., actions belonging to all solutions). Given a set of
search solutions S = {S1, ..., Sk} for some initial and final
states, we define the reconstruction action set as follows:
(cid:92)
R =
Si
∀Si∈S
If R (cid:54)= ∅, then the NM expands its knowledge about the
actions performed by agents and it uses this information to
increase the knowledge about the initial and final states. More
formally, the set of actions observed in t is updated as:
Actt = Actt ∪ R
12If all actions were observed, no reconstruction would be needed.
5
The initial state pt is updated as follows:
pt = pt
(cid:91)
(cid:83) post(R)(cid:83) p•
(cid:83) eff (Actt)
(cid:83) p∗
t
t
pre(R)
(cid:26) pt+1
Finally, the final state is updated as follows:
if Actt < Ag
otherwise
pt+1
t is defined as before and p•
pt+1 =
where p∗
t is the set of extended
invariant literals; i.e., literals in pt that have not been modified
since there is not a solution Si ∈ S such that the concurrent
action Si ∪ Actt changes any of these literals:
l
(cid:91)
p•
t =
∀l∈pt:
(cid:64)Si∈S:l,post(Actt∪Si)(cid:54)(cid:96)⊥
EXAMPLE. The reconstruction set for the example is:
R = {move(r3, e, a)}
This action belongs to all solutions, so the NM can be
absolutely sure about the performance of this action, even
when the NM has not observed it. As a consequence, the NM
extends its information as follows:
Act0 = {move(r1, a, b), move(r3, e, a)}
and p0 remains unchanged and p1 is updated as follows:
p1 = {in(r1, b),¬in(r1, a),¬in(r1, c),¬in(r1, d),¬in(r1, e),
¬in(r1, f ),¬in(r2, b),¬in(r2, c),¬in(r2, f ), in(r3, a),
¬in(r3, b),¬in(r3, c),¬in(r3, d),¬in(r3, e),¬in(r3, f )}
The main disadvantage of full reconstruction is that, for
many real-world problems, the number of candidate solutions
that needs to be explored is prohibitively large, as shown
later in Section IV. In response to this problem, we provide a
polynomial approximation below.
2) Approximate Reconstruction: Approximate reconstruc-
tion includes an approximate search that finds the actions
performed by unobserved agents that are consistent with
the states of the world before and after action execution.
Specifically, approximate reconstruction identifies actions that
do not necessarily include the specific actions performed by
unobserved agents but that allow the NM to control norms.
The main intuition beyond approximate reconstruction is as
follows: imagine that at a given initial state an agent can
perform just one action and that this action is forbidden (vs.
mandatory). In this case, the NM identifies that the agent
has violated (vs. fulfilled) a norm. Besides that, if an agent
can perform n different actions and all
these actions are
forbidden (vs. mandatory), the NM does not need to know
which action has been executed to conclude that a norm has
been violated (vs. fulfilled)13. Hence, we say that a violation
has been discovered (instead of identified). Given a set of
13Note that the propose of this paper is to monitor norms, not to determine
whether agents are responsible for norm violations/fulfilments. Monitoring
situations where agents can only execute forbidden/obligatory actions can
help to detect norm-design problems. Additionally, the fact that an agent can
only execute forbidden actions may be explained by the agent putting itself
into these illegal situations (e.g., I am allowed to overtake but overtaking may
put me in a situation where I can only exceed the speed limit).
prohibition instances P and an action a, we define that the
action a is forbidden (denoted by f orbidden(P, a)) when
∃p ∈ P : ∃σ : σ · action(p) = a. Similarly, given a set of
obligation instances O and an action a, we define that the
action a is mandatory (denoted by mandatory(O, a)) when
∃o ∈ O : ∃σ : σ · action(o) = a.
Definition 8. Given a partial state pt, a set of observed actions
Actt at time t, and a partial resulting state pt+1; we define
approximate search as a function that calculates the set of all
unobserved applicable actions (cid:101)S = {ai, ..., an} such that:
• the preconditions of each action in (cid:101)S are consistent with
the initial state (i.e., ∀ai ∈ (cid:101)S : g, pt, pre(ai), (cid:79) (cid:54)(cid:96) ⊥);
• the postconditions of each action in (cid:101)S are consistent with
the final state (i.e., ∀ai ∈ (cid:101)S : g, pt+1, post(ai), (cid:79) (cid:54)(cid:96) ⊥);
• actions in (cid:101)S are performed by unobserved agents (i.e.,
actor((cid:101)S) ∩ actor(Actt) = ∅);
• all unobserved agents perform at least one action in (cid:101)S .
EXAMPLE. Given the partial state description p0, the set
of observed actions Act0, and the partial resulting state p1,
the approximate search function looks for actions of agents r2
and r3 (since they are the agents that have not been observed).
According to the initial position of r2, the NM can infer that
r2 may have performed two different actions move(r2, d, a)
and move(r2, d, e). Again, r3 may have performed action
move(r3, e, a). The approximate solution for this problem is
defined as:
(cid:101)S = {move(r2, d, a), move(r2, d, e), move(r3, e, a)}
solutions ((cid:101)S) to expand its knowledge about the actions per-
As in full reconstruction, the NM uses approximate search
formed by unobserved agents and to increase the knowledge
about the initial and final states. When an unobserved agent
may have executed only one action,
then the NM knows
for sure that this action was executed. More formally, the
reconstruction action set is defined as follows:
(cid:91)
∀a∈(cid:101)S:(cid:54)∃a(cid:48)∈(cid:101)S:
R =
a
a(cid:54)=a(cid:48)∧actor(a)=actor(a(cid:48))
The set of actions observed in t is updated as:
Then the initial state pt is updated as follows:
Actt = Actt ∪ R
pt = pt
(cid:91)
(cid:83) post(R)(cid:83) p◦
(cid:83) eff (Actt)
(cid:83) p∗
t
pre(R)
(cid:26) pt+1
The final state is updated as follows:
if Actt < Ag
otherwise
t
pt+1
t is defined as before and p◦
pt+1 =
where p∗
t is the set of extended
invariant literals in pt; i.e., literals that have not been modified
since there is not an observed action or an applicable action
that changes them:
(cid:32)
p◦
t =
(cid:91)
∀l∈pt:
l,post(Actt)(cid:54)(cid:96)⊥
(cid:33)(cid:92)(cid:32) (cid:91)
l,post((cid:101)S)(cid:54)(cid:96)⊥
∀l∈pt:
l
(cid:33)
l
Finally, the set of discovered violations and fulfilments is a
set of actions defined as follows:
6
D = {a1, ..., aj}
performs ai (i.e., actor(ai) ) is:
where for each action ai in D: ai is in (cid:101)S and the agent that
• able to execute more than one action (i.e., ∃aj ∈ (cid:101)S :
ai (cid:54)= aj ∧ actor(ai) = actor(aj));
• only able to execute forbidden (vs. mandatory) actions
and ai is one of these forbidden (vs. mandatory) actions;
When an agent is only able to perform forbidden (vs. manda-
tory) actions, an action among these can be selected according
to various criteria. For example, in a normative system where
the presumption of innocence principle holds, the NM should
assume that the agent has violated (vs. fulfilled) the least (vs.
most) important norm and the action that violates (vs. fulfils)
this norm is selected. Note discovering violations is very useful
in many practical applications, in which it would allow the NM
to ban offender agents (e.g., Intrusion Detection/Prevention
Systems [3]), to stop the execution of any offender agent
(e.g., Business Process Compliance monitoring [27]), or to
put offender agents under close surveillance (e.g., Model-
Based Diagnosis Systems [22]), even when the specific action
performed ins not known.
EXAMPLE.
In case of the approximate reconstruction, r3
is only able to perform one action, which entails that the NM
can be absolute sure about the performance of this action and
the reconstruction set is defined as:
R = {move(r3, e, a)}
As a consequence, the NM extends its information as follows:
Act0 = {move(r1, a, b), move(r3, e, a)}
p0 remains unchanged and p1 is updated as follows:
p1 = {in(r1, b),¬in(r1, a),¬in(r1, c),¬in(r1, d),¬in(r1, e),
¬in(r1, f ),¬in(r2, b),¬in(r2, c),¬in(r2, f ), in(r3, a),
¬in(r3, b),¬in(r3, c),¬in(r3, d),¬in(r3, e),¬in(r3, f )}
In this situation, r2 is only able to execute forbidden ac-
tions -- recall that the instances (cid:104)P, move(R2, L1, a)(cid:105) and
(cid:104)P, move(R2, L1, e)(cid:105) forbid any robot to move into offices
a and e and that r2 may have been executed actions
move(r2, d, a) and move(r2, d, e). Thus, the set of discovered
violations and fulfilments is defined as follows:
D = {move(r2, d, e)}
note that the discovered violation does not correspond to the
action executed by r2, however, it allows the NM to determine
that r2 must have violated an instance.
C. Norm Monitoring
Once all the information about the actions performed by
the agents and the partial states has been reconstructed, the
NM checks the actions of agents to determine which instances
have been violated or fulfilled. Recall
that norms in our
model are defined as conditional rules that state which actions
the state of the world,
are obligatory or forbidden. Given that the NM has partial
knowledge about
the NM should
control norms only when it is completely sure that the norms
are relevant to ensure that the norm monitoring process is
sound. In particular, we define that a norm is relevant to a
partial situation when the norm condition is satisfied by the
partial situation -- i.e., a norm (cid:104)deontic, condition, action(cid:105) is
relevant to a partial situation represented by a partial state p,
the static properties g and the domain knowledge (cid:79) if ∃σ such
that p, g, (cid:79) (cid:96) σ · condition.
EXAMPLE. In state p0 the norm that forbids robots to move
into occupied offices is instantiated three times as follows:
(cid:104)P, move(R2, L1, d)(cid:105) where σ = {L2/d}
(cid:104)P, move(R2, L1, a)(cid:105) where σ = {L2/a}
(cid:104)P, move(R2, L1, a)(cid:105) where σ = {L2/e}
Once the NM has determined which norm instances hold
in a given situation, it has to check the actions of agents to
determine which instances have been violated and which ones
have been fulfilled.
Obligation Instance. In presence of partial knowledge about
the actions performed by agents, the NM can only determine
that an obligation instance has been fulfilled. If the NM knows
all the actions performed by agents, then it can determine
whether an obligation has been fulfilled or violated.
Definition 9. Given an obligation instance (cid:104)O, action(cid:48)(cid:105) and
a set of observed actions Act, then the obligation is defined
iff ∃σ : σ · action(cid:48) ∈ Act
iff ((cid:54) ∃σ : σ · action(cid:48) ∈ Act) ∧ Act = Ag
otherwise
Prohibition Instance. In presence of partial knowledge about
the actions performed by agents, the NM can only determine
that a prohibition instance has been violated. If the NM knows
all the actions performed by agents then it can determine
whether a prohibition has been fulfilled or violated.
Definition 10. Given a prohibition instance (cid:104)P, action(cid:48)(cid:105) and
a set of observed actions Act, then the prohibition is defined
iff ∃σ : σ · action(cid:48) ∈ Act
iff ((cid:54) ∃σ : σ · action(cid:48) ∈ Act) ∧ Act = Ag
otherwise
Finally, the set of discovered violations and fulfilments is
used to identify those agents that have violated or fulfilled an
instance.
EXAMPLE. Taking into account the set of actions Act0,
the NM can identify that robot r3 has violated the in-
stance (cid:104)P, move(R2, L1, a)(cid:105), even though this forbidden ac-
tion has not been observed by the NM. Specifically, there is
σ = {R2/r3, L1/e} such that σ(move(R2, L1, a)) ∈ Act0.
Besides that, the approximate reconstruction discovers that
robot r2 has violated a prohibition instance though it doe
that D =
snot know the exact action performed -- recall
as: f ulf illed
violated
unknown
as: violated
f ulf illed
unknown
7
{move(r2, d, e)}. Had the NM not performed the proposed
reconstruction processes, none of these violations would have
been detected.
IV. NM ALGORITHMS
Algorithm 1 contains the NM pseudocode. In each step, the
NM observes the actions of agents and uses this information
to update the current and the previous partial states (lines 4-
9). If all the actions have not been observed in the previous
state,
then the NM executes the reconstruction function
to reconstruct unobserved actions (lines 11-14). Then, the
checkN orms function is executed to determine which norms
have been violated and fulfilled in the previous state (line 15)
according to Definitions 9 and 10.
Note that the NM code can be executed while actions are
performed without delaying agents. Regarding the temporal
cost of the algorithm executed by NMs, it is determined by
the cost of the reconstruction function, the implementations
of which (full and approximate) are discussed below.
(cid:46) p0 is an empty conjunction of literals
Actt ← observeActions()
if Actt < Ag then
pt+1 ← post(Actt)
else
pt+1 ← p∗
pt ← pt
if t > 0 then
Algorithm 1 NM Algorithm
Require: Ag, N, D, (cid:79), g
1: p0 = ∅
2: t ← 0
3: while true do
4:
5:
6:
7:
8:
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
15:
16:
(cid:86) pre(Actt)
(cid:86) eff (Actt)
if Actt−1 < Ag then
t ← t + 1
t
T A ← Ag \ actors(Actt−1)
D ← ∅
reconstruction(pt−1, pt, Actt−1, T A, D)
(cid:46) Target Agents
(cid:46) Discovered violations and fuflilments
checkN orms(pt−1, Actt−1)
Full Reconstruction (Algorithm 2). This pseudocode corre-
sponds to the full reconstruction function. This function calls
the function search to search the actions of target agents (line
2). Then, for all the solutions found, the NM checks if they
are consistent according to Definition 7 (lines 4-6). Finally,
consistent solutions are used to extend the set of observed
actions and the knowledge about the initial and final states
(lines 7-14). The temporal cost of this algorithm is given by
the cost of the search function discussed below.
Algorithm 3 contains the pseudocode of the recursive
search function that computes all the sequences of consistent
actions that may have been executed by the agents that have
not been observed. It starts by checking that
there is at
least one target agent (line 2). If so, it identifies all actions
that might have been executed by one target agent (lines 3-
4). An action might have been executed if it is consistent
according to the static properties,
the domain knowledge,
and the initial and final states. For each consistent action, it
reconstructs the actions of the remaining agents recursively
the temporal cost of this
(lines 5-13). In the worst case,
(cid:46) Candidate Solutions
(cid:46) Consistent Solutions
if checkSolutionConsistency(Act, Sj, i, f ) then
S(cid:48) ← search(i, f, Act, T A)
S ← ∅
for all Sj ∈ S(cid:48) do
S ← S ∪ Sj
∀Si∈S Si
Algorithm 2 Full Reconstruction Function
1: function FULLRECONSTRUCTION(i, f, Act, T A, D)
2:
3:
4:
5:
6:
7:
8:
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
R ←(cid:84)
i ← i(cid:86) pre(R)
f ← f(cid:86) post(R)(cid:86) i•
f ← i∗(cid:86) f(cid:86) eff (Act)
Act ← Act ∪ R
if Act < Ag then
if R (cid:54)= ∅ then
else
function is O(AgD×ID ), where Ag is the set of agents,
D is the set of action descriptions and ID is the maximum
number of instantiations per action. This situation arises when
no action is observed and all actions are applicable for all
agents.
Algorithm 3 Search Function
1: function SEARCH(i, f, Act, T A)
2:
3:
4:
if T A (cid:54)= ∅ then
if ∃σ :
for all d ∈ D do
actor(σ · d) ∈ T A then
(cid:46) Identify consistent actions
checkActionConsitency(σ · d, i, f ) ∧
α = actor(σ · d)
i(cid:48) ← i(cid:86) pre(σ · d)
f(cid:48) ← f(cid:86) post(σ · d)
Act(cid:48) ← Act ∪ σ · d
T A(cid:48) ← T A \ {α}
S ← search(i(cid:48), f(cid:48), Act(cid:48), T A(cid:48))
for all Si ∈ S do
Si ← Si ∪ σ · d
return S
5:
6:
7:
8:
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
15:
else
return ∅
Approximate Reconstruction Function (Algorithm 4). This
function calls the function ApproximateSearch to search
the applicable actions per each target agent (line 2). Then,
the list of applicable actions per each agent is checked (lines
3-12). Specifically, if an agent may have executed one action
only, then the NM knows that this action was executed and
it updates the reconstructed action set (lines 3-5). Then, the
set of observed actions and the knowledge about the initial
and final states is updated (lines 6-12). Finally, discovered
violations and fulfilments are calculated (lines 14-19). The
temporal cost of this algorithm is given by the cost of the
ApproximateSearch function discussed below.
pseudocode
the
ApproximateSearch function.
starts by initialising
the list of applicable actions per agent (lines 3-4). Then it
calculates the set of instances that are relevant to the initial
state (line 7). The function calculates per each target agent
the list of applicable actions that it may have executed (lines
9-11). Then, the list of applicable actions per each agent
is checked (lines 12-18). Specifically, if an agent may have
executed one action only, then the NM knows that this action
Algorithm 5
contains
the
of
It
8
was executed and it updates the list of applicable actions,
the initial and final states, and retracts the agent from the
target agents (lines 14-17). This process is repeated until
there are no more target agents or the initial and final states
remain unchanged. Then the set of instances that are relevant
to the initial state is calculated (line 13). Finally, the list
of applicable actions per agent is updated with actions of
remaining target agents (lines 19-20). The temporal cost of
this function is O(Ag2 × D × ID).
Algorithm 4 Approximate Reconstruction Function
1: function APPROXIMATERECONSTRUCTION(i, f, Act, T A, D)
2:
3:
4:
5:
6:
7:
8:
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
15:
16:
17:
18:
19:
(cid:101)S ← approximateSearch(i, f, Act, T A)
if (cid:101)Sα = 1 then
i ← i(cid:86) pre(R)
f ← f(cid:86) post(R)(cid:86) i◦
f ← i∗(cid:86) f(cid:86) eff (Act)
if (cid:101)Sα > 1 then
if (cid:54) ∃a ∈ (cid:101)Sα : ¬f orbidden(P, a) then
else if (cid:54) ∃a ∈ (cid:101)Sα : ¬mandatory(O, a) then
for all α ∈ T A do
R ← R ∪ Sα
Act ← Act ∪ R
if Act < Ag then
(cid:46) a is an action from (cid:101)Sα
(cid:46) a is an action from (cid:101)Sα
O, P ← calculateInstances(i)
for all α ∈ T A do
D ← D ∪ a
D ← D ∪ a
if R (cid:54)= ∅ then
else
(cid:46) List of approximate actions per agent
checkActionConsitency(σ · d, i, f ) ∧
(cid:101)Sα ← ∅
continue ← true
for all α ∈ T A do
while continue ∧ T A (cid:54)= ∅ do
Algorithm 5 Approximate Search Function
1: function APPROXIMATESEARCH(i, f, Act, T A)
2:
3:
4:
5:
6:
7:
8:
9:
10:
continue ← f alse
for all α ∈ T A do
for all d ∈ D do
actor(σ · d) ∈ T A then
for all α ∈ T A do
if Lα = 1 then
Lactor(σ·d) ← Lactor(σ·d) ∪ σ · d
Lα ← ∅
if ∃σ :
11:
12:
13:
14:
15:
16:
17:
18:
19:
20:
21:
(cid:101)Sα ← Lα
i ← i(cid:86) pre(Lα)
f ← f(cid:86) post(Lα)
T A ← T A \ {α}
continue ← true
for all α ∈ T A do
(cid:101)Sα ← Lα
return (cid:101)S
V. EVALUATION
This section compares the performance of a NM with full
reconstruction, a NM with approximate reconstruction and a
traditional norm monitor -- which is the method used in the
majority of previous proposals [6], [23], [14], [24], [8] -- that
only considers the observed actions to detect violations; with
respect to their capabilities to monitor norm compliance. We
have evaluated our proposal in a case study, which allows
us to contextualise the results and to give a meaningful
interpretation to them; and in a series of random experiments,
which allow us to evaluate our proposal under a wide range
of different situations and parameter values.
A. Case Study
We implemented in Java a simulator of the paper example
in which robots attend requests in offices connected through
corridors. Compliance with the collision avoidance norm is
controlled by a monitor that observes surveillance cameras.
In each simulation, we generate corridors and cameras ran-
domly. In each step of the simulation, each robot chooses
randomly one applicable action to be executed. The simulation
is executed 100 steps and repeated 100 times to support the
findings. We conducted experiments in which the number of
offices O took a random value within the (cid:74)3, 500(cid:75) interval
(cid:74)2, 250(cid:75) interval. Besides that, to be able to compare with the
number of offices O takes a random value within(cid:74)3, 10(cid:75) and
the number of robots R takes a random value within (cid:74)2, 5(cid:75),
full NM, we also considered small scenarios only, in which the
and the number of robots R took a random value within the
as the full reconstruction has an exponential cost and it is
intractable for most of the cases with the default intervals.
1) Action Observability: To analyse the performance and
scalability of monitors with respect to their capabilities to
observe actions, we defined the number of corridors C as
a random value within the (cid:74)O, O × (O − 1)(cid:75) interval and
varied the ratio of cameras to corridors (action observability).
Table I shows the percentage of violations detected per each
type of monitor. The higher the ratio of cameras, the more
actions are observed and the better the performance of all
monitors. Moreover, the approximate NM offers on average
a 39% performance improvement over a traditional monitor
(i.e., it identifies 16% more violations plus a further 24%
of discovered violations). That is, an approximate NM out-
performs a traditional monitor with the same capabilities to
observe actions. When compared to full NM in small scenarios
(O ∈(cid:74)3, 10(cid:75) and R ∈(cid:74)2, 5(cid:75)), approximate NM performs sim-
ilarly. This is explained by the fact that there is a single norm
in this scenario, actions have no concurrency conditions, and
the preconditions and postconditions of actions are disjoint.
In this circumstances, the approximate reconstruction process
reconstructs actions similarly to the full reconstruction14.
Cameras Traditional Approximate NM
Identify+Discover
Ratio Monitor
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0%
11%
31%
55%
78%
100%
0+0%
14+9%
40+12%
71+10%
91+4%
100+0%
O ∈(cid:74)3, 500(cid:75) and R ∈(cid:74)2, 250(cid:75)
Cameras Traditional Full Approximate NM
Ratio Monitor NM Identify+Discover
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0%
0%
32%
16%
68%
32%
88%
56%
76%
99%
100% 100%
0+0%
32+6%
67+5%
88+3%
99+0%
100+0%
O ∈(cid:74)3, 10(cid:75) and R ∈(cid:74)2, 5(cid:75)
TABLE I: Action Observability Experiment
14Note that full reconstruction does not guarantee completeness.
9
2) Action Instantiations: To analyse the performance and
scalability of monitors with respect to agent capabilities to
execute actions (i.e., the number of instantiations per action),
we varied the ratio of corridors15 (e.g., a ratio of 0% means
C = O) and defined the number of cameras as a random value
within the (cid:74)0, C(cid:75) interval. Table II shows the results of this
experiment. The approximate NM offers on average a 43%
performance improvement over a traditional monitor (i.e., it
identifies 29% more violations plus a further 14% of discov-
ered violations). That is, given the same number of possible
instantiations per action, an approximate NM outperforms a
traditional monitor. Besides, we can see that, as in the previous
experiment, the approximate NM performs similarly to the
full NM. In particular, when the ratio of corridors is higher
than 0%, agents are capable of executing different actions
and the reconstruction process becomes more complex, which
decreases the performance of full and approximate NMs.
However, full and approximate NMs noticeably outperform
the traditional monitor regardless of the ratio of corridors.
Corridors Traditional Approximate NM
Identify+Discover
Monitor
Corridors Traditional Full Approximate NM
Monitor NM Identify+Discover
Ratio
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
51%
48%
48%
41%
49%
42%
98+0%
55+6%
56+7%
47+6%
56+13%
49+7%
Ratio
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
52%
59%
55%
51%
55%
57%
99%
80%
74%
70%
68%
70%
99+0%
79+3%
74+3%
69+4%
68+5%
69+4%
O ∈(cid:74)3, 500(cid:75) and R ∈(cid:74)2, 250(cid:75)
O ∈(cid:74)3, 10(cid:75) and R ∈(cid:74)2., 5(cid:75)
TABLE II: Action Instantiations Experiment
B. Random Experiments
We implemented a simulator in Java in which there is a set
of agents that perform actions in a monitored environment as
defined below. In particular, our simulator does not model a
specific scenario; rather it creates a different scenario in each
simulation (i.e., generating randomly agent capabilities, the
environment properties, actions and norms). As in the previous
experiments, we have considered big and small scenarios. In
particular, the number of agents G in small scenarios took
a random value within the (cid:74)1, 5(cid:75) interval, whereas in big
scenarios G took a random value within the(cid:74)1, 500(cid:75) interval.
(cid:74)1, 50(cid:75) interval. Again, the simulation is executed 100 steps
The number of actions A took a random value within the
and repeated 1000 times to ensure that the values of the
simulation parameters range over possible values16.
Agent Definition. We modelled different types of agents
with different capabilities to perform actions. In particular,
the set of actions available to each agent depends on the
function/s assumed by each agent in a particular simulation.
To model these capabilities, a set of roles is created at the
beginning of each simulation. Specifically, the number of roles
created took a random value within the (cid:74)1, A(cid:75) interval. For
15Recall that C takes values within the(cid:74)O, O × (O − 1)(cid:75) interval.
each role a subset of the actions are randomly selected as the
role capabilities; i.e., all agents enacting this role are able to
16Note that in the random experiments there are more simulation parameters
than in the case-study simulator and a higher number of repetitions is required
to support the findings.
perform these actions17. To avoid that all roles have similar
capabilities, which would lead to simulations populated by
homogeneous agents, the number of actions selected as role
capabilities took a random value within the (cid:74)1,(cid:100)0.1 ∗ A(cid:101)(cid:75)
interval (i.e., at maximum each role is capable of performing a
10% of the actions). At the beginning of each simulation, each
agent is defined as enacting a random subset of the roles. In
each step of the simulation, each agent selects randomly one
action among the available actions that it can execute in the
current state.
Environment Definition. In the simulator, the environment
is described in terms of different situations or states of affairs
that can be true or false. Each one of these states of affairs is
represented by a grounded proposition. Thus, the state of the
environment is defined in terms of a set of propositions. For
simplicity, we assumed that these propositions are independent
(i.e, propositions are not logically related). In our simulations,
the number of propositions P took a random value within the
(cid:74)A, 2 ∗ A(cid:75) interval (i.e., there is at least one proposition per
each action18). Besides that, there is a set of grounded atomic
formulas describing the roles played by agents and the actions
that can be performed by each role. The relationship between
agents and roles is formally represented by a binary predicate
(play). Specifically, the expression play(g, r) describes the
fact that the agent identified by g enacts the role identified by
r. Similarly, relationship between roles and actions is formally
represented by a binary predicate (capable). Specifically, the
expression capable(a, r) describes the fact that agents enacting
role r are capable of performing the action identified by a. For
simplicity, we assume that the roles enacted by the agents and
the role capabilities are static properties of the environment.
Action Definition. Actions allow agents to change the state
of the environment. At
the beginning of each simulation,
a set of actions is randomly generated. For each action
(cid:104)name, pre, con, post(cid:105) the elements are defined as follows:
name is initialised with a sequential identifier a; pre is defined
as {play(A, R), capable(R, a), p1, ..., pn} where the elements
p1, ..., pn are randomly selected from the proposition set; con
is defined as {a1(A1, R1), ..., am(Am, Rm)}, where each ai
is an action randomly selected from the action set such that
ai (cid:54)= a and Ai, Ri are free variables representing the agent
performing the action and the role capable of performing this
action, respectively; and post is defined as {p1, ..., pk} where
each pi is a proposition randomly selected from the proposition
set. To avoid that actions have too many constraints, which
would be unrealistic and make actions to be only executed
on few situations, the number of propositions in pre and
post takes a random value within the(cid:74)1,(cid:100)0.1 ∗ P(cid:101)(cid:75) interval.
within the(cid:74)0,(cid:100)0.1 ∗ A(cid:101)(cid:75) interval.
Similalry, the number of actions in con takes a random value
Besides these actions, a NOP action, which has no effect
on the environment, was created. To maximise the number
of actions executed in the simulations, which may entail
more violations and fulfilments, we defined that the NOP
action can only be executed by agents when none of their
17This condition has been formulated in action preconditions as explained
below.
18Note that an action can change the truth value of several propositions.
10
available actions can be executed. However, similar results
would have been obtained if this condition was relaxed19. Our
simulator models scenarios where the NOP action can always
be observed. This is the case in many real domains such as
Intrusion Detection Systems or Autonomous Systems, where
it it not always possible to analyse the data (e.g., the packages)
sent by agents (e.g., hosts) to infer the actions performed, but
it is always possible to know which agents have performed an
action (i.e., which agents have sent packages).
norms took a random value within the (cid:74)1, A(cid:75) (i.e.,
Norm Definition. Agents' actions are regulated by a set
the beginning of each simulation, a set of
of norms. At
norms is randomly created. In particular the number of
there
is at maximum one norm per each action). For each ac-
tion (cid:104)deontic, condition, action(cid:105) the elements are defined
as follows: deontic is randomly initialised with a deontic
operator; condition is defined as {p1, ..., pk} where each pi is
a proposition randomly selected from the proposition set; and
action is randomly initialised with an action. To allow norms
to be instantiated, the number of propositions in condition
takes a random value within the(cid:74)0,(cid:100)P ∗ 0.1(cid:101)(cid:75) interval.
1) Action Observability: To analyse the performance and
scalability of monitors with respect to their capabilities to
observe actions, we varied the observation probability. Tables
III and IV show the percentage of detected fulfilments and
violations, respectively. Again, the approximate NM offers
a significant performance improvement over a traditional
monitor; i.e., the approximate NM offers on average a 74%
performance improvement over a traditional monitor. When
compared to full NM in small scenarios (A ∈ (cid:74)1, 50(cid:75) and
G ∈(cid:74)1, 5(cid:75)), the full NM offers on average a 21% performance
improvement over an approximate NM. This is explained by
the fact that this experiment is more complex than the case
study; i.e., there are several norms (both prohibition and obli-
gation norms), actions have concurrent conditions and actions
may have conflicting preconditions and postconditions (i.e.,
conditions that are defined over the same propositions). Note
that the traditional monitor detects violations and fulfilments
even when the observation probability is 0%. These detections
correspond to situations in which none of the agents can
execute any action (i.e., all agents execute the NOP action)
which leads to the fulfilment of prohibition instances and the
violation of obligation instances. This phenomenon is more
frequent in case of small scenarios since the lower the number
of agents, the higher the probability that all agents cannot
execute any action.
2) Action Possibilities: To analyse the performance and
scalability of monitors with respect to agent capabilities to
execute actions (i.e., the number of available actions), we
defined the observation probability as a random value within
the [0, 100%] interval and we varied the number of actions.
Tables V and VI show the percentage of detected fulfilments
and violations, respectively. In this experiment,
the more
actions, the more complex the reconstruction problem is. As
a consequence, the improvement offered by an approximate
19Note that the capabilities of monitors to detect violations and fulfilments
do not depend on the fact that agents are allowed to perform the NOP action
in any situation.
Observ. Traditional Approximate NM
Prob. Monitor
Identify+Discover
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
35+7%
47+6%
62+4%
72+3%
80+2%
100+0%
A ∈(cid:74)1, 50(cid:75) and G ∈(cid:74)1, 500(cid:75)
2%
18%
35%
50%
66%
100%
Observ. Traditional Full Approximate NM
Prob. Monitor NM Identify+Discover
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
46%
20%
51%
23%
57%
31%
69%
43%
79%
58%
100% 100%
34+1%
39+1%
45+1%
56+0%
70+0%
100+0%
A ∈(cid:74)1, 50(cid:75) and G ∈(cid:74)1, 5(cid:75)
TABLE III: Fulfilments Detected in the Action Observability
Experiment
Observ Traditional Approximate NM
Prob. Monitor
Identify+Discover
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
36+8%
50+6%
62+6%
70+2%
78+2%
100+0%
A ∈(cid:74)1, 50(cid:75) and G ∈(cid:74)1, 500(cid:75)
2%
18%
35%
49%
65%
100%
Observ Traditional Full Approximate NM
Prob. Monitor NM Identify+Discover
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
44%
20%
50%
23%
56%
32%
68%
42%
56%
78%
100% 100%
33+1%
37+0%
45+0%
55+0%
69+0%
100+0%
A ∈(cid:74)1, 50(cid:75) and G ∈(cid:74)1, 5(cid:75)
TABLE IV: Violations Detected in the Action Observability
Experiment
NM over a traditional monitor decreases as the number of
actions increases. However, the approximate NM still offer on
average a 56% performance improvement over a traditional
monitor. When the number of actions is very high (e.g., when
the number of actions is 128 in small scenarios), then action
preconditions become very complex and most of the times the
NOP action is executed by all agents, which entails that the all
monitors obtain a good performance. We can see that, as in the
previous experiment, the approximate NM performs slightly
worse than the full NM (i.e., the full NM offers on average
a 15% performance improvement over an approximate NM).
However, full and approximate NMs noticeably outperform
the traditional monitor regardless of the number of actions.
Actions Traditional Approximate NM
Identify+Discover
Monitor
Actions Traditional Full Approximate NM
Monitor NM Identify+Discover
95+8%
75+1%
48+0%
40+0%
52%
49%
32%
29%
G ∈(cid:74)1, 500(cid:75)
69%
47%
38%
53%
99%
75%
63%
83%
G ∈(cid:74)1, 5(cid:75)
95+3%
71+0%
48+0%
57+0%
TABLE V: Fulfilments Detected in the Action Possibilities
Experiment
Actions Traditional Approximate NM
Identify+Discover
Monitor
Actions Traditional Full Approximate NM
Monitor NM Identify+Discover
93+5%
76+6%
50+1%
39+0%
53%
49%
35%
31%
G ∈(cid:74)1, 500(cid:75)
68%
48%
38%
56%
99%
76%
62%
85%
G ∈(cid:74)1, 5(cid:75)
95+2%
72+1%
47+0%
59+0%
TABLE VI: Violations Detected in the Action Possibilities
Experiment
C. Summary
The conclusions of our evaluation are threefold:
1) Both approximate and full reconstruction processes are
more effective (i.e., detect more norm violations and ful-
filments) than traditional monitoring approaches regard-
less of the scenario complexity (i.e., action possibilities
2
8
32
128
2
8
32
128
2
8
32
128
2
8
32
128
11
and observability). Both in the case study and in the ran-
dom experiments our algorithms improved significantly
the percentage of violations and fulfilments detected.
2) Approximate reconstruction is slighting less effective
than full reconstruction. In the case study, where a single
prohibition norm was monitored; the approximate NM
obtained almost
the same results as the full NM. In
our random experiments, where several prohibition and
obligation norms were monitored, the full NM offered
an average improvement of a 18% over an approximate
NM.
3) Approximate reconstruction is scalable with the scenario
size (i.e., the number of agents and actions to be mon-
itored). In particular, our experiments demonstrate that
the approximate algorithm can be used to monitor a large
number of agents (we simulated scenarios with up to 500
agents), actions (we simulated scenarios with up to 128
actions), and norms (we simulated scenarios with up to
128 norms).
VI. RELATED WORK
Previous work on norms for regulating MAS proposed
control mechanisms for norms to have an effective influence on
agent behaviours [15]. These control mechanisms are classified
into two main categories [15]: regimentation mechanisms,
which make the violation of norms impossible; and enforce-
ment mechanisms, which are applied after the detection of
norm violations and fulfilments, reacting upon them.
Regimentation mechanisms prevent agents from performing
forbidden actions (vs. force agents to perform obligatory
actions) by mediating access to resources and the commu-
nication channel, such as Electronic Institutions (EIs) [12].
However, the regimentation of all actions is often difficult or
impossible. Furthermore, it is sometimes preferable to allow
agents to make flexible decisions about norm compliance
[7]. In response to this need, enforcement mechanisms were
developed. Proposals on the enforcement of norms can be
classified according to the entity that monitors whether norms
are fulfilled or not. Specifically, norm compliance can be
monitored by either agents themselves or the underlying
infrastructure may provide monitoring entities.
Regarding agent monitoring, this approach is characterized
by the fact that norm violations and fulfilments are monitored
by agents that are involved in an interaction [30], [9], or other
agents that observe an interaction in which they are not directly
involved [28], [10], [32]. The main drawback of proposals
based on agent monitoring is the fact that norm monitoring
and enforcement must be implemented by agent programmers.
Regarding infrastructural monitoring, several authors pro-
posed developing entities at the infrastructure level that are in
charge of both monitoring and enforcing norms. Cardoso &
Oliveira [6] proposed an architecture in which the monitoring
and enforcement of norms is made by a single institutional
entity. This centralized implementation represents a perfor-
mance limitation when dealing with a considerable number
of agents. To address the performance limitation of central-
ized approaches, distributed mechanisms for an institutional
enforcement of norms were proposed in [23], [14], [24], [8].
12
All of the aforementioned proposals on monitoring assume
that monitors have complete observational capabilities. Excep-
tion to these approaches is the recent work of Bulling et al.
[5] and Alechina et al. [2]. In [5], the partial observability
problem is addressed combining different norm monitors to
build ideal monitors (i.e., monitors that together are able to
detect the violation of a given set of norms). In [2], the authors
propose to synthesise an approximate set of norms that can be
monitored given the observational capabilities of a monitor.
However, there are circumstances in which norms cannot be
modified (e.g., contract and law monitoring) or ideal monitors
are expensive and/or not feasible. We take a different approach
in which norms and monitors' observation capabilities remain
unchanged and monitors reconstruct unobserved actions.
Our approach is also related to planning, where methods
(e.g., POMDPs [18]) for choosing optimal actions in partially
observable environments have been proposed. A major differ-
ence between these proposals and our proposal is that NMs
do not perform practical reasoning, i.e., they do not try to
optimise or achieve a practical goal. Instead, NMs perform
both deductive and abductive reasoning [25] to reason from
observed actions to reach a conclusion about the state of the
world, and to infer unobserved actions.
VII. CONCLUSION
In this paper, we propose information models and algo-
rithms for monitoring norms under partial action observability
by reconstructing unobserved actions from observed actions
using two different reconstruction processes: full and ap-
proximate. Our experiments demonstrate that both reconstruc-
tion processes detect more norm violations than traditional
monitoring approaches. Approximate reconstruction performs
slightly worse than full reconstruction, whereas its computa-
tional cost is much cheaper, making it suitable to be applied
in practice.
The reconstruction algorithms proposed in this paper can
be applied to several domains that require action monitoring;
from normative MAS [31], to intrusion detection systems [16],
to control systems [26] and to intelligent surveillance systems
[17]. As future work, we plan to investigate domain-dependent
approximations that could speed up action reconstruction even
further.
REFERENCES
update. In Proc. of IJCAI, 2013.
[2] N. Alechina, M. Dastani, and B. Logan. Norm approximation for
imperfect monitors. In Proc. of AAMAS, pages 117 -- 124, 2014.
[3] T. Bass.
Intrusion detection systems and multisensor data fusion.
Communications of the ACM, 43(4):99 -- 105, 2000.
[4] C. Boutilier and R. I. Brafman. Partial-order planning with concur-
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research,
rent interacting actions.
14(1):105 -- 136, 2001.
[5] N. Bulling, M. Dastani, and M. Knobbout. Monitoring norm violations
in multi-agent systems. In Proc. of AAMAS, pages 491 -- 498, 2013.
[6] H. Cardoso and E. Oliveira. Institutional reality and norms: Specifying
and monitoring agent organizations. International Journal of Coopera-
tive Information Systems, 16(1):67 -- 95, 2007.
[7] C. Castelfranchi.
Formalising the informal? Dynamic social order,
bottom-up social control, and spontaneous normative relations. Journal
of Applied Logic, 1(1-2):47 -- 92, 2003.
[1] N. Alechina, M. Dastani, and B. Logan. Reasoning about normative
Proc. of IJCAI, pages 1507 -- 1512, 2007.
[8] N. Criado, E. Argente, P. Noriega, and V. Botti. Manea: A distributed
architecture for enforcing norms in open mas. Engineering Applications
of Artificial Intelligence, 26(1):76 -- 95, 2013.
[9] A. Daskalopulu, T. Dimitrakos, and T. Maibaum.
Evidence-based
electronic contract performance monitoring. Group Decision and Nego-
tiation, 11(6):469 -- 485, 2002.
[10] A. P. de Pinninck, C. Sierra, and W. M. Schorlemmer. A multiagent
network for peer norm enforcement. Journal of Autonomous Agents
and Multi-Agent Systems, 21(3):397 -- 424, 2010.
[11] F. Dignum. Autonomous agents with norms. Artificial Intelligence and
Law, 7(1):69 -- 79, 1999.
[12] M. Esteva, B. Rosell, J. A. Rodr´ıguez-Aguilar, and J. L. Arcos. Ameli:
In Proc. of
An agent-based middleware for electronic institutions.
AAMAS, pages 236 -- 243, 2004.
[13] M. Fitting. First-order logic and automated theorem proving. Springer,
1996.
[14] D. Gaertner, A. Garcia-Camino, P. Noriega, J.-A. Rodriguez-Aguilar, and
W. Vasconcelos. Distributed norm management in regulated multiagent
systems. In Proc. of AAMAS, pages 624 -- 631, 2007.
[15] D. Grossi, H. Aldewereld, and F. Dignum. Ubi lex, ibi poena: Designing
In COIN II, pages 101 -- 114.
in e-institutions.
norm enforcement
Springer, 2007.
[16] W. Hu, W. Hu, and S. Maybank. Adaboost-based algorithm for
network intrusion detection. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and
Cybernetics, Part B: Cybernetics, 38(2):577 -- 583, 2008.
[17] C.-M. Huang and L.-C. Fu. Multitarget visual tracking based effec-
IEEE
tive surveillance with cooperation of multiple active cameras.
Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B: Cybernetics,
41(1):234 -- 247, 2011.
[18] L. P. Kaelbling, M. L. Littman, and A. R. Cassandra. Planning and
acting in partially observable stochastic domains. Journal of Artificial
Intelligence, 101(1):99 -- 134, 1998.
[19] F. L´opez y L´opez, M. Luck, and M. dInverno. A normative framework
for agent-based systems. Computational & Mathematical Organization
Theory, 12(2-3):227 -- 250, 2006.
[20] E. Lorini. On the logical foundations of moral agency. In Deontic Logic
in Computer Science, pages 108 -- 122. Springer, 2012.
[21] F. Meneguzzi, S. Modgil, N. Oren, S. Miles, M. Luck, and N. Faci.
Applying electronic contracting to the aerospace aftercare domain.
Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 25(7):1471 -- 1487,
2012.
[22] R. Micalizio, P. Torasso, and G. Torta. On-line monitoring and diagnosis
In Proc. of ECAI,
of multi-agent systems: a model based approach.
volume 16, page 848, 2004.
[23] N. Minsky and V. Ungureanu. Law-governed interaction: a coordination
and control mechanism for heterogeneous distributed systems. ACM
Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, 9(3):273 -- 305,
2000.
[24] S. Modgil, N. Faci, F. Meneguzzi, N. Oren, S. Miles, and M. Luck. A
framework for monitoring agent-based normative systems. In Proc. of
AAMAS, pages 153 -- 160, 2009.
[25] G. Paul. Approaches to abductive reasoning: an overview. Journal of
Artificial Intelligence Review, 7(2):109 -- 152, 1993.
[26] C. Rieger, D. Scheidt, and W. Smart. Guest editorial: Introduction to
IEEE
the special issue on resilient control architectures and systems.
Transactions on Cybernetics, 44(11):1994 -- 1996, Nov 2014.
[27] S. Sadiq, G. Governatori, and K. Namiri. Modeling control objectives for
business process compliance. In Business process management, pages
149 -- 164. Springer, 2007.
[28] S. Sen and S. Airiau. Emergence of norms through social learning. In
[29] W. Vasconcelos, M. J. Kollingbaum, and T. J. Norman. Resolving
conflict and inconsistency in norm-regulated virtual organizations.
In
Proceedings of the 6th international joint conference on Autonomous
agents and multiagent systems, page 91. ACM, 2007.
[30] M. Venkatraman and M. Singh. Verifying compliance with commitment
Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems,
protocols.
2(3):217 -- 236, 1999.
[31] C. Yu, M. Zhang, and F. Ren. Collective learning for the emergence of
social norms in networked multiagent systems. IEEE Transactions on
Cybernetics, 44(12):2342 -- 2355, Dec 2014.
[32] W. Zeng and M.-Y. Chow. Resilient distributed control in the presence
of misbehaving agents in networked control systems. IEEE Transactions
on Cybernetics, 44(11):2038 -- 2049, Nov 2014.
|
1302.5592 | 2 | 1302 | 2013-04-29T14:52:46 | A tournament of order 24 with two disjoint TEQ-retentive sets | [
"cs.MA",
"math.CO"
] | Brandt et al. (2013) have recently disproved a conjecture by Schwartz (1990) by non-constructively showing the existence of a counterexample with about 10^136 alternatives. We provide a concrete counterexample for Schwartz's conjecture with only 24 alternatives. | cs.MA | cs |
A tournament of order 24 with two disjoint
TEQ-retentive sets
Felix Brandt
and Hans Georg Seedig
Technische Universitat Munchen
85748 Munich, Germany
{brandtf,seedigh}@in.tum.de
Brandt et al. (2013) have recently disproved a conjecture by Schwartz (1990)
by non-constructively showing the existence of a counterexample with about
10136 alternatives. We provide a concrete counterexample for Schwartz's con-
jecture with only 24 alternatives.
1 Introduction
A tournament T is a pair (A, ≻), where A is a set of alternatives and ≻ is an asymmetric and
complete (and thus irreflexive) binary relation on A, usually referred to as the dominance
relation. The dominance relation can be extended to sets of alternatives by writing X ≻ Y
when x ≻ y for all x ∈ X and y ∈ Y . For a tournament (A, ≻), an alternative x ∈ A, and
a subset X ⊆ A of alternatives, we denote by DX(x) = { y ∈ X y ≻ x } the dominators
of x. A tournament solution is a function that maps a tournament to a nonempty subset
of its alternatives (see, e.g., Laslier, 1997, for further information). Given a tournament
T = (A, ≻) and a tournament solution S, a nonempty subset of alternatives X ⊆ A is called
S-retentive if S(DA(x)) ⊂ X for all x ∈ X such that DA(x) 6= ∅. Schwartz (1990) defined
the tournament equilibrium set (TEQ) of a given tournament T = (A, ≻) recursively as
the union of all inclusion-minimal TEQ-retentive sets in T .
Schwartz conjectured that every tournament contains a unique inclusion-minimal TEQ-
retentive set, which was later shown to be equivalent to TEQ satisfying any one of a num-
ber of desirable properties for tournament solutions (Laffond et al., 1993; Houy, 2009a,b;
Brandt et al., 2010a; Brandt, 2011b; Brandt and Harrenstein, 2011; Brandt, 2011a). This
conjecture was recently disproved by Brandt et al. (2013) who have shown the existence
of a counterexample with about 10136 alternatives using the probabilistic method. Since
1
it was shown that TEQ satisfies the above mentioned desirable properties for all tour-
naments that are smaller than the smallest counterexample to Schwartz's conjecture, the
search for smaller counterexamples remains of interest. In fact, the counterexample found
by Brandt et al. (2013) is so large that it has no practical consequences whatsoever for
TEQ.
In this note, we provide a tournament of order 24 with two disjoint TEQ-retentive
sets. In contrast to the previous counterexample, both TEQ-retentive sets are of the same
order and even isomorphic. On the other hand, the tournament does not constitute a
counterexample to a weakening of Schwartz's conjecture by Brandt (2011b).
Let nTEQ be the greatest natural number n such that all tournaments of order n or less
admit a unique minimal TEQ-retentive set. Together with earlier results by Brandt et al.
(2010b), we now have that 12 ≤ nTEQ ≤ 23.
The counterexample is based on new structural insights about tournament solutions that
we will explore further in future work.
2 The Counterexample
We define a tournament T = (A ≻) with 24 alternatives that has two disjoint TEQ-
retentive sets X = {x1, . . . , x12} and Y = {y1, . . . , y12} with A = X ∪ Y . The two induced
subtournaments T X and T Y are isomorphic.
Let X1 = {x1, . . . , x6}, X2 = {x7, . . . , x12}, Y1 = {y1, . . . , y6}, and Y2 = {y7, . . . , y12}.
Then, the dominance relation between alternatives in X and Y is defined as illustrated in
Figure 1.
X1
X2
X
Y1
Y2
Y
Figure 1: The structure of the counterexample. The two subtournaments T X and T Y are
isomorphic and of order 12. Furthermore, X1 ≻ Y2, X2 ≻ Y1, Y1 ≻ X1, and
Y2 ≻ X2.
The dominator sets in T X (and equivalently in T Y ) are defined as follows:
DX (x1) = {x4, x5, x6, x8, x9, x12},
DX (x3) = {x1, x2, x6, x7, x9, x10},
DX (x5) = {x2, x3, x4, x8, x10, x11},
DX (x7) = {x1, x5, x6, x11, x12},
DX (x9) = {x2, x4, x5, x7, x8},
DX (x11) = {x1, x2, x3, x8, x9, x10}, and DX(x12) = {x3, x4, x5, x9, x10, x11}.
DX(x2) = {x1, x6, x7, x10, x12},
DX(x4) = {x2, x3, x7, x8, x11},
DX(x6) = {x4, x5, x9, x11, x12},
DX(x8) = {x2, x3, x6, x7, x12},
DX(x10) = {x1, x4, x6, x7, x8, x9},
2
A rather tedious check reveals that
TEQ(DA(x2)) = {x6, x10, x12} ⊂ X,
TEQ(DA(x1)) = {x4, x8, x12} ⊂ X,
TEQ(DA(x4)) = {x2, x7, x11} ⊂ X,
TEQ(DA(x3)) = {x6, x7, x9} ⊂ X,
TEQ(DA(x6)) = {x4, x9, x11} ⊂ X,
TEQ(DA(x5)) = {x2, x8, x10} ⊂ X,
TEQ(DA(x8)) = {x3, x6, x12} ⊂ X,
TEQ(DA(x7)) = {x1, x5, x11} ⊂ X,
TEQ(DA(x9)) = {x2, x5, x7} ⊂ X,
TEQ(DA(x10)) = {x4, x6, x7} ⊂ X,
TEQ(DA(x11)) = {x1, x2, x8} ⊂ X, and TEQ(DA(x12)) = {x3, x4, x9} ⊂ X.
Hence, X is TEQ-retentive in T . Moreover, it can be checked that TEQ(DA(yi)) ⊂ Y for
all i ∈ {1, . . . , 12}, which implies that Y is TEQ-retentive as well. In fact, we even have
that, for all i, j ∈ {1, . . . , 12}, yj ∈ TEQ(DA(yi)) if and only if xj ∈ TEQ(DA(xi)).
References
F. Brandt. Group-strategyproof irresolute social choice functions.
In T. Walsh, editor,
Proc. of 22nd IJCAI, pages 79 -- 84. AAAI Press, 2011a.
F. Brandt. Minimal stable sets in tournaments. Journal of Economic Theory, 146(4):
1481 -- 1499, 2011b.
F. Brandt and P. Harrenstein. Set-rationalizable choice and self-stability. Journal of
Economic Theory, 146(4):1721 -- 1731, 2011.
F. Brandt, M. Brill, F. Fischer, and P. Harrenstein. Minimal retentive sets in tournaments.
In W. van der Hoek, G. A. Kaminka, Y. Lesp´erance, and M. Luck, editors, Proc. of 9th
AAMAS Conference, pages 47 -- 54. IFAAMAS, 2010a.
F. Brandt, F. Fischer, P. Harrenstein, and M. Mair. A computational analysis of the
tournament equilibrium set. Social Choice and Welfare, 34(4):597 -- 609, 2010b.
F. Brandt, M. Chudnovsky, I. Kim, G. Liu, S. Norin, A. Scott, P. Seymour, and
S. Thomass´e. A counterexample to a conjecture of Schwartz. Social Choice and Welfare,
40:739 -- 743, 2013.
N. Houy. Still more on the tournament equilibrium set. Social Choice and Welfare, 32:
93 -- 99, 2009a.
N. Houy. A few new results on TEQ. Mimeo, 2009b.
G. Laffond, J.-F. Laslier, and M. Le Breton. More on the tournament equilibrium set.
Math´ematiques et sciences humaines, 31(123):37 -- 44, 1993.
J.-F. Laslier. Tournament Solutions and Majority Voting. Springer, 1997.
T. Schwartz. Cyclic tournaments and cooperative majority voting: A solution. Social
Choice and Welfare, 7:19 -- 29, 1990.
3
|
1805.10176 | 1 | 1805 | 2018-05-25T14:34:51 | Few self-involved agents among BC agents can lead to polarized local or global consensus | [
"cs.MA"
] | Social issues are generally discussed by highly-involved and less-involved people to build social norms defining what has to be thought and done about them. As self-involved agents share different attitude dynamics to other agents Wood, Pool et al, 1996, we study the emergence and evolution of norms through an individual-based model involving these two types of agents. The dynamics of self-involved agents is drawn from Huet and Deffuant, 2010, and the dynamics of others, from Deffuant et al, 2001. The attitude of an agent is represented as a segment on a continuous attitudinal space. Two agents are close if their attitude segments share sufficient overlap. Our agents discuss two different issues, one of which, called main issue, is more important for the self-involved agents than the other, called secondary issue. Self-involved agents are attracted on both issues if they are close on main issue, but shift away from their peer's opinion if they are only close on secondary issue. Differently, non-self-involved agents are attracted by other agents when they are close on both the main and secondary issues. We observe the emergence of various types of extreme minor clusters. In one or different groups of attitudes, they can lead to an already-built moderate norm or a norm polarized on secondary and/or main issues. They can also push disagreeing agents gathered in different groups to a global moderate consensus. | cs.MA | cs | March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
8
1
0
2
y
a
M
5
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
6
7
1
0
1
.
5
0
8
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Advances in Complex Systems
c(cid:13) World Scientific Publishing Company
FEW SELF-INVOLVED AGENTS AMONG BOUNDED
CONFIDENCE AGENTS CAN CHANGE NORMS
Irstea, Laboratory of Engineering for Complex Systems LISC, Address
Sylvie HUET∗
63172 Aubi`ere, France
[email protected]
Jean-Denis MATHIAS
Irstea, Laboratory of Engineering for Complex Systems LISC, Address
63172 Aubi`ere, France
[email protected]
Received (received date)
Revised (revised date)
Social issues are generally discussed by highly-involved and less-involved people to build
social norms defining what has to be thought and done about them. As self-involved
agents share different attitude dynamics to other agents [46], we study the emergence
and evolution of norms through an individual-based model involving these two types of
agents. The dynamics of self-involved agents is drawn from [20], and the dynamics of
others, from [9]. The attitude of an agent is represented as a segment on a continuous
attitudinal space. Two agents are close if their attitude segments share sufficient overlap.
Our agents discuss two different issues, one of which, called main issue, is more important
for the self-involved agents than the other, called secondary issue. Self-involved agents are
attracted on both issues if they are close on main issue, but shift away from their peers
opinion if they are only close on secondary issue. Differently, non-self-involved agents
are attracted by other agents when they are close on both the main and secondary
issues. We observe the emergence of various types of extreme minor clusters. In one
or different groups of attitudes, they can lead to an already-built moderate norm or a
norm polarized on secondary and/or main issues. They can also push disagreeing agents
gathered in different groups to a global moderate consensus.
Keywords: Attraction; rejection; norm; involvement; bounded confidence model; polar-
ization; extreme minority effect.
1. Introduction
In this paper, we define a norm as simply the behavior or opinion adopted by the
majority of a group of people. We are not interested in descriptive norms but more in
the injunctive norm emerging from our interactions with others and from the shared
∗Typeset names in 10 pt Times Roman, uppercase. Use the footnote to indicate the present or
permanent address of the author.
1
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
2 Huet S., Mathias J.D.
normative beliefs supporting it [2]. Whereas descriptive norms refer to what most
people do, injunctive norms depict what most people approve of doing [12], what
is acceptable in a group. As a rule, the norm exerts social pressure to conformity
in the group, and agents tend to avoid straying too far from it. However, norms
do change, and there may also be a boomerang effect [37]. For instance, in most
European countries, majority opinion on society issues like abortion, homosexuality
and smoking has changed dramatically over the last 50 years. In agriculture, the
norm has long been towards strong intensification, meaning most farmers attach
high value to intensive practices and their high production outcomes regardless of
whether or not they conform in terms of behavior. Today, however, more and more
people and a minority of farmers disapprove of these practices, and this groundswell
may bring about strong social change in our conceptions of agriculture. The research
reported here sets out to understanding how such minorities emerge and how such
changes can take place.
The scholarship has singled out the involvement of certain agents as a condition
favoring resistance to the pressure to conformity. Muzafer Sherif especially outlined
the role of ego-involvement in persuasion: "... Regardless of the discrepancy of the
position presented, we predict that the more the person is involved in the issue
(the more important it is to him), the less susceptible he will be to short-term
attempts to change his attitude" [38]. Ego-involvement "refers more generally to
the involvement of the self or personal involvement. Ego-involving topics are those
that have intrinsic importance and personal meaning ... Important or involving
issues were those that had self-relevance" [33].
In his theories of social comparison [13] and cognitive dissonance [14], Leon
Festinger highlighted the need to be close, to be a member of a group, and to be
cognitively consistent. Here, building on these seminal works, we propose an agent-
based model inspired by [46] and social identity theories [4] [40] [42] to explore how
the strong ego-involvement of a part of the population may be responsible for the
evolution of a norm. The model agents can be involved or not in an issue being
discussed, and the corresponding dynamics are based on [9] and [20]. Two issues
are discussed. Some agents are involved in neither of them, while others are involved
in one issue, called main issue, but not in the other, called secondary issue.
The simulations show the emergence of small sets of agents sharing common ex-
treme opinions on the issues and differing from the majority. Under some conditions,
these agent clusters can lead a moderate majority to follow their extreme opinion on
the main or the secondary issues. This drift to the extreme can also take place when
the moderate majority is split in several different groups of opinions, each having
their own norm. However, we observe that the polarization on the secondary issue
can be very slow. In all these cases, we observe that a moderate norm changes for
a more extreme one. In what follows, we start by giving an overview of the model,
then go on to describe more details of the results and explain how they emerge, and
finish by summarizing the main results and discussing the interpretations .
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
Few self-involved agents among BC agents can lead to polarized local or global consensus
3
2. State of the art
Global overviews of the social psychology literature and agent-based models related
to social influence can be found in [5] [26] [17]. The vast majority of existing models
fail to consider the involvement of the agent in the issue discussed, despite it long
being recognized as an important variable by the social psychology scholarship [1]
[39] [38] [41].
A few models do consider agent involvement to some extent. The bounded con-
fidence model [9] [18] is quite consistent with social judgment theory, which states
that positive influence (i.e. opinion or attitude attraction) is a function of the dis-
crepancy of opinions between two agents, bounded by the influencees level of ego-
involvement in the discussed issue [39]. The "confidence segment" may thus be
related to the involvement in an issue - the larger the segment, the less involved the
agent.
Assuming that agents can sometimes shift away from each other as shown by [44]
or [39], [25] [21] [22] and [15] have proposed models with one threshold for attraction
and the same or another threshold for rejection. Overall, they have modeled atti-
tude shifts as proportional to the distance to the threshold relevant for rejection.
These thresholds can be also interpreted as defining the level of the agents ego-
involvement. Another investigation by simulation showing potential links between
involvement and attitude dynamics can be found in [36] with a model derived from
self-categorization theory [43]. More on more-or-less similar models can be found
in a recent review [17] that concluded on a need to compare existing models. In
line with this recommendation, below we give an in-depth description of models
potentially relatable to ego-involvement and sufficiently related to be meaningfully
compared.
Bounded confidence models can show convergence to extreme or moderate con-
sensus. The simulation typically starts with a population including two types of
agents: extremists who have extreme and very certain attitudes (they are never in-
fluenced by others), and moderates whose fairly uncertain attitudes are uniformly
distributed and who can easily be influenced. Depending on the initial number
of extremists and the initial uncertainty of the moderates, three types of conver-
gence emerge: central clusters, double extreme clusters in which almost everyone
has adopted one or the other extremist attitude, and a single extreme cluster imply-
ing that everyone shares the same extremist attitude [8] [7] [10]. A single extreme
cluster emerges from an initial convergence to a central opinion of moderate agents
which is then pulled by the extremist agents. This can be related to a norm change.
Recently, [28, 27] show that a new stationary state appears when the uncertainties
do not change over time and when the moderates have very large uncertainties,
i.e. the attitudes of moderate agents keep fluctuating without clustering, but the
distribution of the attitudes remains stable over time. These models assume that
attraction to the extreme minority is the main driver of norm change. Importantly,
they suppose that this extreme minority is initially present in the population - they
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
4 Huet S., Mathias J.D.
do not explain how these initial extremists appear.
These models are in line with social psychology scholarship that assumes attrac-
tion to an extreme minority attitude [32] or an extreme minority group [11] [45] [6]
is the main driver of polarization. This is also tied to ego-involvement, since social
judgment theory [39] from which the bounded confidence models are largely in-
spired, assumes that level of ego-involvement influences the sensitivity of the agents
to persuasion. It argues for an influence that increases and then decreases with the
discrepancy between the attitude of influencer and the attitude of the influence.
The level of ego-involvement defines the inflexion point of the influence. Greater
ego-involvement leads to thicker discrepancy before the inflexion point, and thus
lower susceptibility to opinion change.
Another hypothesis to explain norm change can be found in a willingness of
agents to differentiate from others or at least some others. This is particularly
salient when agents are in deep disagreement on an important issue, typically one
that involves their identity, in which case they tend to be willing to differentiate
on other, less important issues. Indeed, several studies and theories suggest that
polarization is connected with identity issues [4] [40] [42]. The set of experiments
presented in [46] suggests that level of self-relevance of the source-group for the
agent is a key factor in the rejection mechanism. Indeed, the experiments show that
in cases of agreement on a minor issue and disagreement on a highly self-relevant
issue (i.e. group membership in the experimentation), a subject tends to shift away
from alters position on the minor issue. Moreover, in cases of agreement on a highly
self-relevant issue, the subjects tend to be attracted on minor issues whatever the
level of preliminary disagreement. [20] proposed an agent-based model inspired by
[46] considering a dynamics for highly self-involved agents (considering the degree
ego-involvement in an issue as very similar in concept to the self-relevance of an
issue). The authors consider peer interactions in which two agents influence each
other on attitudinal dimensions, assuming that one attitude is important (main)
and the other is secondary. On each of the two dimensions (i.e. two attitudes), they
suppose that the attitudes can take continuous values between -1 and +1. When
the agents are close to each other on the main dimension, they tend to attract each
other on the secondary dimension, even if their disagreement is strong. When they
disagree on the main dimension and are close on the secondary, then they tend to
reject each other on the secondary dimension. The model includes two thresholds:
the um threshold on the main dimension, and the us threshold on the secondary
dimension.
This model leads to approximately 1/um main opinion clusters, while in the
classical bounded confidence model, this number is approximately 1/um ∗ 1/us.
The reason for this significant difference is that in the model proposed in [20] the
clustering is only driven by the main dimension with its threshold um; the number
of secondary dimensions does not influence the number of clusters [20]. This makes
the number of clusters independent from the number of secondary dimensions, and
simplifies the perception of the social space (the smaller number of clusters).
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
Few self-involved agents among BC agents can lead to polarized local or global consensus
5
Simulations with this model also show the existence of minor clusters containing
a very small number of agents, when the parameter ruling the speed of attraction
is sufficiently large (as is the case in the following study). These minor clusters
have already been observed in the bounded confidence model. They are located
between the main clusters and at the extremes of the opinion space, especially for
large values of confidence threshold u leading to one major cluster containing at
least 95% of the population [23] [24]. These minor clusters are important in the new
model that we describe later in this paper.
[20] also observe a polarization on the secondary dimension due to rejection.
This polarization often occurs after a first stage of clustering in a moderate opinion
and then they migrate to an extreme attitude. However, this dynamics takes place
only when all agents share the main dimension as highly self-relevant, as in the
experiments of [46]. Of course, in practice it is unlikely to find a situation where all
the agents of a population define themselves through the same salient social issue.
[46] (pp. 1190, 1191) adds that if the participant is not highly negatively self-
involved in the source-group of the source, he will not change his opinion when he
agrees with the source on the secondary issue but not on the main issue. Instead,
he decreases the relevance of the source (i.e. the level of importance assigned to the
sources group) in a way to not differentiate from it in the future. They add that
participants who were relatively indifferent to the group source demonstrated little
shift in their attitude judgments (p. 1186). Here, then, and for the sake of simplicity,
we assume that some agents are indifferent to their group membership and do not
change their opinion if they disagree on only one dimension and that self-relevance,
or level of importance given to the main attitude, is constant.
In the following, we consider a mixed population composed of a static set of
highly-self-involved agents (called HSI agents) in one main attitude and the com-
plementary set of no-more-important-attitude agents (called non-HSI agents). The
dynamics of the HSI type of agents is based on [20] while the dynamics of the non-
HSI type is based on a classical 2D bounded confidence model [9]. Our populations
of agents have attitudes initially drawn uniformly. We simulate their evolution, for
different values of the parameters, in order to compare the behavior of a mixed
population to the behavior of pure population of highly involved agents or non-
highly-involved agents. Analysis of the simulation found the emergence of several
types of extreme minor clusters. They can lead a population that has converged
to a moderate norm in a first stage to an extreme norm on both the minor and
fundamental ones. This phenomenon can drive the majority of the population or
only some groups of opinions. We also observe that several groups polarized on
secondary issues ultimately, after a very long time, adopt a unique moderate norm.
Some of these observations are specific to mixed populations. Moreover, a small
number of self-involved agents in the population is enough to significantly reduce
the number of clusters.
In what follows, we start by giving an overview of the model, then go on to
describe more details of the results and explain how they emerge, and finish by
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
6 Huet S., Mathias J.D.
summarizing the main results and discussing the interpretations.
3. The model and experimental design
We consider a population of N individuals, part of them considered highly-self-
involved in the main dimension while the other part is not. The model includes four
parameters: h, the proportion of highly-self-involved people that share very similar
dynamics to the people considering group membership as highly self-relevant in
[44], um and us, thresholds for opinion change on the main and the secondary
dimension, respectively, and µ ruling the intensity of influence at each meeting
(comprised between 0 and 0.5). An individual has two attitudes, xm (on the main
dimension) and xs (on the secondary dimension), taking real values between -1 and
+1. During an iteration, a pair of individuals X and Y is randomly chosen and can
influence each other. The algorithm is the following:
• Choose a random couple (X,Y ) of individuals in the population;
• X and Y change their attitudes at the same time, according to the influence
function corresponding to their status, i.e. the potential influencee is a non-highly-
self-involved (non-HSI) agent or a highly-self-involved (HSI) agent.
3.1. Influence on a non-highly self-involved agent (non-HSI)
The calculation of the influence of Y on X if X is a non-HSI agent (of course the
influence of X on Y if Y is a non-HSI agent is found by inverting X and Y ) is as
follows. Let (xm, xs) and (ym, ys) be the attitudes of X and Y, respectively. The
influence of Y on X is not null if xm − ym ≤ um and xs − ys ≤ us indicating
that agent X agrees with Y. Both attitudes of X are going to get closer to those of
Y, proportionally to the attitudinal distance on each dimension:
xm(t + 1) = xm(t) + µ(ym(t) − xm(t))
xs(t + 1) = xs(t) + µ(ys(t) − xs(t))
(1)
(2)
For every other case of partial agreement (only close on one dimension) or total
disagreement (far on two dimensions), X remains indifferent to Y and does not
change opinion.
3.2. Influence on a highly self-involved agent (HSI)
The calculation of the influence of Y on X if X is a HSI agent (of course the
influence of X on Y if Y is a HSI is found by inverting X and Y ) is based on [20]
as follows. Let (xm, xs) and (ym, ys) be the attitudes of X and Y respectively. We
first consider the main attitude dimension.
If xm − ym ≤ um, agent X agrees with Y on the main dimension. Both atti-
tudes of X are going to get closer to those of Y, proportionally to the attitudinal
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
Few self-involved agents among BC agents can lead to polarized local or global consensus
7
distance on each dimension:
xm(t + 1) = xm(t) + µ(ym(t) − xm(t))
xs(t + 1) = xs(t) + µ(ys(t) − xs(t))
(3)
(4)
Indeed, whatever the agreement level on the secondary dimension is, X is going
to be globally closer to Y. If it was already close, it gets closer.
If xm − ym > um, then agent X disagrees with Y on the main dimension,
and if xs − ys ≤ us, then agent X feels it is too close to Y on the secondary
dimension, because of their disagreement on the main dimension. X solves this
conflicting situation by moving away from Y on this dimension. The attitude change
is proportional to the distance to reach the rejection threshold:
if (xs − ys) < 0, then xs (t + 1) = xs (t) − µ (us − (ys (t) − xs (t)))
else if (ys (t) 6= xs (t)), then xs (t + 1) = xs (t) + µ (us + (ys (t) − xs (t)))
else xs (t + 1) = xs (t) + sign() µus
where sign() is a function returning -1 or 1, each with a probability 0.5. This
sets the direction of the opinion change chosen at random when X and Y perfectly
agree.
In the other cases, X is not modified by Y. Moreover, we confine the main
attitude in the interval [-1, +1]. The secondary attitude can be confined in the
interval [-1, +1], or totally unbounded. These two cases allow, in an experimental
design considering both, an understanding of the impact of the confinement. The
attitude of Y is calculated in the same way, considering the situation of the meeting
with X and if Y is HSI.
3.3. Experimental design and the measured indicators
We run the model, for different values of the parameters, in order to compare the
behavior of a mixed population to the known behaviors of a pure population of
HSI or non-HSI agents. We vary the following parameters considering 10 replicates
for each set of values and 10,000 agents. Using 10 replications is sufficient for our
study, since there is little variation in outcome measures between runs: the average
standard deviation of our main indicator, i.e. the average absolute opinion of the
population varying between 0 and 1, is 0.06. um and us vary from 0.05 to 1 in
increments of 0.05. Most of the study is done using h equal to 0.1. However, we
also vary h to show that the emerging patterns are sensitive to this parameter for
what is observed on the secondary attitude dimension. For a same set of parameter
values, we consider two cases for the purpose of comparison: (1) on the secondary
dimension, the opinion is confined between [-1;+1]; (2) it is not confined, nor on
the main, neither on the secondary dimension. However, this is only during the
simulation, since in both cases the initial distribution is confined in [-1;+1].
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
8 Huet S., Mathias J.D.
While the basic study is done with 10,000 agents, the figures representing one
population state in what follows can be built on a population of 25,000 or 5,000
agents (figures 1 to 4 and 8). This is only to make the figures easier to read and
does not impact the qualitative results observed. The figures giving an overview of
the behavior of the model (figures 5, 7, 9 and 10) are built from a population of
10,000 agents.
We arbitrarily stop the exploration of um and us at 1 for this first study. Sim-
ilarly, µ, the parameter ruling the intensity of the influence, remains constant on
the two dimensions for every experimental condition, at a value of 0.5.
The second case was studied to prove that the bounds are not responsible for
the polarization. Indeed, due to bounds, some clusters of agents unable to adopt
an attitude far enough from others might explain why some other clusters polarize
and are finally located further than expected. Two indicators are measured during
the simulation and then averaged over the replicates in order to define the number
of norms we observe as well as how moderate they are. These indicators are:
• the number of clusters (which is classically counted by considering an agent as a
member of a cluster if it is located at a distance smaller than a threshold from at
least one member of the group considered); each cluster has its own norm, which
is the average opinion of its members;
• the average absolute opinion on each dimension so as to define how polarized the
population is. Polarization is classically defined as an extremization of attitudes
after some discussions in a group compared to the attitudes initially held by
the in-group people. It is classically measured by the average opinion before and
after a discussion. When the average opinion has increased in absolute value,
the discussion is assumed to have led to polarization, in a process that is both
individual and collective.
The interpretation of the level of moderation of the norm(s) and its
evolution from the average absolute opinion depends on the number of
clusters. We know this model is ruled in terms of group number by the dynamics of
the bounded confidence model. From this model, we are able to define the expected
absolute average opinion of the population when it does not polarize. We thus know
the evolution has to be interpreted differently when the final number of groups is
one and when it is at least two or more:
• when all the agents converge to a unique group, we know that they tend to a
moderate central opinion which is 0.5 in our model. Since the agents opinions are
initialized at random, the average absolute opinion is valued 0 at the beginning,
as the opinion case goes from -1 to +1. Then, for a unique opinion group (a
unique norm), a final value of the average absolute opinion higher than 0 indicates
a polarization of the norm. If the average absolute opinion is higher than 0.5,
this means the population gathered into one moderate group (with an average
absolute opinion close to 0) before adopting an extreme norm (this behavior will
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
Few self-involved agents among BC agents can lead to polarized local or global consensus
9
be illustrated in the following);
• when agents are gathered in several groups at the end of the simulation, the
initial average absolute opinion is still valued 0.5 but the expected moderate
final average absolute opinion varies from 0.4 to 0.5 depending on whether the
number of clusters is odd or even, respectively. Then we can diagnose the level of
polarization of the groups - and each of their corresponding norms - using these
references.
4. The trajectories to understand the global dynamics
Fig. 1. Opinion states for 25,000 agents (25,000 agents were chosen for illustration purposes to
make the dynamics more visible on the graph): on the left, initial random opinion; on the right,
at time-step 448. Each dot represents one couple of opinion (xm,xs) of an agent. On the x-axis,
opinion 1 is the main opinion. On the y-axis, opinion 2 is the secondary dimension. The attitudes
on the secondary dimension are confined in [-1, +1]. Small dots are non-HSI agents, and large dots
are HSI agents. The density distributions of opinions on each dimension are visible on the right and
at the top of the right-hand graph. The model can be run at http://motive.cemagref.fr/lisc/bc/
and thus the trajectories seen in color.
This section shows typical trajectories of the model corresponding to the emer-
gence of a first norm which then goes on to change due to the dynamics. These
trajectories illustrate the main principles of the model. They have been selected for
illustration purposes considering the most frequent steady state of the bounded con-
fidence model: the moderate consensus for which every or almost every agent adopts
a moderate opinion. Figure 1 presents the initial state as well as the type of graph
used to show the trajectories of the model (on the left). All along the simulation,
dots on graphs represent agents opinions: small dots represent the non-HSI agents,
and large dots represent the HSI agents. Since the clusters are sufficiently formed,
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
10 Huet S., Mathias J.D.
they are also represented in density over the parameter space (on the right). The
scale for the density is on the right of the figure. The model can be run online at
http://motive.cemagref.fr/lisc/bc/ and thus the trajectories seen in color (the code
is also available). All the graphs in this section consider a population with 25,000
agents to make them more readable, and a confined secondary attitude.
4.1. A moderate consensus on the main dimension polarizes due
to a minority effect
Figure 2 presents the first unexpected impact of the presence of HIS agents in
the population. After an expected convergence, since um is higher than 0.5, to a
moderate consensus among almost all the agents, this consensual group is seen to
polarize due to the impact of extreme minorities. The trajectory is mainly ruled
by attraction between agents. Due to the high value of um which implies strong
interagent influence, agents quickly gravitate to the center (from step 20 to step
190), and some agents are forgotten by the dynamics on the extreme values of the
main dimension (see the histogram representation of the main dimension on the
figures). HSI agents gravitate to center quicker than non-HSI agents; they only
need to be close to the influencer on the main dimension to converge to the center.
Non-HSI agents are slower due to the double constraint for influence (close on
the two dimensions), and so they are then the ones forgotten by the dynamics on
the extremes. They gather together and constitute the "minor clusters" referred
to in the state-of-the-art section. For us < um, the initial centralization on the
secondary dimension is slower than the centralization on the main dimension (see
figures from step 20 to 190). Then, there are less forgotten agents at the extremes
on the secondary dimension. Moreover, HSI agents gravitate to center quicker than
non-HSI agents (see larger dots in the center compared to small ones around at
steps 20 to 80).
We observe a second period in the simulation from step 80 to step 190. This
is a transitory in-group polarization on the secondary dimension. Almost all the
agents are gathered in the central cluster defined by the main dimension. However,
regarding the secondary dimension, non-HSI agents, which composed the majority
of the central cluster, are gathered in three clusters (see the density distribution
on the right of the figures, step 80 and 93). The HSI agents, which are members
of this central cluster due to their dynamics, assess the non-HSI agents, which are
also members of the central cluster, as being member of their unique cluster also
on the secondary dimension. They are then influenced by them, and continuously
move from one non-HSI secondary dimension cluster to another. At the same time,
they influence in return the non-HSI agents, progressively attracting them to the
center, reducing the number of clusters on the secondary dimension to two (see
density distribution on the figure at step 150), and finally gathering them into a
unique central cluster (step 190).
In a third period, since everyone is gathered in a unique large centered cluster, a
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
Few self-involved agents among BC agents can lead to polarized local or global consensus
11
Fig. 2. From a moderate majority to an extreme majority on the main dimension. Stable state for
25000 agents, um = 0.8, us = 0.3, h = 0.1 (large dots are HSI and small dots are non-HSI agents).
From top left to bottom right, time: 20, 40, 80, 93, 150, 190, 1200, 5300, 8676, 14275, 32600 and
89720. On x-axis, opinion 1 is the main opinion. On y-axis, opinion 2 is the secondary dimension.
The attitudes on the secondary dimension are confined in [-1, +1]. More details on how to read
figures can be found in the caption to Fig. 1.
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
12 Huet S., Mathias J.D.
first moderate norm has been built. However, this moderate cluster slowly oscillates
in the opinion space due to HSI agents who want to be closer to forgotten agents
on the borders since they consider them as members of their own group. This
movement leads the larger cluster to a polarization that is only stopped when all
forgotten people who are close on the main dimension are gathered in it (see from
step 190 to the end). The major cluster, which had been moderate at time 190 and
for a long time, has ultimately changed norm by the end to finish with a relatively
extreme norm.
It is obvious that HSI agents represented by the larger dots are attracted on
both dimensions by the extreme corners of non-HSI agents. To sum up, it is the
stability of the emerging small corner clusters which is responsible for
the polarization of the larger cluster. This stability comes from non-
HSI agents which require closeness on both the main and secondary
dimensions in order to be influenced. It allows the extreme corners of non-HSI
agents to attract the HSI agents previously located in the center. This first type
of polarization is entirely due to the attraction process and does not
depend on the rejection process.
Fig. 3. Long transitory in-group polarization on the secondary dimension um = 0.7, us = 0.1, h
= 0.1, 5000 agents. The clustering process on the secondary dimension is very long when us is
small. Then, the agents stay a long time within several clusters on the secondary dimension inside
a unique cluster based on the main dimension (see time 1500 and 4000 on the left and the centered
graph). However they ultimately form a unique cluster after a very long time (step 96032 on the
right). On x-axis, opinion 1 is the main opinion. On y-axis, opinion 2 is the secondary dimension.
The attitudes on the secondary dimension are confined in [-1, +1]. More details on how to read
figures can be found in the caption to Fig. 1.
The transitory in-group polarization on the secondary dimension observed dur-
ing the second period can last for long as shown in figure 3. It occurs when us is
small (and um >0.5). It is due to the time required to reach the convergence, which
increases when us decreases. At smaller us values, the unique central cluster covers
almost all the secondary dimension for a long time, composed of various subclusters
of non-HSI agents which are joined altogether by moving HSI agents (see Fig. 5).
At the end, everyone is gathered in the center due to the impact of the HSI agents.
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
Few self-involved agents among BC agents can lead to polarized local or global consensus
13
This perfectly describes how HSI increases the level of cohesion of the population
compared to a population of non-HSI agents (i.e. compared to the classical bounded
confidence model).
4.2. A moderate consensus on the secondary dimension polarizes
due to another minority effect
Fig. 4. From a moderate majority to an extreme majority on the secondary dimension. Stable
state for 25000 agents, um = 0.7, us = 1.0, h = 0.1 (large dots are HSI agents and small dots
are non-HSI agents). Top circles indicate extreme cluster of non-HSI agents and bottom circles
indicate HSI agents. From top left to bottom right, time: 11, 14, 96, 6505 and 15969. On the x-axis,
opinion 1 is the main opinion. On the y-axis, opinion 2 is the secondary dimension. The attitudes
on the secondary dimension are confined in [-1, +1]. More details on how to read figures can be
found in the caption to Fig. 1.
Figure 4 shows how a similar change can also occur on the secondary dimension
in a mixed population. For our particular case, compared to the minority effect
leading to norm change on the main dimension, agents in the central cluster gather
very fast on the secondary dimension (see steps 11 and 14). As in the previous
subsection, some non-HSI agents remain forgotten on the extremes, especially on
the main dimension because us is so large on the secondary dimension that the
convergence to the center happens very quickly and does not forget anyone except
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
14 Huet S., Mathias J.D.
if the closeness conditions is not respected on the main dimension. Moreover, agains
since us is very large, agents are very close to each other on the secondary dimension
before being close on the main. In such situation, HSI agents located at one extreme
of the large cluster on the main dimension shift away from agents (HSI or non-HSI)
located at the other extreme of this same large cluster, since they do not consider
them as members of the same group while feeling close on the secondary dimension
(see steps 11 and 14, HSI agents represented by the larger dots). Some HSI agents
polarize progressively to the extreme by shifting away from the other HSI agents
and the forgotten non-HSI agents located close to the other extreme, while the other
agents have gathered to a major cluster with a moderate norm (see step 96).
Then, these HSI and non-HSI agents gather together to create extreme minor
clusters (see step 6505). From the point of view of the HSI agents, members of the
largest initially central cluster, the members of the minor clusters are considered as
close on the secondary dimension while far on the main dimension. The HSI agents
of the largest cluster then shift away from them while simultaneously attracting
the non-HSI agents of the largest cluster. On the other hand, extreme HSI agents
of the minor clusters do the same (see bottom circles on fig. 4). This makes the
large cluster polarized on the secondary dimension until the minor clusters are no
longer considered close while minor clusters do the same. Then, once again, after
having an initially moderate norm, the major cluster adopts an extreme norm, but
on the secondary dimension. This type of polarization depends on rejection
(it does not appear for a similar model with no rejection).
5. The global properties of the dynamics
This section overviews the stable states reached by the model presented in section
3. We especially want to see which norm is reached and whether it changed during
the simulation.
5.1. When does the norm change on the main dimension?
In the following, we address our research question by looking on the main dimension
and the secondary dimension in turn. We draw maps of the average absolute opinion
at the end of the simulation for various um and various us on the main and on the
secondary dimension. As explained in subsection 3.3, interpretation of the degree
of gray depends on the number of clusters at the end of the simulation. Two areas
should be distinguished: um > 0.5 giving more than one cluster on the left of the
map; and um < 0.55 giving one major cluster on the right of the map. Perfect
moderation of the final opinions is indicated in white on the right but mid-grey on
the left. For both sides, all other gray degree show various levels or polarization.
The fig. 5 shows the maps for main dimension.
For um > 0.5 corresponding to only one major cluster, we observed a polarized
norm within a particular angle-shape of couples of (um, us) values. The trajectory
shown in the Figure 2 occurs in this area which corresponds to a norm change from
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
Few self-involved agents among BC agents can lead to polarized local or global consensus
15
s
u
1
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
0.6
0.55
0.5
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 1
um
Fig. 5. Variation of average absolute opinion on the main dimension for h = 0.1 and 10000 agents.
x-axis plots um and y-axis plots various um.
moderate to extreme. The white area indicates agents that have adopted a moderate
norm and then remain unaffected by extreme minor clusters. The angle-shape is due
to the speed of convergence which, depending on the value of uncertainty, leaves the
agentsat various distances from the center without being influenced by the other
converging agents. This was pointed out by [23] in their study of the emergence
of minor clusters in a bounded confidence model implemented in an agent-based
model. Figure 6, which is extracted from their work, clearly shows that in the area
corresponding to one major centered cluster (on the right of the graph), the location
of the minor cluster, not so far from the center at the beginning, strays further away
as u increases. Thus, when the minor clusters are closer on one dimension to the
HSI agents shifting towards them, they can be influenced quicker by HSI agents and
join the moderate central cluster before the HSI agents have attracted the majority
of non-HSI agents of the moderate central cluster to the extreme. When the minor
clusters are further, they almost cannot be influenced by HSI agents before the
moderate major cluster becomes more extreme. This indicates that this dynamics
is probably sensitive to the proportion of HSI agents in the population.
On the left part of the figure, for um < 0.55 corresponding to more than one
major cluster, we observed norms that polarized for um=0.45 and us from = 0.3
to 0.75 (see the darkest gray of the left part of the figure). This um value indicates
that the stable state has two major clusters. The darker area thus corresponds to a
bipolarization of the population. For lower and larger values of us, the population
gathered in two moderate clusters is not sensitive to the minor extreme clusters.
Note that this kind of polarization on the main dimension only occurs when the
population is mixed, composed of HSI and non-HSI agents. It does not occur with a
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
16 Huet S., Mathias J.D.
simple 2D bounded confidence model, nor with a model like [20] with a population
composed only of HSI agents.
Fig. 6. Distribution of agents opinions x (on the y-axis) as a function of attraction threshold u
in x-axis for µ = 0.5 - extracted from [23], figure 2. White dots indicate minor clusters, whereas
black dots indicate major clusters, with a population larger than 1000 agents. The lines enclose
the basin of attraction of the state with a single cluster. The results of a single realization are
shown in each panel for each value of u on the x-axis.
5.2. When does the norm change occur on the secondary
dimension?
Figure 7 shows the maps for the secondary dimension.
For um > 0.5 corresponding to only one major cluster, we observed a polarized
norm for (a) large us > 0.9 and (b) small us < 0.15. The trajectory shown in
figure 4 occurs in this area, for a large us. This is where we observe a norm change:
from moderate to extreme. What occur in this area for small us corresponds to the
trajectory shown in the figure 3, which is a very long transitory polarization on the
secondary dimension. We have not done a long-enough simulation to observe the
final moderate consensus, so the centralization is not yet total at the end of our
simulations. The white and light-grey areas indicate a total centralization where
agents have adopted a moderate norm and then remain unaffected by extreme
minor clusters.
On the left part of the figure, for um < 0.55 corresponding to more than one ma-
jor cluster, we observed a polarization of norms when us is large enough compared
to um (darker areas). Note there is not only a polarization on the left corner (darker
areas) but also a centralization (mid-grey area around the diagonal of the left part).
The population states in this centralization area is composed of clusters of agents
having a similar opinion that is closer to the centered opinion 0 compared to the
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
Few self-involved agents among BC agents can lead to polarized local or global consensus
17
s
u
1
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
0.6
0.55
0.5
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 1
um
Fig. 7. Variation of the average absolute opinion on secondary dimension for h = 0.1 and 10000
agents. x-axis plots um and y-axis plots various um.
expected moderate behavior. This expected behavior corresponding to the case of
HSI agents having no impact is reached in the transitory area between the darker
top triangle and the mid-grey diagonal [see 3.3 for details on how to interpret the
average absolute opinion values]. These polarization and centralization dynamics on
the secondary dimension, as well as the position of the moderate frontier between
the two, can be properly explained. The frontier is defined by us=2 um. Indeed,
in a pure non-HSI-agent population, cluster localization is exclusively due to the
attraction process, as agents gather each other in areas of us or um widths. So two
clusters, located in two different areas, are distant from two us or um (depending
on the dimensions we look at). Conversely, when the population contains some HSI
agents, the attraction on the secondary dimension is no longer bounded by us since
HSI agents are attracted and attract in return every other agent that is close on
the main dimension until they all become members of the same cluster on the sec-
ondary dimension too. There is thus a strong tendency to gather in the center of
the secondary dimension in a first step. However, in a second step, the rejection
by HSI agents of members of other clusters defined by the main dimension pushes
away the people from different clusters on the secondary dimension. This is a norm
change: from moderate at first, to polarized. However, HSI agents do not need to
differ from more than us to become stable. This is why clusters have a closer equi-
librium position in the opinion space on the secondary dimension (distant from us)
than expected from a more oriented attraction dynamics (distant from 2 us). As
confirmed by Figure 8 at right, this is affected by h, which partly rules the initial
attraction strength against the rejection process.
Overall, for a population containing HSI agents, the frontier between centraliza-
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
18 Huet S., Mathias J.D.
Fig. 8. Dynamic equilibrium state for 5000 agents, um = 0.05 and us = 1.1, for h = 0.7 on the left
and for h = 0.05 on the right. A small h (on the right) allows agents to cluster on the secondary
dimension even if HSI agents continue moving, whereas for a large h the agents are always moving
and unsatisfied (on the right). This clearly shows that the smaller proportion of HSI agents allows
non-HSI agents to cluster despite the bounded property of the opinion space. The HSI agents are
located on the extrema of the secondary dimension and in the center. Clusters, mainly composed
of non-HSI agents are stable even if close on the main dimension. Since HSI agents, a minority, are
attracted by their related clusters of non-HSI agents, they remain close to them on the secondary
dimension despite their discomfort with also being close on the main dimension with other clusters
and/or on the borders of the secondary dimension. They have pushed their own clusters away
from the center of the secondary space, but there are too few of HSI agents to make them move
continuously.
tion and polarization on the secondary dimension is defined by us=2um, regardless
of whether the dimension is bounded, because this is the exact value for which
the opinion space occupied by the clusters on the main dimension and the second
dimension is the same, knowing that the whole space on the main dimension is oc-
cupied according to the uniform initial distribution of opinion. For us <2um, there
is less space occupied on the secondary dimension, which implies a centralization
of opinions that are consequently closer to the center than they initially were. For
us >2um, the clustering process on the secondary dimension requires more space
than that occupied on the main dimension. This opinion evolution occurs when the
rejection threshold is significantly higher than the attraction threshold. For these
values, the rejection process is dominant. The initial attraction on the secondary
dimension is weak. Indeed, as the attraction on the main dimension is also weak,
many agents stay far from each other. The polarization on this dimension begins
before the centralization has really been formed. In this case, people are partic-
ularly narrow-minded about what is important for them, and thus form a lot of
groups. Moreover, HSI agents want to be very different from agents of other groups
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
Few self-involved agents among BC agents can lead to polarized local or global consensus
19
on the secondary dimension. They socially self-define by differentiation to others.
For a pure population of HSI agents and for very small um values and very large
us values, agents continue to fluctuate on the secondary dimension without being
able to find an opinion allowing them to differentiate from agents of other groups.
In the same conditions, for a mixed population with a small enough h, agents do
not fluctuate. Figure 8 illustrates these behaviors and shows (see left) that a mixed
population tends to cluster. Indeed, on the left, we observe that for low h values, the
number of clusters is the same for a bounded opinion space as for an un-bounded
opinion space (see on the right of Figure 9). Conversely, on the left of figure 9
showing a pure population of HSI agents in a bounded opinion space, for larger h
values, the number of clusters decreases to zero since the continuous move on the
secondary dimension makes the cluster-counting algorithm inefficient.
Fig. 9. Average absolute opinion on the secondary dimension (bars) and average number of clusters
containing more than 2% of the population (line) for various h on x-axis on the left for an bounded
opinion space and on the right for an unbounded opinion space (5000 agents um = 0.05 and us
=1.1, 10 replicates). Note that polarization level is the same for all h in the bounded space case
but sensitive to h in an unbounded opinion space. This finding warrants further investigations,
which are not in the scope of this paper.
Note, finally, that the polarizations for um > 0.5 on the secondary dimension
only occur when the population is mixed, composed of HSI and non-HSI agents,
at least for us ≤ 1. It does not occur with a simple 2D bounded confidence model,
nor with a model like [20] with a population composed only of HSI agents. The
polarization for um < 0.55 and a large enough us does not occur with a simple 2D
bounded confidence model but does occur with a model like [20] with a population
composed only of HSI agents.
5.3. What about the two dimensions seen simultaneously?
Overall, from the comparison between the figure 5 and the figure 7, one can no-
tice the two types of polarization, on the main and on the secondary dimension,
do not appear simultaneously. However, the centralization area on the secondary
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
20 Huet S., Mathias J.D.
dimension, delimited by us ≃ 2um, corresponds to very different behaviors on the
main dimension: polarization, centralization or no change. This means that while
the cohesion increases on the secondary dimension, all the behaviors are possible
on the main dimension.
We would intuitively think that the polarization can be explained by the fact
the opinion space is bounded. However, this is not the case, as can be seen in Figure
10 below showing results for an unbounded attitude space, where we see the same
polarization areas on both maps.
s
u
1
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
0.6
0.55
0.5
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
s
u
1
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
0.6
0.55
0.5
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 1
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 1
um
um
Fig. 10. Average absolute opinion on the main (left) secondary (right) dimension for 10000 agents
evaluating in an unbounded opinion space, h=0.1. x-axis plots um and y-axis plots us. While
white (right part on the right figure) or mid-grey (left part of the left figure) charts the area with
a moderate polarization [which in fact can correspond to no change in polarization compared to
the initialization, but also to a decrease preceding an increase], white on the right part of the left
figure) charts the area of total centralization and darker grey charts the area of polarization [which
has decreased and then increased, or not changed].
6. Conclusions
Here we study how self-involvement can explain a norm change in an agent-based
model. We consider a population composed of two different types of agents: highly-
self-involved (HSI) agents having a dynamics based on [20] inspired by a particular
set of experiments [46]; non-highly-self-involved agents (non-HSI) with a dynamics
based on a 2D bounded confidence model [9]. The dynamics of HSI corresponds to
the particular behavior in terms of attitude change of people who are highly self-
involved in one dimension and consider it as self-defining. From the modelling point
of view, it assumes that one dimension is more stable and more important than the
other. This more stable dimension, called main dimension, represents the highly
self-relevant issue for the agents, and it rules the attitude change on a secondary
dimension. If two agents are close on the main dimension (separated by a distance
smaller than um), then they attract each other on the main dimension and on
the secondary dimension, whatever their disagreement on the secondary dimension.
If they are far from each other on the main dimension, then proximity on the
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
Few self-involved agents among BC agents can lead to polarized local or global consensus
21
secondary dimension (at a distance less than us) is uncomfortable, and generates
rejection on this dimension. Proximity on a dimension is defined by comparing the
attitude distance with the agents threshold on this dimension. For non-HSI agents,
neither main nor secondary dimension is more important. Then, to be influenced,
the non-HSI agent should consider the peer source as close on the two dimensions
simultaneously. One might think this latter condition for influence is hard to meet,
yet [46] state that participants who do not consider the source as highly self-relevant
do not change their opinions, and experiments reported in [30] [29] [31] [35] show
that the level of attraction for peers depends on the degree of similarity with them.
As expected, simulations show agents gathering in attitudinal groups. The num-
ber of groups is defined by how close they are on the main dimension to the rest
of the population. Even a few HSI people are enough to minimize the number of
clusters.
The moderate cluster(s) built in the central part (i.e. having a moderate norm)
of the opinion space at first can later polarize on main issues for some particular
couples of values (um, us) and adopt a (some) more extreme norm(s). This is due
to the interaction of these major moderate cluster(s) with some extreme minor
clusters. These extreme minor clusters emerge from the dynamics and are only
composed of non-HSI agents. When they appear close enough to major clusters,
they get absorbed by them, whereas when they are further in the opinion space,
but not far enough for moderate HSI agents to see them as not in-group members,
they attract the moderate agents without being influenced by them. Indeed, they
are more stable, as they are more demanding on the conditions of closeness to
be influenced (i.e. closeness on the two attitudinal dimensions is required). The
attracted moderate HSI agents are then attracted by the non-HSI agents located
both in the center and in the extremes. However, only the interaction with centered
agents is symmetrical. Due to the stochasticity of the model, one of the minor
extreme clusters finally has more impact on the moderate agents. Then, at this time,
extreme non-HSI agents attract moderate HSI agents who, in turn, will attract the
moderate non-HSI agents. This is a long process, since moderate non-HSI agents
resist by also attracting HSI agents. However, as extreme non-HSI agents cannot
be attracted, they finish by winning, and the previous majority of moderate agents
becomes more extreme.
A second type of norm change from moderate to extreme appears on the sec-
ondary dimension. It occurs when some agents remain forgotten on the extreme of
the main dimension - i.e. non-HSI agents, as well as some HSI agents, located far
enough from the center on the main dimensionare rejected on the secondary dimen-
sion during the convergence to a moderate opinion of the population majority. These
extreme agents, both HSI and non-HSI, form extreme minor clusters on the main
attitudinal dimension. The norm change of the clusters is due to HSI agents reject-
ing other HSI agents from other groups and attracting agents of their own groups.
This echoes the theories related to groups and identity, especially self-categorization
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
22 Huet S., Mathias J.D.
theory [25] [16] [21] arguing that agents look for a compromise between difference
and similarity to others at group level. This type of polarization depends on re-
jection. It is more intuitive, since people are more certain about their fundamental
issue than their secondary issue.
The appearance of a long transitory in-group polarization associated with large
certainty (i.e. small uncertainty) on secondary issues is also of interest. It also
perfectly describes how HSI increases the level of in-population cohesion compared
to a population of non-HSI.
7. Discussion
Our discussion consists mainly in a comparison to other models of attitude, as
recommended in [17]. Overall, these first results seem to reconcile different points
of view on the possible source of polarization due to minorities: (1) attraction for
extreme minority on the main issue, or (2) rejection on the secondary issue.
In contrast with most of the scholarship presented in introduction, the hypothe-
ses of our model do not favor one or the other reason for evolution to polarized
norms, but instead integrates both mechanisms and shows that both explanations
are compatible and can occur in different contexts.
Indeed, if we focus on the hypothesis that the change of norm is due to an
attraction of the majority by a minority, we can compare our work to [7] and
[10] and more recently [28] or [19] with a slightly different version of the bounded
confidence model (these two versions have been properly compared in [24]). In
our model, as in these works, the evolution to a polarized norm does not depend
on rejection, but only on attraction to an extreme minority on the main issue.
The result of our experimental design has been also interpreted with the patterns
reported by these authors (see the Appendix). One can draw a parallel with the
classical increase of u and proportion of extremists in the population explaining
the emerging pattern in the bounded confidence with extremists, and the increase
of um, ruling the number of clusters and us ruling how strong the extremists are.
The models differ in the hypothesis explaining the strength of the minor extreme
cluster: in the bounded confidence model, the strength of the extremist cluster is
directly proportional to its size, whereas in our model this relationship is less direct,
because the influence requires conditions on both the attitude dimensions. But the
main difference is that extremists are endogenously added at initialization in the
bounded confidence model with extremists, whereas they emerge in our model. This
emergence makes the impact of us complex and difficult to disentangle. Note too in
Figure 11 in Appendix on the left map that "bipolarization"' in the darkest gray
occurs for lower uncertainty values (i.e. um) compared to the bounded confidence
model with extremists (u).
This suggests that an evolution of the fundamental attitudes defining a norm
is not due to the rejection mechanism on these attitudes but more to the low self-
involvement (i.e. strong uncertainty) of the majority of agents, which makes them
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
Few self-involved agents among BC agents can lead to polarized local or global consensus
23
easier to influence by the extreme minor groups. In some cases, these minor groups
are themselves conversely very resistant to the influence of the moderate majority,
which is the condition they need to attract this majority to their extreme attitude. In
the bounded confidence model with extremists, this resistance comes from strong
certainty, whereas in our model it is due to a higher similarity requirement to
trigger influence. In fact, both explanations can be seen as complementary. Both
of them are compatible with the attitude strength-related literature which argues
that extremity, importance and certainty are key factors in the capacity to resist
influence [34] [3].
Turning to focus on the second possible explanation for evolution of a norm, i.e.
willingness to differentiate, we can also compare our model to the classical patterns
of the bounded confidence model with extremists. An evolution of the moderate
norm to a polarized norm occurs due to rejection on the secondary dimension in our
model. We can see in figure 11 in Appendix on the right map that our model is able
to produce a "single extreme"' and "bipolarization"', again for lower uncertainty
values (um) than the bounded confidence model with extremists. It also shows a
"polarization"' when there are numerous clusters that, to our knowledge, do not
appear in the bounded confidence model with extremists.
Here then, overall, and standing apart from most of the models considering a
rejection process presented in [17], we show in a unique model the various behaviors
and explanations related to the emergence of extreme clusters and moderate to
polarized norms. Moreover, we show that our conclusions are also valid when the
attitude space is not bounded.
However, our results are dependent to a number of assumptions:
• as already stated, the emergence of extreme minority clusters is due to the speed
of the converging process (i.e. due to the parameter µ); nothing occurs when the
speed of convergence to the center is lower ;
• the model assumes a uniform initial opinion distribution. Compared to other
distributions, depending on factors such as the standard deviation of a normal
initial distribution, it yields a lower or higher number of extremists that might
exacerbate the emergence and influence of extreme clusters when these clusters
are due to the speed of the attraction process;
• the interaction network is complete: every agent can try to interact with any other
agent. Regardless of whether this assumption is plausible, it can be expected
to have a positive effect on the number of interactions before convergence, and
perhaps on the number of agents who remain extremists due of the convergence
dynamics;
• the most important dimension is the same for every agent, so the dimension for
unconditional attraction and rejection is the same for everyone, which makes it
quite difficult to expect what would occur if the most important dimension varies
from one agent to another;
• homogeneous um and us thresholds, which might make opinion clusters more
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
24 Huet S., Mathias J.D.
stable than they would be if agents had different thresholds;
The next step is to study the sensitivity of our results to these assumptions.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank the Auvergne Region in France for providing grant funding
("Emergent themes" 2015, project Associatione), and Guillaume Deffuant (Irstea
Lisc) for providing valuable help.
References
[1] Allport, G., The ego in contemporary psychology, Psychological Review 50 (1943)
451 -- 478.
[2] Bicchieri, C. and Mercier, H., Norms and Beliefs: How Change Occurs (Computa-
tional Social Sciences, Springer, Cham, 2014), pp. 1 -- 25.
[3] Bizer, G., Visser, P., Berent, M. K., and Krosnick, J., Importance, Knowledge, and
Accessibility: Exploring the Dimensionality of Strength-Related Attitude Properties
(Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2004), pp. 215 -- 241.
[4] Brewer, M., The social self: On being the same and different at the same time,
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 17 (1991) 475 -- 482.
[5] Castellano, C., Fortunato, S., and Loreto, V., Statistical physics of social dynamics,
Review of Modern Physics 81 (2009) 591 -- 646.
[6] Crano, W. D. and Prislin, R., Attitudes and persuasion, Annual Review of Psychology
57 (2006) 345 -- 374.
[7] Deffuant, G., Comparing extremism propagation in continuous opinion models, Jour-
nal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 9 (2006) 1 -- 8.
[8] Deffuant, G., Amblard, F., Weisbuch, G., and Faure, T., How can extremism pre-
vail? a study based on the relative agreement interaction model, Journal of Artificial
Societies and Social Simulation 5 (2002).
[9] Deffuant, G., Neau, D., Amblard, F., and Weisbuch, G., Mixing beliefs among inter-
acting agents, Advances in Complex Systems (2001) 87 -- 98.
[10] Deffuant, G. and Weisbuch, G., Probability distribution dynamics explaining agent
model convergence to extremism, Premier Reference Source (Information Science Ref-
erence, Hershey, USA, 2007), pp. 43 -- 60.
[11] Eagly, A. H. and Chaiken, S., The Social Context of Attitude Formation and Change,
Vol. Chapter 13 (Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Thomson/Wadsworth,
1993), pp. 627 -- 663.
[12] Farrow, K., Grolleau, G., and Ibanez, L., Social norms and pro-environmental behav-
ior: A review of the evidence, Ecological Economics 140 (2017) 1 -- 13.
[13] Festinger, L., A theory of social comparison processes, Human Relations 7 (1954)
117 -- 140.
[14] Festinger, L., A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Stanford, CA, Stanford University
Press, 1957).
[15] Flache, A. and Macy, M. W., Local convergence and global diversity: From interper-
sonal to social influence, Journal of Conflict Resolution 55 (2011) 970 -- 995.
[16] Flache, A. and Mas, M., Why do faultlines matter? a computational model of how
strong demographic faultlines undermine team cohesion, Simulation Modelling Prac-
tice and Theory 16 (2008a) 175 -- 191.
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
Few self-involved agents among BC agents can lead to polarized local or global consensus
25
[17] Flache, A., Mas, M., Feliciani, T., Chattoe-Brown, E., Deffuant, G., Huet, S., and
Lorenz, J., Models of social influence: Towards the next frontiers, Journal of Artificial
Societies and Social Simulation 20 (2017) 2.
[18] Hegselmann, R. and Krause, U., Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence models,
analysis and simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 5 (2002).
[19] Hegselmann, R. and Krause, U., Opinion dynamics under the influence of radical
groups, charismatic leaders, and other constant signals: A simple unifying model,
NHM 10 (2015) 477 -- 509.
[20] Huet, S. and Deffuant, G., Openness leads to opinion stability and narrowness to
volatility, Advances in Complex Systems 13 (2010) 405 -- 423.
[21] Jager, W. and Amblard, F., Uniformity, bipolarization and pluriformity captured as
generic stylized behavior with an agent-based simulation model of attitude change,
Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory (2004) 295 -- 303.
[22] Jager, W. and Amblard, F., Multiple attitude dynamics in large populations, in
Agent 2005 Conference on Generative Social Processes, Models, and Mechanisms,
eds. Macal, C., North, M., and Sallach, D. (co-sponsored by Argonne National Lab-
oratory and The University of Chicago, 2005), pp. 595 -- 613.
[23] Laguna, M. F., Abramson, G., and Zanette, D. H., Minorities in a model for opinion
formation, Complexity 9 (2004) 31 -- 36.
[24] Lorenz, J., Continuous opinion dynamics under bounded confidence: A survey, Inter-
national Journal of Modern Physics C 18 (2007) 1819 -- 1838.
[25] Mark, N. P., Culture and competition: Homophily and distancing explanations for
cultural niches, American Sociological Review 68 (2003) 319 -- 345.
[26] Mason, W. A., Conrey, F. R., and Smith, E. R., Situating social influence processes:
Dynamic, multidirectional flows of influence within social networks, Personality and
Social Psychology Review 11 (2007) 279 -- 300.
[27] Mathias, J., Huet, S., and Deffuant, G., An energy-like indicator to assess opinion
resilience, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 473 (2017) 501 --
510.
[28] Mathias, J.-D., Huet, S., and Deffuant, G., Bounded confidence model with fixed
uncertainties and extremists: The opinions can keep fluctuating indefinitely, Journal
of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 19 (2016) 6.
[29] Michinov, E. and Michinov, N., Social comparison orientation moderates the effects
of group membership on the similarity-attraction relationship, The Journal of Social
Psychology 151 (2011) 754 -- 766.
[30] Michinov, E. and Monteil, J.-M., Attraction personnelle et attraction sociale: Lorsque
la saillance categorielle annule la relation similitude-attraction, Canadian Journal of
Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement 35 (2003) 305.
[31] Montoya, R. M. and Pittinsky, T. L., When increased group identification leads to
outgroup liking and cooperation: The role of trust, The Journal of Social Psychology
151 (2011) 784 -- 806.
[32] Moscovici, S. and Zavalloni, M., The group as a polarizer of attitudes, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology 12 (1969) 125 -- 135.
[33] Petty, R., Cacioppo, J., and Haugtvedt, C., Ego-involvement and persuasion: An
appreciative look at the Sherif 's contribution to the study of self-relevance and attitude
change (Springer/Verlag, New York, 1992), pp. 147 -- 175.
[34] Petty, R. and Krosnick, J. A., Attitude strength: An overview, Vol. 4 (Lawrence Erl-
baum Associates, Inc, Hillsdale, NJ, England, 1995), pp. 1 -- 24.
[35] Reid, C. A., Davis, J. L., and Green, J. D., The power of change: interpersonal
attraction as a function of attitude similarity and attitude alignment, The Journal of
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
26 Huet S., Mathias J.D.
Social Psychology 153 (2013) 700 -- 719.
[36] Salzarulo, L., A continuous opinion dynamics model based on the principle of meta-
contrast, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 9 (2006).
[37] Schultz, P., Nolan, J., Cialdini, R., Goldstein, N., and Griskevicius, V., The construc-
tive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms, Psychological Science 18
(2007) 429 -- 434.
[38] Sherif, C. W. and Muzafer, S., Attitude, ego-involvement, and change, in Symposium
of the Pennsylvania State University (Wiley, New York, 1968), p. 316.
[39] Sherif, M. and Hovland, C., Social Judgment. Assimilation and contrast effects. Com-
munication and attitude change (New Haven and London: Yale University Press,
1961).
[40] Tajfel, H. and Turner, J., An integrative theory of intergroup conflict (Monterey, CA:
Brooks/Cole, 1979), pp. 33 -- 47.
[41] Thomsen, C. J., Borgida, E., and Lavine, H., The causes and consequences of personal
involvement (Psychology Press Taylor and Francis Group, 1995), pp. 191 -- 214.
[42] Turner, J., Social identification and psychological group formation, chapter 25 (Cam-
bridge University Press, Cambridge, 1984), pp. 518 -- 538.
[43] Turner, J., Hogg, M., Oakes, p., Reicher, S., and Wetherell, M., Rediscovering the
social groups: A self-categorization theory (Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, 1987).
[44] Whittaker, J. O., Opinion change as a function of communication-attitude discrep-
ancy, Psychological Reports 13 (1963) 763 -- 772.
[45] Wood, W., Lundgren, S., Ouellette, J., Busceme, S., and Blackstone, T., Minority
influence: a meta-analytic review of social influence processes, Psychological Bulletin
115 (1994) 323 -- 345.
[46] Wood, W., Pool, G., Leck, K., and Purvis, D., Self-definition, defensive processing,
and influence: the normative impact of majority and minority groups, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology (1996) 1181 -- 1193.
Appendix A. Results of the experimental design expressed in
terms of patterns of the bounded confidence model
with extremists
Figure 11 presents the map indicating the patterns output from the model for the
experimental design presented in section 3.3. A type of convergence, i.e. a pattern,
is defined by at least 50% of replicates leading to this type. The patterns are:
• the large majority of agents gather in a single moderate cluster - number 0 on
the map;
• the large majority of agents gather in a single polarized cluster - number 1 on
the map;
• the agents are gathered in different groups of attitudes or opinions and these
groups are located further from each other than expected by the bounded confi-
dence model - number 3 on the map;
• bi-polarization, a subcategory of the pattern above, in which the agents are gath-
ered in two major groups of attitudes or opinions and these two groups are located
further from each other than expected by the bounded confidence model - number
2 on the map ;
• the agents are gathered in different groups of attitudes or opinions and these
March 24, 2021 11:6 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE
sHuetHSInonHSI
Few self-involved agents among BC agents can lead to polarized local or global consensus
27
groups are moderate enough since they are located at the same distance from
each other as expected by the bounded confidence model - number 4 on the map;
Fig. 11. Diagnosis on the main dimension (on the left) and on the secondary dimension (on
the right), h 0.1: 0 (or 0.5) means single moderate cluster; 1 means single extreme cluster; 3
means several polarized clusters; 4 means several moderate clusters; 2 means bi-polarization (two
polarized clusters). For each map, x-axis plots um increasing from right to the left, and y-axis
plots us decreasing from top to the bottom.
The polarization on the main and on the secondary issue does not, at a stable
state, seem able to occur simultaneously in most cases. However, a long transitory
polarization on the two dimensions is definitely possible for um and us values in the
bottom right corner.
Moreover, the map does not show the state recently pointed out by [28] in
which non-extremist agents continue to fluctuate without being able to find a stable
attitude due to a very large uncertainty and their attraction for the extremists
agents. This is because it does not appear with h 0.1, but we know from [20] that
when h is larger, in fact 1 in this paper, this kind of state also appears. However,
it differs in the way it can be explained from the dynamics, since it is not only
associated to the uncertainty value but also to the rejection process.
|
1204.6091 | 1 | 1204 | 2012-04-27T00:34:19 | A structured approach to VO reconfigurations through Policies | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.SE"
] | One of the strength of Virtual Organisations is their ability to dynamically and rapidly adapt in response to changing environmental conditions. Dynamic adaptability has been studied in other system areas as well and system management through policies has crystallized itself as a very prominent solution in system and network administration. However, these areas are often concerned with very low-level technical aspects. Previous work on the APPEL policy language has been aimed at dynamically adapting system behaviour to satisfy end-user demands and - as part of STPOWLA - APPEL was used to adapt workflow instances at runtime. In this paper we explore how the ideas of APPEL and STPOWLA can be extended from workflows to the wider scope of Virtual Organisations. We will use a Travel Booking VO as example. | cs.MA | cs | A structured approach to VO reconfigurations through
Policies
Stephan Reiff-Marganiec
Department of Computer Science
University of Leicester
Leicester, UK
[email protected]
One of the strength of Virtual Organisations is their ability to dynamically and rapidly adapt in re-
sponse to changing environmental conditions. Dynamic adaptability has been studied in other system
areas as well and system management through policies has crystallized itself as a very prominent so-
lution in system and network administration. However, these areas are often concerned with very
low-level technical aspects. Previous work on the APPEL policy language has been aimed at dynam-
ically adapting system behaviour to satisfy end-user demands and – as part of STPOWLA – APPEL
was used to adapt workflow instances at runtime. In this paper we explore how the ideas of APPEL
and STPOWLA can be extended from workflows to the wider scope of Virtual Organisations. We will
use a Travel Booking VO as example.
1 Introduction
Over the last decade there were many changes to the business sector, many were driven by a fundamental
penetration of IT into business and daily life. Customers nowadays expect businesses to be available
24/7 and to cater for their ever changing demands – and they can do so because the world has in many
ways become more local. Through the internet one can now obtain services and products from around
the globe with no additional effort to buying from a local provider. Clearly these changes mean that
businesses have to adapt to cater for this demand and remain competitive.
This might sound very negative, but many opportunities have arisen out of this change as businesses
can now provide to a global market, thus having significantly expanded their customer reach. Businesses
can also use this connected world to work together effectively, thus being able to jointly offer services
which they cannot offer individually.
On the IT side, Business Process Management (BPM) and SOA have become more integrated, pro-
viding promising solutions to the design and development of the software systems of the future, as
clearly stated in [10]: "The BPM-SOA combination allows services to be used as reusable components
that can be orchestrated to support the needs of dynamic business processes. The combination enables
businesses to iteratively design and optimize business processes that are based on services that can be
changed quickly, instead of being 'hard-wired'. This has the potential to lead to increased agility, more
transparency, lower development and maintenance costs and a better alignment between business and
IT."
These changes apply to the business process, where the flexibility to customize a core model to
adapt it to various requirements and to accommodate the variability of a business domain are required.
In previous work [9], we defined StPowla – to be read like 'Saint Paula' – a Service-Targeted Policy-
Oriented WorkfLow Approach. StPowla supports policy-driven business modelling over general Service
Oriented Architectures (SOAs).
Jeremy Bryans and John Fitzgerald (Eds.):
Formal Aspects of Virtual Organisations 2011 (FAVO 2011)
EPTCS 83, 2012, pp. 22–31, doi:10.4204/EPTCS.83.3
c(cid:13) S. Reiff-Marganiec
This work is licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution License.
S. Reiff-Marganiec
23
However, the demand for flexibility and copying with variability does not stop at the business process
– it extends to the whole organisation. This becomes of fundamental importance when we consider small
and medium organisations working together to be competitive in a global market. In some sectors, for
example the building trade, people have done this for a long time by pulling in skills from other compa-
nies by subcontracting. Virtual Organisations have emerged as a way to capture flexible cooperation. As
such a VO presents a loosely bound consortium of organisations that work together to achieve a specific
goal for a customer; the consortium will usually disband when no further demand for its service exists.
To allow for VOs to be formed quickly, the notion of a VBE (a VO Breeding Environment) provides a
structure in which companies are aware of each other and have established relationships on which they
can draw when new demands arise. The organisational advantages of VBEs have been discussed in detail
in several publications, for example [1, 7].
Much work in the area of VOs focuses on their use in organisational environments or steps towards
frameworks for enabling VOs. another avenue that is pursued, possibly to a lesser extent, is that of
modelling VOs to understand and analyze their behaviour and structure more formally. Such approaches
include [6, 17, 4], and the work presented here considers modelling of reconfigurations.
In this short exploratory paper we will review APPEL and STPOWLA in Section 2 and briefly recap
on the VOML modelling framework for VOs in Section 3. The core of the paper (Section 4)will present
initial investigations in extensions to the StPowla ideas for VOs – which is very much work in progress.
Sections 5 and 6 will round the paper off by looking at related work and drawing conclusions on our
work.
2 Appel Policies and Workflow Reconfigurations
Policies have been used to describe rules that are used to modify the behaviour of a system at runtime,
e.g. [12]. Much effort has been invested in defining policy languages for low-level system administration
(such as management of network routers), but also into policy languages for access control. APPEL has
been defined with a natural language semantics [18] as well as a formal semantics based on ∆DSTL [14].
APPEL was developed for telecommunications systems, however it is a general language for expressing
policies in a variety of application domains. APPEL was designed with a separation between the core
language and its specialization for concrete domains.
In APPEL a policy consists of a number of policy rules, grouped using a number of operators
(sequential, parallel, guarded and unguarded choice). A policy rule has the following syntax
[appliesTo location] [when trigger] [if condition] do action
(1)
The core language defines the structure of the policies, the details of these parts are defined in specific
application domains. Triggers and actions are domain-specific. An atomic condition is either a domain-
specific or a more generic (e.g. time) predicate. This allows the core language to be used for different
purposes.
The applicability of a rule is defined on the core language and depends on whether its trigger has
occurred and whether its conditions are satisfied. Triggers are caused by external events. Triggers may
be combined using or, with the obvious meaning that either is sufficient to apply the rule. Conditions
may be negated as well as combined with and and or with the expected meaning. A condition expresses
properties of the state and of the trigger parameters. Finally, actions have an effect on the system in
which the policies are applied. A few operators (and, andthen, or and orelse) have been defined to
24
VO reconfigurations through Policies
create composite actions.
component of a system they apply.
In addition policies are 'located', that is one can define to which actor or
STPOWLA is concerned with the adaptation of workflows, which are then executed on top of a service
oriented architecture. A workflow defines the business process core as the composition of building
blocks called tasks, similar to [16]. Each task performs a step in the business; policies are used to
express finer details of the business process, by defining details of task executions as well as workflow
adaptations. Policies can be updated dynamically, to adapt the core workflow to the changing needs of
the environment. Note that the policies are assumed to be applied at execution time of a workflow and
dynamically make changes to an instance of the workflow that is being run.
Policies in STPOWLA exist in two flavours: refinement policies and reconfiguration policies. The
former are concerned with adding extra requirements to be considered when a service is located to
execute a task (e.g. select only services that are based in Europe). The latter modify the workflow
structure, for example by adding and/or deleting tasks. Let us just consider a few examples of policies,
at a quite abstract level. Considering a hotel setting, we might have policies like
P1: Company invoiced customers will not be required to pay a deposit on checking in.
P2: In a small hotel, the hotel manager will show VIP customers to their rooms.
P1 would be an example of a policy that changes the workflow: one would normally expect a 'pay
deposit' task to exist, which would be removed for the instances covered by P1. P2, on the other hand,
is a policy that places requirements on a task: if we assume a 'show customer to room' task, then this
would normally need to be enacted by a hotel employee and the specific one to be chosen for VIP guests
is the hotel manager.
APPEL was specialised to the domain of workflows, by making precise the triggers, conditions and
actions that are possible in the domain of workflow adaptation [15] and [3] are concerned with refinement
and reconfiguration policies respectively.
The defined triggers are based on tasks: one might wish to apply rules when a task is started,
completes or fails so triggers are defined as task entry, task exit and task f ail. Actions are either a
parametrised refinement action req(−,−,−) or actions to insert and remove tasks (insert(T 1,T 2,−)
and remove(T )). The semantics of req is to find a service as described by the first and third arguments
(specifying service type and SLA constraints), bind it, and invoke it with the values in the second argu-
ment (the invocation parameters). insert inserts the task specified in the first argument after or in parallel
to the task in the second argument based on the value in the third argument while remove removes the
task. Clearly when adding or removing tasks there might be clean-up actions needed to ensure a well-
formed workflow, which are considered in the definition of the semantics of the actions. Also, req might
lead to requirements that cannot be fulfilled if no suitable service can be found – a fact of reality.
3 VOML Models
The Virtual Organization Modelling Language (VOML) is dedicated to VO development in the context
of a VO Breeding Environment. The VOML approach [2, 17] supports the definition of structural and
behavioural models of VBEs and VOs based on three different levels of representation: (1) the defini-
tion of the persistent functionalities of the VBE; (2) the definition of the transient functionalities of the
VOs that are offered by the VBE at a specific moment in time and (3) the ensemble of components (in-
stances) and connectors that, at that time, deliver the services offered by the VOs present in the business
configuration.
S. Reiff-Marganiec
25
VOML offers several sub languages, addressing different levels of a VO. VO-S (the structural VO
modelling language) is concerned with the structural level description of a VO, VO-O (the operational
VO modelling language) is more focused on a description that refines the structural model by provid-
ing operational details. VO-R (the VO reconfiguration language) presents an alternative approach to
describing reconfigurations (we will contrast this in the next section).
In this paper we are mostly concerned with the structural representation of a VO, as it is here that in
our opinion the most interesting adaptations can be made. We will here review VO-S briefly.
We define the basic structure of the VO in VO-S. The VO structural model consists of five basic
elements: (1) Members, (2) Process, (3) Tasks, (4) VBEResource and (5) Data-Flow. Of these, Members,
Tasks and VBEResources are elements that can occur in VBE specifications, too.
Members can be Partners (permanent members of the VBE), Associates (transient members of the
VBE who have joined temporarily to fulfil demand for a VO) and extEntity (transient members of a VO
who are discovered for each VO instance). The Process describes the workflow which lists those tasks
that contribute directly towards achieving the goals of the VO (this captures the control flow) and Data-
Flow expresses which data items are expected from the customer and partners and their flow between
tasks. VBEResources are resources available to all VOs and are provided by the VBE. Finally, Task
specifications define the competencies required by the VO from its members. Tasks are complex and a
more detailed description is available in [17]. VO-S provides three types of tasks: AtomicTask (tasks to
be performed by only one member), ReplicableTask (tasks that can be shared to gain extra capacity) and
ComposableTask (tasks that can be shared to address capability issues) to address one of the main reason
of VO formation (namely the incapacity of each individual organisation of reacting to a demand).
4 VO reconfigurations
Applications of APPEL in the context of communications systems, and indeed in our related work [17]
policy triggers are events occurring through communication or events in the system. For example, we
have suggested triggers such as capability de f icit(), which would be raised if the VO (maybe through its
coordinator) identifies that there could be the specific problem of a certain capability not being available.
The advantage is that the events are occurring in the domain, however it comes with the disadvantage that
new such domain events might be formulated and hence the vocabulary of the policy languages needs to
be extended. There is also the question as to implementing the monitoring of the environment and the
raising of the triggers as part of a component or actor who gains a very central role in the VO.
STPOWLA considers adaptations made to the workflows or tasks in relation to the starting or entering
of a task, so one could say that policies are triggered by the execution structure of the workflow. This
approach is different in that decisions to restructure are taken just before a task is undertaken or after
it has finished (or failed). This means that a very small and stable number of triggers exists. We will
explore here how this approach would work for VOs.
Let us consider the specific triggers, actions and conditions that form the domain specific parts of a
policy language for VO reconfigurations.
The VO-S model has tasks as central entities, which are then discharged by VO members. It seems
sensible to assume that these tasks do in their fundamental nature not differ from tasks in a workflow,
and hence we can reuse the three triggers from StPowla. The triggers are summarised in Tab. 1
Note that a tasks will have a hidden boot-strap process where it will be checked whether members are
assigned to enact it and where the existence of all capabilities and capacities needed for the task will be
evaluated. One could say that this is a default policy for a task, which as actions adds required members
26
VO reconfigurations through Policies
Trigger
task entry()
task exit()
task f ailure()
Description
occurs when a new task is started, that is when data and control flows have
reached a task and it becomes active
occurs when a task completes successfully, that is when data and control
flows are exiting the task
occurs when a task fails
Table 1: Triggers
Group
Workflow – Control
Workflow – Control
Workflow – Data
Workflow – Data
Action
add task(T 1,T 2,relation)
delete task(T )
provide input(I,T )
remove input(I,T )
change type(T,newtype,args) Task Structure
add member(P)
remove member(P)
assign duty(P,T,args)
unassign duty(P,T,args)
Members
Members
Duty
Duty
Table 2: Actions
and assigns them to the task if there is any shortage. If no suitable members can be found the task will
fail.
Policies achieve change through the actions that they propose. In order to understand the full cata-
logue of actions that we need to offer we need to analyse what aspects of VO we might wish to change.
Recall that STPOWLA allowed for changes to the workflow as well as the addition of extra require-
ments for a task. VOs are more complex than workflows, in fact workflows form just one part of a VO
specification.
Table 2 shows the actions that will be available to policy authors and hence the opportunities to
change the VO. The actions fall into a number of different groups, depending on which entity they affect.
We believe that all structural changes that must be made to a VO can be achieved by the above actions,
which we will now describe and analyse in more detail.
The most obvious change to a VO is the addition or removal of a member. To that extend add member()
and remove member() actions are provided. They take a single argument, the member identifier P of the
affected member. The semantics of add member() is straight forward: a new member will be available in
the VO to undertake duties. remove member() is more complicated. While the member is removed from
the VO and hence will not be available for any duties any more they will have to discharge any activities
that they are involved with in active instances of the VO and as a consequence of them being removed
the will be automatically unassigned from any duties on tasks. This will possibly lead to a number of
tasks that are unassigned to a member or where there is a shortage of capabilities or capacities – these
circumstances will be repaired by the task's default policy.
assign duty(P,T [,args]) allows for member P to be added to task T . As members could offer a
number of capabilities and there is always choice on capacity the assignment operation will allow to
specify which capability and what capacity a member will bring to a task. unassign duty(P,T [,args])
allows to remove responsibilities from a member – note that as with remove member() the member will
S. Reiff-Marganiec
Action
can run(T )
active(T )
task type(T )
has capacity(P,c1,c2)
has capability(P,c)
27
Group
allows to check whether all requirements for a task T are full-filled,
that is whether all needed members are assigned and sufficient resources
are available.
allows to check if an instance of task T is executing.
allows to check the current type of a task T .
allows to check whether member P has free capacity of amount c2
in capability c1.
short-hand for has capacity(P,c1,0) – a check whether the member has
a capability.
Table 3: Conditions
need to discharge currently active tasks. Either of these two actions will allow to change the involvement
of a member by providing a T and P pair that already exists with new values for args – these will
overwrite the existing values. In case of a reduction, again any commitment made to currently active
tasks remains.
Changes to the task structure, allowing for tasks to be changed between Atomic, Replicable and
Composable Tasks can be achieved using the change type(T,new type,args) action.
We also cater for 4 actions in relation to the workflow of the VO. Two of these are concerned with
control flow, while the other two allow to redirect data flow. add task(T 1,T 2,relation) allows to insert
a new task T 1 'next to' task T 2 – where 'next to' is made precise by the relation. The values foreseen
for relation are "parallel" and "after", with the obvious semantics of the control flow reaching the par-
allel task T 1 simultaneously with T 2, whereas the outgoing control flow of T 2 would be input to T 1
and T 1's output goes to where T 2's went before with the after relation. delete task(T ) deletes a task,
making good any control flow breaks caused. Clearly tasks can only be deleted if they are not active.
provide input(I,T ) and remove input(I,T ) allow to redirect the dataflow, with either providing a data
item I to task T or removing it.
Conditions in policies will usually need to allow checks for certain assignments. We will assume the
general checks for time or date that are useful for all policies in all domains. Specifically for VOs we
require a few new conditions. These are shown with a brief explanation in Tab. 3.
4.1 Example
Let us consider a VO for travel arrangements, a quite typical example used frequently in the literature.
[17] presents a model of such a VO in more detail, however here a brief description will be sufficient.
This VO, let us call it VisitUs, offers travel arrangements including flight and hotel bookings. Hotel
bookings are provided by a task HotelProv, which for sake of argument is currently fulfilled by one
partner with an exclusive contract. VisitUs realises that it could increase business by being able to offer
more accommodation. The current hotel provision partner is in agreement to let competitors contribute
rooms when they a getting too full. The following policy describes how this could be captured.
policy MoreBeds
appliesTo HotelProv
when task entry()
if not has capacity(Hotel, beds, n)
do change type(HotelProv, Replicable, competition)
28
VO reconfigurations through Policies
andthen add member(newHotel)
andthen assign duty(newHotel, beds)
The policy MoreBeds describes situations where the HotelProv task needs to be adapted if the
hotel partner does not have sufficient capacity. In order to allow for other organisations to offer beds,
the current partner cannot be exclusive anymore, and hence the task has to become of a replicable type.
Once it can be shared, a new hotel partner can be added and be assigned duties against the task. Note that
the task can be shared once it is replicable, but here a sharing of a competitive nature has been selected,
under which the partner offering the best conditions will get the allocation.
5 Related Work
There has been some effort in modelling virtual organisations, as well as providing flexibility in systems.
We would like to identify three specific items here, as we deem them most relevant. However, this is not
meant to be an exhaustive review and we are aware that other work that can be seen as relevant exists,
which is not mentioned here.
[13] presents a formal set-up to model the structure and responsibilities of a VO in an agent based
setting. This work is focused mostly on the creation of VOs which is an aspect that we do not cover
here. We do believe that the presented reconfiguration work is orthogonal and and could be applied to
the agent based work where the main change would be that the enactment of the actions defined in this
paper would be on agents rather than on the VOML model. This could be an interesting angle, as agents
are by their very nature much closer to an executable environment than a modelling language.
VDM has been employed in [6] to model VOs. This work differs from our approach in that it uses a
general purpose modelling language rather than the VO specific one used here. An advantage from their
approach is the direct access to verification tools and methodologies, which they employed to analyse
properties of VOs. This approach does not provide a direct route to domain experts to model VOs and
describe reconfigurations as extensive VDM knowledge is required. Some more recent work [8] proposes
the use of animation to make the analysis of the models more accessible – however it does not address
the aspect that we considered here of making the actual modelling more accessible.
While we focused on system adaptation through policies, which has been a long standing and suc-
cessful approach, it is not the only. Aspect oriented programming allows to isolate concerns and treat
them as separate concepts when implementing systems. [11] presented an approach that allows to re-
configure BPEL processes using aspect oriented techniques. They dynamically weave separately defined
rules (expressed as aspects) into a BPEL process to adapt its behaviour. This could be a possible alter-
native to the approach presented here. It would require that the trigger points identified were 'hooks'
for aspects, which would then be executed at the respective places. However, this approach is far less
natural, as it requires additional programmes that will be run instead or in addition to the specified task
descriptions while the policy based approach is purely descriptive and furthermore shows simple changes
to the existing system which are easier to comprehend.
6 Discussion and Future Work
We presented an overview of STPOWLA, an approach based on the APPEL policy language to dynam-
ically adapt workflows. We also reviewed the VOML, the Virtual Organisation Modelling Language,
framework briefly, focusing our attention to the structural descriptions for VOs. The aim of the paper
S. Reiff-Marganiec
29
was to explore how a STPOWLA-like approach could be used to adapt virtual organisations. The result of
this analysis is an identification of a small and comprehensive set of domain specific triggers, actions and
conditions for the APPEL policy language that allow to express structural reconfigurations of VOs. This
has been exemplified with a Travel Booking VO. We believe that the small policy language presented
allows to describe typical structural transformations required for a VO in a natural way.
There are two more generic aspects worthy of discussion: one is the question whether the added
formality gained by modelling is of actual benefit to the VO community and the other is whether the
definition of more specific or the use of more generic languages provides a better approach. Considering
the former, VOs have been studies from several angles, but like any system it is often useful to have a
very precise understanding of their behaviour. one example would be the analysis of scenarios making
predictions about the future. For example one might wish to know what happens if a partner were
to leave or what would happen if a disaster struck and some services could not be provided anymore.
Formal analysis of a model allows to make such predictions, but for that a model is required capturing
the desired properties of the VO. This has let to several approaches for modelling VOs as we have shown
in the previous section.
The second aspect is a more debatable topic, as the existing studies in the more formal arena show that
different groups have taken different views on this. A more specific language offering dedicated concepts
for modelling VOs is desirable as it allows 'users' of VOs to describe them and to also understand their
structure. Our work on VOML falls into this category as it makes concepts from the VO domain first
class citizens in the language. Work using general formal modelling languages has a big advantage in
that it can usually rely on readily available tools for modelling as well as analyzing said models, however
this usually comes at the cost of experts in those languages and tools being required. Of course one could
add a further less formal layer, namely that of generic graphical modelling languages such as UML into
the discussion. What we believe is that the ideal approach is a combination of all of these techniques. We
foresee that for example UML activity diagrams form an ideal vehicle to describe the processes and task
dependencies in the workflow of the VO, with VOML (or similar domain specific languages) allowing to
express domain specific criteria of VOs. The combination of these could be mapped into a more generic
modelling language such as VDM and at that level analysis could be performed. This leaves one very
crucial aspect, which has seen more attention in the formal modeling and verification community in the
last decade, namely that of mapping the analysis results back into the domain language so that the user
can understand the results more directly.
Future work will analyse which properties of a VO can be guaranteed in the light of changes possible
through policies – that is we wish to study how fundamental a VO can be changed through policies and
whether that is desirable. The initial feeling is that this is not too desirable, as essentially by using the
right policies the purpose of a VO could be changed fundamentally (all tasks could be removed and a
completely new set be added). Furthermore, there is of course the questions of how easy it will be to
recover through the tasks default policy from member removals or duty dis-allocations.
A solution to restrict the changes possible, which would not only address this problem, but actu-
ally add to the properties one might wish to define on VO models would be to add more policies (also
expressed in APPEL) at the VBE and VO level. These policies would be constraints rather than recon-
figuration instructions, and as such would not have triggers, but rather would specify a set of conditions
and have actions that prohibit or undo (or repair) certain reconfigurations made. This will be explored,
as it is of interest beyond the scope of the current work presented here. Having policies expressed at
different levels also can give rise to a problem referred to as policy conflict: this occurs when policies
are simultaneously requesting actions that are incompatible – however solutions to the policy conflict
problem have already been studied and formalised for APPEL in [14].
30
References
VO reconfigurations through Policies
[1] H. Afsarmanesh & L.M. Camarinha-Matos (2005): A framework for management of virtual organizations
breeding environments. In: Collaborative Networks and their Breeding Environments – Proceedings of 6th
PRO-VE'05, Springer, pp. 35–48.
[2] Laura Bocchi, Jos´e Luiz Fiadeiro, Noor Rajper & Stephan Reiff-Marganiec (2009): Structure and
In Bryans & Fitzgerald [5], pp. 26–40,
Behaviour of Virtual Organisation Breeding Environments.
doi:10.4204/EPTCS.16.3.
[3] Laura Bocchi, Stephen Gorton & Stephan Reiff-Marganiec (2010): From StPowla processes to SRML models.
Form. Asp. Comput. 22, pp. 243–268, doi:10.1007/s00165-009-0118-7.
[4] Jeremy Bryans, John Fitzgerald & Tom McCutcheon (2011): Refinement-Based Techniques in the Analysis of
Information Flow Policies for Dynamic Virtual Organisations. In Luis Camarinha-Matos, Alexandra Pereira-
Klen & Hamideh Afsarmanesh, editors: Adaptation and Value Creating Collaborative Networks, IFIP Ad-
vances in Information and Communication Technology 362, Springer Boston, pp. 314–321, doi:10.1007/978-
3-642-23330-2 35.
[5] Jeremy Bryans & John S. Fitzgerald, editors (2009): Proceedings Second Workshop on Formal Aspects of
Virtual Organisations. EPTCS 16, doi:10.4204/EPTCS.16.
[6] Jeremy W. Bryans, John S. Fitzgerald, Cliff B. Jones & Igor Mozolevsky (2006): Formal modelling of
dynamic coalitions, with an application in chemical engineering. Technical Report, Newcastle University.
[7] L.M. Camarinha-Matos, H. Afsarmanesh & A. Ortiz, editors (2005): Collaborative networks and their breed-
ing environments. IFIP Vol. 186, Springer.
[8] John S Fitzgerald, Jeremy W Bryans, David Greathead, Clifff B Jones & Richard Payne (2008): Animation-
based Validation of a Formal Model of Dynamic Virtual Organisations Available at www.bcs.org/upload/
pdf/ewic_fm07_paper3.pdf.
[9] S. Gorton, C. Montangero, S. Reiff-Marganiec & L. Semini (2007): STPOWLA: SOA, Policies and Work-
flows. In: Revised Selected Papers of Workshops, ICSOC'07, LNCS 4907, Springer, pp. 351–362.
[10] F. Kamoun (2007): A roadmap towards the convergence of business process management and service ori-
ented architecture. Ubiquity 8(14), doi:10.1145/1247272.1247273. ACM Press.
[11] Dimka Karastoyanova & Frank Leymann (2009): BPEL'n'Aspects: Adapting Service Orchestration Logic.
In: Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE International Conference on Web Services, ICWS '09, IEEE Computer
Society, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 222–229, doi:10.1109/ICWS.2009.75.
[12] E. Lupu & M. Sloman (1999): Conflicts in Policy Based Distributed Systems Management. IEEE Transac-
tions on Software Engineering 25(6).
[13] Jarred McGinnis, Kostas Stathis & Francesca Toni (2009): A Formal Framework of Virtual Organisations as
Agent Societies. In Bryans & Fitzgerald [5], pp. 1–14, doi:10.4204/EPTCS.16.1.
[14] Carlo Montangero, Stephan Reiff-Marganiec & Laura Semini (2008): Logic-based Conflict Detection for
Distributed Policies. Fundam. Inf. 89, pp. 511–538. Available at http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?
id=1497115.1497122.
[15] Carlo Montangero, Stephan Reiff-Marganiec & Laura Semini (2011): Model-Driven Development of Adapt-
able Service-Oriented Business Processes. In Martin Wirsing & Matthias Holzl, editors: Rigorous Software
Engineering for Service-Oriented Systems, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 6582, Springer Berlin / Hei-
delberg, pp. 115–132, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-20401-2 6.
[16] OMG (2006): Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) Specification.
[17] Stephan Reiff-Marganiec & Noor Rajper (2011): Modelling Virtual Organisations: Structure and Reconfig-
urations. In Luis Camarinha-Matos, Alexandra Pereira-Klen & Hamideh Afsarmanesh, editors: Adaptation
and Value Creating Collaborative Networks, IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology
362, Springer Boston, pp. 297–305, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-23330-2 33.
S. Reiff-Marganiec
31
[18] K. J. Turner, S. Reiff-Marganiec, L. Blair, J. Pang, T. Gray, P. Perry & J. Ireland (2006): Policy Support for
Call Control. Computer Standards and Interfaces 28(6), pp. 635–649.
|
1911.07591 | 1 | 1911 | 2019-11-18T12:44:14 | Dynamic exploration of multi-agent systems with timed periodic tasks | [
"cs.MA"
] | We formalise and study multi-agent timed models MAPTs (Multi-Agent with timed Periodic Tasks), where each agent is associated to a regular timed schema upon which all possibles actions of the agent rely. MAPTs allow for an accelerated semantics and a layered structure of the state space, so that it is possible to explore the latter dynamically and use heuristics to greatly reduce the computation time needed to address reachability problems. We apply MAPTs to explore state spaces of autonomous vehicles and compare it with other approaches in terms of expressivity, abstraction level and computation time. | cs.MA | cs |
Dynamic exploration of multi-agent systems
with timed periodic tasks
Johan Arcile
IBISC, Univ Evry, Universit´e Paris-Saclay,
91025, Evry, France
Hanna Klaudel
IBISC, Univ Evry, Universit´e Paris-Saclay,
91025, Evry, France
Raymond Devillers
ULB, Bruxelles, Belgium
Abstract. We formalise and study multi-agent timed models MAPTs (Multi-Agent with timed
Periodic Tasks), where each agent is associated to a regular timed schema upon which all possibles
actions of the agent rely. MAPTs allow for an accelerated semantics and a layered structure of
the state space, so that it is possible to explore the latter dynamically and use heuristics to greatly
reduce the computation time needed to address reachability problems.
We apply MAPTs to explore state spaces of autonomous vehicles and compare it with other
approaches in terms of expressivity, abstraction level and computation time.
Keywords: Real time multi-agent systems, periodic behaviour, on-the-fly exploration
1.
Introduction
In the context of modelling and validating communicating autonomous vehicles (CAVs), the
framework VERIFCAR [2] allows to study the behaviour and properties of systems composed
of concurrent agents interacting in real time (expressed through real variables called clocks) and
through shared variables. Each agent performs time restricted actions that impact the valuation
of shared variables. The system is highly non-deterministic due to overlaps of timed intervals in
which the actions of various agents can occur.
VERIFCAR is suitable for the exhaustive analysis of critical situations in terms of safety, efficiency
and robustness with a specific focus on the impact of latencies, communication delays and failures
on the behaviour of CAVs. It features a parametric model of CAVs allowing to automatically
adjust the size of the state space to suit the required level of abstraction. This model is based on
timed automata with an interleaving semantics [1], and is implemented with UPPAAL [14], a state
of the art tool for real time systems with an efficient state space reduction for model checking.
However, it is limited in terms of expressivity and deals only with discrete values, which is not
always convenient and may lead to imprecise computations.
2
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
Various approaches [8, 6, 10, 12], relying on formal methods, address the modelling and analysis
of multi-agent systems in a context similar to ours. In particular, bounded model checking ap-
proaches [4, 3, 13] have been used for studying temporal logic properties. Standard and highly
optimised model checking tools, like UPPAAL [14, 7, 1], simplify a lot the process of studying
the behaviour of such systems, but have some drawbacks. For instance, in addition to clocks,
they usually only allow integer variables while rational ones would sometimes be more natural,
leading to artificial discretisations. Next, they only check Boolean expressions while it may be
essential to analyse numerical ones. Finally, the Boolean expressions are restricted to a subset of
the ones allowed by classical logical languages, in particular by excluding nested queries.
It turns out that state spaces in the applications studied with VERIFCAR are generally very large
but take the form of a semantic directed acyclic graph (DAG). Each agent also has syntactically
the form of a DAG between clock resets. Our goal is to exploit these peculiarities to build a
dedicated checking environment for reachability problems. Concretely, we want to explore the
graph dynamically (i.e., checking temporal logic properties directly as we explore states) to avoid
constructing the full state space, and therefore not to loose time and memory space storing and
comparing all previously reached states. The objective is to be able to tune the verification algo-
rithm with heuristics that will choose which path to explore in priority, which might significantly
speed up the computation time if the searched state exists. That implies that our algorithms
should explore the graph depth-first, since width-first algorithms cannot explore paths freely and
are restricted to fully explore all the states at some depth before exploring the next one.
For systems featuring a high level of concurrency between actions, such as the CAV systems,
most of the non-determinism results from possibly having several actions of different agents
available from a given state, that can occur in different orders and which often lead eventually
to the same state. This corresponds in the state space to what is sometimes called diamonds.
Width first exploration allows to compare states at a given depth and therefore remove duplicates,
which is an efficient way to detect such diamonds. On the other hand, depth-first exploring such
a state space with diamonds, leads to examine possibly several times the same states or paths,
which is not efficient. In this context, our aim is to detect and merge identical states coming
from diamonds while continuing to explore the state space mainly depth-firstly. This diamond
detection will consist in a width-first exploration in a certain layer of the state space, each layer
corresponding to some states at a given depth having common characteristics. It turns out that
such layers may be observed in the state space of CAV systems. This allows for a depth-first
exploration from layer to layer, while greatly reducing the chances of exploring several times the
same states. The class of models on which this kind of algorithm can be applied will be referred
to as Multi-Agent with timed Periodic Tasks (MAPTs).
To implement such algorithms we use ZINC [11], a compiler for high level Petri nets that gen-
erates a library of functions allowing to easily explore the state space. We use such functions to
dynamically explore the state space with algorithms designed for our needs. In particular, this
allows to apply heuristics leading to faster computation times, and results in a better expressivity
of temporal logic than UPPAAL, in particular by including nested queries. Another gain when
comparing to UPPAAL is that we are not limited to integer computations and can use real or ra-
tional variables, thus avoiding loss of information. To use ZINC, we have to emulate the real time
with discrete variables. We do so in a way that preserves the behaviour of the system: when using
the model with the same discrete variables as with UPPAAL, we obtain identical results.
In this paper, we start by a formal definition of G-MAPTs, a general class of MAPT-like models,
study its properties and provide a translation for high level Petri nets. Then, we introduce our
MAPT models, by slightly constraining G-MAPT ones, in order to avoid useless features and
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
3
to allow a first kind of acceleration procedures. Then, we present the layered structure and the
algorithms taking advantage of it. Finally, we propose heuristics and use them in experiments that
highlight the benefits of our approach in terms of expressivity, abstraction level and computation
time.
2. Syntax and semantics of G-MAPTs
A G-MAPT is a model composed of several agents that may interact through a shared variable.
Each agent is associated with a clock and performs actions occurring in some given time intervals.
There is no competition between agents in the sense that no agent will ever have to wait for another
one's action in order to perform its own actions. However, there may be non determinism when
several actions are available at the same time, as well as choices between actions and time passing.
A G-MAPT is a tuple (V, F, A, Init) where:
• V is a set of values;
• F is a (finite) set of variable transformations, i.e., calculable functions from V to V;
• A is a set of n agents such that ∀i ∈ [1, n], agent Ai
df= (Li, Ci, Ti, Ei) with:
-- Li is a set of localities denoted as a list Li
df= (l1
i , . . . , lmi
i
) with mi > 0, such that
∀i (cid:54)= j, Li ∩ Lj = ∅;
-- Ci is the unique clock of agent Ai, with values in N;
-- Ti is a finite set of transitions, forming a directed acyclic graph between localities,
, each transition being of
with a unique initial locality l1
the form (l, f, I, l(cid:48)) where l, l(cid:48) ∈ Li are the source and destination localities, f ∈ F is
a function and I df= [a, b] is an interval with a, b ∈ N and a ≤ b.
i and a unique final locality lmi
i
-- Ei ∈ N \ {0} is the reset period of agent Ai.
• Init is a triple ((l1,··· , ln), (init1,··· , initn), initV ) where ∀i ∈ [1, n], li ∈ Li, initi ∈ N
and initV ∈ V.
•
)
i
i = ∅ and (l mi
For each agent Ai and each locality l ∈ Li, we shall define by l• = {(l, f, I, l(cid:48)) ∈ Ti} the set
of transitions originated from l, and by •l = {(l(cid:48), f, I, l) ∈ Ti} the set of transitions leading
= ∅. Moreover, when i (cid:54)= j, since
to l. Note that, from the hypotheses, •l1
Li ∩ Lj = ∅, Ti ∩ Tj = ∅ too, so that each transition belongs to a single agent, avoiding
confusions in the model.
A simple example of a G-MAPT M with two non-deterministic agents is represented in Ex 2.1.
In the semantics, for each agent Ai, we will emulate a transition from lmi
i that resets clock
Ci every Ei time units. As such, each agent in the network cycles over a fixed period. There can
be several possible cycles though, since a given locality may be the source of several transitions,
so that there may be several paths from l1
The behaviour of the system is defined as a transition system where Init is the initial state. A state
of a G-MAPT composed of n agents as described above is a tuple denoted by s = ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c, v) where
(cid:126)l = (l1,··· , ln) with li ∈ Li is the current locality of agent Ai, (cid:126)c = (c1,··· , cn) where ci ∈ N
is the value of clock Ci, and v ∈ V is the value of variable V . There are three possible kinds of
state changes: a firing of a transition, a clock reset and a time increase.
i to lmi
to l1
.
i
i
4
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
• A transition (l, f, [a, b], l(cid:48)) ∈ Ti can be fired if li = l and a ≤ ci ≤ b. Then, in the new
state, li ← l(cid:48) and v ← f (v).
• A clock Ci can be reset if li = lmi
• Time can increase if ∀i ∈ [1, n], either there exist at least one transition (l, f, [a, b], l(cid:48)) ∈ Ti
and ci < Ei. A time increase means that ∀i ∈ [1, n],
and ci = Ei. Then, ci ← 0 and li ← l1
i .
i
with li = l and ci < b, or li = lmi
ci ← ci + 1.
i
It may be observed that there is a single global element in such a system: variable V ; all the other
ones are local to an agent. It is unique but its values may have the form of a vector, and an agent
may modify several components of this vector through the functions of F used in its transitions,
thus emulating the presence of several global variables. The values of V are not restricted to the
integer domain, but there is only a countable set of values that may be reached: the ones that
may be obtained from initv by a recursive application of functions from F (the variable is not
modified by the resets nor the time increases). However this domain may be dense inside the
reals, for instance.
1
[1, 1]
f1
[2, 3]
f2
E1 = 5
2
3
[1, 1]
f3
[2, 3]
f4
E2 = 5
4
Figure 1. Visual representation of G-MAPT from Ex. 2.1. Dashed arcs represent resets.
Example 2.1. Let M = (V, F, A, Init) where:
• V = R × N;
• F = {f1, f2, f3, f4} with
f1(x, y) → (2x, y + 1)
f3(x, y) → ( x
f2(x, y) → (x + 1.3, y + 1)
f4(x, y) → (2x, y)
• A = {(L1, C1, T1, E1), (L2, C2, T2, E2)} with
2 , y)
L1 = {1, 2} T1 = {(1, f1, [1, 2], 2), (l, f2, [3, 3], 2)} E1 = 5
L2 = {3, 4} T2 = {(3, f3, [1, 2], 4), (3, f4, [3, 3], 4)} E2 = 5
• Init = ((1, 3), (0, 0), (0.5, 0)).
A visual representation of M is given in Fig. 1 while the initial fragment of its dynamics is
depicted on top left of Fig. 5. Note that only transition firings and time increases are represented
♦
in Fig. 5 while the values v of variable V in the states ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c, v) are always omitted.
In a dynamic system, persistence is a property that states that, if two state changes are enabled at
some state, then none of these changes disables the other one and performing them in any order
leads to the same resulting state, forming a kind of diamond. In G-MAPT systems we have a
kind of persistence restricted to different agents.
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
5
1. if s enables two transitions t1 = (l1, f1, I1, l(cid:48)
Proposition 2.2. In a G-MAPT, if i (cid:54)= j and s = ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c, v) is any state, we have:
1) ∈ Ti and t2 = (l2, f2, I2, l(cid:48)
2) ∈ Tj, leading
respectively to states s1 and s2, then s1 enables t2 leading to a state s3 and s2 enables t1
leading to a state s4; moreover s3 = s4 iff f1◦f2(v) = f2◦f1(v), i.e., if f1 and f2 commute
on v;
2. if s enables a transition t = (l, f, I, l(cid:48)) ∈ Ti and a reset of Aj, leading respectively to states
s1 and s2, then s1 enables the reset of Aj leading to a state s3 and s2 enables t leading to
the same state s3;
3. if s enables a reset of Ai and a reset of Aj, leading respectively to states s1 and s2, then s1
enables the reset of Aj leading to a state s3 and s2 enables the reset of Ai leading to the
same state s3.
Proof:
1. The property results from the fact that transitions do not modify clocks, and a transition of
some agent only modifies the locality of the latter, together with the common variable V ; in
s3 the variable becomes f2 ◦ f1(v), while in s4 the variable becomes f1 ◦ f2(v). Note that
if i = j, s1 does not enable transition t2 since, from the acyclicity hypothesis, the locality
of Ai is changed, hence is not the source of t2 (and symmetrically);
2. the property results from the fact that a transition does not modify any clock, and a reset of
Aj only modifies the locality and clock of the latter; the common variable V will have the
value f (v) after both the execution of the transition followed by the reset as well as after
the reset followed by the transition. Note that i may not be the same as j here since the
reset of Ai may only occur in locality lmi
, while no transition may occur there;
i
3. the property results from the fact that a reset of an agent only modifies the locality and clock
i , so that a
, i.e., Ai has a single locality, no transition and does
of the latter. Note that, if i = j, since after a first reset the locality becomes l1
second one may only occur if l1
not act on the common variable, hence may be dropped.
i = lmi
i
(cid:117)(cid:116)
2.1. Constraints
We define in this subsection two types of constraints, which are motivated by the properties of
our target application domain and which will be used to obtain interesting properties.
A G-MAPT is called strongly live if it satisfies the following constraint:
Constraint 1.
1. If the initial locality of some agent Ai is the terminal one (li = lmi
), then the initial value
i
of clock Ci satisfies initi ≤ Ei;
2. otherwise (when li (cid:54)= lmi
), we have initi ≤ max{b (li, f, [a, b], l(cid:48)) ∈ li
•});
i
6
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
3. moreover, for each agent Ai, if l ∈ Li \ {l1
max{b (l(cid:48), f, [a, b], l) ∈ •l} ≤ min{b(cid:48) (l, f(cid:48), [a(cid:48), b(cid:48)], l(cid:48)(cid:48)) ∈ l•};
i , lmi
i }, then
i } ≤ Ei.
4. and we have max{b (l(cid:48), f, [a, b], lmi
) ∈ •lmi
i
The first two constraints ensure that, when the system is started, either in the terminal locality or
in a non terminal one of some agent, the time is not blocked and we shall have the possibility
to perform an action in some future. The next constraint ensures that whenever a non terminal
locality is entered, any (and not only some) transition originated from that locality will have the
possibility to occur in some future (the case when we enter an initial locality is irrelevant since
resets reinitialise the corresponding clock to 0). The last constraint captures similar features in
the case when we enter a terminal locality.
In other words, each transition or reset in l• is enabled when entering l or will be enabled in the
future (after possibly some time passings in order to reach the lower bound a).
Proposition 2.3. In a G-MAPT satisfying Constraints 1, after any evolution ω, each transition
and each reset (as well as time passings) may be fired in some future.
i
i
) =⇒ ci ≤ Ei and (li (cid:54)= lmi
Proof:
We may first observe by induction on the length of ω that, if s = ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c, v) is the state reached
) =⇒
after the evolution ω, for any agent Ai we have (li = lmi
•}), i.e., the same G-MAPT with initial state s also satisfies
ci ≤ max{b (li, f, [a, b], l(cid:48)) ∈ li
Constraint 1 (the last two ones do not rely on the initial state). The property is trivial for ω = ε.
If the property is satisfied for some ω, it remains so for any extension, from the definition of the
semantics of G-MAPT and the last two points of Constraint 1.
It also results from the same remark that any evolution ω satisfying the mentioned properties may
be extended (there is no deadlock). It remains to show that any extension may be performed in
some future.
For time passing, we may observe that, if time passing may never be performed, since the set of
localities for each agent has the form of a DAG, extending ω will finally perform a reset, and
since each Ei is strictly positive we shall finally perform all the resets and stop at some point,
which is forbidden. Hence we are sure time passings will be possible.
Since time passings may always be performed in the future, all resets will be performed eventu-
ally.
i ) ∈ Ti. From the same argument about time passings, it will be
Finally, let t = (l(cid:48)
possible to eventually perform reset ri, then follow a path going from l1
i in the DAG of Ai,
performing each transition in turn when reaching the corresponding a, due to Constraint 1.3. (cid:117)(cid:116)
i, f, [a, b], l(cid:48)(cid:48)
i to l(cid:48)
The next constraint is a syntactic manner of ensuring the acyclicity of the G-MAPT's dynamics
(i.e., its state space):
Constraint 2.
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
7
1. V df= W × X and there exist an agent Ai such that in all paths of transition from l1
i to lmi
,
there exists a transition t df= (l, f, [a, b], l(cid:48)) such that for all (w, x) ∈ V, f (w, x) = (w(cid:48), x(cid:48))
with x < x(cid:48);
i
2. and there is no f ∈ F such that for some (w, x) ∈ V, we have f (w, x) = (w(cid:48), x(cid:48)) with
x > x(cid:48).
The first constraint ensures that at least one agent increments the X part of variable V at least
once between two of its resets. The second one ensures that no function can decrease the X part
of variable V .
In other words, the X part of v increases in each cycle of agent Ai, which results in an absence
of cycles in the whole state space of the G-MAPT.
Proposition 2.4. A G-MAPT satisfying Constraint 2 is acyclic.
Proof:
If there is a cycle, it means that there exists a path from the initial state with at least two different
states in the path s1 = ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c, v) and s2 = ((cid:126)l(cid:48), (cid:126)c(cid:48), v(cid:48)), which are actually identical. Since the
localities of each agent form a static DAG determined by its transitions and each Ei is strictly
positive, having (cid:126)l = (cid:126)l(cid:48) and (cid:126)c = (cid:126)c(cid:48) may only happen if all agents have done at least one reset
between s1 and s2. Indeed, if there is no reset, since (cid:126)c = (cid:126)c(cid:48) we may only have transitions in the
cycle, but this is incompatible to have DAGs in each agent. Moreover, since between two resets
of an agent time strictly increases, (cid:126)c = (cid:126)c(cid:48) may only occur if all agents have performed one or
more resets. Thus, it is enough to observe that variable V cannot decrease from Constraint 2.2,
and a transition t like in Constraint 2.1 should occur, guaranteeing that v (cid:54)= v(cid:48).
(cid:117)(cid:116)
Definition 2.5. A MAPT is a G-MAPT satisfying Constraints 1 and 2.
A MAPT may be non-deterministic but it is strongly live and has a DAG state space. For instance,
the G-MAPT M from Ex. 2.1 satisfies both constraints (acyclicity is satisfied due to y being
incremented in all cycles of A1) and so is actually a MAPT.
3. Translation into high level Petri nets
A high level Petri net [5] can be viewed as an abbreviation of a low-level one [9] where tokens are
elements of some set of values that can be checked and updated when transitions are fired. Here,
we express a G-MAPT as a high level Petri net to be implemented with ZINC.
Formally, a high level Petri net is a tuple (S, T, λ, M0) where:
• S is a finite set of places;
• T is a finite set of transitions;
• λ is a labelling function on places, transitions and arcs such that
-- for each place s ∈ S, λ(s) is a set of values defining the type of s,
8
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
-- for each transition t ∈ T , λ(t) is a Boolean expression with variables and constants
-- for each arc (x, y) ∈ (S × T ) ∪ (T × S), λ(x, y) is the annotation of the arc from x
defining the guard of t and
to y, driving the production or consumption of tokens.
• M0 is an initial marking associating tokens to places, according to their types.
The semantics of a high level Petri net is captured by a transition system containing as states
all the markings, which are reachable from the initial marking M0. A marking M(cid:48) is directly
reachable from a marking M if there is a transition t enabled at M, whose firing leads to M(cid:48); it
is reachable from M if there is a sequence of such firings leading to it. A transition t is enabled
at some marking M if the tokens in all the input places of t allow to satisfy the flow expressed by
the annotations of input arcs and the guard of t, through a valuation of the variables involved in
the latter. The firing of t consumes the concerned tokens in input places of t and produces tokens
on output places of t, according to the annotations of the output arcs and the same valuation.
s1
1
x
x > 0
t
y
s2
2
(w, z)
(w + x, z + y)
(0, 0) s3
Figure 2. A high level Petri net.
Fig. 2 shows an example of a high level Petri net where place types are N for s1 and s2, and N×N
for s3. Transition t is enabled at the initial marking since there exists a valuation of variables in the
annotations of arcs and in the guard of t, with values from tokens, x (cid:55)→ 1, y (cid:55)→ 2, w (cid:55)→ 0, z (cid:55)→ 0,
that satisfies the guard. The firing of t consumes the tokens in all three places and produces a new
token (1, 2) in place s3.
Definition 3.1. Given a G-MAPT Q = (V, F, A, Init) with A = n, its translation to a high
level Petri net N = translate(P ) = (S, T, λ, M0) is defined as follows:
• S = {sA, sC, sV } with λ(sA) df= L1 × ··· × Ln where Li is the set of localities of agent
i ), λ(sC) df= Nn and λ(sV ) df= V; For any token x of
Ai (its jth element will be denoted lj
the type λ(sA) or λ(sC), we denote by x[i] the ith element of the list.
• T df= Ttrans ∪ Treset ∪ {ttime} where
-- Ttrans is the smallest set of transitions such that, for each agent Ai = (Li, Ci, Ti, Ei)
in A and for each transition (l, f, [a, b], l(cid:48)) ∈ Ti, there is a transition t ∈ Ttrans such
that λ(sA, t) df= x, λ(sC, t) df= y, λ(sV , t) df= z, λ(t, sA) df= x(cid:48) where x(cid:48)[i] ← l(cid:48) and
∀j (cid:54)= i, x(cid:48)[j] ← x[j], λ(t, sC) df= y, λ(t, sV ) df= f (z) and λ(t) df= (x[i] = l) ∧ (a ≤
y[i] ≤ b). This is equivalent to the set of transitions of the G-MAPT.
-- Treset is the smallest set of transitions such that, for each agent Ai = (Li, Ci, Ti, Ei)
in A, there is a transition t ∈ Treset such as λ(sA, t) df= x, λ(sC, t) df= y, λ(t, sA) df= x(cid:48)
where x(cid:48)[i] ← l1
i and ∀j (cid:54)= i, x(cid:48)[j] ← x[j], λ(t, sC) df= y(cid:48) where y(cid:48)[i] ← 0 and
df= Li. This
∀j (cid:54)= i, y(cid:48)[j] ← y[j], and λ(t) df= (x[i] = lmi
is equivalent to the set of clock resets of the G-MAPT.
) ∧ (y[i] = Ei) where mi
i
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
9
-- λ(sA, ttime) df= x, λ(sC, ttime) df= y, λ(ttime, sA) df= x, λ(ttime, sC) df= y(cid:48), where
∀i ∈ [1, n], y(cid:48)[i] ← y[i] + 1, and λ(ttime) df= G1 ∧ ··· ∧ Gn where Gi acts as the
df= (g1 ∨ ··· ∨ gmi)
"upper bound guard" for all the transitions in agent Ai, i.e., Gi
with mi = Li and ∀j ∈ [1, mi − 1], gj
i ) ∧ (y[i] < B), where B =
•} is the highest upper bound of the intervals from all
max{b(lj
) ∧ (y[i] < Ei). This is equivalent to
outgoing transitions of lj
a time increase.
i , f, [a, b], l(cid:48)) ∈ l j
df= (x[i] = lj
i
i and gmi
df= (x[i] = lmi
i
• (M0(sA), M0(sC), M0(sV )) = Init is the initial marking
The translation associates singletons as arc annotations for all arcs. As a consequence, during
the execution, starting from the initial marking which associates one token to each place, there
will always be exactly one token in each of the three places. Each reachable marking, where sA
contains (cid:126)l, sC contains (cid:126)c and sV contains v, encodes a state ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c, v) of the considered G-MAPT.
Figure 3 sketches the Petri net translation of the G-MAPT from Ex. 2.1. At the initial marking,
t1, t2, t(cid:48)
2 are not enabled because the token read from sC (i.e., the vector of clock values)
does not satisfies the guards, while r1 and r2 are not enabled because the token read from sA
(i.e., the vector of localities) does not satisfies the guards. On the other hand, the transition time
is enabled. Its firing reads1 tokens in places sV and sA, consumes (0, 0) and produces (1, 1) in
sC. At this new marking, time, t1 and t2 are enabled and the process continues exactly as in the
G-MAPT.
1 and t(cid:48)
Proposition 3.2. A G-MAPT Q and its translated Petri net N = translate(Q) have equivalent
state spaces and semantics.
Proof:
Immediate from the definitions.
(cid:117)(cid:116)
1means that consumes and produces the same tokens
10
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
((l1 = 1 ∧ c1 < 3) ∨ (l1 = 2 ∧ c1 < 5))
∧((l2 = 3 ∧ c2 < 3) ∨ (l2 = 4 ∧ c2 < 5))
(c1, c2)/(c1 + 1, c2 + 2)
time
l1 = 2 ∧ c1 = 5
(l1, l2)
(c1, c2)
(c1, c2)
(c1, c2)
(c1, c2)
r1
l2 = 4 ∧ c2 = 5
r2
(l1, l2)/(1, l2)
(l1, l2)/(l1, 3)
(l1, l2)/(l1, 4)
(1, 3) sA
(l1, l2)/(l1, 4)
(l1, l2)/(2, l2)
(l1, l2)/(2, l2)
l2 = 3 ∧ 2 ≤ c2 ≤ 3
sC
(0, 0)
(c1, c2)
(c1, c2)
t2
l2 = 3 ∧ 1 ≤ c2 ≤ 1
(x, y)/( x
2 , y)
(x, y)/(2x, y)
t(cid:48)
2
t1
(x, y)/(2x, y + 1)
l1 = 1 ∧ 1 ≤ c1 ≤ 1
(x, y)/(x + 1.3, y + 1)
l1 = 1 ∧ 2 ≤ c1 ≤ 3
t(cid:48)
1
(0.5, 0)
sV
Figure 3.
Petri net translation of the G-MAPT from Ex. 2.1 with the initial marking. Arcs are bidirectional
and annotated by pairs w/z (or w instead of w/w) meaning that w is the label of the arc from place to transition
and z of the opposite one.
4. Acceleration
Let us assume we are interested by the causality relation between transitions rather than by the
exact dates of their firings. It is then often possible to reduce the size of the original state space.
To do so, we assume that the G-MAPT satisfies Constraint 1.
We may first consider action zones, defined as maximum time intervals in which the same tran-
sitions and resets are enabled from the current state (note however that, when a reset is enabled,
the zone has length 0, since before an Ei the corresponding reset is not enabled and we may not
go beyond Ei). Instead of increasing time by unitary steps, we can then progress in one step from
an action zone to another one, until we decide or must fire a transition or reset. This generally
corresponds to increasing time by more than one unit at once. Note that, when we jump to a zone,
we may choose any point in it since, by definition, all of them behave the same with respect to
enabled events; in the following, we have chosen to go to the end of the zone since this allows to
perform bigger time steps; this will also be precious when defining borders of layers.
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
11
However, not all action zones reachable from a given state need to be explored: we may neglect
action zones which are dominated by other ones, i.e., for which the set of enabled transitions
and resets is included in another one. As an example, let us assume that the sets of enabled
transitions are successively (from the current state): {t1, t2} → {t1, t2, t3} → {t2, t3} →
{t3} → {t3, t4} → {t3, t4, t5} → {t4, t5} . . . (i.e., letting the time evolve, we first encounter
a3, then b1, b2, a4, a5, b3, ...). The maximal (non-dominated) action zones are indicated in
bold. We may thus first jump (in time) to the end of the zone allowing {t1, t2, t3}, then choose
if we want to fire t1 or t2 or t3, or jump to the end of the zone allowing {t3, t4, t5}, where we
can again decide to fire a transition or not (unless a firing is mandatory, i.e., there is no further
non-dominated action zone).
In order to pursue the analysis, let s = ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c, v) be the current state and, for each agent Ai let
(cid:40)
Bi
df=
Ei − ci if li = lmi
max{b − ci (li, f, [a, b], l(cid:48)) ∈ li
i
•} otherwise
B df= min{Bi i ∈ [1, n]}
From our hypotheses, each Bi, hence also B, is non-negative, and we may not let pass more than
B time units before choosing to fire a transition or a reset. In particular, if B = 0, increasing
time would prevent any transition in some locality to ever be enable again. To avoid such a local
deadlock, we must choose a transition or reset to fire.
When time evolves, if we reach an a or an E the set of enabled transitions and resets increases
(note that an E behaves both as an a and as a b), and if we overtake a b (we may not overtake an
E), this set shrinks. We must thus find the first b or E preceded by at least one a.
This may be done as follows: let
a
df=
δ
df=
min(α)
0
min(β)
0
if α df= {a − ci ∃ (li, f, [a, b], l(cid:48)
and ci < a ≤ B} ∪ {Ei − ci li = lmi
and ci < Ei ≤ B} (cid:54)= ∅
otherwise
i
i) ∈ Ti for some agent Ai
for some agent Ai
if β df= {b − ci ∃ (li, f(cid:48), [a, b], l(cid:48)) ∈ li
with 0 < a ≤ b − ci ≤ B} ∪ {Ei − ci li = lmi
agent Ai with Ei ≤ ci + B } (cid:54)= ∅
otherwise
• for some agent Ai
for some
i
It may be observed that a > 0 ⇐⇒ α (cid:54)= ∅ ⇐⇒ β (cid:54)= ∅ ⇐⇒ δ > 0.
If a = 0, that means that there is no way to increase the set of enabled transitions or resets in the
future; there is thus no interest to let time evolve (and indeed δ = 0) and we must choose now
a transition or a reset to be fired (time will possibly be allowed to increase in the new locality).
Otherwise, we may fire a transition or a reset or perform a time jump of δ, which is of at most
B time units. Note that when a transition or reset is fired, we need to recompute B; when a time
shift (or jump) is performed, δ > 0 and we need to adjust all the clocks and B: ∀i : ci ← ci + δ
and B ← B − δ.
12
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
We may remark that the initial state as well as the states reached after a firing are not necessarily
in a maximal zone. This may be checked easily: the first b or E is preceded by one or more a's
from this current state. We may then force a time jump δ as computed above to reach the end
of the first maximal zone before wondering if we shall perform a firing. However, this is not
absolutely necessary and we may decide to perform a firing or a time jump at this current state.
Finally, we may observe that, when we perform a firing in some agent Ai, we are positioned
before B, hence before Bi by definition. From Constraints 1.3 and 1.4 above, whatever the time
jumps performed in the previous state, the first maximal zone is the same, so that we do not miss
a possible firing from the new current state.
Figure 4. Example of time increase based on the action zone acceleration. Current time is indicated by grey
dots, while the maximal possible time increase for each variant is shown with its respective color (blue for t4,
red for t(cid:48)
4 and green for t(cid:48)(cid:48)
4).
For a better understanding, let us consider the example of acceleration illustrated in Fig. 4, with
two agents A1 and A2. To simplify the presentation, we shall assume that the clocks C1 and C2
are aligned, so that the time intervals of the transitions can be represented in the same space. The
current state of the system can be described as follows: from the current locality of agent A1,
the outgoing transitions t1 and t2 can be fired respectively in the intervals [0, 3] and [1, 5], while
from the current locality of agent A2, the outgoing transitions t3 and t4 (in blue in the figure)
can be fired respectively in [0, 6] and [2, 4]. For any transition ti, its lower and upper bounds
will be referred to as ai and bi. Let us assume that the current time is currently at instant 1. In
such a case, the current action zone is [a2, a4[ and it enables t1, t2 and t3. The next action zone
[a4, b1] enables all four transitions (and is thus maximal). So, from the current action zone we
may fire one of t1, t2 or t3 or let the time pass. The (accelerated) time increase should lead then
to action zone [a4, b1], for instance at b1. That way, we would include all the possible sequences
of transitions, including the firing of t4 followed by t1.
Now let us consider a variant of the example, in which t4 is replaced by t(cid:48)
4 (in red in the figure),
with a time interval of [4, 6]. In that scenario, the current action zone is [a2, b1] and it enables t1,
t2 and t3. The next zone is ]b1, a4(cid:48)[, which enables t2 and t3 only: since the enabled transitions
are included in the current action zone, this zone is not interesting from a causality point of
view. Finally, the zone [a(cid:48)
4, b2] enables t2, t3 and t4, which is interesting because a new transition
becomes enabled and the next time increase should lead to the end of this zone. It is important
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
13
to note that all the sequences involving t1 are preserved, as the time increase is only one of the
possibles evolution of the system, the firing of t1, t2 and t3 also being possible.
Finally, let us consider a second variant, in which t4 is replaced by t(cid:48)(cid:48)
4 (in green in the figure), with
a time interval of [6, 8]. In that scenario, the current action zone is still [a2, b1], which enables t1,
t2 and t3. The next action zone ]b1, b2] enables t2 and t3 only. As before, the enabled transitions
are included in the current action zone, which means that going to this zone is irrelevant. However,
it is not possible to go further ahead since we reached B (it corresponds to the time before reaching
b2). We must thus chose a transition to fire in the current zone. Transition t(cid:48)(cid:48)
4 is presently non-
enabled; it may become enabled in the future however, after (at least) t1 or t2 is fired.
In the context of Petri net the acceleration may be defined syntactically (by modifying the guard
of transition ttime and the annotations of arcs from transition ttime to place sC) and corresponds
to replacing the following items in Definition 3.1:
• λ(ttime, sC) = y(cid:48), where ∀i ∈ [1, n], y(cid:48)[i] ← y[i] + δ;
• λ(ttime) df= δ > 0.
The computation of δ is possible thanks to the current localities of agents present in tokens in
place sA and the values of clocks present as tokens in place sC.
Note finally an interesting feature of the accelerated semantics: if we change the granularity of the
time and multiply all the timing constant by some factor, the size of the state space of the original
semantics is inflated accordingly. On the contrary, the size (and structure) of the accelerated
semantics remains the same.
4.1. Abstracted dynamics
In order to capture the causality feature of such models, mixing time passings and transition/reset
executions, and to drop the purely timed aspects, we shall consider the graph whose nodes are the
projections of evolutions from the initial state on the set of transitions and resets. Said differently,
if we have a word on the alphabet composed of +δ (time passing, with δ = 1 in the original, non-
accelerated, semantics), ti,j's (transitions of agent Ai) and ri's (reset of agent Ai) representing
a possible evolution of the system up to some point, by dropping all the +δ's we shall get its
projection, and a node of the abstracted (from timing aspects) graph. The (labelled) arcs between
those nodes will be defined by the following rule: if α and αt (or αr) are two nodes, there is an
arc labelled t (or r) between them. This will define a (usually infinite) labelled tree, abstracted
unfolding of the semantics (either original or accelerated) of the considered system.
The initial node (corresponding to the empty evolution) will be labelled by the projection ((cid:126)l; v)
of the initial state ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c; v). This will automatically (recursively) determine the label of the other
nodes: if ((cid:126)l; v) is the label of some node and there is an arc labelled t = (li, f, [a, b], l(cid:48)
i) from it to
another one, the latter will be labelled ((cid:126)l(cid:48); f (v)), where (cid:126)l(cid:48) is (cid:126)l with li replaced by l(cid:48)
i; and if the arc
is labelled ri, the label of the destination node will be ((cid:126)l(cid:48); v), where (cid:126)l(cid:48) is (cid:126)l with li replaced by l1
i .
As an illustration consider the MAPT of Ex. 2.1, where we neglect the values of the variable to
simplify a bit the presentation. The initial fragment of the original and accelerated dynamics as
well as the corresponding abstracted dynamics are represented in Fig. 5, assuming initially the
clocks are both equal to 0, A1 is in state 1 and A2 is in state 3.
14
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
(1, 3; 0, 0)
(1, 3; 0, 0)
t2
+1
(2, 3; 1, 1)
(2, 4; 1, 1)
t1
t1
+1
(1, 3; 1, 1)
(1, 4; 1, 1)
+1
+2
t2
t2
t2
+1
(2, 3; 2, 2)
+1
(2, 4; 2, 2)
(2, 3; 2, 2)
(2, 4; 2, 2)
t1
(1, 3; 2, 2)
t1
+1
(1; 4; 2, 2)
t(cid:48)
2
t2
t1
+1
(1, 3; 2, 2)
t1
+1
(1; 4; 2, 2)
t(cid:48)
2
t2
+1
+1
t(cid:48)
1
t(cid:48)
2
t(cid:48)
1
+1
(2, 3; 3, 3)
+1
(2, 4; 3, 3)
+1
(2, 3; 3, 3)
+1
(2, 4; 3, 3)
t(cid:48)
1
t(cid:48)
2
t(cid:48)
1
+1
(1, 3; 3, 3)
(1, 4; 3, 3)
(1, 3; 3, 3)
(1, 4; 3, 3)
(1, 3)
t1
t(cid:48)
1
t2
t(cid:48)
2
(2, 3)
t(cid:48)
2
t2
(2, 3)
t(cid:48)
2
(2, 4)
(2, 4)
(2, 4)
(1, 4)
t(cid:48)
1
(2, 4)
(1, 4)
t1
t(cid:48)
1
(2, 4)
(2, 4)
Figure 5.
Top left: the original dynamics. Top right: the accelerated one. Bottom: the abstracted dynamics.
The initial fragments (without variable values) of the various dynamics for the MAPT from Ex 2.1.
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
15
Proposition 4.1. The original and accelerated semantics of a MAPT lead to the same abstracted
dynamics.
Proof:
We only have to show that the set of (untimed) projections of evolutions in the original semantics
is the same as the ones in the accelerated one.
First, we may observe that each evolution in the accelerated semantics is also an evolution in
the original one: a time passing of δ time units to reach a maximal action zone is the same as δ
time passings of 1 time unit; indeed, by definition, δ ≤ B and at the end in both cases we have
B − δ = B − δ · 1 ≥ 0.
It thus remains to show that, if word(ω) is the projection of some evolution ω of the original
semantics, it is also the projection of some evolution ω(cid:48) of the accelerated one. We shall proceed
by induction on the length of ω and show more exactly that for each ω there is an accelerated
evolution ω(cid:48) such that word(ω(cid:48)) = word(ω) and the set of enabled transitions/resets after ω is
included in the one after ω(cid:48).
The property is trivially satisfied initially, when ω = ω(cid:48) = ε, but also if the initial enabled
set is not maximal and we choose the accelerated strategy going to (any point realising) the first
maximal enabled set through some shift δ. Indeed, we know by definition that some shift δ always
lead to the first maximal enabled set and nowhere else. Then, in this last case, by definition δ ≤ B
and the set of enabled transitions/resets increases.
We already observed that, if word(ω) = word(ω(cid:48)), the locality and the variable are the same after
ω and ω(cid:48). Let ∆(ω) be the time elapsed during the evolution described by ω. We may observe
that the clocks are determined by word(ω) and ∆(ω), independently on when the time passings
exactly occurred: for any agent Ai, ci = initi + ∆(ω)− Ei · #ri(ω), where #ri(ω) is the number
of resets of Ai in word(ω). We also have that we may not let more than mini{Ei} time passings
We shall now assume that(cid:101)ω extends ω by one event, that ω and ω(cid:48) form an adequate pair, and
to occur in a row, since then we should have a reset occurring before.
that it is then possible to build an adequate accelerated evolution(cid:101)ω(cid:48).
If(cid:101)ω = ω(+1), i.e., if(cid:101)ω is obtained from ω by adding a time passing (of 1 time unit), the projection
of(cid:101)ω is the same as the one of ω, hence of ω(cid:48) by the induction hypothesis. If the enabled set after(cid:101)ω
set after(cid:101)ω is no longer included in the one after ω(cid:48), that means we reached one or more a's which
were not reached yet by ω(cid:48), so that we may deduce that ∆(ω(cid:48)) < ∆((cid:101)ω). But then, going to (any
also occur for(cid:101)ω, forcing to first perform a transition or reset after ω) and recover the induction
If(cid:101)ω = ωri, for some agent Ai, we must have that initi + ∆((cid:101)ω) = initi + ∆(ω) = k · Ei for
ω(cid:48) we have the same action zone and initi + ∆(ω(cid:48)) = k · Ei (the same factor for ω(cid:48) as for(cid:101)ω since
ω(cid:48)ri is the same as after(cid:101)ω, and the situation is the same as initially.
If(cid:101)ω = ωt, for some transition t of some agent Ai, by the induction hypothesis t may also occur
after ω(cid:48) and word((cid:101)ω) = word(ω(cid:48)t). Any t(cid:48) enabled after ω in any Aj for j (cid:54)= i remains enabled
some factor k, with ri belonging to the set of transitions/resets enabled after ω. But an action
zone enabling a reset is an interval including exactly one time unit, and is maximal. Hence after
the time passings between resets are limited). We may thus also perform ri after ω(cid:48), the state after
is still included in the one after ω(cid:48), the latter still satisfies the induction hypothesis. If the enabled
point in) the next maximal action zone (with the aid of some aggregated time passing δ) in the
accelerated semantics, we shall reach those a's (without trespassing B since otherwise this would
hypothesis.
16
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
Constraint 1, no transition at the new location has already reached its enabling end point in the
after (cid:101)ω as well as after ω(cid:48)t, by the induction hypothesis. For agent Ai, from the third item of
original (after(cid:101)ω) and in the accelerated (after ω(cid:48)t) semantics. If ∆((cid:101)ω) ≤ ∆(ω(cid:48)t) = ∆(ω(cid:48)), the
clock Ci of Ai is not greater after(cid:101)ω than after ω(cid:48)t) (see the formula above yielding ci) so that
all the enabled transitions of Ai after(cid:101)ω are also enabled after(cid:101)ω(cid:48)t, and the induction hypothesis
remains valid. On the contrary, if ∆((cid:101)ω) > ∆(ω(cid:48)t), it may happen that some(cid:101)t in Ai is enabled after
(cid:101)ω but not after ω(cid:48)t; however, from ω(cid:48)t it is then possible to let time pass during ∆((cid:101)ω) − ∆(ω(cid:48)t),
which leads to the same state as after (cid:101)ω; it is then also possible to consider a maximal action
zone after ω(cid:48)t which encompasses all the transitions enabled after(cid:101)ω, to reach it in the accelerated
semantics, and the induction hypothesis remains valid.
(cid:117)(cid:116)
5. Layers and strong and weak variables
When model checking a system, one usually has the choice between a depth-first and a width-
first exploration of the state space. For reachability properties (where one searches if some state
satisfying a specific property may be reached), depth-first (directed and limited by the query)
is usually considered more effective. However, the majority of the non-determinism in systems
featuring a high level of concurrency (such as MAPTs, and in particular CAV systems) leads to
diamonds. Indeed, if transitions on different agents are available at a state then they may occur
in several possible orders, all of them converging most of the time to the same state (see the
paragraph on persistence above). In order to avoid exploring again and again the same states,
a depth-first exploration needs to store all the states already visited up to now, which is usually
impossible to do in case of large systems. For example, if states s1 and s2 share a common
successor s3, the algorithm will compute successors of s1, then remove s1 from memory and
continue with its successors, until reaching s3 and exploring all paths from s3, forgetting each
time the nodes already visited. That way, when the algorithm has explored all paths from s1 and
start exploring from s2, there is no memory of s3 having been explored already, and thus all paths
starting from it will be explored again.
On the contrary, using width-first algorithms would guarantee avoiding that issue, because dupli-
cate states obtained at a given depth can be removed. However, this would also imply exploring
all reachable states at a given depth and forbid using heuristics to direct and limit the exploration.
An idea is then to try to combine both approaches.
5.1. Layered state space
The state space of a MAPT shows an interesting characteristics: apart from having no cycles
(see Prop. 2.4: the state space in our case is always a DAG), its structure can often be divided in
layers such that all states on the border of a layer share the same vectors of localities and clocks
(and thus, the same set of enabled transitions) and are situated at the same time distance from the
initial state. The only difference concerns the value of the variable, due to the non-determinism
and the concurrency inherent to this kind of models. Non-determinism means that an agent has
the choice between several transitions at some location; concurrency means that at least two
agents may perform transitions at some point. In the first case, several paths may be followed
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
17
by the agent to reach some point, leading to different values of the variable; in the second case,
transitions of the two agents may be commuted, leading again to different values of the variable.
This is schematised by Fig. 6, where one can see how the state space is divided in sub-spaces
(each of them being a DAG with a unique initial state) such that each final state of a sub-space is
the initial state of another one. The sub-spaces may intersect.
More formally, in a DAG, we have a natural partial order: s1 < s2 if there is a non-empty path
from s1 to s2; s1 and s2 are incomparable if there is no non-empty path between them.
A cut is a maximal subset of incomparable states. A cut partitions the partially ordered space into
three subsets: the states before the cut, the cut itself, and the states after the cut.
In the following, we shall denote by ω a (possibly empty) evolution leading from some state s to
some state s(cid:48), i.e., the sequence of transitions, resets and time passings labelling some path going
from s to s(cid:48) in the state space of the considered model. As usual, we shall also denote by ∆(ω)
the sum of the time passings along ω, also called the time distance from s to s(cid:48) (along ω).
Definition 5.1. In a MAPT (whose state space is a DAG), a cut is said coherent if all its states
have the same locality and clock vectors, and any two evolutions ω1, ω2 linking the initial state
to states of the cut have the same time length: ∆(ω1) = ∆(ω2). Coherent cuts may be used to
define borders between layers.
Let s be any state in a MAPT; the states reachable from s form a DAG subspace, in which we
may also define coherent cuts: a coherent cone with apex s is the set of states up to a coherent cut
in this subspace (including s and the cut).
Proposition 5.2.
1 ∈ C1, s2, s(cid:48)
1 to s(cid:48)
2 ∈ C2. If there is an evolution ω from s1 to s2 and ω(cid:48) from s(cid:48)
• Coherent cuts do not cross, in the following sense. Let C1 and C2 be two coherent cuts in a
MAPT, s1, s(cid:48)
2 to
1, then C1 = C2 and ω = ε = ω(cid:48). In particular, no two distinct coherent cuts may have a
s(cid:48)
common state.
• The time distance between coherent cuts is constant, in the following sense. Let C1 and C2
2 ∈ C2, with an evolution ω from
• If s1 ∈ C1 and there is a coherent cone with time height ∆ (for any evolution ω from s1 to
the base of the cone, ∆(ω) = ∆), then there is a coherent cut C3 separated from C1 by a
time distance ∆.
two different coherent cuts in a MAPT, s1, s(cid:48)
s1 to s2 and ω(cid:48) from s(cid:48)
2, then ∆(ω) = ∆(ω(cid:48)).
1 ∈ C1, s2, s(cid:48)
Proof:
• In the first case, if there is a path (cid:101)ω from s0 to s1 and a path (cid:101)ω(cid:48) from s0 to s(cid:48)
have ∆((cid:101)ω) + ∆(ω) = ∆((cid:101)ωω) = ∆((cid:101)ω(cid:48)) and ∆((cid:101)ω(cid:48)) + ∆(ω(cid:48)) = ∆((cid:101)ω(cid:48)ω(cid:48)) = ∆((cid:101)ω), hence
∆(ω) = −∆(ω(cid:48)), which is only possible if ∆(ω) = 0 = ∆(ω(cid:48)).
Also, since s2 and s(cid:48)
to some state s(cid:48)(cid:48)
length 0 from s1 to s(cid:48)(cid:48)
of each agent Ai form a DAG and Ei > 0, this is only possible if ω = ε = ω(cid:48).
2 have the same localities and clocks, there is an evolution ω(cid:48) from s(cid:48)
1 with the same localities and clocks as s1, hence an evolution ωω(cid:48) of time
1, which reproduces the same localities and clocks. Since the localities
2, we must
2
18
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
from s0 to s(cid:48)
the property.
• The last property results from the observation that, if s(cid:48)
1 = s(cid:48)
In particular, if ω = ε, i.e., s1 = s2, we also have that s(cid:48)
if ω(cid:48) = ε.
2 and C1 = C2, and similarly
• In the next case, if s0 is the initial state and there is a path(cid:101)ω from s0 to s1 and a path(cid:101)ω(cid:48)
1, we must have ∆((cid:101)ω) + ∆(ω) = ∆((cid:101)ωω) = ∆((cid:101)ω(cid:48)ω(cid:48)) = ∆((cid:101)ω(cid:48)) + ∆(ω(cid:48)), hence
1 ∈ C1, since s1 and s2 have the
same localities and clocks, any evolution from s1 to the base of the cone is also present
from s(cid:48)
1 and leads to a state with the same localities and clocks as the states on the base of
the cone (but the variables may differ). And conversely, if a path leads from s(cid:48)
1 to a state of
C3, it has time length ∆ and there is the same path from s1 to some state on the base of the
cone.
(cid:117)(cid:116)
For instance, if agent Ai in a MAPT starts at l1
i with a null clock, after Ei time units and before
(Ei + 1) time units, it shall necessarily pass through its reset (it is possible that it performs other
transitions before and/or after this reset without modifying its clock, but it is sure the agent will
go through this reset before performing a new time passing). Hence, if each agent starts from its
initial locality with a null clock, after lcm{E1, . . . , En} (i.e., the least common multiple of the
various reset periods; in the following, we shall denote this value by lcm(E)) time units, it is sure
we shall be able to revisit the initial state, but possibly with various values of the variable, yielding
the border of a layer. From this border the same sequences of transitions/resets/time-passings as
initially will occur periodically (with a period of lcm(E)), leading to new borders, with the initial
localities and the null clocks.
The situation will be similar if ∀Ai : initi = init mod Ei for some value init < lcm(E). Indeed,
for each agent Ai and each k, after Ei − initi + k · Ei time passing we shall visit l1
i with a null
clock, hence visit new borders after (k + 1) · lcm(E) − init time passings.
For other initial values of the clocks, it is not sure we shall be able to structure the state space in
layers, but in either case, it may also happen there are other kinds of layers and borders.
Let us consider for instance the system illustrated on top of Fig. 7, where each agent starts with
a null clock in its initial locality. Agent A1 is deterministic since there is a single transition
1, and agent A2 is not since two transitions may occur while
originated from l1
2. If we forget the value of the variable, the graph for A1 is periodic with a period of
being in l2
E1 = 10 and the graph for A2 is periodic with a period of E2 = 15. The whole system is therefore
periodic with a period of lcm(E) = lcm{E1, E2} = 30. The sequence of intervals depicted in
the bottom of the figure for A1, represents the intervals where transitions have to take place, with
their time distance from the initial state (here these intervals are disjoint, but they could overlap
as well). Note that if an initial clock initi were to be strictly positive, the sequence of intervals
for agent i would be shifted to the left by initi time units. For A2, the intervals exhibited on the
figure have a different interpretation, that will be explained below.
A border may not occur at a time t measured from the beginning of the system if, for some
deterministic agent Ai (the case for non-deterministic agents will be handled below), there is an
interval [a, b], shifted by some multiple of Ei, such that
1 as well as from l2
a + k · Ei − initi < t < b + k · Ei − initi
(1)
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
19
initial state
s1
s2
s
initial part
first layer
second layer
...
...
...
...
Figure 6. General shape of a layered state space with a zoom on the initial part. Identical states are merged
together. All states on the border of a layer share the same vectors of localities and clocks but have different
values of v. Each sub-space surrounded by dashed lines is a DAG having a unique initial state and one or more
final states as shown in blue for the sub-space corresponding to the initial part.
Indeed, in that case, at time t, Ai may either be at the source or at the destination of the cor-
responding transition, without being able to impeach that, hence without being certain of the
locality.
Hence, a deterministic agent may allow a border to occur at a time t if one of the following cases
occurs:
• If t is strictly between the various shifted intervals of Ai, we know immediately that when
we reach this time we are at some specific location in Ai. For instance at time t = 19 in
1.
Fig. 7, we are sure A1 is in location l3
• If t is situated at the right of some (shifted) interval, the agent can be either in the source or
in the destination localities. The first situation does not exist in every paths, as it is possible
to leave the source before t, while the second situation exists in all paths. Therefore, the
second situation is suitable for a coherent cut. This case happens in Fig. 7, for instance
when the system reaches time t = 5, A1 may be either in l1
1.
1 or in l2
• If t is situated at the left of some (shifted) interval, the agent can be either in the source
or in the destination localities. This is symmetric to the previous case, and here it is the
first situation that exists in all paths and is suitable for a coherent cut. This case happens in
Fig. 7, for instance when the system reaches time t = 6, A1 may be either in l2
• If t is situated on an interval of length 0 (such as a reset, or transition with an interval
where a = b). This corresponds to a union of the two previous cases, where two localities
1 or in l3
1.
20
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
A1
l1
1
[1, 5]
l2
1
[6, 8]
l3
1
E1 = 10
A2
l1
2
[0, 4]
l2
2
[7, 11]
l4
2
E2 = 15
[6,7]
l3
2
9 ]
[ 9 ,
Top: Example of a MAPT composed of agents A1 and A2 with clocks C1 and C2 initialized to 0.
Figure 7.
Bottom: Time intervals where a transition or set of transitions may be performed. Red dotted lines indicate time
units where a coherent cut may exist.
are possible. Here, both are suitable for a coherent cut. This case happens in Fig. 7, for
instance when the system reaches time t = 20, A1 may be either in l3
1 or in l1
1.
• If t is both at the right of some shifted interval and at the left of another one (meaning that
they intersect on t), this comes back to a combination of the previous cases. As such, a
suitable situation for a coherent cut is to consider the system after performing the transition
corresponding to the left interval and before performing the transition corresponding to the
right interval. A particular occurrence of this case is shown in Fig. 7 at time 15, where A2 is
at the right of an interval of length 0 corresponding to its reset and at the left of the interval
2. The fact that one
of the transition from l1
of the interval is of length 0, is included in the general case.
2. In this situation, A2 may either be in l4
2 or l2
2, l1
2 after having performed a transition at time 6, or in l2
For a non-deterministic agent, like A2 in Fig. 7, the analysis is similar but slightly more complex;
indeed, even between intervals it may be in several possible localities2. For instance, at time
2, and we may
t = 7, A2 may either be in l3
2 since it has the possibility to choose the other
not force the system to wait for A2 going in l3
transition. The idea is then to consider the localities of the considered non-deterministic agent
Ai which by themselves are singleton cuts in the DAG of its localities, i.e., the localities which
2, l2
are visited in every complete iteration (from l1
2
and l4
2. They form a sequence in Li: let Pi be this list and denote by succ(l) the successor of l
in Pi. Thus, between two localities l and succ(l) in Pi, either there is a unique transition enabled
in some interval [a, b] (as in the deterministic case above) or there are at least two different paths
with possibly several transitions enabled at some moment in the interval [a, b], where a is the
smallest lower bound of all the outgoing transitions from l and b is the greatest upper bound of all
i ). For A2 in Fig. 7, those localities are l1
i to lm
2of course not at the same time: for different histories.
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
21
the incoming transitions to succ(l). One may think about [a, b] as the enabling interval of some
virtual transition from l to succ(l). Then, exactly the same argument as above may be used to
check if a state space of a MAPT admits layers, and this amounts to a proof of:
Proposition 5.3. A MAPT admits a layered state space with borders at t + (cid:96)· lcm(E) with (cid:96) ∈ N
i }, and for a df= min{a (l, f, [a, b], l(cid:48)) ∈ l•},
if, for each agent Ai, for each l ∈ Pi \ {lm
b df= max{b (l(cid:48), f, [a, b], succ(l)) ∈ •succ(l)}, no k ∈ N satisfies: a + k · Ei − initi < t <
b + k · Ei − initi, where initi is the initial value of clock Ci.
(cid:3)
A border detected that way will then be defined by the couple ((l1,··· , ln), (c1,··· , cn)) where,
for agent Ai, ci = (t + initi) mod Ei (or Ei instead of 0 if we reach the position of a reset
but decide not to perform the latter) and li is the locality periodically reached in all possibles
paths at clock value ci. Locality li is determined by the clock if we are not at the border of an
interval, otherwise we have to know if the corresponding transition or reset has to be performed.
In particular, when reaching intervals of length 0, we have a choice between several localities
(before or after performing the corresponding transition or reset).
Searching for t more efficiently Proposition 5.3 allows to search for the coherent cuts
whose sets of localities and clocks reproduce every lcm(E) time units3. Hence, it is not nec-
essary to consider times t beyond lcm(E); note however that it may happen that a coherent cut
occurs at time lcm(E), but not at time 0, if the corresponding localities occur "before" the initial
ones at time lcm(E). Also, this proposition seems to imply we should consider all the shifted
version of each interval [a, b], i.e., all integer values for k. This is not true: for each [a, b] we only
have to consider the greatest k respecting the left constraint a + k· Ei − initi < t, i.e., the greatest
− 1(cid:101). We then have
ka such that ka < t+initi−a
to check if t < b + ka · Ei − initi (in which case the considered t does not define a coherent cut).
If we also want to avoid the extremities of the intervals [a, b], we get that no k should lead to
the constraint a + k · Ei − initi ≤ t ≤ b + k · Ei − initi. This leads to the simpler formula
ka = (cid:98) t+initi−a
(cid:99), and to the check t ≤ b + ka · Ei − initi. Also, in this case the clock vector is
enough to describe the coherent cut without any ambiguity.
, which is given by the formula ka = (cid:100) t+initi−a
Ei
Ei
Ei
Combination with the accelerated semantics
If we consider only the locality and clock
vectors and we neglect the value of variable V in the states, a coherent cut becomes a mandatory
crossing point in the original dynamics of the system. This will also be true in the accelerated
semantics, but in order to preserve the periodic occurrences of these points we need to avoid
letting time jumps go anywhere in the next maximal action zone: we need a deterministic rule,
like the one we mentioned before, prescribing to go to the end of the zone. We shall adopt this
rule in the following.
Since in the accelerated semantics, time passings jump to (the end of) the next maximal action
zone, intervals do not play the same role as in the original semantics and we may not rely on
Property 5.3 to find the coherent cuts. In particular, coherent cuts in the accelerated semantics
3There may also be non-periodic coherent cuts at the beginning of the state space, if some agents do not start at their initial
locality with a null clock. Indeed, for those agents, it may happen that other localities are certainly visited before the first
reset, which introduce other intervals [a, b] before that time. However, we shall not use those extra coherent cuts in our
exploration and model checking tool.
22
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
((1, 1); (0, 0))
((1, 2); (5, 5))
((2, 2); (4, 4))
+1
((2, 2); (5, 5))
+1
+3
((2, 2); (6, 6))
+2
((3, 2); (6, 6))
((2, 3); (6, 6))
+1
((2, 2); (7, 7))
A fragment of the original and accelerated dynamics with omitted values of V for Example 7.
Figure 8.
Vectors of localities (li
2) are denoted by (i, j). The thick arcs correspond to the steps present in the accelerated
dynamics while thin ones correspond to the steps present in the original one. Time passing arcs are labelled by
the corresponding delay; transition arcs are unlabelled (the corresponding transition may be read in the change
of localities). Coherent cuts in original dynamics are underlined and those in the accelerated one are bold.
1, lj
are usually not ones in the original one. This is due to the fact that, as time steps may be bigger
than one unit in the accelerated dynamics, it may happen that a time passing overpasses the clock
vector corresponding to some coherent cut ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c) present in the original dynamics.
However, we may relate coherent cuts in the accelerated semantics to the ones in the original one,
which may be characterised by Property 5.3: as we shall see in Proposition 5.4, a state ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c + δ)
reached after going over an original coherent cut ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c) is in fact a coherent cut of the accelerated
dynamics. This is illustrated in Figure 8.
One may observe that in both dynamics, all paths go to either ((1, 2); (5, 5)) or ((2, 2); (4, 4)).
In the original dynamics, the coherent cut at ((2, 2); (5, 5)) is reached, and after a time passing
the coherent cut at ((2, 2); (6, 6)) is reached. From ((2, 2); (6, 6)), three actions are possible
(two transitions and one time passing).
In the accelerated dynamics, it is still possible from
((1, 2); (5, 5)) to reach ((2, 2); (5, 5)), but not from ((2, 2); (4, 4)) as the acceleration directly
leads to ((2, 2); (7, 7)). From ((2, 2); (5, 5)) in the accelerated semantics, the acceleration also
leads to ((2, 2); (7, 7)), since this state corresponds to the end of the first maximal action zone.
As such, in the accelerated semantics, ((2, 2); (6, 6)) is not a coherent cut anymore since it is
not reachable, but also ((2, 2); (5, 5)) is no longer a coherent cut since there exist paths that go
over it. This illustrates that, in the accelerated dynamics, the locality vector corresponding to an
original cut may be entered with different clock values, but from those states (here ((2, 2); (4, 4))
and ((2, 2); (5, 5))) the acceleration will always lead to the same vectors of localities and clocks
(here ((2, 2); (7, 7))), which is a coherent cut in the accelerated semantics.
It remains to show that this is not an accident but a general rule.
Proposition 5.4. For each (periodic, with the period lcm(E)) coherent cut characterised by the
vectors ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c) at time t (measured from the beginning of the system) in the original semantics,
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
23
there is a coherent cut in the accelerated semantics for the same vector of localities (cid:126)l and clock
vector (cid:126)c + δ at time t + δ, for some δ ∈ N.
Proof:
Since, in the accelerated semantics as in the original one, the localities are determined by the se-
quence of transitions and resets that have been performed, from Proposition 4.1 we know that the
visited localities are the same in both semantics. Moreover, each reachable state in the accelerated
dynamics is also reachable in the original one and for each existing path between two states in
the accelerated dynamics there is also at least one path in the original one. As a coherent cut is a
mandatory crossing point (when we neglect the values of the variable) in the original dynamics of
the system, the only way to avoid it in the accelerated dynamics is to have a new arc from a state
before the cut leading to a state after the cut (for instance, in Figure 8, the original cut (2, 2)(5, 5)
is reachable in the accelerated semantics, but it may also be skipped by the arc from (2, 2)(4, 4)
to (2, 2)(7, 7), hence it is not a cut in the accelerated semantics; the original cut (2, 2)(6, 6) is
not even reachable in the accelerated semantics, due to the arc from (2, 2)(5, 5) to (2, 2)(7, 7)).
All transitions and resets present in the accelerated dynamics are also present in the original one,
therefore only a time passing (jumping to the end of the next maximal action zone) may provide
such a possibility. Hence, if we may prove that whenever a time passing in the accelerated dy-
namics goes from a state s before a cut in the original dynamics to a state s(cid:48) after that cut, the
state s(cid:48) belongs to a coherent cut in the accelerated dynamics, we are done.
If an agent Ai has a single location l1
i , i.e., mi = 1, its resets do not change the location (only
its clock goes from Ei to 0), hence we shall neglect it in the following definition of t− and t+,
considering its resets are spurious. Let t− = max{t(cid:48) t(cid:48) = (k · Ei − initi) ≤ t, k > 0, i ∈
{1, . . . , n}, mi > 1} be the time of the last (non-spurious) reset not after t, and t+ = min{t(cid:48)
t(cid:48) = (k · Ei − initi) ≥ t, k > 0, i ∈ {1, . . . , n}, mi > 1} be the time of the first (non-spurious)
reset not before t.
If the original coherent cut ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c) occurs before the first non-spurious reset then, with the usual
convention max(∅) = 0 in N, t− = 0. If a reset is available or was just performed at t, then
t− = t = t+.
Since we assumed that the transition graph of each agent is acyclic, if an agent leaves a locality,
the same locality cannot be reached again before the next reset of this agent. As a consequence, in
the interval [t−, t+], a vector of localities (cid:126)l once exited (i.e., performing a transition from a state
with (cid:126)l) cannot be reached again. Therefore in both semantics, it is not possible to enter (cid:126)l strictly
after t in the interval [t−, t+], nor to leave (cid:126)l strictly before t in the interval [t−, t+], since (cid:126)l must be
reached at time t in each original path (by definition of a coherent cut in the original semantics;
note that other vectors of localities may also be reached at t, before or after (cid:126)l).
Hence, in the accelerated semantics, (cid:126)l will always be entered at some t(cid:48) ≤ t and may only be
leaved at some t(cid:48)(cid:48) ≥ t. There may be several values for t(cid:48), depending on the path followed
to reach this locality (for instance, in Figure 8, there are two ways to enter (2, 2): (2, 2)(4, 4)
and (2, 2)(5, 5)). On the contrary, there is single value t(cid:48)(cid:48), corresponding to the end of the first
maximal action zone starting at or after t, and there is one since otherwise that would mean there
is no way to reach t and get out of (cid:126)l. This yields the unique way to get out of the locality vector (cid:126)l,
hence a coherent cut of the accelerated semantics, adding δ = t(cid:48)(cid:48) − t to each clock since we did
not performed a reset meanwhile. For instance, in the example of Figure 8, if t = 5 there are two
24
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
possible paths, either t(cid:48) = 4 and d = 3, or t(cid:48) = 5 and d = 2, leading in both cases to the coherent
cut (2, 2)(7, 7) of the accelerated semantics. Notice a curious feature: in the accelerated semantics
for the same example, we reach the coherent cut ((2, 2); (5, 5)) of the original semantics, but it is
no longer a coherent cut since there exists now a path that does not reach it, because of the added
arc labelled +3.
From the choice of the jump points in the accelerated semantics, δ will be the same for each
re-occurrence of the considered coherent cut, at t + k · lcm(E).
(cid:117)(cid:116)
Exploring layered state space The function next border(state), depicted in Algorithm 1
takes a state state = ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c, v) and computes, through a width first exploration, the set of successors
up to the next border. It applies to both original and accelerated semantics and requires to define
a non empty set of periodic cuts Cuts (in the form ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c), i.e., without the variable, obtained from
an application of Prop. 5.3) that are coherent in the original dynamics.
To do so we introduce the function next state(s), which returns the set of all successors of state
s (depending on the chosen semantics), and the function is cut(pre s, s), which is true if the state
s, successor of state pre s is part of a cut defined by Cuts. Formally, is cut(pre s, s) depends
on the chosen semantics. In the original semantics, is cut(pre s, s) is true if s = ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c, v) and
((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c) ∈ Cuts. In the accelerated semantics, is cut(pre s, s) is true if one of the following occurs:
• s = ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c, v), ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c) ∈ Cuts and at least one transition or reset allows to leave s, which means
that the coherent cut is the same in both semantics;
• pre s = ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c, v), s = ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c+, v), ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c) ∈ Cuts and s is the only successor of pre s with
(cid:126)c < (cid:126)c+, which means that the original cut has also been reached in accelerated semantics
but is no longer a coherent cut;
• pre s = ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c−, v), s = ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c+, v) and ((cid:126)l, (cid:126)c) ∈ Cuts with (cid:126)c− < (cid:126)c ≤ (cid:126)c+, which means that
the accelerated time increase went over the original cut.
The algorithm is described in python : list.add(e) adds element e in the queue list (only if
e /∈ list) , while list.pop() removes the first element (it is a first in/first out behaviour), border
and exploring are initially empty and the loop condition is true as long as exploring is nonempty.
This can be used iteratively in a depth-first exploration to jump from a state to one of its successors
belonging to the next border. During this exploration, an additional function may be used to check
if a state satisfies some condition. Such a use of layers allows to reduce the number of explored
paths by detecting diamonds caused by the order of transitions of concurrent agents.
5.2. Exploration using strong and weak variables
The approach presented in the previous section does not deal with diamonds spreading on a time
distance longer than the one between two adjacent borders. For example, it may still happen
that two different states s1 and s2 belonging to the same border have a common successor s in
the future, as illustrated in Fig. 6. To cope with this issue, it is more interesting to perform the
width-first exploration that computes successors at the next border for the set {s1, s2} instead
than taking them separately. In general, it is not obvious to know or guess which states should be
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
25
Algorithm 1 next border(state)
border[] {Set of states to be returned}
exploring[] {Queue of states to explore}
exploring.add(state)
while exploring do
end if
end for
end while
return border
pre s ← exploring.pop()
successors ← next state(pre s)
for all s ∈ successors do
if is cut(pre s, s) then
border.add(s) {States of the cut are added to border}
exploring.add(s) {Other states are added to exploring}
else
kept together in the computation of the next border. Indeed, one should be able to determine when
sets of states should be split in sub-sets and when they should be kept together. To perform such
a clustering, it may be interesting to exploit the properties of target applications, such as CAVS.
A possible solution is to assume V df= Vw × Vs, where Vw (weak) is a less important part of V
and Vs (strong) a more important one, such that states differing in the valuation of Vs are unlikely
to have a common successor, while this is not the case for Vw. Symmetrically, states with the
same valuation of Vs are more likely to have a common successor. This may give us a criterion
to cluster states and jump from a set of states to the set of their successors at the next border.
The choice of Vs and Vw is of course system-dependent and should be defined by an expert, or
with the help of a simulation tool. As an example, elements that can be assigned a new value
independently of their previous one might be considered as weak, while elements whose value
changes depend on their present value (for instance the position of a moving object) might be
considered as strong.
Function clustered next border(state set) is then a variant of next border(), taking a set of
states and producing a set of clusters, i.e., sets of states having identical values of variables in Vs.
It is used in a similar way as next border() to explore in a depth-first manner the layered state
space, the only difference being that it jumps from a cluster belonging to some border to a cluster
belonging to the next one, based on the choice of Vs.
Note that if Vs = ∅, such an exploration is equivalent to a classical width-first one, since states at
a border are always kept is the same sub-set. With such an algorithm, for a bounded layered state
space of a MAPT, one can perform an "on-the-fly" depth-first exploration since there is no need
to memorize explored states. This may be used to efficiently search for specific reachable states,
and may be sped up by the use of heuristics that choose which sets of states to explore first.
26
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
6. Dynamic exploration of a MAPT
This section is dedicated to exploration algorithms of finite prefixes of MAPTs: states that do not
have successors in the considered prefix will be called final. The algorithms are denoted with the
CTL temporal logic syntax. Since this temporal logic is meant to explore infinite paths, we shall
consider that each final state has a self loop.
Our algorithms have two main characteristics: they operate "on-the-fly", which means that they do
not store the entire visited state space (but only a cut of it), and they can be tuned with heuristics
defining a priority on paths to be explored, that might significantly speed up the computation
time if the searched states exist. To do so we rely on the algorithm clustered next border()
mentioned in Section 5. Since they do not store all the states that have been explored, we chose
not to return traces of execution, unlike what is usually proposed by standard temporal logic
model checking tools.
We formalise in the following algorithms for the basic CTL properties EF p and EGp, respec-
tively meaning a reachable state satisfies p and there exists a path where p is always true. Any
property for which we have an algorithm may be negated, so that we can also express AF p and
AGp, respectively equivalent to ¬(EG¬p) and ¬(EF¬p).
The algorithm for EF p consists, starting from a stack containing the initial state, in taking the
first element s of the stack, returning it if p is true on s, and otherwise adding the result of function
clustered next border(s) to the stack. The algorithm continues recursively until reaching p or
there is no more states to explore in the considered finite prefix. Additionally, we return true if p is
satisfied by a state between two borders, i.e., during an application of clustered next border().
The algorithm for EGp works in a similar way, but the state s is returned if p is true on s and if s
is final, and clustered next border(s) is added to the stack only if p is true on s. Additionally,
states where p is not true are dropped when explored in clustered next border(). That way,
only states where p is true are explored.
We may also define algorithms for nested CTL queries built with binary logical operators. We
shall for example consider two of them: EF (p ∧ EF q), meaning that a reachable state satisfies
p and from that state a reachable state satisfies q, and EF (p ∧ EGq), meaning that a reachable
state satisfies p and from that state there exist a path where q is always true. One may notice that
the "leads to" operator ( −−> ) used in the state of the art tool UPPAAL follows the equivalence :
p −−> q <=> AG(¬p∨ AF q) <=> ¬EF (p∧ EG¬q). This operator is therefore expressible
in our framework. Although only these two queries are given here, any kind of nested CTL query
can be implemented.
Those nested queries are implemented using a marking function (i.e., a Boolean indicator). EF (p∧
EF q) is implemented as follows. Whenever p is true on a state, the state is marked. Whenever
a state is marked, all its successors are marked. Starting from a stack containing the initial state,
the first element s of the stack is returned if q is true on s and s is marked. Otherwise, the re-
sult of clustered next border(s) is added to the stack. The same marking process is performed
between two borders, i.e., in clustered next border(). We continue recursively until a state val-
idates the property or there is no more state to explore. As for EF (p ∧ EGq), states are marked
whenever both p and q are true or the state is a successor of a marked state and q is true. If a
marked final state is reached, it validates the property and is returned. Again, the same marking
process is performed in clustered next border().
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
27
7. Experiments
In this section we illustrate the performances of our exploration algorithms. To do so, we use
MAPTs representing systems of autonomous communicating vehicles, for which both Con-
straints 1 and 2 are satisfied. The first constraint allows to use the acceleration, which heavily
reduces the size of the state space as well as the number of diamonds. The second constraint
ensures that the state space is a DAG. As a consequence of the latter, the state space is infinite,
because of the X part of V . In the following case studies, the longitudinal positions of the vehi-
cles on the road will play the role of this part. The road we observe is technically infinite, but as
we are interested only in the analysis of a portion of it, we can bound the exploration to a fixed
value of X. The system thus converges towards a bound that, once reached, is considered as a
final state.
In the following, we first compare the exploration time obtained with or without acceleration.
Then, we discuss the advantages and drawbacks of using various types of layer-based explo-
rations. In the third part of this section, we provide some heuristics, and experiment them in order
to (hopefully) observe the gain that can be achieved with them. Finally, we compare this method
with the framework VERIFCAR [2], which uses UPPAAL, and we provide a verification method
for the analysis of such systems that is more efficient than the one proposed in [2].
Three models used in [2], featuring various state space sizes, have been implemented as MAPTs.
Those models represent systems of autonomous vehicles circulating on a portion of highway
where each vehicle communicates with the other ones to make decisions about its behaviour.
These experiments have been performed by implementing the models with the free high level
Petri net tool ZINC, using its library to implement our exploration algorithms.
7.1. Efficiency of the accelerated dynamics.
A width first exploration of the state space on each of the three models have been performed using
both the original and the accelerated semantics. Table 1 provide for each model the number of
states in its state space along with their full exploration times (FET) in both semantics and in
UPPAAL. As expected, the accelerated semantics reduced exploration time, therefore, it has been
used in all the subsequent experiments.
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
FET original semantics (s)
FET accelerated semantics (s)
FET UPPAAL (s)
Size of the state space
14.5
10.8
5
144
52.1
36
574
420
379
7751
52732
285944
Table 1.
It is interesting to mention that the main improvement of the accelerated semantics, compared to
the original one, is to explore only one state of each (maximal) action zone. As such, the more
a system features transitions with wide non-deterministic time intervals, the greater is the time
gain provided by the accelerated semantics. Here, the non-deterministic time intervals present
28
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
in Model 1 and Model 3 are quite short, such that the number of paths that are ignored in the
accelerated dynamics is not very important. On the other hand, Model 2 features a transition with
a wider non-deterministic time interval, explaining why the difference between the two semantics
is more pronounced for this model. We can thus expect the accelerated semantics to be even more
useful when using models similar to the one depicted in Figure 7.
7.2. Efficiency of the layer-based exploration.
Here, we compare, for several exploration algorithms, the full exploration time and the reachabil-
ity time of the first occurrence of a final state. They are explored in width first, depth first without
layers and depth first with layers (with and without the use of strong/weak variables). The size of
the list Cuts was 1 for the models 1 and 3, and 5 for the second one. Table 2 shows the results.
Exploration algorithm
Full exploration time (s)
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Width first
Depth first without layers
Depth first layered (Vw = ∅)
Depth first layered (small Vw)
Depth first layered (large Vw)
10.8
∞
11
11
11
52.1
∞
∞
250
71
420
∞
∞
2015
667
First occurrence of a final state (s)
Model 1 Model 2
Model 3
419.9
10.7
3.3
4.5
4.5
4.5
52
4.6
6.6
7.4
14.4
3.9
4.1
6
7.2
Table 2.
Comparison of full exploration time and time to reach the first occurrence of a final state state for
exploration algorithms in width first, depth first with and without layers and with or without the use of weak
variables. ∞ means that the exploration was stopped after 50 hours of computation without a result.
One can see that the width first algorithm has the best full exploration time in any case, but
the time before reaching any final state is close to the full exploration one, which makes it the
worst technique in this case. On the other hand, the standard depth first algorithm is the fastest
for reaching a final state, but it does not fully explore the state space even after 50 hours of
computation.
Results for Model 1 show that as long as the layer based approach is used, the full exploration
time is very close to that of the width first algorithm. This indicates that there is almost no
diamonds covering several layers, meaning that different states belonging to the border of a layer
almost never share a common successor. Because of that, the use of weak variables has no effect.
Although this case is rather simple, it clearly highlights the advantage of layer-based exploration:
with almost no increase in full exploration time, it is able to reach a final state much faster.
Model 2 and Model 3 have much more complex state spaces and, in these cases, the layer-based
algorithm that does not rely on weak variables to aggregate states is not able to explore the full
state space even after 50 hours of computation. On the contrary, using even a small number but
well chosen weak variables (6 out of 39), it is possible to fully explore the state space. In both
cases, exploration is about five times longer than the exploration time of width first algorithm.
When using a large number of weak variables (30 out of 39), the exploration is much shorter
(about 1.5 times the time of width first algorithm). One can note however that the larger Vw, the
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
29
longer it takes to reach a final state. Indeed, as states are aggregated layer by layer, a too large Vw
would result in an exploration similar to a width first one, where all states are kept together and
final states are only reached at the end of the computation. With the weak variables chosen, the
time to reach a final state remains however reasonable.
In the next experiments, the depth first algorithms always use layers and a fixed non-empty Vw.
7.3. Heuristics
Exploration algorithms based on layers allow the use of heuristics. These heuristics guide the
exploration, choosing among all the unexplored states the one that will most likely lead to a state
that satisfies the checked property. The heuristics we use consists in associating a weight to each
state. When a new state is discovered, it is placed in a list ordered by weight of states to explore.
The list of states to explore is sorted either by ascending or descending weight, depending on the
property to verify. The weight is a prediction of the distance between the current state and a state
satisfying the property. The next state to be explored is the last in the list, i.e., having the highest
(respectively lowest) weight.
Therefore, a property may be associated with a heuristics that takes a state as an input and returns
a weight as an output. Below is a list of heuristics that we used for experiment purposes together
with the property they are associated to:
1. distance vh1 vh2 : returns the longitudinal position of vehicle vh1 minus that of vehicle
vh2. It may be used with property EF arrival vh1 bef ore vh2 and weights sorted in
ascending order, where arrival vh1 before vh2 is true in a state if vehicle vh1 reaches the
end of the road portion before vehicle vh2 does. The idea behind is to check in priority
states where vh1 is the most ahead of vh2.
2. estimated travel time vh: returns the time traveled since the initial state plus the esti-
mated time to reach the end of the road portion, assuming the current speed is maintained. It
may be used with weights sorted in ascending order and property EF travel time vh sup n,
where travel time vh ≥ n is true in a state if vh has reached the end of the road portion
within n time units. The idea is to check in priority states where vh is predicted to reach
the end of the road with the shortest time.
3. time to overtake vh1 vh2 : is the time before both vehicles arrive at the same longitudinal
position if they keep their current speed. It may be used with weights sorted in descending
order and property EF ttc vh1 vh2 ≤ n, where ttc vh1 vh2 is the value of the time to
collision indicator between vh1 and vh2 (i.e., the delay before there is a collision between
the two vehicles if they keep their current speed), and n is a time to collision value. The
idea is to check in priority states where one of the vehicles is getting closer to the other one
with the higher speed.
These heuristics have been used on Model 3, with results given in Table 3. The scenario in Model
3 considers three vehicles positioned as depicted in Fig. 9 on a two lane road portion that is 500
m long, with one additional junction lane. Initially, vehicle A is on the right lane at position 0 m
with a speed of 30 m/s, vehicle B is on the left lane at position 30 m with a speed of 15 m/s and
vehicle C is on the junction lane at position 40 m with a speed of 20 m/s. They all aim at being
on the right lane at the end of the road portion.
The first two queries can only be true in a final state (the deepest layer). As such, the reachability
time with the width first algorithm is close to the full exploration time with the same algorithm.
30
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
Figure 9.
Initial positions and possible trajectories of autonomous vehicles for the scenario in Model 3.
Exploration algorithm
Width first
Depth first without heuristics
Depth first with heuristics
EF arrival B bef ore A EF travel time A ≥ 15.9 EF ttc A C ≤ 1.14 EF ttc A B ≤ 0
416
234 -- 357
131
427
167 -- 340
149
292
247 -- 547
103
95
277 -- 483
13
Comparison of reachability time for exploration algorithms in width first and depth first with and
Table 3.
without heuristics. As depth first without heuristics is non deterministic, the two values correspond to the fastest
and the slowest runs obtained for each query (five runs where performed each time).
In general, the width first reachablity time depends on the depth of the first state that satisfies the
property. One can observe that for the fourth query, the state is actually reached at a lower depth,
which is reflected by the reachability time.
As the depth first algorithm without heuristics randomly chooses which paths to explore first, the
reachability time varies. The number of states in the whole state space that satisfies the property
thus impacts the mean reachability time with this algorithm, i.e., when there is more possibility
to verify the property, the average time needed is shorter. As we do not want to rely on luck, this
is not satisfying.
On the other hand, depth first algorithm with heuristics explores states in a given order (depending
on their weights) and therefore the reachablity time is always the same. The heuristics we used
could of course be modified and improved, but they are enough to show a significant decrease of
the reachability time. Even for the fourth query, where the width first is faster than the depth first
algorithm, the heuristics allows to quickly identify the state that satisfies the property.
7.4. Comparison with VERIFCAR
We will now compare the reachability time obtained with UPPAAL with the ones obtained with
the depth first exploration algorithms with heuristics, on Model 3. We observed that UPPAAL
first constructs the state space in about 106 s, then is able to answer almost instantly if a searched
state exists.
It can therefore answer several queries after constructing the state space, unlike
our heuristics-based dynamic exploration algorithms, which have to explore the state space from
scratch for each query. Yet, most of the states we aimed for can be reached easily, and the
computation took only about 4 seconds. Queries depicted in Table 3 are those where states were
harder to reach. Compared to the ones we obtained in [2], these results indicate that, when a
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
31
reachability property is verified, our algorithms have the same kind of execution time than the
ones observed with UPPAAL. On the other hand, if the reachability property is not true, they are
slower than UPPAAL, which depending on the kind of query takes between 34 and 370 seconds,
which equals the full exploration time with this tool for Model 3. As mentioned previously, the
full state space exploration time with depth first algorithms on this Model, is in our case, of 667
seconds. This is not a surprise since UPPAAL is a mature tool using many efficient abstractions.
However, UPPAAL is restricted in terms of expressivity, at least in two ways interesting for us.
First, it is not possible to directly check bounds of a given numerical indicator, and such bounds
should be obtained by dichotomy, requiring several runs for each indicator, such as proposed in
the methodology of [2]. Second, it is limited to a subset of CTL (accepting mainly non nested
queries). Our algorithms do not have such restrictions.
Indeed it is possible to do a full exploration of the state space while keeping, for each state, the
lower and higher values reached on the paths leading to the state, for a given set of indicators.
That way, all the information needed to analyse the behaviour of the system, can be obtained after
only one full exploration. This is performed as a standard width-first exploration (storing states
in a file) with the difference that each state is associated to a set of pairs (min, max), being the
(temporary) bounds of the considered indicators. Each time a state is explored, the value for each
indicator is computed, and it overwrites min if it is smaller, and max if it is greater. That way,
each state s contains, for each indicator, the smallest and highest values that exist on the paths
from the initial state to s. As several paths can lead to s, we will consider that s reached from
path P 1 and s reached from path P 2 are equivalent only if the set of their indicators are also
equivalent. Therefore, some diamonds might be detected (i.e., two identical states coming from
different paths) but not merged together in order to keep information about their respective paths.
That way it is possible to have several versions of the same state, but with different indicator
values. If one is interested in the reachability of states (for instance, if an indicator is equal to
some value), this can easily be done in the same way, by adding Boolean variables to the set
of indicators. At the end of the exploration, we get this way the set of all final states, together
with all the information that has been carried on their respective paths. It therefore contains all
the information needed to analyse finely the system. For the case of Model 3, getting the arrival
order together with the bounds for travel time and worst time-to-collision takes 708 seconds. In
comparison, the time needed by UPPAAL to obtain the same information with the dichotomy
procedure is 3553 seconds.
Also, the DAG shape of the state space allows us to implement any kind of CTL queries. For the
experiments, we used a query of the kind EF (p ∧ EGq), which is the negation of the "leads to"
operator p −−> ¬q (the only nested operator available in UPPAAL, in addition to deadlock tests)
and two of the kind EF (p ∧ EF q), which cannot be expressed in UPPAAL.
In [2], arrival C bef ore A −−> arrival B bef ore A) was used and reached a state invalid-
ing the property in 110 seconds. Its negation can be expressed here as EF (arrival C bef ore A∧
EG¬arrival B bef ore A) and our algorithm finds the state validating the property in about 10
seconds. The properties EF (ttc A B ≤ 1 ∧ EF arrival A bef ore C and EF (ttc A B ≤
1 ∧ EF arrival A bef ore B), that cannot be checked in UPPAAL, can be expressed here. The
first one expresses the possibility for vehicle A to arrive ahead of vehicle C after a dangerous
situation has occurred, involving a time to collision of less than 1 second. The second is similar
for vehicle A and B in the same conditions. The first query is false and needs to explore the
whole state space to give an answer (in 680 seconds), while the second one is true and finds a
state satisfying the property in about 10 seconds.
32
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
Finally, it is worth mentioning that discretisation is needed for UPPAAL, and therefore approxi-
mations may be mandatory in some cases, leading to a loss in precision and realism. In addition
to a better expressivity, the model checking process presented in this paper also ensures that no
approximation is needed, hence a higher level of realism is achieved.
8. Conclusion
We introduced G-MAPTs, multi-agent timed models where each agent is associated to a regular
timed schema upon which all possibles actions of the agent rely. The formalism allows to eas-
ily model systems featuring a high level of concurrency between actions, where actions are not
temporally deterministic, such as the CAVs. We have then formalised MAPTs (Multi-Agent with
timed Periodic Tasks), by soundly constraining G-MAPT ones. MAPTs allows for an acceler-
ated semantics which is an abstraction that greatly reduces the size of the state space by reducing
as much as possible the number of time passings in the system. We also presented how to extract
a layered structure out of a MAPT, that allows to detect diamonds while exploring the system
depth first. We provided a translation from G-MAPT to high level Petri nets, which allowed us
to implement a dedicated checking environment for this formalism with the (free) academic tool
ZINC. Algorithms implemented in such environments explore state spaces dynamically and can
be used together with heuristics that allow to reduce the computation time needed to reach some
states in the model. Finally, experiments highlighted the efficiency of our abstractions, and a com-
parison of model checking CAVs systems with the framework VERIFCAR has been performed.
Although our checking environment does not return traces of executions and is not better for full
exploration times than the state of art tool UPPAAL used in VERIFCAR, it has a better expressiv-
ity both on the model, since we can compute with non-integer numbers, and on the queries since
nested CTL ones can be checked. The heuristics performed well for reachability problems and
we also provided an exploration algorithm that allows to gather all information needed to analyse
the system in one run, which greatly decreased the time needed to gather the same amount of
information when using VERIFCAR. Although we developed this method with the case study of
autonomous vehicles in mind, this formalism and all the abstractions and algorithms presented in
this paper can be easily applied to any multi-agent real time systems where agents adopt a cyclic
behaviour, such as mobile robots completing cyclically tasks according to their own objectives,
flying drone squadrons, etc.
References
[1] R. Alur and D. Dill. Automata for modelling real-time systems.
In Proceedings of the
International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP'90), volume
443 of LNCS, pages 322 -- 335. Springer-Verlag, 1990.
[2] Johan Arcile, Raymond Devillers, and Hanna Klaudel. Verifcar: a framework for modeling
and model checking communicating autonomous vehicles. Autonomous Agents and Multi-
Agent Systems, 33(3):353 -- 381, May 2019.
[3] Armin Biere, Alessandro Cimatti, Edmund M Clarke, Ofer Strichman, Yunshan Zhu, et al.
Bounded model checking. Advances in computers, 58(11):117 -- 148, 2003.
[4] Edmund Clarke, Armin Biere, Richard Raimi, and Yunshan Zhu. Bounded model checking
using satisfiability solving. Formal Methods in System Design, 19(1):7 -- 34, Jul 2001.
J. Arcile, R. Devillers, H. Klaudel / Dynamic exploration of MAS with timed periodic tasks
33
[5] Kurt Jensen. Coloured Petri Nets - Basic Concepts, Analysis Methods and Practical Use -
Volume 1. EATCS Monographs on TCS. Springer, 1992.
[6] S. Kong, S. Gao, W. Chen, and E. Clarke. dreach: δ-reachability analysis for hybrid systems.
In Christel Baier and Cesare Tinelli, editors, Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and
Analysis of Systems, pages 200 -- 205, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2015. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
[7] Kim G. Larsen, Paul Pettersson, and Wang Yi. Uppaal in a nutshell. International Journal
on Software Tools for Technology Transfer (STTT), 1(1-2):134 -- 152, Oct 1997.
[8] M. O'Kelly, H. Abbas, and R. Mangharam. APEX : Autonomous vehicle plan verification
and execution. In SAE World Congress, 2016.
[9] James L. Peterson. Petri Net Theory and the Modelling of Systems. Prentice Hall, 1981.
[10] A. Platzer and J.-D. Quesel. European train control system: A case study in formal ver-
In Karin Breitman and Ana Cavalcanti, editors, Formal Methods and Software
ification.
Engineering, pages 246 -- 265, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
[11] Franck Pommereau. ZINC: a compiler for "any language"-coloured Petri nets. Technical
report, IBISC, university of Evry / Paris-Saclay, 2018.
[12] M. M. Quottrup, T. Bak, and R. I. Zamanabadi. Multi-robot planning : a timed automata ap-
proach. In IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2004. Proceedings.
ICRA '04. 2004, volume 5, pages 4417 -- 4422 Vol.5, April 2004.
[13] Maria Sorea. Bounded model checking for timed automata. Electronic Notes in Theoretical
Computer Science, 68(5):116 -- 134, 2003.
[14] Uppaal. http://www.uppaal.org/.
|
1903.01365 | 1 | 1903 | 2019-03-04T17:05:38 | Microscopic Traffic Simulation by Cooperative Multi-agent Deep Reinforcement Learning | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI",
"cs.LG"
] | Expert human drivers perform actions relying on traffic laws and their previous experience. While traffic laws are easily embedded into an artificial brain, modeling human complex behaviors which come from past experience is a more challenging task. One of these behaviors is the capability of communicating intentions and negotiating the right of way through driving actions, as when a driver is entering a crowded roundabout and observes other cars movements to guess the best time to merge in. In addition, each driver has its own unique driving style, which is conditioned by both its personal characteristics, such as age and quality of sight, and external factors, such as being late or in a bad mood. For these reasons, the interaction between different drivers is not trivial to simulate in a realistic manner. In this paper, this problem is addressed by developing a microscopic simulator using a Deep Reinforcement Learning Algorithm based on a combination of visual frames, representing the perception around the vehicle, and a vector of numerical parameters. In particular, the algorithm called Asynchronous Advantage Actor-Critic has been extended to a multi-agent scenario in which every agent needs to learn to interact with other similar agents. Moreover, the model includes a novel architecture such that the driving style of each vehicle is adjustable by tuning some of its input parameters, permitting to simulate drivers with different levels of aggressiveness and desired cruising speeds. | cs.MA | cs | Microscopic Traffic Simulation by
Cooperative Multi-agent Deep Reinforcement Learning
Giulio Bacchiani
VisLab - University of Parma
Parma, Italy
[email protected]
Daniele Molinari
VisLab
Parma, Italy
[email protected]
Marco Patander
VisLab
Parma, Italy
[email protected]
9
1
0
2
r
a
M
4
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
5
6
3
1
0
.
3
0
9
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
ABSTRACT
Expert human drivers perform actions relying on traffic laws and
their previous experience. While traffic laws are easily embedded
into an artificial brain, modeling human complex behaviors which
come from past experience is a more challenging task. One of these
behaviors is the capability of communicating intentions and nego-
tiating the right of way through driving actions, as when a driver is
entering a crowded roundabout and observes other cars movements
to guess the best time to merge in. In addition, each driver has its
own unique driving style, which is conditioned by both its personal
characteristics, such as age and quality of sight, and external fac-
tors, such as being late or in a bad mood. For these reasons, the
interaction between different drivers is not trivial to simulate in a
realistic manner. In this paper, this problem is addressed by devel-
oping a microscopic simulator using a Deep Reinforcement Learning
Algorithm based on a combination of visual frames, representing
the perception around the vehicle, and a vector of numerical param-
eters. In particular, the algorithm called Asynchronous Advantage
Actor-Critic has been extended to a multi-agent scenario in which
every agent needs to learn to interact with other similar agents.
Moreover, the model includes a novel architecture such that the
driving style of each vehicle is adjustable by tuning some of its in-
put parameters, permitting to simulate drivers with different levels
of aggressiveness and desired cruising speeds.
1 INTRODUCTION
The development of autonomous vehicles is a topic of great inter-
est in recent years, gaining more and more attention both from
academy and industry. An interesting challenge is teaching the
autonomous car to interact and thus implicitly communicate with
human drivers about the execution of particular maneuvers, such
as entering a roundabout or an intersection. This is a mandatory re-
quest since the introduction of self-driving cars onto public roads is
going to be gradual, hence human- and self-driving vehicles have to
cohabit the same spaces. In addition, it would be desirable that this
communication would resembles the one which takes place every
day on the streets between human beings, so that human drivers
does not need to care if the other vehicles are autonomous or not.
Achieving this goal would improve the efficiency in traffic scenarios
with both artificial and human players, as studied in [9] in case of
vehicle-pedestrian negotiation, as well as increase people's trust
in autonomous vehicles. We believe that seeing self-driving cars
hesitating and interpreting the situation, as human usually do to
negotiate, would help in breaking the diffidence of the community
and support a seamless integration in regular traffic.
Typical solutions ([28], [4]) for handling those particular maneu-
vers consist on rule-based methods which use some notion of the
time-to-collision ([29]), so that they will be executed only if there is
enough time in the worst case scenario. These solutions lead to ex-
cessively cautious behaviors due to the lack of interpretation of the
situation, and suggested the use of machine learning approaches,
such as Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes ([17]) or
Deep Learning techniques ([12]), in order to infer intentions of
other drivers. However, training machine learning algorithms of
this kind typically requires simulated environments, and so the
behavioral simulation of other drivers plays an important role.
Popular microscopic traffic simulators, such as Vissim [6] and
Sumo [13], use specific hard-coded rules to control vehicles dy-
namic based on common traffic laws. For example, in uncontrolled
intersections where vehicles have to give way to traffic on the right,
each vehicle will wait the freeing of the right lane before entering
the intersection. At the same time, a vehicle will yield to all cars
within a roundabout before entering.
Even if this conduct seems normal, the capability of negotia-
tion between vehicles is missing: an artificial driver will not try to
convince other cars of letting it squeeze in, or it will wait forever
if another vehicle with the right of way is yielding. In a nutshell,
simulated vehicles are not able to break the behavioral rules, a thing
that men and women usually do in normal driving scenarios.
Recent advances in machine learning suggest the use of Deep
Neural Networks ([7]) to achieve complex behaviors, inducing the
agent to learn from representations instead of manually writing
rules. In particular, the use of Reinforcement Learning (RL, [25])
techniques to train such agents appears to be a proficient path ([20]).
RL deals with how an agent should act in a given environment
in order to maximize the expected cumulative sum of rewards it
will receives, with the idea of behaving optimally in the long run
instead of chasing the highest immediate reward. This framework
is appealing because it does not need explicit supervision at every
decision instant, but the agent learns through a scalar reward signal
that reflects the overall result of the actions taken. This reward can
also be given once it is known if the whole series of actions led to
a good or bad result, like when the car succeed in completing the
maneuver or it collides with another vehicle.
A well-known downside of Deep Learning is that it is data-
hungry ([10]), namely many examples are needed to robustly train
the model. Moreover RL requires both positive and negative experi-
ences, making it unsuitable to be used in real world where negative
experiences are generally very expensive to get. These two limita-
tions make the use of a synthetic environment fundamental when
using Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL).
The aim of this work is to develop a microscopic traffic simu-
lator in which vehicles are endowed with interaction capabilities.
This simulator has been thought to be used to train modules able
to perform high-level maneuvers with implicit negotiation skills;
however it may turn useful for traffic safety and flow analyses as
well. Longitudinal accelerations of each vehicle are modeled by a
neural network.
Our contributions to reach the goal is twofold: firstly we extend
the Asynchronous Advantage Actor-Critic (A3C, [19]) to operate in
a multi-agent setting; secondly, we propose a novel architecture
which permits to modify the behavior of every agent, even if they
all share parameters of the same network as required by the A3C
scenario. Agents are collectively trained in a multi-agent fashion so
that cooperative behaviors can emerge, gradually inducing agents
to learn to interact with each other.
Each agent receives as input a sequence of images representing
the scene portions that can be seen at different times translated
as top views, taking a cue from the ATARI environment. Using a
visual input makes the system ready to be applicable to different
scenarios without the need of having a situation-dependent input.
However, this kind of input alone does not give the possibility of
differentiate the behavior between different drivers.
Because of that, the introduced architecture permits to incorpo-
rate the visual input with a vector of parameters, which are used to
tune the behavior of the driver. Indeed, every human has its own
peculiar way of driving affected by its temper and external factors
resulting in impatience or calmness depending on the situation:
let's think for this purpose on how we drive when we are in a hurry
or when we are carrying a baby to the kindergarten. Encapsulating
drivers with different styles inside the simulator makes the simu-
lation more realistic and would lead to the development of more
robust applications. Moreover, the parameter input can be used
to give additional details which are not perceivable from images,
such as the absolute speed of the agent, enriching the incoming
information to the network.
The proposed solution is evaluated on a synthetic single-lane
roundabout scenario shown in Figure 1b, but the same approach
can be adopted in other scenarios as well. The advantage of abstract
representations of this kind is their ease of reproduction with both
synthetic and real data, so that high-level maneuver modules trained
upon the simulator can be directly used in real world with little
effort. A similar approach has been taken concurrently to this work
in [1].
2 RELATED WORKS
Road users simulation is essential to the development of maneu-
ver decision making modules for automated vehicles. In [12] a
system able to enter in an intersection is trained while other vehi-
cles followed a deterministic model called Intelligent Driver Model
(IDM, [27]). In [16] a lane change maneuver module is learned us-
ing DRL in a scenario where other vehicles follow a simple lane
keeping behavior with collision avoidance, while in [14] they are
also able to overtake relying on hard-coded rules. In [22] both high
level (maneuver decision) and low level policies (acceleration and
braking) are learned for addressing an intersection in which other
vehicles behave aggressively following some preprogrammed rules.
(a) Real world
(b) Synthetic representation
(c) Navigable
(d) Obstacles
(e) Path
Figure 1: Synthetic representation of a real world scenario.
The top-view of the real scene depicted in (a) is translated
in the synthetic representation shown in (b). (c), (d) and (e)
are the semantic layers of the region inside the green square
used as visual input for the green agent.
In all these cases, vehicles populating the environment have a
similar conduct and their driving styles are undifferentiated, weak-
ening the realism of the environment.
In [11] the driving styles diversity is increased by assigning
randomly generated speed trajectories to the IDM model; in [17]
the behavior variation is enforced by adding a finite number of
motion intentions which can be adopted by the drivers.
However, none of the aforementioned works explicitly consider
agents with complex behaviors such as negotiation, since their
motion depends on some specific features, e.g. the distance from
the vehicle ahead.
Non-trivial vehicles' motion is obtained in [24] by imitation
learning ([2]) using data collected from human drivers; this solution
is clearly expensive and directed to a specific situation.
Having a visual input enhance the system capability of modeling
complex behaviors and makes it adaptable to a varieties of different
problems and road scenarios without the need of shaping the input
for each situation. This was initially proved in [20], where the
same algorithm, network architecture and hyperparameters were
used to learn how to play many different ATARI 2600 games. The
difficulty posed by the correlation between subsequent states in RL
was overcome by storing past experiences and updating the agent
with mini-batches of old and new examples, a mechanism called
experience replay.
The system has been improved in [19] increasing its time and
memory efficiency thanks to the parallel execution of multiple
agents in place of experience replay. In particular, we extended the
Asynchronous Advantage Actor Critic (A3C) so that it can operate in
a multi-agent scenarios where many agents are allowed to interact.
In [8] the algorithm called Trust Region Policy Optimization
(TRPO [23]) and A3C are extended to multi-agent systems where
all agents share parameters of a single policy and contribute to its
update simultaneously. In the same work this approach has been
evaluated for other two popular DRL algorithms, DQN and Deep
Deterministic Policy Gradient (DDPG [15]), which both rely on ex-
perience replay; the results were not satisfying, probably due to the
incompatibility between experience replay and the non-stationarity
of the system coming from the constantly changing policies of
agents populating the environment. This suggests that using paral-
lel actor-learners as in A3C has a stabilizing effect which holds in
case of a multi-agent setting, since it removes the dependency on
the experience replay mechanism. A different approach in case of
independent learners with no parameter sharing is taken in [18],
where the environment is made stationary by feeding the critic of
the DDPG algorithm at training time with actions and observations
of all agents.
Parameter sharing is appealing but forces the agents to behave
similarly. For this reason we coupled the visual input with some
parameters whose values influence the agent policy, inducing differ-
ent and tunable behaviors. The idea of mixing a high-dimensional
visual input and a low-dimensional stream was taken from [5], in
which the low-dimensional vector, called measurements, is used
to define the goal for the agent and to drive the setting toward
supervised learning by learning how actions modify future values
of the measurements. However, this solution fits those problems
that have a natural concept of relevant and observable set of mea-
surements (such as video-game playing), but fails on problems in
which only a sparse and delayed feedback is available. Hence, we
used the low-dimensional input just as an additional input, and
followed standard temporal-difference reinforcement learning for
training our agents.
3 BACKGROUND
3.1 Reinforcement Learning
In this work we used Reinforcement Learning methods applied to
the Markov Decision Process framework, in which an agent takes
actions at discrete time steps based on the state of the environment.
At every step the agent receives a reward signal together with the
new state of the updated environment, which is modified by both
its natural progress and the action of the agent itself. The reward
signal is generally a simple scalar value and has a central role in the
learning process, since it is the only way for the agent to evaluate its
actions. This introduces a well-known difficulty of RL: the feedback
is generally the result of many actions, possibly taken several steps
in the past.
Describing the process in mathematical terms, the action at time
t is represented by at and is taken from a discrete or continuous
range of actions referred to as A; the state at time t is represented
as st while the reward as rt . The goal of the agent is to learn
a policy π(as), namely the probability of taking action a given
the state s, in order to maximize the expectation of a function of
future rewards called return. The return is generally defined as
t rt + γrt +1 + ... + γT−t rT−t , where T is the terminal time
step and γ is a discount factor used to modulate the importance of
future rewards.
Rt =T
Useful for the estimation of a policy are the value functions.
The state-value function (1) of a policy π gives the expected return
when, starting from state s, the policy π is followed; the action-value
function (2), similarly, gives the expected return if we follow policy
π after taking action a in state s.
Vπ(st) = E(Rt st)
(1)
Qπ(st , at) = E(Rt st , at)
(2)
If the agent was able to find the optimal action-value function
Q∗(s, a), namely the action-value function of the best policy, the
problem would be solved since it could pick the best action from a
generic state st simply by choosing a∗ = maxa∈A Q∗(s, a).
Trying to estimate this function is the goal of those algorithms
which fall under the category of action-value methods such as Q-
learning ([30]). If we approximate Q∗(s, a) with a function q(s, a; θ)
modeled by the vector of parameters θ, in 1-step Q-learning the
parameters are updated as:
θt +1 = θt + α · K
∂q(st , at ; θt)
∂θt
(3)
K = rt + maxa∗q(st +1, a
where α is a parameter dependent on the optimization algorithm
while K tells if the approximated action-value function should be
increased or decreased around the pair {st , at } and is defined as:
(4)
It is worth noting that the target value rt +maxa∗q(st +1, a∗; θt) is an
estimate itself because it uses the estimated action-value function
of the next state as better approximation of the real optimal action-
value. This operation of learning "a guess from a guess" is called
bootstrapping.
∗; θt) − q(st , at ; θt)
A different approach is taken in policy-based methods, which
directly estimate the policy instead of a value function. In this cate-
gory falls the algorithm called Reinforce ([31]) in which parameters
are updated such that probabilities of actions that yielded a bet-
ter cumulative reward at the end of an episode are increased with
respect to the lower-return actions. Approximating the optimal
policy π∗(as) with a function π(as; θ), the updates are:
θt +1 = θt + α · Rt
∂ log π(as; θ)
∂θ
(5)
In this algorithm the updates can be computed only at the end of
an episode, since the true cumulative reward is needed.
Between action-value and policy-based methods there is an hy-
brid family of algorithms called actor-critic methods.
In this setting the policy is directly optimized as in policy-based
solutions; however, the value function is also estimated, giving two
benefits: firstly the value of a state is used to reduce the variance of
updates, as explained in [25]; furthermore the estimated state-value
function permits bootstrapping, thus avoiding the need to wait for
the end of an episode before performing a parameters update. The
probability of actions can now be modulated with the following
Advantage Ab instead of the full reward Rt :
Ab = rt + γrt +1 + ... + γ b−1rt +b−1 + v(st +b; θv) − v(st ; θv)
(6)
where b is the number of real rewards used before bootstrapping,
called bootstrapping interval.
Calling the approximated optimal policy π(as; θ π) and the state-
value function v(s; θv), the updates of this two functions can now
be defined as:
(7)
θ π
t +1 = θ π
t + απ · Ab
t + αv · Ab
∂ log π(as; θ π)
∂θ π
∂v(st ; θv)
∂θv
θv
t +1 = θv
(8)
If the bootstrapping interval b equals 1, only the reward following
an action is used to directly evaluate that action. This setting is
ideal in scenarios where the complete consequences of an action
are known immediately (e.g. face correctly recognized by a face
detection agent); however, it is not optimal in situation where the
reward is delayed (e.g. agent regulating the water level of a dam).
Increasing b, a longer series of rewards will be accumulated before
estimating the value function; in this way delayed rewards are
propagated faster but their merit is divided among all the actions
performed in the time window.
In the n-step actor critic algorithm used in A3C a mixed approach
is adopted. In this solution both long and short-term bootstrapping
take place: every n time-steps (or if a terminal state is reached) a se-
quence of updates like those in equations (7) and (8) are performed,
one for each time-step. In each update the longest possible series of
rewards is used for estimating the value of the state, ranging from
a 1-step to n-step updates. This process is shown in Algorithm 1.
(cid:40)0
Algorithm 1 n-step Advantage Actor Critic
1: initialize parameters θπ of π(as; θπ)
2: initialize parameters θv of V(as; θv)
3: t ← 1
4: while learninд is active do
5:
6:
7: while t − tlast_up < n and st is not terminal do
8:
9:
10:
11:
execute action at
get reward rt , state st +1
t ← t + 1
end while
get st
tlast_up = t
if st is terminal
12:
V(st ; θv) otherwise
R =
∆π = 0, ∆v = 0
for each i = t − 1, .., t − tlast_up do
R = ri + γr
∆π = ∆π + ∇θπ log π(aisi; θπ)(R − V(si; θv))
∆v = ∆v + ∇θv (R − V(si; θv))2
end for
get απ , αv from the optimization algorithm
θπ = θπ + απ · ∆π
θv = θv + αv · ∆v
13:
14:
15:
16:
17:
18:
19:
20:
21:
22: end while
3.2 Asynchronous Advantage Actor Critic -
A3C
A problem of using Deep Neural Networks as function approxima-
tors in RL is the correlation between updates that comes from the
sequentiality of data in the process.
This correlation was initially broken by using the so called expe-
rience replay ([20]): tuples {st , at , st +1, rt } were stored instead of
being used immediately, while the parameters updates were com-
puted using randomly sampled tuples from the replay buffer. In
this setting, updates are not based on sequential data anymore, but
the replay buffer makes the process expensive in terms of memory
occupation and it forces the use of old data.
An improved solution, adopted in [19], consists in running sev-
eral actor-critic agents in parallel, each one with its own copy of
the parameters of a global neural network. Every agent acts in a
different instance of the environment and sends its updates, com-
puted as in Algorithm 1, asynchronously from the other agents.
Since each agent is seeing a different environment configuration,
their updates are not correlated and contribute in augmenting the
stability of the process. A visual representation of this system is
shown in Figure 2a.
4 MICROSCOPIC TRAFFIC SIMULATION
4.1 Multi-agent A3C
In the normal A3C setting, multiple agents act in parallel in in-
dependent instances of the same environment. However, it is not
possible for them to learn the interaction with each other, since
each agent is sensing a state which is independent from that of the
others.
In order to make this interaction possible we let several agents
share the same playground, so that they will be able to sense each
other. For instance, let's consider agents a and b acting on the same
environment: a, by taking action aa
t at time step t based on policy
t ), could affect state sb
π(aa
t sa
t +1 of the agent b. If this happens, b will
t +1sb
t +1), potentially affecting
react accordingly taking action π(ab
in turn sa
t +2. Therefore, learning the optimal policy π for an agent
means taking into account not only how the environment is affected
by its actions, but also what behavior they induce to other agents.
In practice, this implies that agents have to wait that the oth-
ers took their actions before receiving the subsequent state. This
affects negatively the performance of the algorithm, since, due to
the asynchronous nature of the process, some of the agents could
be computing their updates, that is executing a time consuming
backpropagation. Moreover, this solution jeopardizes the stability
of the system because parameter updates of agents acting in the
same environment are not independent anymore. For this reason,
in multi-agent A3C we run several environment instances as in
traditional A3C, each one populated with several active agents.
Each agent accumulates updates every n frames, and sends them
to a global copy of the network only at the end of the episode
in order to reduce the synchronization burden, updating at the
same time its local copy with the updates coming from the other
agents. Since some of those agents are accumulating experience in
different environment instances, the correlation between updates is
diminished, making the process more stable. Algorithm 2 shows the
process of multi-agent A3C, whose visual representation is given
in Figure 2b.
In our experiment we set n = 20 and γ = 0.99; we used RMSProp
optimizer with a decay factor of α = 0.99 and initial learning rate
of 7e−4.
# executed concurrently
Algorithm 2 multi-agent n-step Advantage Actor Critic
д
д
π of π(as; θπ)
v of V(as; θv)
run naд threads concurrently
1: initialize parameters θ
2: initialize parameters θ
3: get nenv as the number of environment instances
4: get naд as the number of agents for each environment
5: run nenv environment instances concurrently
6: for each environment instance do
7:
8: end for
9: for each aдent a do
t ← 1
10:
11: while traininд is active do
д
π = θ
12:
π
д
v = θ
13:
v
14:
15:
16:
17:
18:
19:
20:
21:
22:
23:
get st
tlast_up = t
while t − tlast_up < n and st is not terminal do
execute action at from π(at st ; θ a
π)
wait other agents to finish their actions
get reward rt , state st +1
t ← t + 1
end while
copy parameters θ a
copy parameters θ a
∆a
π = 0, ∆a
while st is not terminal do
v = 0
(cid:40)0
if st is terminal
V(st , θ a
v) otherwise
R =
for each i = t − 1, .., t − tlast_up do
R = ri + γr
∆a
π = ∆a
∆a
v = ∆a
π log π(aisi; θ a
(R − V(asi; θ a
π + ∇θ a
v + ∇θ a
v
π)(R − V(asi; θ a
v))
v))2
24:
25:
26:
27:
28:
29:
30:
31:
32:
33:
34: end for
end for
end while
д
π using ∆a
update θ
π
д
v using ∆a
update θ
v
end while
Depending on how the reward function is shaped, the learning
process may be cooperative or competitive ([26]). The former is the
way we followed to simulate behavior of road vehicles: a positive
reward is given to the artificial driver if it reaches its goal while a
negative reward is given to those drivers involved in a crash. Agents
are stimulated to reach their goals avoiding other agents, leading
to an implicit negotiation when the paths of different vehicles
intersect.
We think that this multi-agent learning setting is captivating
for many applications that require a simulation environment with
intelligent agents, because it learns the joint interactive behavior
eliminating the need for hand-designed behavioral rules.
4.2 Input architecture
Having a visual input organized as images is appealing since it frees
from the need of defining a case-specific design for each different
scenario. Moreover, it frees from the need of considering a fixed
amount of vehicles (as in [11]).
(a) Single-agent setting
(b) Multi-agent setting
Figure 2: Comparison between single and multi-agent A3C
settings. Red robots are learning agents acting in environ-
ment Ei, while blue robots are passive agents. Each ac-
tive agent owns a copy Lj of the global network, and it
contributes to its evolution by updates Uj. In (a) learning
agents play in an environment populated only by non-active
agents, while in (b) active agents can sense each other, allow-
ing them to learn how to interact.
However, this kind of input has a drawback: the convolutional
pipeline makes it not suitable for communicating numerical infor-
mation, such as the desired behavior for the agent or its precise
speed. Transferring this type of information is possible using fully-
connected layers, but it becomes inefficient to directly process
visual images by this mean. For this reason, we shaped our system
in order to have a mixed input, made of visual and numerical infor-
mation, which is processed by two different pipelines as elucidated
in Section 4.3.
4.2.1 Visual input. The agent may not be able to sense the whole
environment but just a portion of it, which we call its view. The
visual part of the input consists on a historical sequence of the v
most recent views seen from the agent. We set v = 4 as in [20]
making the estimation of relative speed and acceleration feasible.
Each view is divided in semantic layers separating information with
different origin. As explained in Section 5.1 we included semantic
layers related to the navigable space, the path the agent will follow
and obstacles around the vehicle; however, several other layers
could be added, such as the occluded area or the road markings, in
order to enrich the input information.
4.2.2 Numerical input. The numerical component permits the
augmentation of the input with information which are not directly
perceivable from the sequence of views, such as the absolute speed
of the agent or the exact distance which is still to be traveled to
reach the goal. This allows a better understanding of the scene,
i.e. a better estimation of the states value. More importantly, the
numerical input can be used to shape agents attitude by teaching it
a direct correlation between some of its tunable input and the to-be-
obtained reward. Practically, they can be used to partially perturb
the state of the agent at will. In this work we took advantage of
numerical input to the network for tuning the agent aggressiveness
and to suggest a desired cruising speed, as explained in Sections 5.4
and 5.5 respectively.
4.3 Network architecture
Because of the different nature of the two input streams, they are
initially processed by two different pipelines, aimed to produce two
feature vectors.
The image processing pipeline is constituted by two convolu-
tional and one fully connected layers, whereas the numerical input
vector is processed by two fully connected layers. Each pipeline
produces a feature vector as output. The two output vectors are
joined together before being handled by the last fully-connected
hidden layer. After every transformation a ReLU nonlinearity is
applied to the output.
The idea of this hybrid architecture has been inspired from [5], in
which an input made of a single image and two numerical vectors
is processed by a network built in a similar fashion.
The output of the last hidden layer is finally used for the actions
log-probabilities computation and the state-value estimation. The
network architecture is represented in Figure 3.
5 EXPERIMENT
The model explained in Section 4 has been used to simulate the
traffic of cars on a roundabout with three entries (Figure 1b), which
is a representation of an existing roundabout (Figure 1a) made with
the help of the Cairo graphics library ([21]).
Each vehicle populating the roundabout has its own path which
simply depends on a randomly assigned exit; the goal of the agent
is to reach the end of its exit lane. Furthermore, to each agent is
assigned a desired cruising speed consisting to the maximum speed
the agent is aiming for, which it should be reached and maintained
when caution is not needed; this speed will be called from now
on its target speed. A new vehicle with a random target speed is
spawned from an entry lane dependently on the positions of the
other cars, inducing different traffic conditions.
During the experiments the roundabout was populated by a
maximum of six vehicles such that no traffic jams were created,
thus making the effects of the agent's behavior tuning appreciable.
Figure 3: Architecture of the network. Visual input V and
numerical input N initially follow two different pipelines,
before being merged in a single vector, which is then used
to compute probabilities of actions and to estimate the value
of the state.
However, this framework can be used to simulate vehicles' behavior
even in high traffic conditions.
5.1 State space
As explained in Section 4.2 the input is made of two different
streams, a visual and a numerical one. The visual part is a rep-
resentation of the surrounding of the vehicle within a limited range
of 50x50 square meters converted to a sequence of images with
84x84 pixels. This input is made of several semantic layers, which
in this experiment are:
(1) Navigable space: the part of the space in which vehicles can
drive, generally given from the maps and shown in Figure 1c;
(2) Obstacles: made of all vehicles and obstacles seen from the
agent, including the agent himself; this information can be
obtained from the perception module of the self-driving
vehicle and it is shown in Figure 1d;
(3) Path: that shows to the agent its assigned path, and depends
on the choices of the high-level planner; this layer is shown
in Figure 1e.
The numerical part, on the other hand, consists of several scalar
values which contain both additional information about the scene
and clues to predict future rewards, which are used at test time to
modulate the agent behavior. In our instance the numerical input
is restricted to the following parameters:
(1) Agent speed.
(2) Target speed.
(3) Elapsed time ratio: ratio between the elapsed time from
the beginning of the episode and the time limit to reach the
goal.
(4) Distance to the goal: distance to be traveled before reach-
ing the goal.
The network architecture, together with the hyperparameters
used for the experiment, are shown in Figure 3.
5.2 Action space
The chosen action space is discrete and boils down to three actions:
accelerate, brake or maintain the same speed. We set comfortable
acceleration values, which are 1 m
s2 in case of positive acceleration
and −2 m
s2 in case of braking. The acceleration command will have
its effect only if the speed is under a maximum accepted value.
rt = rterminal + rdanдer + rspeed
zero only if t is a terminal state; it equals:
5.3 Reward shaping
The reward obtained from an agent is made of three main terms:
(9)
rterminal depends on how the episode ends, and so differs from
• +1: if the agent reaches its goal;
• −1: if the agent crashes against another agent;
• −1: if the available time expires.
• 0: if t is a non-terminal state.
rdanдer is a soft penalization given in situations which are to be
avoided, either because the agent made a dangerous maneuver or
because it broke some traffic laws. Calling dv the distance traveled
from the vehicle v in one second, rdanдer will be:
• −ky: if the agent fails to yield when entering the roundabout
to an already inserted vehicle v. This happens when the
agent crosses the region in front of v whose length is taken
equal to 3 · dv, as shown from the orange region in the
example of Figure 1b.
• −ks: if the agent a violates the safety distance with the ve-
hicle in front, unless the latter is entering the roundabout
and it is cutting in front of the agent. The safety distance in
this case is taken equal to da, and the associated region is
depicted in yellow in Figure 1b.
• 0: if none of the above occur.
rspeed is a positive reward which is maximized when the ac-
tual speed of the agent (sa) coincides with the target speed input
parameter (st ):
(cid:40) sa
· kp
rspeed =
st
kp − sa−st
st
· kn
if sa ≤ st
if sa > st
(10)
In our experiment we set ky = ks = 0.05, kp = 0.001, kn = 0.03.
5.4 Aggressiveness tuning
In the training phase, agents learn to increase their speed to reach
the goal within a time limit. This is possible because both time
left and remaining distance to be traveled are provided as input. It
was not possible to achieve this same behavior without using the
distance-to-the-goal input, highlighting the agent inability to realize
from images that increasing its speed the goal will be reached faster.
Nevertheless, things work well when this information is enforced
with the remaining distance, confirming the power of the visual-
numerical coupling.
This experience has been exploited at test time to vary the agent
aggressiveness by tuning its time and distance left at will, since it
is not needed anymore to limit the episode length. Doing this each
agent present in the simulator will have its own unique attitude,
resulting in a more heterogeneous scenario.
We explored scenarios in which the elapsed time ratio was re-
placed by an arbitrary real value in the [0, 1] interval, keeping the
distance to an imaginary goal fixed. Values close to 1 will induce
the agent to drive faster, in order to avoid the predicted negative
return for running out of time. For the same reason, values close
to 0 will tell the driver that it still has much time, and it is not a
problem to yield to other vehicles. This way, the elapsed time ratio
acts as an "aggressiveness level" for the agent.
An experiment has been set up in order to test the validity of this
approach. We populated the roundabout with six vehicles having
random aggressiveness levels, and we tested how an agent with
a fixed known aggressiveness behaves by letting it play several
episodes. We registered two different parameters as feedback of
each driver style: the ratio of positive ending episodes, in which the
agent reaches the goal, and its average speed. Results are shown in
the graph of Figure 4a. It is clearly visible that, by increasing the
aggressiveness level, the driver behavior will shift towards a more
risky configuration, since both average speed and probability of
accidents grow. Moreover, it is interesting to see that values of ag-
gressiveness outside the training interval [0, 1] produce consistent
consequences to the agent conduct, intensifying its behavior even
further.
5.5 Target speed tuning
The rspeed reward term, presented in Section 5.3, increases until
the speed of the agent gets closer to its target speed, and it starts
to diminish for agent speeds above the desired one. At training
time, agents were assigned a random target speed for every episode,
taken from a uniform distribution between [5, 8] m
s , inducing them
to learn to not surpass that tunable value and so simulating drivers
with different desired speeds. Agents can still decide to surpass
their target speed if this will bring advantages, such as stopping
the insertion of another vehicle by a particular aggressive driver.
To evaluate how the dedicated input affects the behavior of the
agent we let several agents, having different target speed values
but equal aggressiveness levels of 0.5, to play several runs in sce-
narios similar to the one used to test the aggressiveness tuning in
Section 5.4.
The graph with the results, given in Figure 4b, shows that an
increment on the agent target speed leads to an higher average
speed, without affecting negatively the positive ending ratio. Even
in this case, values of the target speed outside the training range
[5, 8] induce consistent agent behaviors.
5.6 Environment settings comparisons
We compared agents trained with 1 and 4 environment instances
in a simplified case in which the target speed given to the agent
cannot be exceeded (once reached the target speed the accelerate
command has no effect), in order to speed up learning for compari-
son purposes. We tested both with and without action repeat of 4
([20]), that is repeating the last action for the following 4 frames
(repeated actions are not used for computing the updates). It has
been proved that in some cases action repeat improves learning
([3]) by increasing the capability to learn associations between tem-
porally distant state-action pairs, giving to actions more time to
affect the state.
(a) aggressiveness test
//
(b) speed test
Figure 4: Effect of aggressiveness (a) and target speed (b)
levels variation on the agent behavior. Blue plots show the
agent positive-ending episodes ratio while the red plots its
average speed. Dashed lines refer to an agent whose action
are repeated for 4 times while solid lines to an agent free to
choose actions at every time step. Each data point is obtained
averaging over 5000 episodes.
The learning curves, shown in Figure 5, tell that, when using the
action repeat technique, training the system with multiple instances
stabilizes learning and leads to a better overall performance, even if
in both cases the model converges. This confirms that reducing the
correlation between updates brings a positive effect. It is interesting
to note that in the multi-instance scenario agents start to improve
their ability to reach the goal at a later stage but with a faster pace.
Our explanation for this behavior is that, when running several
environment instances, a higher rate of asynchronous updates com-
ing from pseudo-random policies makes learning more problematic.
Indeed, during the length of an episode, the local policy of the agent
for which the updates are computed remains fixed, while the global
policy receives asynchronous updates from several other agents
whose behavior is still infant. However, when the policies of agents
start to gain sense, their updates will be directed strongly toward a
common goal due to a reduced search space.
Nonetheless, things change when action are not repeated. Indeed,
while the model still converges when using a single environment
instance, agents are not able to learn successfully when adopting
(a) 1 instance, yes action repeat
(b) 4 instances, yes action repeat
(c) 1 instance, no action repeat
(d) 4 instances, no action repeat
Figure 5: Learning comparison between systems trained
with single or multiple environment instances, with or with-
out action repeat.
the multi-instance setting, making the stabilizing effect of action
repetition necessary.
However, the use of repeated actions brings a drawback, that is
to diminish the rate at which agents interact with the environment.
Indeed our empirical results, given in the graphs of Figure 4, show
that the positive episode ratio at test time increases if actions are
not repeated, even if the model was trained with action repetition.
In this way it is possible to take advantage of the stabilizing effect
of action repetition, without loosing the chance of a finer action
selection resolution.
6 CONCLUSION
We presented an architecture able to model the longitudinal behav-
ior of vehicles on a synthetic road scenario by using a multi-agent
version of the A3C algorithm. This solution allows simulating road
traffic without the need of specifying hand crafted behaviors for
vehicles or collecting real data.
Agents populating the simulator sense the surrounding by a
visual input made of a sequence of images representing different
semantic information across the last time steps. The proposed ar-
chitecture gives also the possibility to simulate the uniqueness of
each real human driver by coupling a series of scalar parameters to
the visual one. We exploited this feature so that aggressiveness and
desired cruising speed of each driver can be regulated.
Even if our framework is able to deal with generic junction
shapes, we focused our tests on a specific scenario consisting of a
single-lane roundabout with three entries: it would be interesting
to see how well the system is able to generalize to different junction
topologies for application in which these information are not known
a priori. Moreover, it would be intriguing to extend the architecture
in order to include lateral behaviors of vehicles in the simulation.
It is worth to mention, as can be seen in the previous graphs, that
the proposed simulator is not collision free, but it reaches success
−0.200.20.40.60.811.251.51.7520.70.750.80.850.90.951Aggressivenesspositiveepisodesratio4.24.655.45.86.26.677.4averagespeed[ms]p.e.ratioavgspeedp.e.ratiowitha.r.avg.speedwitha.r.4.555.566.577.588.50.70.750.80.850.90.951Targetspeedpositiveepisodesratio4.24.655.45.86.26.677.4averagespeed[ms]p.e.ratioavgspeedp.e.ratiowitha.r.avgspeedwitha.r. 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 50000 100000 150000 200000positive episodes ratioEpisode 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 50000 100000 150000 200000positive episodes ratioEpisode 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 50000 100000 150000 200000positive episodes ratioEpisode 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 50000 100000 150000 200000positive episodes ratioEpisode ratios close to 1 when a safe driving is set. Even though a collision-
free simulator could be desirable for some applications, the aim of
this work was to simulate real driving scenarios in which errors
and accidents happen: modeling them in the simulator may lead to
the development of more robust high-level maneuver modules.
The time needed to train the model is not negligible and can
reach several days in a desktop computer. The main issue is that
before proceeding to the subsequent time step, all the agents acting
in the same environment instance need to have taken their actions:
since some of them might be computing gradients, the overall per-
formance decreases. Future works can be directed toward the design
of a more efficient network architecture, as well as the development
of a learning setting in which the gradient computations of all the
agents in the same instance are executed simultaneously.
7 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We are grateful to the reviewers for their precious advices. Thanks
also to Claudio, Roberto and Alessandra for their suggestions.
REFERENCES
[1] Mayank Bansal, Alex Krizhevsky, and Abhijit S. Ogale. 2018. ChauffeurNet:
(2018).
Learning to Drive by Imitating the Best and Synthesizing the Worst.
arXiv:1812.03079
[2] Mariusz Bojarski et al. 2016. End to End Learning for Self-Driving Cars. (2016).
arXiv:1604.07316
[3] Alex Braylan et al. 2015. Frame Skip Is a Powerful Parameter for Learning to
Play Atari. In AAAI-15 Workshop on Learning for General Competency in Video
Games.
[4] Akansel Cosgun et al. 2017. Towards Full Automated Drive in Urban Environ-
ments: A Demonstration in GoMentum Station, California. abs/1705.01187 (2017).
arXiv:1705.01187
[5] Alexey Dosovitskiy and Vladlen Koltun. 2017. Learning to Act by Predicting the
Future. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR).
[6] Vortisch P. Fellendorf M. [n. d.]. Microscopic Traffic Flow Simulator VISSIM. In
Fundamentals of Traffic Simulation, Jaume Barcelò (Ed.).
[7] Ian Goodfellow, Yoshua Bengio, and Aaron Courville. 2016. Deep Learning. MIT
Press. http://www.deeplearningbook.org.
[8] Jayesh K. Gupta, Maxim Egorov, and Mykel Kochenderfer. 2017. Cooperative
Multi-agent Control Using Deep Reinforcement Learning. In Autonomous Agents
and Multiagent Systems. 66 -- 83.
[9] S. Gupta, M. Vasardani, and S. Winter. 2018. Negotiation Between Vehicles and
Pedestrians for the Right of Way at Intersections. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent
Transportation Systems (2018), 1 -- 12.
[10] Alon Halevy, Peter Norvig, and Fernando Pereira. 2009. The Unreasonable
Effectiveness of Data. IEEE Intelligent Systems 24 (2009), 8 -- 12.
[11] Carl-Johan Hoel, Krister Wolff, and Leo Laine. 2018. Automated Speed and
(2018).
Lane Change Decision Making using Deep Reinforcement Learning.
arXiv:1803.10056
[12] David Isele, Akansel Cosgun, Kaushik Subramanian, and Kikuo Fujimura. 2017.
Navigating Occluded Intersections with Autonomous Vehicles using Deep Rein-
forcement Learning. (2017). arXiv:1705.01196
[13] Daniel Krajzewicz, Georg Hertkorn, Christian Feld, and Peter Wagner. 2002.
SUMO (Simulation of Urban MObility); An open-source traffic simulation. In 4th
Middle East Symposium on Simulation and Modelling (MESM2002). 183 -- 187.
[14] X. Li, X. Xu, and L. Zuo. 2015. Reinforcement learning based overtaking decision-
making for highway autonomous driving. In International Conference on Intelli-
gent Control and Information Processing (ICICIP). 336 -- 342.
[15] Timothy P. Lillicrap, Jonathan J. Hunt, Alexander Pritzel, Nicolas Heess, Tom
Erez, Yuval Tassa, David Silver, and Daan Wierstra. 2015. Continuous control
with deep reinforcement learning. (2015). arXiv:1509.02971
[16] Jingchu Liu, Pengfei Hou, Lisen Mu, Yinan Yu, and Chang Huang. 2018. Elements
of Effective Deep Reinforcement Learning towards Tactical Driving Decision
Making. (2018). arXiv:1802.00332
[17] W. Liu, S. Kim, S. Pendleton, and M. H. Ang. 2015. Situation-aware decision
making for autonomous driving on urban road using online POMDP. In IEEE
Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV). 1126 -- 1133.
[18] Ryan Lowe et al. 2017. Multi-Agent Actor-Critic for Mixed Cooperative-
Competitive Environments. (2017). arXiv:1706.02275
[19] Volodymyr Mnih, Adrià Puigdomènech Badia, Mehdi Mirza, Alex Graves, Timo-
thy P. Lillicrap, Tim Harley, David Silver, and Koray Kavukcuoglu. 2016. Asyn-
chronous Methods for Deep Reinforcement Learning. In Proceedings of the 33nd
International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML). 1928 -- 1937.
[20] Volodymyr Mnih, Koray Kavukcuoglu, David Silver, et al. 2015. Human-level
control through deep reinforcement learning. Nature 518, 7540 (Feb. 2015), 529 --
533.
[21] Keith Packard and Carl Worth. 2003 -- 2018. Cairo graphics library. https://www.
cairographics.org/. (2003 -- 2018).
[22] Chris Paxton, Vasumathi Raman, Gregory D. Hager, and Marin Kobilarov. 2017.
Combining neural networks and tree search for task and motion planning in
challenging environments. In IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent
Robots and Systems (IROS), Vol. 2017-September. 6059 -- 6066.
[23] John Schulman, Sergey Levine, Philipp Moritz, Michael I. Jordan, and Pieter
Abbeel. 2015. Trust Region Policy Optimization. In International Conference on
Machine Learning (ICML).
[24] Shai Shalev-Shwartz, Shaked Shammah, and Amnon Shashua. 2016.
Multi-Agent, Reinforcement Learning for Autonomous Driving.
arXiv:1610.03295
[25] Richard S. Sutton and Andrew G. Barto. 2018. Reinforcement Learning: An Intro-
Safe,
(2016).
duction. MIT Press.
[26] Ardi Tampuu et al. 2015. Multiagent Cooperation and Competition with Deep
Reinforcement Learning. (2015). arXiv:1511.08779
[27] M Treiber, A Hennecke, and D Helbing. 2000. Congested Traffic States in Empiri-
cal Observations and Microscopic Simulations. Phys. Rev. E 62 (2000), 1805 -- 1824.
[28] Chris Urmson et al. 2008. Autonomous Driving in Urban Environments: Boss
and the Urban Challenge. J. Field Robot. 25, 8 (Aug. 2008), 425 -- 466.
[29] Richard van der Horst and Jeroen Hogema. 1994. Time-To-Collision and Collision
Avoidance Systems. In 6th ICTCT workshop.
[30] Christopher John Cornish Hellaby Watkins. 1989. Learning from Delayed Rewards.
Ph.D. Dissertation. King's College, Cambridge, UK.
[31] Ronald J. Williams. 1992. Simple Statistical Gradient-Following Algorithms for
Connectionist Reinforcement Learning. Mach. Learn. 8, 3-4 (May 1992), 229 -- 256.
|
1712.07887 | 1 | 1712 | 2017-12-21T11:41:13 | Multiagent-based Participatory Urban Simulation through Inverse Reinforcement Learning | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI"
] | The multiagent-based participatory simulation features prominently in urban planning as the acquired model is considered as the hybrid system of the domain and the local knowledge. However, the key problem of generating realistic agents for particular social phenomena invariably remains. The existing models have attempted to dictate the factors involving human behavior, which appeared to be intractable. In this paper, Inverse Reinforcement Learning (IRL) is introduced to address this problem. IRL is developed for computational modeling of human behavior and has achieved great successes in robotics, psychology and machine learning. The possibilities presented by this new style of modeling are drawn out as conclusions, and the relative challenges with this modeling are highlighted. | cs.MA | cs | Multiagent-based Participatory Urban Simulation through
Inverse Reinforcement Learning
Soma Suzuki
Center for Advanced Spatial Analysis
University College London
Abstract
The multiagent-based participatory simulation
features prominently in urban planning as the
acquired model is considered as the hybrid
system of the domain and the local
knowledge. However, the key problem of
generating realistic agents for particular social
phenomena invariably remains. The existing
models have attempted to dictate the factors
involving human behavior, which appeared to
be intractable. In this paper, Inverse
Reinforcement Learning (IRL) is introduced
to address this problem. IRL is developed for
computational modeling of human behavior
and has achieved great successes in robotics,
psychology and machine learning. The
possibilities presented by this new style of
modeling are drawn out as conclusions, and
the relative challenges with this modeling are
highlighted.
I. Introduction
Urban modeling is traditionally seen as
rational and technical (Sager 1999), thus
leading to massive failures in urban planning
(Jacobs 1961). To interpret knowledge of
local context (McCall 2003), participatory
simulation has been studied intensively, by
allowing experts and non-experts to
interactively define the model (Drogoul,
In
Vanbergue and Meurisse 2002).
conjunction with participatory simulation,
multi-agent human movement modeling has
garnered attention in that the model enables
bottom-up simulation which has the potential
to deemphasize the manipulative intrusion
(Epstein 1999). Even though it made great
progress, the limitation of the multi-agent
simulation in constructing highly realistic
agents has been the subject of much
discussion (Batty and Torrens 2001). The
incurred distrust in the simulation model has
always vexed urban planners and impeded
efficient urban planning. The constraints
mainly arise from the number of variables
that the agent needs to address since the
solution space quickly becomes intractable as
the number of parameters increases. A
promising approach for overcoming this
drawback is to learn preferences of humans
from the observed demonstration by inverting
a model of rational decision making given a
reward function (Russell and Norvig 1995).
This approach is known as Inverse
Reinforcement Learning (IRL) in Markov
Decision Process (MDP) (Ng and Russell
2000) in the machine learning community.
This paper attempts to address the limitation
of multi-agent participatory simulation when
replicating social phenomena. In section II,
the importance of participatory simulation is
discussed with a particular experiment in the
city of Kyoto. To demonstrate that IRL
creates another paradigm in urban simulation,
the contribution and the limitation of existing
theoretical models are examined in section
III. Then Markov Decision Process and
Inverse Reinforcement
Learning are
introduced in section IV with a specific
example of robot simulation to illustrate the
potential of IRL. Finally, the conclusion and
future work are discussed in section V.
II. Participatory Simulation
Significant planning difficulties result from
the estrangement between the stakeholder's
local knowledge and planner's technical
theory. With the participation of the
stakeholder in the process of urban planning,
more plausible solutions are expected to be
achieved. This is particularly true of multi-
agent urban simulation design. It is most
unlikely that a virtual agent merely based on
academic data reflects local knowledge.
Start
Define agent
Multi-agent simulation
Participatory Simulation
Refine agent
Multi-agent simulation
Output
Figure 1. Participatory design.
The recent rise of participatory urban
simulation has opened a new field of research
to address this problem, by enabling the
model to incorporate knowledge of both
experts and non-experts, through a role-
playing game or by being immersed in the
simulation as "human agent" (Edmonds
2000). The human agents interact with virtual
agents to gain the insight into the simulated
model. The brief process of participatory
urban modeling is illustrated in Figure 1
(Ishida, Nakajima, Murakami and Nakanishi
2007). The learning process of multiagent-
based participatory simulation consists of two
phases: the deductive agent design and
participatory agent design. At first, experts
generate agents based on the domain
knowledge and data. After validating the
model, the human agents are immersed in the
simulated environment and the participatory
simulation is performed. There is also an
extension of participatory simulation known
as argument experiment, where an experiment
is performed in real space by humans with a
multiagent virtual simulation. Take, for
instance, the augmented experiment has been
conducted in the city of Kyoto (Ishida,
Nakajima, Murakami and Nakanishi 2007).
Example: Augmented Experiment in Kyoto
To simulate disaster evacuation in Kyoto
station, a tracking system that navigates
passengers based on their current location
was deployed. Beyond the conventional
evacuation system in stations, which
announces route information from public
megaphones, the systems are intended to
instruct individuals via mobile phones. In the
augmented experiment, the pedestrians'
movements were captured using GPS trace.
Then, the real-time human movements were
projected onto avatars in virtual space. In
parallel with the real space experiment, a
multiagent-based simulation with a large
number of agents generated by domain theory
was conducted. Finally, the system instructed
the evacuees to evacuation destinations, with
a) two-dimensional map and b) three-
dimensional virtual spaces. Ten humans and
three thousand agents undertook the
experiment. Through the experiment, it turns
out that a map is an excellent method for
evacuee navigation. On the other hand, the
small and low-resolution images of three-
dimensional virtual spaces on mobiles phones
were not very effective.
By integrating the real world experiment and
virtual world experiment, the experiment is
augmented, enabling large-scale simulation
with the small number of subjects for
experiments. By incorporating theory based
agents and human-controlled agents,
multiagent-based participatory urban
simulation is expected to fill in the gap
between the refined academic theory and
practical domain knowledge, and an expected
consequence being that stakeholders are more
engaged in the planning process to achieve
more effective urban modeling.
III. Limitation on Agent Design
Models are, by definition, representation of a
simplification of the real world, and
consequently, any simulation models are
necessarily incomplete and partial (Batty and
Torrens 2001). However, they need to, of
course, achieve minimum plausibility to be
utilized in actual planning. There are two
issues that we should draw together to
illustrate the limitation of reproducing the real
world with traditional agent-based pedestrian
simulation. The first is the issue of the
complications that arise from the rule-based
models
intractable
mathematical operations. This leads to the
second issue of the impracticability of
validating all the plausible models against
data. The archetypal example of this is an
agent-based pedestrian model STREETS that
which
induce
Center for Advanced Spatial Analysis in
University College London developed
(Schelhorn, O'Sullivan, Haklay and Thurstain
1999).
Example: STREETS
In the simulated environment of STREETS,
the street network with various attractions
such as shops, offices and public buildings are
configured. Each pedestrian agent was
attributed two characters: socio-economic and
behavioral. Socio-economic characteristics
contribute to income and gender, which
define the locations that the agents are
intended to visit. Behavioral characteristics
dictate the detailed behavior of agents such as
speed, visual range, and fixation. The speed is
the maximum walking speed of the agent.
Visual range defines which elements in the
environment the agent will see. Fixation
relates to how consistent the agent is in the
pre-determined activity schedule upon
encountering the configured attraction.
Finally, various parameters are introduced to
determine the likelihood of following
distractions. a) The match of agent types and
building types. For instance, an agent who is
engaged in the activity of shopping is
assumed to enter into another shop during the
journey but is less likely to be attracted by the
office building. b) The attractiveness of the
building for a certain demographics. c) The
level of inconsistency of the agent, which is a
general behavioral characteristic defined as
fixation. This models the reality that some
people are more easily distracted than others.
Fixation interacts with the agent's internal
clock, which measures the time an agent is
supposed to stay in the system. As the
remaining time decreases, the agent becomes
more concentrated in completing the pre-
determined schedule.
Even though the STREETS is an interesting
approach toward modeling social phenomena
in the city and explains the pedestrian
movement to a certain level, the generated
simulation is not realistic enough to be used
in policy-making. First and most importantly,
pedestrians' activity schedule and the possible
deviation when finding the attractive building
is not, of course, based merely on their gender
and salary. A naive solution to replicating the
real world more plausibly is to use more
variables, or rules such as age, ethnicity and
household structures, with more detailed
parameters on the attractiveness of facilities.
However, the solution space explodes
enormously as the number of variables
increases, and there are almost infinite
numbers of factors involved in a pedestrian
activity and incorporating all the elements is
typically intractable. To make matters worse,
even supposing all the necessary variables are
described, there is no way that all the
elements of the model are validated. This
dilemma between the parsimony model and
complex system has been the chief limitation
of the agent-based pedestrian model in
practical applications, and a consequence of
this is that the simulation model is relegated
to non-policy contexts such as education, a
group discussion, learning from visualization
and even entertainment (Batty and Torrens
2001). Although those applications of the
model are very important, the original passion
of replicating the reality is seemingly lost.
IV. Inverse Reinforcement Learning
Instead of merely reacting to the environment,
the cognitive agents need to take actions
based on what they individually observe. In
this section, Inverse Reinforcement Learning
(IRL) and Markov Decision Process (MDP)
are briefly introduced as the potential use for
generating realistic and plausible pedestrian
agents.
Markov Decision Process
A finite MDP is a tuple (S, A,
where
Psa
, γ, R ),
S is a finite set of N states {
}.
sn
A is a set of K actions {
a1, a2,
…, }.
ak
s1, s2,
…,
is state transition probabilities upon
Psa
taking action a in state s.
γ
∈
R :
𝕊 × 𝔸 → ℝ
that depends on state and action.
[0,1] is the discount factor.
is the reward function
sn
:
a1, a2,
π* 𝕊 → 𝔸
The classical problem of MDP consists of
finding the optimal policy
which
selects the actions that maximize the expected
reward for every state.
Inverse Reinforcement Learning
Inverse Reinforcement Learning (IRL)
problem is to find the reward function from
an observed policy. More specifically, given a
finite space S = {
…, }, set of actions
s1, s2,
A = {
…, }, transition probabilities
ak
, a discount factor γ
[0,1] and a policy π
∈
Psa
, the goal of IRL is to find a reward
:
𝕊 → 𝔸
function such that π is an optimal policy
.
π*
When learning reward functions through IRL,
the ultimate objective is to guide an artificial
agent with the acquired reward function, and
a consequence being that the agent learns a
"good" policy or simply imitates the observed
behavior. IRL is a very promising approach in
generating pedestrian agents in the urban
environment as the current pervasiveness of
mobile devices allows us for the collection of
mobile location data such as GPS, Wi-Fi, or
RFID,
namely training data at an
unprecedented scale and granularity
(Mehrotra and Musolesi 2017).
The traditional agent-based pedestrian model
assumes, in a sense, that the reward function
is known: STREETS assumes that the
attractiveness, in other words, the reward of
each building, is fixed. However, it seems
evident that in examining human behavior the
reward function must be considered unknown
to be ascertained through inductive reasoning
(Ng and Russell 2000). As it is infeasible to
determine the relative weights of the factors
such as the desire for shortest path, avoidance
of crowded areas and movement with the
flow, IRL is a fundamental problem of the
agent-based pedestrian model. To give a clear
example, the successful application of IRL in
robot navigation is illustrated here.
Example: Robot Navigation with IRL
In the context of socially intelligent robot
navigation, a human-like walking pattern has
been investigated (Shiarlis, Messias and
Whiteson 2017). The experiments took place
in a simplified social environment where two
people are placed randomly in a room. The
purpose of the experiment is to find the
reward function that accounts for the
relationship between the placed people and
the navigation route. For example, if people
are facing each other, the robot should not
pass between them as they are likely engaged
in some activities such as conversation. In
contrast, if they are looking away from each
other, it might be better to navigate between
them if it yields the shortest path. With the
trajectory data of human demonstrator for
multiple initial and final points, the reward
function is learned and then deployed in the
robot. As a result, the robot demonstrated a
plausible and socially compliant path.
Learning socially intelligent navigation and
generating realistic pedestrians in urban
environments is intuitively equivalent in that
both processes address the problem of how
humans "would" behave. In light of the
success in robotics, it is not altogether
irrelevant to attempt anew to replicate
pedestrians in the city. Although IRL is a
promising approach for learning pedestrian
movement patterns, there are several
challenges that need to be addressed.
Furthermore, as the model does not need a
particular underlying theory, it could be
applied to scenarios where no theory has yet
been established and even possibly used to
develop new human behavior theory.
Pitfall in Inverse Reinforcement Learning
There are three conceivable issues for
generating pedestrian agents through IRL. As
a full description of the pitfalls of IRL is
beyond the scope of this paper, only the major
challenges are introduced briefly. a) As is
always the case with deductive models, a
quantitative evaluation is difficult since no
ground truth data is available. Instead, the
model is qualitatively validated. The plausible
validation method needs to be considered. b)
The other problem arises as the learned
reward functions do not necessarily explain
human preferences. People often deviate from
optimality (Evans, Stuhlmuller, and Goodman
2015). To illustrate, if an agent repeatedly
fails to choose preferred actions due to
cognitive bias or irrationality, the model
concludes that the agent does not prefer the
option at all. To illustrate, a number of people
smoke every day while intending to quit and
considering the action to be regrettable. c) In
addition, a major challenge in applying
reinforcement learning in the multiagent
model is how to manage the explosive
computational cost as the state-action space
grows exponentially with the number of
agents and the learning becomes prohibitively
slow. There are two possible approaches to
alleviate this drawback. Firstly, as known as
structural reinforcement learning, it is
possible to reduce the size of the state-action
space by supplying the model with the partial,
but fundamental pedestrian movements in the
form of connectivity graph structures (Hillier
1989). Secondly, by replacing the simulation
model with a fast statistical surrogate (also
called an emulator), the state-action space is
more efficiently explored, thus leading to less
expensive computation. To achieve this, one
needs to apply a dimension reduction
technique to the input space, as done for
Gaussian Process emulators for instance (Liu
and Guillas).
V. Conclusion
robotics,
In this paper, Inverse Reinforcement Learning
(IRL) is presented for designing multiagent-
based participatory urban simulation. This has
helped to demonstrate that the existing agent-
based urban modelings, although they are
declared as "agent-based", are invariably top-
down and tautological, being less informative
of real world, This is due, for the most part, to
the intractability of factors involving human
behavior, and to the wrong attempt to dictate
them. An interdisciplinary approach to spatial
analysis,
and computational
psychology is required to realize robust
simulation for efficient urban planning.
Through the immediate feedback from the
model that incorporates knowledge of experts
and non-experts, urban planning is expected
to be more nimble, responsive and effective.
More importantly, as qualitative validation is
not
in participatory urban
simulation, the acquired simulation result
needs to be qualitatively interpreted.
Consider, for example, that the pedestrian
simulation in the urban environment is
performed and a number of accidents have
occurred in the virtual environment. With the
lack of fear of death, participated stakeholders
would behave in a fundamentally different
way. To gain plausible insights into social
phenomena from participatory simulation, a
available
standardized validation method needs to be
established: subsequent examination on the
levels of reality participants experienced is
one of the possible analysis.
J.
M.
References
Sager, T. (1999) The rationality issue in land-
use planning. Journal of Management History
5.
Jacobs, J. (1961) The Death and Life of Great
American Cities.
McCall, M. (2003) Seeking good governance
in participatory-GIS. Habitat International 27
549-573.
Epstein,
(1999) Agent-Based
Computational Model and Generative Social
Science, Complexity, 4, 41-60.
Batty, M., & Torrens, P.M. (2001) Modeling
Complexity: The Limits to Prediction,
Working Paper 36, Centre for Advanced
Spatial Analysis, University College, London.
Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (1995) Artificial
Intelligence: A modern approach.
Ishida, T., & Nakajima, Y., & Murakami Y., &
Nakanishi, H. (2007) Augmented Experiment:
Participatory Design with Multiagent
Simulation, International Joint Conference on
Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-07).
Schelhorn, T., & O'Sullivan, D., & Haklay,
M., & Thurstain, G. M. (1999) STREETS: An
Agent-Based Pedestrian Model, Working
Paper 9, Centre for Advanced Spatial
Analysis, University College, London.
Ng, A. Y., & Russell, S. J. (2000) Algorithms
for inverse reinforcement learning. Icml, 663–
670.
Shiarlis, K., & Messias, J., & Whiteson, S.
(2017) Rapidly Exploring Learning Trees.
Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2017 IEEE
International Conference.
Drogoul, A., & Vanbergue, D., & Meurisse, T.
(2002) Multiagent-Based Simulation: Where
are the Agents? LNAI 2581, 1-15.
Evans, O., & Stuhlmuller, A., & Goodman, N.
D. (2016) Learning the Preferences of
Ignorant, Inconsistent Agents. Proceedings of
the 30th AAAI Conference on Artificial
Intelligence (AAAI-2016)
Mehrotra, A., & Musolesi, M. (2017).
Sensing and Modeling Human Behavior
Using Social Media and Mobile Data,
Comprehensive Geographic Information
Systems. 3, 313-319.
Hillier, B (1989) The architecture of the urban
object. Ekistics , 56, 5 - 21.
Liu, X., & Guillas, S. (2017). Dimension
reduction for Gaussian process emulation: an
application to the influence of bathymetry on
tsunami heights. SIAM/ASA Journal on
Uncertainty Quantification, 5(1), 787-812.
Edmonds, B. (2000) The use of models -
making MABS more informative. Moss, S.,
Davidson, P., eds.: Multi-Agent Based
Simulation 2000. Volume 1979 of Lecture
Notes in Artificial Intelligence. 15-32
|
1711.11181 | 4 | 1711 | 2019-03-04T17:03:27 | Strategic Topology Switching for Security-Part II: Detection & Switching Topologies | [
"cs.MA",
"math.OC"
] | This two-part paper considers strategic topology switching for security in the second-order multi-agent system. In Part II, we propose a strategy on switching topologies to detect zero-dynamics attack (ZDA), whose attack-starting time is allowed to be not the initial time. We first characterize the sufficient and necessary condition for detectability of ZDA, in terms of the network topologies to be switched to and the set of agents to be monitored. We then propose an attack detection algorithm based on the Luenberger observer, using the characterized detectability condition. Employing the strategy on switching times proposed in Part I and the strategy on switching topologies proposed here, a strategic topology-switching algorithm is derived. Its primary advantages are threefold: (i) in achieving consensus in the absence of attacks, the control protocol does not need velocity measurements and the algorithm has no constraint on the magnitudes of coupling weights; (ii) in tracking system in the absence of attacks, the Luenberger observer has no constraint on the magnitudes of observer gains and the number of monitored agents, i.e., only one monitored agent's output is sufficient; (iii) in detecting ZDA, the algorithm allows the defender to have no knowledge of the attack-starting time and the number of misbehaving agents (i.e., agents under attack). Simulations are provided to verify the effectiveness of the strategic topology-switching algorithm. | cs.MA | cs | Strategic Topology Switching for Security -- Part II:
Detection & Switching Topologies
Yanbing Mao, Emrah Akyol, and Ziang Zhang
1
9
1
0
2
r
a
M
4
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
4
v
1
8
1
1
1
.
1
1
7
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract -- This two-part paper considers strategic topology
switching for security in the second-order multi-agent system.
In Part II, we propose a strategy on switching topologies to
detect zero-dynamics attack (ZDA), whose attack-starting time
is allowed to be not the initial time. We first characterize the
sufficient and necessary condition for detectability of ZDA, in
terms of the network topologies to be switched to and the
set of agents to be monitored. We then propose an attack
detection algorithm based on the Luenberger observer, using
the characterized detectability condition. Employing the strategy
on switching times proposed in Part I [1] and the strategy on
switching topologies proposed here, a strategic topology-switching
algorithm is derived. Its primary advantages are threefold: (i)
in achieving consensus in the absence of attacks, the control
protocol does not need velocity measurements and the algorithm
has no constraint on the magnitudes of coupling weights; (ii)
in tracking system in the absence of attacks, the Luenberger
observer has no constraint on the magnitudes of observer gains
and the number of monitored agents, i.e., only one monitored
agent's output is sufficient; (iii) in detecting ZDA, the algorithm
allows the defender to have no knowledge of the attack-starting
time and the number of misbehaving agents (i.e., agents under
attack). Simulations are provided to verify the effectiveness of
the strategic topology-switching algorithm.
Index Terms -- Multi-agent system, strategic topology switching,
zero-dynamics attack, attack-starting time, attack detection.
I. INTRODUCTION
I N Part-I paper [1], the proposed simplified control protocol
under switching topology employs only relative positions
of agents, which is different from the well-studied control
protocols [2] -- [8]. The main objective of this two-part paper
is the strategic topology-switching algorithm for the second-
order multi-agent system under attack. The algorithm is based
on two strategies, one of which on switching times and the
other on switching topologies. The strategy on switching
times, as introduced in Part-I paper [1], enables the second-
order multi-agent system in the absence of attacks to reach the
second-order consensus. The strategy on switching topologies
proposed in this Part-II paper enables the strategic topology-
switching algorithm to detect stealthy attacks.
Security concerns regarding the networked systems pose
a formidable threat to their wide deployment, as highlighted
by the recent incidents including distributed denial-of-service
(DDOS) attack on Estonian web sites [9], Maroochy water
breach [10] and cyber attacks on smart grids [11]. The
"networked" aspect exacerbates the difficulty of securing these
Y. Mao, E. Akyol and Z. Zhang are with the Department of Electrical
and Computer Engineering, Binghamton University -- SUNY, Binghamton, NY,
13902 USA, (e-mail: {ymao3, eakyol, zhangzia}@binghamton.edu).
systems since centralized measurement (sensing) and control
are not feasible for such large-scale systems [12], and hence
require the development of decentralized approaches, which
are inherently prone to attacks. Particularly, a special class of
"stealthy" attacks, namely the "zero-dynamics attack" (ZDA),
poses a significant security challenge [13] -- [15]. The main
idea behind ZDA is to hide the attack signal in the null-
space of the state-space representation of the control system
so that it cannot be detected by applying conventional de-
tection methods on the observation signal (hence, the name
"stealthy"). The objective of such an attack can vary from
manipulating the controller to accept false data that would
yield the system towards a desired (e.g., unstable) state to
maliciously altering system dynamics (topology attack [16])
to affect system trajectory.
Recent research efforts have focused on variations of ZDA
for systems with distinct properties. For stochastic cyber-
physical systems, Park et al. [17] designed a robust ZDA,
where the attack-detection signal is guaranteed to stay be-
low a threshold over a finite horizon. In [18], Kim et al.
proposed a discretized ZDA for the sampled-date control
systems, where the attack-detection signal is constantly zero
at the sampling times. Another interesting line of research
pertains to developing defense strategies [12], [19] -- [22]. For
example, Jafarnejadsani et al. [14], [23] proposed a multi-rate
L1 adaptive controller which can detect ZDA in the sampled-
data control systems, by removing certain unstable zeros of
discrete-time systems [13], [15]. Back et al. [24] utilized
"generalized hold" to render the impact of bounded ZDA.
While developing defense strategies for the ZDAs in multi-
agent systems have recently gained interest [12], [19] -- [22]
(see Table I for a brief summary), the space of solutions is
yet to be thoroughly explored. The most prominent features
of prior work are that the conditions of detectable attack
have constrain the connectivity of network topology and
the number of the misbehaving agents (referred to agents
under attack) [12], [19] -- [21], and the corresponding developed
defense strategy for attack detection works effectively only in
situation where the number of misbehaving agents and the
attack-starting time being the initial time are known to the
defender [12], [19], [20], [22], [25], [26]. The main objective
of this work is to remove such constraints and unrealistic
assumptions by utilizing a new approach for attack detection:
intentional topology switching.
Recent experiment of stealthy false-data injection attacks
on networked control system [27] showed the changes in the
system dynamics could be utilized by defender to detect ZDA.
To have changes in the system dynamics, Teixeira et al. [25]
2
proposed a method of modifying output matrix through adding
and removing observed measurements, or modifying input
matrix through adding and removing actuators or perturbing
the control input matrix. But the defense strategy requires
the attack-starting times to be the initial time and known
to defender. In other words,
the defense strategy fails to
work if the attack-starting time is designed to be not the
initial
time and the defender has no such knowledge, as
is practically the case for most scenarios. In such realistic
scenario,
the system dynamics must have
dynamic changes, i.e., some parameters of system dynamics
changes infinitely over infinite time. However, before using the
dynamic changes to detect ZDA in such realistic situation, the
question that whether the dynamic changes in system dynamics
can destroy system stability in the absence of attacks? must
be investigated. If the dynamic changes can destroy system
stability in the absence of attacks, these changes could utilized
by adversary/attacker [28] -- [30].
to detect ZDA,
In recent several years, actively/strategically topology
switching has received significantly attention in the control
theory, network science and graph theory literatures, see
e.g., Amelkin and Singh [31] proposed edge recommenda-
tion to disable external influences of adversaries in social
networks (consensus-seeking social dynamics), while the cou-
pling weights are uncontrollable since they correspond to the
users' interpersonal appraisals; Mao and Akyol [32], [33]
showed that strategic (time-dependent) topology switching is
an effective method in detecting ZDA in the coupled harmonic
oscillators; Ciftcioglu et al. [30] studied dynamic topology
design in the adversary environment where the network de-
signer continually and strategically change network topology
to a denser state, while the adversary attempts to thwart the
defense strategy simultaneously.
Moreover, driven by recent developments in mobile com-
puting, wireless communication and sensing [34], it is more
feasible to set communication topology as a control vari-
able [35]. These motivate us to consider the method of
topology switching to induce changes in the dynamics of
multi-agent systems to detect ZDA. The strategy on switching
times proposed in Part-I paper [1] answers the question: when
the topology of network should switch such that the occurring
dynamic changes in system dynamics do not undermine the
agent's ability of reaching consensus in the absence of attacks.
Based on the work in Part-I paper [1], this Part-II paper focuses
on the strategy on switching topologies that addresses the
problem of switching to what topologies to detect ZDA.
The contribution of this paper is fourfold, which can be
summarized as follows.
• A ZDA variation is first studied, whose attack-starting
time can be not the initial time.
• We characterize the sufficient and necessary condition
for detectability of the ZDA variation under strategic
topology switching.
• We characterize the sufficient and necessary condition for
Luenberger observer in tracking real multi-agent system
in the absence of attacks, which has no constraint on the
number of monitored agents.
CONDITIONS ON DETECTABLE ATTACK
Table I
Reference
[19]
[20]
[12]
[21]
[22]
Conditions
connectivity is not smaller than 2K + 1
K is smaller than connectivity
size of input-output linking is smaller than K
the minimum vertex separator is larger than K + 1
single attack, i.e., K = 1
Dynamics
Discrete Time
Discrete Time
Continuous Time
Discrete Time
Continuous Time
• Based on the strategy on switching times and the strategy
on switching topologies, through employing Luenberger
observer, a strategic topology-switching algorithm for
attack detection is proposed. The advantages of the al-
gorithm are: i) in detecting ZDA, it allows the defender
to have no knowledge of misbehaving agents and the
attack-starting time; ii) in tracking real systems in the
absence of attacks, it has no constraint on the magnitudes
of observer gains and the number of monitored agents;
iii) in achieving the second-order consensus, it has no
constraint on the magnitudes of coupling weights, while
the control protocol does not need velocity measurements.
This paper is organized as follows. We present the pre-
liminaries and the problem formulation in Sections II and
III respectively. In Section IV, we characterize the condition
for detectability of ZDA. Based on this characterization, we
develop an attack detection algorithm in Section V. We provide
numerical simulation results in Section VI, and, in Section VII
we discuss the future research directions.
II. PRELIMINARIES
A. Notation
We use P < 0 to denote a negative definite matrix P . Rn
and Rm×n denote the set of n-dimensional real vectors and
the set of m × n-dimensional real matrices, respectively. Let
C denote the set of complex number. N represents the set of
the natural numbers and N0 = N ∪ {0}. Let 1n×n and 0n×n
be the n × n-dimensional identity matrix and zero matrix,
respectively. 1n ∈ Rn and 0n ∈ Rn denote the vector with all
ones and the vector with all zeros, respectively. The superscript
'⊤' stands for matrix transpose.
The interaction among n agents is modeled by an undirected
graph G = (V, E), where V = {1, 2, . . . , n} is the set of agents
and E ⊂ V × V is the set of edges. The weighted adjacency
matrix A = [aij] ∈ Rn×n is defined as aij = aji > 0 if
(i, j) ∈ E, and aij = aji = 0 otherwise. Assume that there
are no self-loops, i.e., for any i ∈ V, aii = 0. The Laplacian
matrix of an undirected graph G is defined as L = [lij ] ∈
Rn×n, where lii =
aij and lij = −aij for i 6= j.
nPj=1
Some important notations are highlighted as follows:
lcm(·) : operator of least common multiple among scalers;
ker (Q) : set {y : Qy = 0n, Q ∈ Rn×n};
A−1F
V :
V\K :
λi (M ) : ith eigenvalue of matrix M ∈ Rn×n;
S (r) :
µP (·) : matrix measure of induced P -norm;
set {y : Ay ∈ F};
cardinality (i.e., size) of the set V;
complement set of K with respect to V;
rth element of ordered set S;
Q :
set of rational numbers.
B. Attack Model
As a class of stealthy attacks, "zero-dynamics" attack is
hard to detect, identify, and then mitigate from a control theory
perspective [13] -- [15]. Before reviewing its attack policy, let
us first consider the following system:
z (t) = Az (t) ,
y (t) = Cz (t) ,
(1a)
(1b)
where z(t) ∈ R¯n and y(t) ∈ R ¯m denote system state and
monitored output, respectively; A ∈ R¯nׯn, C ∈ R ¯mׯn. Its
corresponding version under attack is described by
z (t) = Az (t) + Bg(t),
y (t) = C z (t) + Dg(t),
(2a)
(2b)
where g(t) ∈ R¯o is attack signal, B ∈ R¯nׯo and D ∈ R ¯mׯo.
The policy of ZDA with introduction of attack-starting time
is presented in the following definition, which is different from
the attack policies studied in [12], [19], [20], [22], [25], [26],
whose attack-starting times are the initial time.
Definition 1: The attack signal
(3)
0¯o,
t ∈ [0, ρ)
g(t) =(cid:26)geη(t−ρ), t ∈ [ρ,∞)
in system (2) is a zero-dynamics attack, if 0¯n 6= z(0)− z(0) ∈
R¯n, 0¯o 6= g(ρ) ∈ R¯o, ρ ≥ 0 and η ∈ C satisfy
z (0) − z (0) ∈ ker (O) , if ρ > 0
(cid:21) ∈ ker(cid:18)(cid:20) η1¯nׯn − A B
D(cid:21)(cid:19) ,
(cid:20) eAρ (z (0) − z (0))
(cid:0)CA¯n−1(cid:1)⊤ i⊤
O ,h C⊤ (CA)⊤ . . .
−g (ρ)
−C
where
(4b)
.
(5)
(4a)
3
implies that Bg(ρ) = 0¯n and Dg(ρ) = 0 ¯m. Thus, the attack
signal (3) does not have any effect on the system (2). The
attack policy (4) in conjunction with the property (6) implies
that in the situation where ρ > 0, i.e., the attack-starting time is
not the initial time, the attack strategy comprises two stealthy
attacks, which can be well illustrated in the example of cyber-
physcial systems:
• Before the starting time ρ, the attacker injects false data
to the data of initial condition sent to the Luenberger
observer (attack detector [12]) in cyber layer, while
keeping stealthy, i.e., y (t) = y (t) for t ∈ [0, ρ).
ZDA g(t) = geη(t−ρ), t ≥ ρ, to the system.
• At the starting time ρ, the attacker introduces signals of
III. PROBLEM FORMULATION
For simplicity, we let the increasingly ordered set M ,
{1, 2, . . .} ⊆ V denote the set of monitored agents.
A. System in The Absence of Attacks
Under the simplified control protocol proposed in [1], the
second-order multi-agent system with monitored outputs is
described by
xi (t) = vi (t)
nXj=1
vi (t) =
aσ(t)
ij
(xj (t) − xi (t)),
i ∈ V
(8a)
(8b)
yj (t) = xj (t), j ∈ M
(8c)
where xi(t) ∈ R is the position, vi(t) ∈ R is the velocity,
yj (t) ∈ R is the output of monitored agent i used to detect
stealthy attack, σ(t) :
is
the topology-switching signal. Here, σ(t) = pk ∈ S for
t ∈ [tk, tk+1) means the pth topology is activated over time
interval [tk, tk+1), k ∈ N0, and apk
ij is the entry of the weighted
adjacency matrix which describes the activated pth topology of
communication network.
[0,∞) → S , {1, 2, . . . , s},
Corollary 1: Under the ZDA (4), the states and monitored
outputs of systems (2) and (1) satisfy
B. System in The Presence of Attacks
y (t) = y (t) , for all t ≥ 0
z (t) =(cid:26)eAt z (0) ,
z (t) + (z (ρ) − z (ρ)) eη(t−ρ), t ∈ (ρ,∞) .
t ∈ [0, ρ]
(6)
(7)
We usually refer to an agent under attack as a misbehaving
agent [20]. We let K ⊆ V denote the set of misbehaving
agents. The multi-agent system (8) under ZDA is described
by
Proof: See Appendix A.
xi (t) = vi (t)
Remark 1: The state solution (7) shows that through choos-
ing the parameter η and also the attack-starting time ρ, the
attacker can achieve various objectives, see e.g.,
vi (t) =
system stability;
• ρ = ∞: altering the steady-state value while not affecting
• ρ < ∞, Re (η) > 0: making system unstable;
• ρ < ∞, Re (η) = 0, Im (η) 6= 0: causing oscillatory
behavior.
aσ(t)
ij
nXi=1
(xj (t) − xi (t)) +(cid:26)gi(t), i ∈ K
0, i ∈ V\K
yj (t) = xj (t), j ∈ M
where gi (t) is the ZDA signal in the form of (3):
gi (t) =(cid:26)gieη(t−ρ), t ∈ [ρ,∞)
otherwise.
0,
(9a)
(9b)
(9c)
(10)
The output (6) indicates the undetectable/stealthy property of
proposed ZDA (3).
Remark 2 (Mixed Stealthy Attacks): To launch the ZDA,
the attacker must modify initial condition; otherwise, z (0) −
z (0) = 0¯n, eAρ(z (0) − z (0)) = 0¯n, which with (4b)
We note that system (9) can equivalently transforms to a
switched system under attack:
z (t) = Aσ(t) z (t) + g (t)
y (t) = C z (t)
(11a)
(11b)
12n×2n
z (t) , e
y (t) , y (t) − y (t) ,
Pσ(tk)
−C
Aσ(tk)(t−tk)
v(t)(cid:21) =(cid:20) x(t)
v(t)(cid:21) ,
0M×2n (cid:21) ,
v(t)(cid:21)−(cid:20) x(t)
z(t) , z(t)−z(t) =(cid:20) x(t)
,(cid:20) η12n×2n − Aσ(tk)
k−1Yo=0
gn (cid:3) ,
g ,(cid:2) 0⊤
Ok ,(cid:20)C⊤ (cid:0)CAσ(tk)(cid:1)⊤
. . . (cid:16)CA2n−1
q = ker(Oq)\ e−Aσ(tq )τq Nk
σ(tk)(cid:17)⊤(cid:21)⊤
k = ker (Om) ,
eAσ(to )(to+1−to) z (0) ,
Nk
Nk
. . .
g1
n
(15a)
(15b)
(15c)
(15d)
(15e)
. (15f)
(15g)
q+1, 1 ≤ q ≤ k − 1. (15h)
. . .
1n×n
Aσ(t)
−Lσ(t) 0n×n (cid:21) ,
,(cid:20) 0n×n
C ,(cid:2) e1
eM 0M×2n−M(cid:3)⊤
z (t) ,(cid:2) x1 (t)
g (t) ,(cid:2) 0⊤
a⊤ (t)(cid:3)⊤
[a (t)]i ,(cid:26)gi (t) , i ∈ K
. . . xn (t) v1 (t)
i ∈ V\K
0,
n
,
,
. . . vn (t)(cid:3)⊤
(12a)
(12b)
,
(12c)
(12d)
(12e)
where ei ∈ Rn is the ith vector of the canonical basis. In
addition, system (8) equivalently transforms to a switched
system:
z (t) = Aσ(t)z (t)
y (t) = Cz (t) .
(13a)
(13b)
We present
the definition of time-dependent switching,
which is part of our defense strategy.
Definition 2: The topology-switching signals σ(t) and σ(t)
in multi-agent systems (11) and (13) are said to be time-
dependent if the switching times and topologies depend only
on time, such that
σ(t) = σ(t), for all t ≥ 0.
(14)
4
where we define the following variables and matrices:
Before presenting the selection scheme of attack-starting
time, let us define:
Algorithm 1: Attack-Starting Time ρ
Input: Sets: Nk
1 recursively computed by (15g)
and (15h), and
Sk ,(cid:26)t :(cid:20) z (t)
−g (cid:21)∈ ker(cid:0)Pσ(tk)(cid:1), t∈ [tk,tk+1](cid:27) (16)
with Pσ(tk), z (t), g and Ok defined in (15).
1 if z (0) 6∈ Nk
1 then
Choose ρ = tk at current tk;
2
3 else
We made the following assumptions on the attacker and
defender.
Assumption 1: The attacker
4
5
6
7
if max
t∈Sk {t} 6= tk+1 then
Choose ρ ∈ Sk at current tk;
Choose ρ at current tk or next tk+1.
else
1) knows the currently activated topology and its dwell time;
2) has the memory of the past switching sequences.
end
8
9 end
Assumption 2: The defender
1) designs the switching sequences including switching
times and topologies;
2) has no knowledge of the attack-starting time;
3) has no knowledge of the number of misbehaving agents.
Proposition 1: Under
topology switch-
ing (14), the action "start attack" of ZDA in the system (11)
does not affect the stealthy property (6) if and only if the
attack-starting time ρ is generated by Algorithm 1.
time-dependent
Proof: See Appendix B.
D. Strategy on Switching Times
C. Attack-Starting Time
The attack-starting time ρ of the signal (3) plays a critical
role in guaranteeing the stealthy property (6), which can be
utilized by the attacker to escape from being detected by the
defense strategy of modifying input or output matrix [25]
finitely over finite time. If the attack-starting time is not rea-
sonable, the changes in system dynamics induced by attacker's
action "start attack" at ρ can be used by defender to detect
the stealthy attack. Therefore, from the perspective of stealthy
attack design, it is not trivial to study how the attacker should
use its knowledge and memory to decide the attack-starting
time to guarantee its stealthy.
Inspired by [25], the core of defense strategy proposed in
this paper is to make changes on system dynamics through
changing communication topology such that the attack pol-
icy (4) is not feasible. In the realistic situation where the
defender has no knowledge of the attack-starting times, to
detect ZDA we must consider infinitely changing topology
over infinite time. The strategy on switching times described
by the following lemma, which are studied in Part I paper
and will also be used for observer design in this Part II paper,
addresses the problem: when should the topology of multi-
agent system (8) switch to detect ZDA, such that the changes
in the system dynamics do not destroy system stability in the
absence of attacks?
Lemma 1:
[1] Consider the second-order multi-agent sys-
5
tem (8). For the given topology set S that satisfies
∀r ∈ S :s λi (Lr)
λj (Lr) ∈ Q, for ∀i, j = 2, . . . , n
(17)
and the scalars 1 > β > 0, α > 0 and κ ∈ N, if the dwell
times τr, r ∈ S, satisfy
, m ∈ N
τr =bτmax + m
α , 0 <bτmax + mTr
; i = 2, ..., n(cid:19),
α−ξ ,
r∈S,i=1,...,n{1 − λi (Lr),−1 + λi (Lr)} and
then the asymptotic
2 −(cid:16)β− 1
κ − 1(cid:17) κ
ξ < α, ξ =
where 0 <bτmax < − ln β
Tr = lcm(cid:18) 2π√λi(Lr)
second-order consensus is achieved.
max
(18)
Tr
2
k ) and v(tk) = v(t−
Remark 3: Let us assume that at time t−
k , system (11)
or (13) is already at the steady state. It verifies that under the
attack signal (3), at the topology-switching time tk, x(tk) =
x(t−
k ), and the system maintains its steady
state at tk, which means topology switching does not have
impulsive effect on the systems (11) and (13). We should note
that the defense strategy (strategic topology switching) that
will be developed in the following sections cannot be directly
applied to such multi-agent systems that topology switching
has impulsive effect.
IV. DETECTABILITY OF ZERO-DYNAMICS ATTACK
This section focuses on the detectability of ZDA, which will
answer the question: what topologies of multi-agent system (8)
to switch to such that the attack policy (4) is not feasible? To
better illustrate the strategy on switching topologies, we intro-
duce the definitions of components in a graph and difference
graph.
Definition 3 (Components of Graph [36]): The components
of a graph are its maximal connected subgraphs. A component
is said to be trivial if it has no edges; otherwise, it is a
nontrivial component.
Definition 4: The difference graph Grs
diff = (Vrs
diff, Ers
diff) of
Figure 1. Components of difference graph (the weights of communications
links are uniformly set as ones).
In the following theorem, we present the strategy on switch-
ing topologies.
Theorem 1: Consider the multi-agent system (11). Under
time-dependent topology switching, the ZDA can be detected
by defender without knowledge of the numbder of misbe-
having agents and the attack-starting time,
if and only if
each component of union difference graph has at least one
monitored agent, i.e.,
Ci(Gdiff) ∩ M 6= ∅,∀i = 1, . . . d.
(20)
Proof: Under result of time-dependent topology switch-
ing (14), from (11) and (13), we have:
z (t) = Aσ(t) z (t) + g (t) ,
y (t) = C z (t) ,
(21a)
(21b)
two graphs Gr and Gs is generated as
where z (t) and y (t) are given by (15a) and (15b), respectively.
Vrs
diff = Vr ∪ Vs
diff, if ar
(i, j) ∈ Ers
where Vr and ar
ij are the set of vertices (agents) and the entry
of weighted adjacency matrix of the graph Gr, respectively.
We define the union difference graph for switching differ-
ij − as
ij 6= 0
Let us define:
0M×2n(cid:21) .
Pr =(cid:20)η12n×2n − Ar 12n×2n
−C
(22)
(Sufficient Condition) We now assume to the contrary that
the system (11) is under ZDA. By Definition 1, we obtain
−g(ρ)(cid:21) ∈ ker(cid:0)Pσ(ρ)(cid:1) .
(cid:20) z(ρ)
(23)
ence graphs as:
Gdiff , [r,s∈S
Vrs
diff, [r,s∈S
Ers
diff .
(19)
We use Ci(Gdiff) to denote the set of agents in ith component
of union difference graph Gdiff. Obviously, V = C1 S C2
S . . . S Cd, and Cp T Cq = ∅ if p 6= q, where d is the
number of the component of graph Gdiff. As an example, the
difference graph in Figure 1 has two nontrivial components,
C1(Gdiff) = {1, 2, 3, 4}, C2(Gdiff) = {5, 6}, and two trivial
components, C3(Gdiff) = {7}, C4(Gdiff) = {8}.
By the resulted state (7) and the form of ZDA signal (3),
we obtain that
[z (t) ,−g(t)] = eη(t−ρ) [z (ρ) ,−g(ρ)] , t ≥ ρ.
Since eη(t−ρ) 6= 0, we conclude that system (11) has ZDA is
equivalent to
(cid:20) z(ρ)
−g(ρ)(cid:21) ∈ \r∈S
ker (Pr).
(24)
6
Substituting C in (12b), z (ρ) in (15a), g(ρ) in (12d)
with (12e), Ar in (12a), and Pr in (22) into (24) and expanding
it out yields
η1n×n−1n×n 0n×n 0n×n
Lr
η1n×n 0n×n 1n×n
−e⊤
0⊤
n
0⊤
n
0⊤
n
j
which is equivalent to
x(ρ)
v(ρ)
0n
−a (ρ)
=
0n
0n
0
,∀j ∈ M,∀r∈ S
ηx (ρ) − v (ρ) = 0n,
−a (ρ) + Lr x (ρ) + ηv(ρ) = 0n,∀r ∈ S
−a (ρ) + Ls x (ρ) + ηv(ρ) = 0n,∀s ∈ S
xj (ρ) = 0,∀j ∈ M.
(25)
(26)
(27)
(28)
Through elementary row transformation, the Laplacian ma-
trix of union difference graph Gdiff can be written as
L , diag{L (C1(Gdiff)) , . . . ,L (Cd(Gdiff))} ,
(29)
where L (Cq(Gdiff)), q ∈ {1, 2, . . . , d}, denote the Laplacian
matrix of the qth component.
Noting that equation (26) subtracting equation (27) results
in (Lr − Ls) x (κ) = 0n,∀r, s ∈ S, which is equivalent to
Lx (κ) = 0n,
where L is defined in (29). From [37], it is known that the
Laplacian matrix of component L (Cq(Gdiff)) has properties:
i) zero is one of its eigenvalues with multiplicity one, ii)
the eigenvector that corresponds to the eigenvalue zero is
1Cq(Gdiff), ∀q ∈ {1, . . . , d}. It follows from (28) and (20)
that the solution of (30) is obtained as x (ρ) = 0n, which
works with (25) implies that v (ρ) = 0n, substituting which
into (26) or (27) yields the same result as a (ρ) = 0n, which, in
conjunction with (12d), implies g (ρ) = 02n, indicating there
is no ZDA by Definition 1. Thus, a contradiction occurs.
(Necessary Condition) Substituting (25) into (26) yields
(cid:0)Lr + η21n×n(cid:1) x (ρ) = a (ρ) ,∀r ∈ S, which is equivalent to
αrLr + η21n×n)x (ρ) = a (ρ) ,
(
SXr=1
(31a)
(31b)
∀αr > 0,
αr = 1.
SXr=1
If Im (η) 6= 0, (25) shows that
∃i ∈ V : Im (xi (ρ)) 6= 0 or Im (vi (ρ)) 6= 0,
which contradicts with v (ρ) ∈ Rn and x (ρ) ∈ Rn in the
definition of ZDA. Therefore, in the following proof, we need
to consider only the cases of (Im (η) = 0, Re (η) = 0) and
(Im (η) = 0, Re (η) 6= 0).
Case One -- (Im (η) = 0, Re (η) 6= 0): We note that there
exists one implied condition that is the union graph G ,
Er(cid:19) of switching topologies in S is connected;
if not,
the asymptotic second-order consensus cannot be
achieved, which is undesirable. It is straightforward to verify
that if the condition (20) is not satisfied, the equation (30) has
(cid:18) Sr∈S
Vr, Sr∈S
(30)
Based on the obtained detectability of ZDA, this section
SPr=1
the solution that has non-identical entries. Moreover, if η 6= 0,
αr = 1.
αrLr + η21n×n is full-rank for ∀αr > 0,
Thus, we obtain a feasible non-zero vector a (ρ) from (31a).
Case Two -- (Im (η) = 0, Re (η) = 0): If the condition (20)
is not satisfied, the equation (30) has the solution with non-
identical entries. Moreover, the union graph of all switching
topologies is connected means that the eigenvector associated
SPr=1
SPr=1
with eigenvalue zero of
αrLr is the only 1n, for any αr >
SPr=1
0,
αr = 1. Therefore, from (31a) with η = 0, we obtain a
feasible non-zero vector a (ρ), which completes the proof of
necessary condition.
Remark 4: The strategy (20) in Theorem 1 implies that the
minimum number of monitored agents required to detect ZDA
is equivalent to the number of components of union difference
graph. Take the difference graph in Figure 1 as an example,
which has four components: two nontrivial components and
if the topology set S
two trivial components. Therefore,
includes only Graph One and Graph Two in Figure 1, M ≥ 4.
V. ATTACK DETECTION ALGORITHM
focus on its detection algorithm.
A. Luenberger Observer under Switching Topology
We now present a Luenberger observer [38] for the sys-
tem (9):
(32a)
(32b)
xi(t) = vi(t)
vi(t) =
nXi=1
aσ(t)
ij (xj(t)−xi(t))−(cid:26)ψiri(t)+θi ri(t), i∈ M
0, i∈ V\M
(32c)
ri(t) = xi(t) − yi(t), i∈ V\M
where yi(t) is the output of monitored agent i in system (9),
ri (t) is the attack-detection signal, ψi and θi are the observer
gains designed by the defender, x(t0) = x(t0), v(t0) = v(t0).
We define the tracking errors as ex (t) , x (t) − x (t) and
ev (t) , v (t) − v (t). A dynamics of tracking errors with
attack-detection signal is obtained from (32) and (9):
ex (t) = ev (t) ,
ev (t) = −(cid:0)Lσ(t)+Φ(cid:1) ex (t)−Θev (t)−a (t) ,
r (t) = Cex (t) ,
(33a)
(33b)
(33c)
where a (t) is defined in (12e), r (t) , y (t) − y(t), and
Φ , diag{ψ1, . . . , ψM, 0, . . . , 0} ∈ Rn×n,
Θ , diag{θ1, . . . , θM, 0, . . . , 0} ∈ Rn×n.
(34)
(35)
The strategy (13) in Theorem 1 implies that if the union dif-
ference graph is connected, i.e., the union difference graph has
only one component, using only one monitored agent's output
is sufficient to detect ZDA. The following result regarding
the stability of system (33) in the absent of attack will answer
the question: under what condition only one monitored agent's
output is sufficient for the observer (32) to asymptotically track
the system (9) in the absent of attack?
Theorem 2: Consider the following matrix:
satisfy (37) and (38), and the topology-switching signal σ(tk)
of the observer (32) and the system (9) are generated by
Algorithm 2.
7
As ,(cid:20)
0n×n
−Ls − Φ −Θ (cid:21) ,
1n×n
(36)
where Ls is the Laplacian matrix of a connected undirected
graph, the gain matrices Φ and Θ defined in (34) and (35)
satisfy
i)
ii)
0n×n 6= Φ ≥ 0,
0n×n 6= Θ ≥ 0.
(37)
(38)
As is Hurwitz for any M ≥ 1, if and only if Ls has distinct
eigenvalues.
iii)
Proof: See Appendix C.
Without knowledge of the misbehaving agents and
the attack-starting time, the observer (32) is able to
detect ZDA in system (9), i.e., r(t) ≡ 0M does not
holds, if and only if the set of monitored agents and
switching topologies satisfy (20).
In the absence of attacks, without constraint on
the magnitudes of observer gains, the observer (32)
asymptotically track the real system (9), i.e.,
the
system (33) is globally uniformly asymptotically
stable.
In the absence of attacks, the agents in system (9)
achieve the asymptotic second-order consensus.
B. Strategic Switching Topology For Detection
The observer (32) can also be modeled as a switched system
as well. Let us recall a technical lemma that can address
the problem: when the topology of observer (32) should
strategically switch such that it can asymptotically track the
real system (9) in the absence of attacks.
Lemma 2:
[39] Consider the switched systems:
x (t) = Aσ(t)x (t) .
under periodic switching, i.e., σ (t) = σ (t + τ ) ∈ S. If there
exists a convex combination of some matrix measure that
satisfies
LXm=1
νmµ (Am) < 0,
(39)
then the switched system system is uniformly asymptotically
stable for every positive τ .
The strategic topology-switching algorithm is described by
Algorithm 2.
Algorithm 2: Strategic Topology-Switching Algorithm
Input: Initial index k = 0, initial time tk = 0, an ordered
topology set S that satisfies (39) and
∃s ∈ S : Ls has distinct eigenvalues,
(40)
dwell times τs, s ∈ S, generated by (18) that
satisfy
Xs∈S
νsµP (As) < 0, νs =
τsPr∈S
.
τr
(41)
1 Run the multi-agent system (9) and the observer (32);
2 Switch topology of system (9) and its observer (32) at
time tk + τσ(tk): σ(tk) ← S (mod(k + 1,S) + 1);
3 Update topology-switching time: tk ← tk + τσ(tk);
4 Update index: k ← k + 1;
5 Go to Step 2.
Theorem 3: Consider the multi-agent system (9) and the
observer (32), where the observer gain matrices Φ and Θ
Proof: We first note that Line 3 and 5 of Algorithm 2
imply the topology-switching signal σ(t) is time-dependent.
Proof of i): Replacing Aσ(t) by Aσ(t) (defined in (36)) in
the steps to derive (25) -- (28) in the proof of Theorem 1, we
have
ηex (ρ) − ev (ρ) = 0n,
a (ρ) + Lrex (ρ) + ηex(ρ) = 0n,∀r ∈ S
a (ρ) + Lsex (ρ) + ηex(ρ) = 0n,∀s ∈ S
exj (ρ) = 0,∀j ∈ M.
(42)
(43)
(44)
(45)
Therefore, the rest of the proof of i) follows that of Theorem 1
straightforwardly.
Proof of ii): In the absence of attacks, the system matrix
of system (33) is Aσ(t) defined in (36). Considering (41), by
Lemma 2, and the conditions (37) and (38), As is Hurwitz.
Thus, there exists P > 0 such that µP (As) < 0. Through
setting on the switching times (dwell times) by (18), (39) can
be satisfied. By Lemma 2, the switched linear system (33) is
uniformly asymptotically stable, which is, in fact, equivalent
to globally uniformly asymptotically stable.
Proof of iii) follows Lemma 1 straightforwardly.
VI. SIMULATION
We consider a system with n = 4 agents. The initial position
and velocity conditions are chosen randomly as x(0) = v(0) =
[1, 2, 3, 4]⊤. The considered network topologies with their
coupling weights are given in Figure 2. The working situation
is illustrated by Figure 2 as:
• Agents 2 -- 4 are misbehaving agents, i.e., K = {2, 3, 4};
• only agent 1 is the monitored one, i.e., M = {1}.
Property ii) in Theorem 3 states that our strategic topology
switching has no constraint on the magnitudes of observer
gains in tracking real system. To demonstrate this, we set the
observer gains significantly small as
Φ = Θ = diag{10−6, 0, 0, 0}.
(46)
A. Undetectable Zero-Dynamics Attack
First, we consider the topology set S = {1, 2}, and set the
topology switching sequence as 1 → 2 → 1 → 2 → . . .,
periodically. It verifies from Figure 2 that the topology set
8
Figure 2. Working situation.
2 + 0.2 = T2
S = {1, 2} satisfies (17) and (41). By Lemma 1, we select
the dwell times τ1 = τ2 = T1
2 + 0.2.
It verifies from Topologies One and Two in Figure 2 that
their generated difference graph is disconnected. Thus, the set
S = {1, 2} does not satisfy (20) in Theorem 1. Therefore, the
attacker can easily design a ZDA such that the observer (32)
under Algorithm 2 fails to detect it.
2 + 0.2 = π
Let the attacker's goal be to make the system working
under Algorithm 2 unstable, without being detected. Following
the policy (4) and the attack-starting time selection scheme --
Algorithm 1, one of its attack strategies is designed as:
• η = 0.0161;
• modify the data of initial condition sent to observer (32)
• choose attack-starting time ρ = 1097.4;
• introduce ZDA signal to system at ρ:
as bx (0) = [1, 1, 3, 5]⊤ andbv (0) = [1, 1, 4, 4]⊤;
g (t) = 10−3(cid:2)0, 7.3eη(t−ρ), 7.3eη(t−ρ),−14.6eη(t−ρ)(cid:3)⊤
The trajectories of detection signal r(t) designed in (32),
and the velocities are shown in Figure 3, which illustrates
that the attacker's goal of making the system unstable without
being detected is achieved under the topology set S = {1, 2}.
.
B. Detectable Zero-Dynamics Attack
To detect
the designed stealthy attack, we now incor-
porate Topology Three in Figure 2 into topology set, i.e.,
S = {1, 2, 3}. We let the topology switching sequence to
be 1 → 2 → 3 → 1 → 2 → 3 → . . ., periodically. It
verifies that the topology set S = {1, 2, 3} satisfies (17)
and (41). Using Lemma 1, the dwell times are selected as
τ1 = τ2 = τ3 = π
2 + 0.2.
We note that in the working situation illustrated by Figure 2,
the existing results [12], [19] -- [22] for the multi-agent systems
under fixed topology fail to detect ZDA. This is mainly due
to the misbehaving-agents set K = 3; the connectivities of
Topologies One, Two and Three are as the same as 1; and the
10
8
6
4
2
0
(a)
Attack-Starting Time
= 1097.4
-2
0
10-9
1
500
1097.4
1500
Time
(b)
)
t
(
r
l
i
a
n
g
S
n
o
i
t
c
e
t
e
D
-
k
c
a
t
t
A
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
0
500
1000
Time
1500
Figure 3. States v(t): multi-agent system under attack is unstable; attack-
detection signal r(t): the attack keeps stealthy over time.
output set M = 1. All these violate the conditions on the
connectivity of the communication network, the size of the
misbehaving-agent set, and the size of the output set, which
are summarized in Table I.
It verifies from Figure 2 that the difference graph generated
by Topologies One and Three, or Topologies Two and Three
is connected. Thus, by property i) in Theorem 3, we conclude
that using only one monitored agent's output, the observer (32)
working under Algorithm 2 is able to detect the designed ZDA
under the topology set S = {1, 2, 3}.
The trajectory of the attack-detection signal r(t) is shown
in Figure 4. Remark 3 states that when the starting time of
ZDA is not the initial time, the proposed attack policy includes
two mixed stealthy attacks. Figure 4 illustrates that using only
agent 1's output, the mixed stealthy attacks are successfully
detected.
C. Observer in The Absence of Attacks
We now show the effectiveness of strategic topology switch-
ing for the observer (32) in estimating the states of the multi-
agent system (8), i.e., the multi-agent system (9) in the absence
of attacks. Input the initial conditions modified by attacker
to the observer (32), i.e., x (0) = bx (0) = [1, 1, 3, 5]⊤ and
v (0) = bv (0) = [1, 1, 4, 4]⊤. The trajectories of observer
Detect Mixed Stealthy Attacks
Zero-dynamics attack is detected.
Attack that modifies initial condition is detected.
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
Attack-starting time of zero-dynamics attack is
= 1097.4.
)
t
(
r
l
i
a
n
g
S
n
o
i
t
c
e
t
e
D
-
k
c
a
t
t
A
-0.4
0
200
400
600
800
1097.4
1400
Time
Figure 4. Attack-detection signal r(t): using only one monitored agent's
output, the designed ZDA is detected.
errors are shown in Figure 5, which shows that using the
significantly small observer gains in (46) and only agent 1's
output, Algorithm 2 works successfully for the observer (32) to
asymptotically track the real multi-agent system in the absence
of attacks.
VII. CONCLUSION
This two-part paper studies strategic topology switching for
the second-order multi-agent system under attack. In Part-I
paper [1], for the simplified control protocol that does need
velocity measurements, we propose a strategy on switching
times that addresses the problem: when the topology should
switch such that
the changes in system dynamics do not
undermine agent's ability of reaching the second consensus
in the absence of attacks. In Part-II paper, we propose a
strategy on switching topologies that addresses the problem:
what topology to switch to, such that the ZDA can be detected.
Based on the two strategies, a defense strategy is derived in
this Part-II paper, its merits are summarized as
• In achieving the second-order consensus in the absence
of attacks, the control protocol does not need the velocity
measurements, while the algorithm has no constraint on
the magnitudes of coupling weights.
• In tracking real systems in the absence of attack, it has
no constraint on the magnitudes of observer gains of
the proposed Luenberger observer and the number of
monitored agents.
• In detecting ZDA, the algorithm has no constraint on the
size of misbehaving-agent set, while the algorithm allows
the defender to have no knowledge of the attack-starting
time.
The theoretical results obtained in this two-part paper imply
several rather interesting results:
• for the size of switching topology set, there exists a
fundamental tradeoff between the topology connection
cost and the convergence speed to consensus;
• for the dwell time of switching topologies, there exist a
tradeoff between the switching cost and the duration of
9
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
1
0.5
0
)
t
(
1
x
e
)
t
(
3
x
e
0
20
40
Time
60
-0.5
0
20
40
Time
60
)
t
(
1
v
e
)
t
(
3
v
e
1
0
-1
-2
0
2
1
0
-1
-2
0
20
40
Time
60
20
40
Time
60
)
t
(
2
x
e
2
1
0
-1
-2
0
)
t
(
4
x
e
1
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
0
)
t
(
2
v
e
)
t
(
4
v
e
4
2
0
-2
0
2
0
-2
-4
0
20
40
Time
60
20
40
Time
60
20
40
Time
60
20
40
Time
60
Figure 5.
Algorithm 2 are globally uniformly asymptotically stable.
In the absence of attacks, trajectories of observer errors under
attacks going undetected, and the convergence speed to
consensus.
Analyzing the tradeoff problems in the lights of game theory
and multi-objective optimization constitutes a part of our
future research.
APPENDIX A
PROOF OF COROLLARY 1
From the attack signal (3), we know that g(t) = 0¯o for t ∈
[0, ρ). Thus, before the attack-starting time ρ, the system (2)
is described by
z (t) = Az (t) ,
y (t) = C z (t) , t ∈ [0, ρ)
(47a)
(47b)
from which the first item in (7) is obtained by integration.
It is straightforward to derive from (47) and (1) that
z (t) − z (t) = A (z (t) − z (t))
y (t) − y (t) = C (z (t) − z (t)) , t ∈ [0, ρ).
(48a)
(48b)
10
We note that (6) implies y (t) − y (t) = C (z (t) − z (t)) =
0 ¯m for all t ∈ [0, ρ), which means z(0) − z(0) 6= 0¯n is
unobservable under the dynamics (48). Thus, z (0) − z (0) ∈
ker (O), i.e., the policy (4a) holds.
Considering the fact that the system (2) under the attack sig-
nal (3) is continuous w.r.t. time, which implies z(ρ−) = z(ρ).
Therefore, z(ρ) − z(ρ) = eAρ(z(0) − z(0)) can be obtained
from (48). The results (6) and (7) over the time interval [ρ,∞)
are generated through launching the classical ZDA signal
g(t) = geη(t−ρ), t ≥ ρ, the detailed proof can be found in [40],
it is omitted here.
APPENDIX B
PROOF OF PROPOSITION 1
Under the result of time-dependent topology switching (14),
from (11) and (13), we obtain a dynamics:
z (t) = Aσ(t) z (t) ,
y (t) = C z (t) , t ∈ [0, ρ)
(49a)
(49b)
where z and y (t) are given in (15a) and (15b), respectively.
It follows from the dynamics (49) that the solution (15d) is
obtained by integration.
Without loss of generality, we let [0, ρ] = [0, t1)∪ [t1, t2)∪
. . . ∪ [tk, ρ) with ρ ≤ tk+1, k ∈ N0. (49) implies the stealthy
property: y (t) = y (t) for all t ∈ [0, ρ], is equivalent to
y (t) = 0M, for all t ∈ [0, t1) ∪ . . . ∪ [tk, ρ).
(50)
for any t ∈ [t0, t+
z (0) ∈ Nk
1 with Nk
We note that (50) means that the system (49) is unobservable
k ), k ∈ N0, which is further equivalent to
1 recursively computed by (15g) and (15h),
via considering Theorem 1 of [41]. The condition in Lines 1
and 2 of Algorithm 1 means that once the attacker finds (50)
does not hold at tk, he must immediately launches ZDA signal
to keep stealthy, i.e., ρ = tk; otherwise, y (tk) 6= 0M. If (50)
holds, the attacker can launch the ZDA at future time, i.e.,
ρ > tk.
The set defined in (16) and the condition "max
t∈Sk {t} = tk+1"
contained in Line 6 of Algorithm 1 implies that the selection
of ρ also dependents on whether ZDA policy (4b) is feasible
at ρ, so that its stealthy property can continue to hold. Line
7 of Algorithm 1 implies that if it is feasible at the incoming
switching time tk+1, the attacker can launch the ZDA signal
at current activated time interval [tk, tk+1) or next interval
[tk+1, tk+2). Otherwise, the attacker must launch the ZDA at
a time in the current time interval, i.e., ρ ∈ Sk.
APPENDIX C
PROOF OF THEOREM 2
We let σ(t) = s ∈ S for t ∈ [tk, tk+1), k ∈ N0. Since Ls is
the Laplacian matrix of a connected graph and Φ ≥ 0, Ls + Φ
is positive definite. We define the following positive function
for the system (33) with a(t) ≡ 0n:
Vs(e (t)) =
e⊤
x (t)(Ls +Φ) ex(t)+e⊤
v (t) ev(t) .
1
2
Its time derivative is obtained as
e (t) = Ase (t) with e (t) ,(cid:2) e⊤
where the inequality is obtained by considering Θ ≥ 0.
Since the dynamics (33) with a(t) ≡ 0n is equivalent to
, we conclude
from (51) that none of the eigenvalues of Ar has positive real
part.
We next prove Ar has neither zero nor pure imagine
v (t)(cid:3)⊤
x (t)
e⊤
C D (cid:21)(cid:19) =
eigenvalues.
1V×V
det (As − λ12n×2n)
Using the well-known formula det(cid:18)(cid:20) A B
det (A) det(cid:0)D − CA−1B(cid:1), from (36) we have:
−Ls − Φ −Θ − λ1n×n (cid:21)(cid:19)
= det(cid:18)(cid:20) −λ1n×n
λ (cid:19)
= det (−λ1n×n) det(cid:18)−Θ − λ1n×n − Ls + Φ
= det(cid:0)λ21n×n + Θλ + Ls + Φ(cid:1) .
φm ,pψm + λθmem,
Let us define:
with em ∈ Rn being the mth vector of the canonical basis. It
verifies from (53), (34) and (35) that
(52)
(53)
(54)
(55)
with
MXp=m
φpφ⊤
p ,
P(m) , λbΘ(m) +bΦ(m) =
bΘ(m) , diag(cid:8)0, . . . , 0, θm, . . . , θM, 0, . . . 0(cid:9) ,
bΦ(m) , diag(cid:8)0, . . . , 0, ψm, . . . , ψM, 0, . . . 0(cid:9) .
det(cid:0)A + χuw⊤(cid:1) = det (A)(cid:0)1 + χw⊤A−1u(cid:1) ,
Let us recall the well-known formula:
where A is invertible, and w and u are vectors. By (55), we
obtain from (52) and (53) -- (55) that
det (As − λ12n×2n)
=
MYm=1(cid:16)1 + φ⊤
m(Hs + P (m + 1))−1φm(cid:17) det (Hs) ,
where
Hs , λ21n×n + Ls.
(56)
(57)
Since Lr
qi2
is a symmetric matrix,
there exists an or-
. . .
qiV (cid:3)⊤
thogonal matrix Q , [q1; . . . ; qn] ∈ RV×V with qi ,
(cid:2) qi1
Q⊤HsQ = diag(cid:8)λ2 + λ1(Ls), . . . , λ2 + λn(Ls)(cid:9) .
∈ RV, i ∈ V, such that
Considering (38) and (35), without loss of generality, we let
Q⊤ = Q−1,
(58b)
(58a)
Vs (e (t)) = −e⊤
v (t) Θev (t) ≤ 0,
(51)
θM 6= 0.
(59)
It follows from (58) and (53) that
M(Hs)−1φM =
φ⊤
det (Hs) =
iM
λi (Ls) + λ2
nXi=1 (cid:0)ψM + λθM(cid:1) q2
nYi=1(cid:0)λi (Ls) + λ2(cid:1),
,
(60)
(61)
from which, we arrive at
=
M(Hs)−1φM(cid:17) det (Hs)
(cid:16)1 + φ⊤
nYi=1(cid:0)λi (Ls) + λ2(cid:1)
nYj6=i(cid:0)λj (Ls) + λ2(cid:1)(cid:0)ψM + λθM(cid:1) q2
nXi=1
M−1Ym=1 (cid:16)1 + φ⊤
m(Hs + P (m + 1))−1φm(cid:17).
Q (λ) ,
iM.
+
Let us define:
Substituting (62) and (63) into (56) yields
det (As − λ12n×2n)
= Q (λ) nYi=1(cid:0)λi (Ls) + λ2(cid:1)
nXi=1
+
iM .
nYj6=i(cid:0)λj (Ls) + λ2(cid:1)(cid:0)ψM+λθM(cid:1) q2
In the followings, we consider two different cases.
(62)
(63)
(64)
A. Case One: Ar has zero eigenvalue
In this case, i.e., λ = 0, it follows from (53), (54), (57), (63)
and the condition θm ≥ 0 and ψm ≥ 0, ∀m ∈
that Q (λ) > 0. Thus, we conclude from (64) that
M,
det (As − λ12n×2n)λ=0 > 0. Therefore, Ar does not have
any zero eigenvalue. A contradiction occurs.
B. Case Two: Ar has pure imagine eigenvalue
This case means λ = i with 0 6= ∈ R. It verifies
from (53), (54) and (57) that
1 + φ⊤
m(Hs + P (m + 1))−1φm 6= 0,∀m ∈ M
thus, Q (λ)λ=i
det (As − i12n×2n) = 0 is equivalent to
6= 0. Then, we conclude from (64) that
nYi=1(cid:0)λi(Ls)−2(cid:1)+
nXi=1
nYj6=i(cid:0)λj (Ls)−2(cid:1) ψMq2
iM
We note that (65) implies
+ i
nYj6=i(cid:0)λj (Ls) − 2(cid:1)θMq2
nXi=1
nYj6=i(cid:0)λj (Ls) − 2(cid:1)θMq2
nXi=1
iM = 0.
iM = 0,
(65)
(66)
which, in conjunction with (59), results in
11
which further implies that
nYj6=i(cid:0)λj (Ls) − 2(cid:1)q2
nXi=1
nYj6=i(cid:0)λj(Ls)−2(cid:1) ψMq2
nXi=1
iM = 0,
iM = 0.
Thus, from (65) we have
that
nQi=1(cid:0)λi(Ls) − 2(cid:1) = 0, which means
∃i ∈ {1, . . . , n} : 2 = λi (Ls).
(67)
it
However,
nPi=1
nQj6=i(cid:0)λj (Ls) − 2(cid:1)θMq2
is straightforward to verify from (67) that
iM 6= 0 if and only if Ls has
thus a
distinct eigenvalues. Consequently, (65) does hold,
contradiction occurs.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors thank Dr. Sadegh Bolouki, Dr. Hamidreza
Jafarnejadsani, and Dr. Pan Zhao for valuable discussions.
REFERENCES
[1] Y. Mao,
switching
https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.11183, 2017.
security-part
E. Akyol,
and
for
Z.
Zhang,
"Strategic
i: Consensus & switching
topology
times,"
[2] W. Yu, G. Chen, and M. Cao, "Some necessary and sufficient con-
ditions for second-order consensus in multi-agent dynamical systems,"
Automatica, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 1089 -- 1095, 2010.
[3] J. Qin, C. Yu, and B. D. Anderson, "On leaderless and leader-following
consensus for interacting clusters of second-order multi-agent systems,"
Automatica, vol. 74, pp. 214 -- 221, 2016.
[4] J. Mei, W. Ren, and J. Chen, "Distributed consensus of second-order
multi-agent systems with heterogeneous unknown inertias and control
gains under a directed graph," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,
vol. 61, no. 8, pp. 2019 -- 2034, 2016.
[5] X. Ai, S. Song, and K. You, "Second-order consensus of multi-agent
systems under limited interaction ranges," Automatica, vol. 68, pp. 329 --
333, 2016.
[6] W. Ren and E. Atkins, "Distributed multi-vehicle coordinated control
via local information exchange," International Journal of Robust and
Nonlinear Control, vol. 17, no. 10-11, pp. 1002 -- 1033, 2007.
[7] N. Huang, Z. Duan, and G. R. Chen, "Some necessary and sufficient
conditions for consensus of second-order multi-agent systems with
sampled position data," Automatica, vol. 63, pp. 148 -- 155, 2016.
[8] A. Abdessameud and A. Tayebi, "On consensus algorithms for double-
integrator dynamics without velocity measurements and with input
constraints," Systems & Control Letters, vol. 59, no. 12, pp. 812 -- 821,
2010.
[9] J. Nazario, "Politically motivated denial of service attacks," The Virtual
Battlefield: Perspectives on Cyber Warfare, pp. 163 -- 181, 2009.
[10] J. Slay and M. Miller, "Lessons learned from the maroochy water
breach," in International Conference on Critical Infrastructure Protec-
tion. Springer, 2007, pp. 73 -- 82.
[11] J. Meserve, "Sources: Staged cyber attack reveals vulnerability
in power grid," http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/26/power.at.risk/ , ac-
cessed 2007-09-26.
[12] F. Pasqualetti, F. D orfler, and F. Bullo, "Attack detection and identi-
fication in cyber-physical systems," IEEE Transactions on Automatic
Control, vol. 58, no. 11, pp. 2715 -- 2729, 2013.
[13] M. Naghnaeian, N. Hirzallah, and P. G. Voulgaris, "Dural rate control
for security in cyber-physical systems," in Decision and Control (CDC),
2015 IEEE 54th Annual Conference on.
IEEE, 2015, pp. 1415 -- 1420.
[14] H. Jafarnejadsani, H. Lee, N. Hovakimyan, and P. Voulgaris, "A multirate
adaptive control for mimo systems with application to cyber-physical
security," in 2018 IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC).
IEEE, 2018, pp. 6620 -- 6625.
12
[15] N. H. Hirzallah and P. G. Voulgaris, "On the computation of worst
attacks: a lp framework," in 2018 Annual American Control Conference
(ACC).
IEEE, 2018, pp. 4527 -- 4532.
[40] T. Geerts, "Invariant subspaces and invertibility properties for singular
systems: The general case," Linear algebra and its applications, vol.
183, pp. 61 -- 88, 1993.
[16] J. Kim and L. Tong, "On topology attack of a smart grid: Undetectable
attacks and countermeasures," IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in
Communications, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 1294 -- 1305, 2013.
[41] A. Tanwani, H. Shim, and D. Liberzon, "Observability for switched
linear systems: characterization and observer design," IEEE Transactions
on Automatic Control, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 891 -- 904, 2013.
[17] G. Park, H. Shim, C. Lee, Y. Eun, and K. H. Johansson, "When
adversary encounters uncertain cyber-physical systems: Robust zero-
dynamics attack with disclosure resources," in Decision and Control
IEEE, 2016, pp. 5085 -- 5090.
(CDC), 2016 IEEE 55th Conference on.
[18] J. Kim, G. Park, H. Shim, and Y. Eun, "Zero-stealthy attack for sampled-
data control systems: The case of faster actuation than sensing," in
Decision and Control (CDC), 2016 IEEE 55th Conference on.
IEEE,
2016, pp. 5956 -- 5961.
[19] S. Sundaram and C. N. Hadjicostis, "Distributed function calculation
via linear iterative strategies in the presence of malicious agents," IEEE
Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 56, no. 7, pp. 1495 -- 1508, 2011.
[20] F. Pasqualetti, A. Bicchi, and F. Bullo, "Consensus computation in
unreliable networks: A system theoretic approach," IEEE Transactions
on Automatic Control, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 90 -- 104, 2012.
[21] S. Weerakkody, X. Liu, and B. Sinopoli, "Robust structural analysis and
design of distributed control systems to prevent zero dynamics attacks,"
in Decision and Control (CDC), 2017 IEEE 56th Annual Conference
on.
IEEE, 2017, pp. 1356 -- 1361.
[22] J. Chen, J. Wei, W. Chen, H. Sandberg, K. H. Johansson, and J. Chen,
"Protecting positive and second-order systems against undetectable
attacks," IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 8373 -- 8378, 2017.
[23] H. Jafarnejadsani, H. Lee, N. Hovakimyan, and P. Voulgaris, "Dual-
rate L1 adaptive controller for cyber-physical sampled-data systems,"
in Decision and Control (CDC), 2017 IEEE 56th Annual Conference
on.
IEEE, 2017, pp. 6259 -- 6264.
[24] J. Back, J. Kim, C. Lee, G. Park, and H. Shim, "Enhancement of security
against zero dynamics attack via generalized hold," in Decision and
Control (CDC), 2017 IEEE 56th Annual Conference on.
IEEE, 2017,
pp. 1350 -- 1355.
[25] A. Teixeira, I. Shames, H. Sandberg, and K. H. Johansson, "Revealing
stealthy attacks in control systems," in Communication, Control, and
Computing (Allerton), 2012 50th Annual Allerton Conference on.
IEEE,
2012, pp. 1806 -- 1813.
[26] -- -- , "A secure control framework for resource-limited adversaries,"
Automatica, vol. 51, pp. 135 -- 148, 2015.
[27] A. Teixeira, D. P´erez, H. Sandberg, and K. H. Johansson, "Attack models
and scenarios for networked control systems," in Proceedings of the
1st international conference on High Confidence Networked Systems.
ACM, 2012, pp. 55 -- 64.
[28] Z. Feng, G. Hu, and G. Wen, "Distributed consensus tracking for multi-
agent systems under two types of attacks," International Journal of
Robust and Nonlinear Control, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 896 -- 918, 2016.
[29] J. Kim and L. Tong, "On topology attack of a smart grid: Undetectable
attacks and countermeasures," IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in
Communications, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 1294 -- 1305, 2013.
[30] E. N. Ciftcioglu, S. Pal, K. S. Chan, D. H. Cansever, A. Swami, A. K.
Singh, and P. Basu, "Topology design games and dynamics in adversarial
environments," IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications,
vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 628 -- 642, 2017.
[31] V. Amelkin and A. K. Singh, "Disabling external influence in social
networks via edge recommendation," arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.08139,
2017.
[32] Y. Mao and E. Akyol, "Detectability of cooperative zero-dynamics
attack," in 2018 56th Annual Allerton Conference on Communication,
Control, and Computing (Allerton), 2018, pp. 227 -- 234.
[33] -- -- , "Synchronization of coupled harmonic oscillators by time-
dependent topology switching," IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 51, no. 23,
pp. 402 -- 407, 2018.
[34] H. Hartenstein, K. P. Laberteaux et al., "A tutorial survey on vehicular
ad hoc networks," IEEE Communications magazine, vol. 46, no. 6, p.
164, 2008.
[35] S. K. Mazumder, Wireless networking based control. Springer, 2011.
[36] M. Newman, Networks: an introduction. Oxford university press, 2010.
[37] A. E. Brouwer and W. H. Haemers, Spectra of graphs. Springer Science
& Business Media, 2011.
[38] D. G. Luenberger, "Observing the state of a linear system," IEEE
Transactions on Military Electronics, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 74 -- 80, 1964.
[39] M. Porfiri, D. G. Roberson, and D. J. Stilwell, "Fast switching analysis
of linear switched systems using exponential splitting," SIAM Journal
on Control and Optimization, vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 2582 -- 2597, 2008.
|
1910.05424 | 1 | 1910 | 2019-10-11T21:46:09 | Anticipating Illegal Maritime Activities from Anomalous Multiscale Fleet Behaviors | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.SI"
] | Illegal fishing is prevalent throughout the world and heavily impacts the health of our oceans, the sustainability and profitability of fisheries, and even acts to destabilize geopolitical relations. To achieve the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goal of "Life Below Water", our ability to detect and predict illegal fishing must improve. Recent advances have been made through the use of vessel location data, however, most analyses to date focus on anomalous spatial behaviors of vessels one at a time. To improve predictions, we develop a method inspired by complex systems theory to monitor the anomalous multi-scale behavior of whole fleets as they respond to nearby illegal activities. Specifically, we analyze changes in the multiscale geospatial organization of fishing fleets operating on the Patagonia Shelf, an important fishing region with chronic exposure to illegal fishing. We show that legally operating (and visible) vessels respond anomalously to nearby illegal activities (by vessels that are difficult to detect). Indeed, precursor behaviors are identified, suggesting a path towards pre-empting illegal activities. This approach offers a promising step towards a global system for detecting, predicting and deterring illegal activities at sea in near real-time. Doing so will be a big step forward to achieving sustainable life underwater. | cs.MA | cs | Anticipating Illegal Maritime Activities from Anomalous
Multiscale Fleet Behaviors
James R. Watson and A. John Woodill†
Oregon State University
October 15, 2019
Abstract
Illegal fishing is prevalent throughout the world and heavily impacts the health of our oceans,
the sustainability and profitability of fisheries, and even acts to destabilize geopolitical relations.
To achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal of "Life Below Water", our ability to
detect and predict illegal fishing must improve. Recent advances have been made through the use of
vessel location data, however, most analyses to date focus on anomalous spatial behaviors of vessels
one at a time. To improve predictions, we develop a method inspired by complex systems theory
to monitor the anomalous multi-scale behavior of whole fleets as they respond to nearby illegal
activities. Specifically, we analyze changes in the multiscale geospatial organization of fishing fleets
operating on the Patagonia Shelf, an important fishing region with chronic exposure to illegal fishing.
We show that legally operating (and visible) vessels respond anomalously to nearby illegal activities
(by vessels that are difficult to detect).
Indeed, precursor behaviors are identified, suggesting a
path towards pre-empting illegal activities. This approach offers a promising step towards a global
system for detecting, predicting and deterring illegal activities at sea in near real-time. Doing so
will be a big step forward to achieving sustainable life underwater.
Keywords: sustainable fisheries; illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing; geospatial intelli-
gence; complex systems; information theory; prediction.
9
1
0
2
t
c
O
1
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
4
2
4
5
0
.
0
1
9
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
†James R. Watson: College of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University;
jrwat-
[email protected]. A. John Woodill: College of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State
University; [email protected]. This work was supported by NASA under the award "Securing Sustainable
Seas: Near real-time monitoring and predicting of global fishing fleet behavior" (Award No. 80NSSC19K0203).
INTRODUCTION
The United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14 is to conserve and sustainably use the
ocean's resources for sustainable growth (United Nations 2016). This is a vital goal to achieve as
many millions of people rely on the oceans for food and income, and unsustainable use of the seas will
lead to diminished food and income security around the world (Béné et al. 2016). The SDG Target
14.4 is to have the global capacity to effectively regulate harvesting and end overfishing by 2020. In
doing so, overharvested fish stocks will then be on a path towards recovery. Sustainable Development
Goal 14 and its specific target can only be achieved if illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU)
fishing is dealt with (Pramod et al. 2014). This means being able to identify in (near) real-time
IUU events around the world, and even predict their occurrences, all so that enforcement and
intervention can occur more frequently and with more efficacy.
Illegal fishing undermines SDG
14 by creating aggregate fishing effort above maximum sustainable levels and potentially creates
geopolitical tension and possibly armed conflict, which have detrimental consequences for regional
development (Österblom and Bodin 2012). Since illegal fishers do not report their catch, their
fishing activities reduce the accuracy of official fish catch and stock estimates and impedes the
ability of regulatory bodies to set catch limits, manage fish populations, and evaluate SDG progress
(Worm and Branch 2012). Further, since their catch is not geographically referenced, their fishing
activities undermine our global ability to monitor marine protection and the health of the oceans
more broadly (Lubchenco and Grorud-Colvert 2015).
Equally important to IUU's socio-economic impacts are its effects on marine environments: IUU
fishing often causes grave environmental damage, especially when vessels use prohibited gear, such
as driftnets, that catch non-target species (like sharks, turtles or dolphins) or physically damages
or destroys reefs, seamounts, and other vulnerable marine ecosystems. In concert, both the socio-
economic and environmental impacts of IUU has a disproportionate effect on smaller-scale fishers
in developing countries, by stealing fish from near-shore waters and undermining the ecosystem on
which the fish depend (Pauly 2018). Given that illegal fishing is valued at $36.4 billion annually and
represents 20% of the global seafood catch (Sumaila et al. 2006; Stimson Center 2018), there is a
pressing need to be able to detect illegal fishing in a timely manner and at spatial and temporal scales
relevant to enforcement. In doing so, diminished IUU activity will lead to improved geopolitical
2
relations in areas where IUU occurs, as well as increases in legal catch and profits (estimated around
14% and 12% respectively; Cabral et al. 2018)
The biggest challenge to detecting and predicting IUU activity has to do with IUU vessels going
dark, that is most "normal" vessels operating legally transmit their location to other vessels via
the Automatic Information System (AIS; Kroodsma et al. 2018). This is done primarily for vessel
collision avoidance and for search and rescue efforts. The trouble is that when certain vessels engage
in illegal activities, they typically turn off their AIS transponders or even falsify their location (this
is known as "spoofing"; de Souza et al. 2016). Looking across the globe there is a "global dark
fleet" operating in and amongst the world's visible (legally operating) fleets (Sumaila et al. 2006)
committing all sorts of bad behaviors, starting with illegal fishing but extending to narcotics, human
and arms trafficking (Tickler et al. 2018). Most current approaches to detecting IUU fishing focuses
on identifying spoofing in AIS data (e.g. Ford et al. 2018), which has led to several recent advances
in our understanding of the global spatial distribution and possible scale of IUU fishing (Miller
et al. 2018). However, these spoofing analyses are almost always retroactive, revealing anomalous
behavior after they have occurred. To make predictions about where IUU activity might happen in
the future, at spatial and temporal scales relevant to enforcement, new approaches are required.
A major limit to current spoofing detection approaches is that they only analyze the anomalous
spatial behavior of vessels one at a time (e.g. Ford et al. 2018; Miller et al. 2018; Petrossian 2018).
In contrast, studies of anomalous behaviors in complex systems show that early detection (and
prediction) can be achieved through the analysis of multiscale patterns, that is a spatial anomaly
(for example) that starts with one actor, but then that spreads to others (Motter 2004). Identifying
contagious behaviors has aided the discovery of large and abrupt changes in financial markets (Gai
and Kapadia 2010), ecosystems (Levin 1998) and our bodies (e.g. the onset of an epileptic fit say;
Litt and Echauz 2002). In the context of IUU fishing, the key conceptual advance is to acknowledge
that any one vessel is embedded in a complex spatial system comprised of all the other vessels in
its proximity. The expectation is that the spatial behavior of a given vessel is determined by their
major objectives (e.g. moving from A to B, finding and catching fishing, etc.), but also by the
proximity and behavior of nearby vessels. If a nearby vessel goes dark and commits an illegal act,
then those nearby legally operating (and visible) vessels may respond anomalously, for instance,
they may move in such a way as to avoid any trouble.
3
For early detection and prediction of IUU fishing, this means not just looking for anomalous
behaviors of any one vessel (i.e. our current abilities to detect spoofing), but in analyzing the
anomalous behavior of whole fleets. A useful analogy is to visible matter in the universe, whose
movement through space is in large part determined by unobserved dark matter. On the seas, the
movement of visible fleets is determined in part by the actions of unobserved dark fleets. Thus, an
approach based on the analysis of anomalous multiscale spatial patterns of visible fleets, as they react
to nearby but unobserved vessels committing illegal activities, could result in an entirely new way
to detect and even predict IUU fishing. Our goal here was to develop such an approach, analyzing
AIS data using new multiscale anomaly detection algorithms inspired by similar approaches applied
to complex systems. We applied our algorithms to vessel location data for the Patagonia shelf, a
highly productive fisheries region, and reveal anomalous precursor signals for several IUU events in
the area. These results offer a promising new path to pre-empting illegal behaviors at sea, with the
ultimate goal of diminishing IUU activity worldwide, and achieving the Sustainable Development
Goal 14: Life Under Water.
METHODS
In order to develop new algorithms for detecting and predicting IUU fishing, we synthesized AIS
data for a specific region of the world -- the Patagonia Shelf (see Figure 1 for a map of the region).
The Patagonia shelf is one of the world's most productive areas for fisheries, and fleets from all
over the world come to harvest many species (Bisbal 1995). Major fisheries include the illex squid,
southern blue whiting and blue grenadier / hoki fisheries, and fleets that dominate the region include
those from Argentina, the UK (through the Falklands Islands), China, and Spain. Indeed, in the
last decade or so, the presence of Chinese fishing fleets has increased substantially (in line with their
Ocean Silk Road initiative; Sutter 2012). Along with increased fishing in general, the Patagonia
Shelf has also experienced increased incidences of illegal fishing, in particular by Chinese fishing
vessels. There have been a number of high-profile incidences where Chinese fishing vessels have
been found to be fishing illegally, for example by the Argentine navy, and then either chased and
even destroyed. To develop new abilities to detect and predict IUU activities, the Patagonia shelf
and these few high profile IUU events serve as important case-studies with which to develop the
4
new methodology.
Fishing Vessel Location Data
Global AIS data for the period 2016-2018 were obtained through Global Fishing Watch1. AIS data
were originally designed for collision avoidance at sea; vessels equipped with an AIS transponder
transmit their position and vessel identification data, such as maritime mobile security information
number (MMSI), call sign, ship type, speed and course over ground, and other information to ships
nearby carrying similar transponders as well as to receiving ground stations and low-orbit satellites.
Signal transmission frequencies vary with speeds between a few seconds and a few minutes. These
high-resolution tracking data are synthesized by ORBCOMM, which were then obtained through
Global Fishing Watch. For this analysis of IUU fishing, we subsetted these global data spatially to
the Patagonia Shelf (Fig. 1) and temporally to specific historic IUU events in this area (see Table
1 for a description of these events).
The AIS data required significant "cleaning" for it to be useable. Specifically, a significant
fraction (12-20%) of vessels were found to spoof their locations. That is specific vessel locations were
observed to "jump" unrealistic distances, indicating anomalous AIS reporting. Another observed
issue was multiple (non)unique identifiers (MMSI) reporting across the region (i.e. the impossible
case where the same vessel is in two locations at the same time). To remove these erroneous data
points, vessels with speeds greater than 32 kilometers per hour were removed. This threshold was
calculated as the 99th percentile of the vessel speed distribution calculated over the whole region for
the whole year of 2016. Vessels reporting locations on land, at a port or zero kilometers from shore
were also removed from the data, as well as vessels that did not travel more than one kilometer per
day. The remaining data were then interpolated to an hourly time-step to remove the intermittent
reporting times by vessels. Although these cleaning steps removed a sizable fraction of the original
data, for each IUU case-study on the Patagonia Shelf, there remained a usable number of vessel
locations (see Table 1, last column).
1https://globalfishingwatch.org/datasets-and-code/
5
Multiscale Fleet Spatial Behavior
To quantify changes in the spatial behavior of entire fleets, we first calculated the "relationship"
between vessels as simply their distances from one another. More specifically, for a given time (i.e.
an hourly time-point in the processed data), for each vessel, the Haversine distance was calculated
to all other vessels in the area (Fig. 1A; for clarity lines identify the nearest three vessels). Overall
vessels and for a given time, this results in an NxN Haversine distance matrix, where N is the
number of vessels in the region. From this distance matrix, a probability density function (PDF) is
computed using kernel density estimation (e.g. see Fig. 1B). Overall time periods, this leads to a
set of between vessel distance distributions, each summarizing the multiscale spatial organization of
fishing vessels on the Patagonia shelf at a given time. These distributions hold an incredible amount
of information that we utilize to develop spatial anomaly indexes indicative of IUU activity.
To monitor the spatial organization of fleets over time, as they potentially respond to nearby
illegal activities, we imagine a situation in which a real-time analysis is required. As new AIS
data is made available, there is a need to compute a spatial anomaly index for that time period.
To allow for this, we perform a retrospective analysis wherein for a given leading time period, it's
between vessel distance distribution is compared with those from a specific lagged time period. This
lagged time period is dependent on two factors: 1) the inherent memory of the system and 2) the
typical timescale of IUU activities. The former is important because marine social-ecological systems
are inherently non-stationary. As a consequence, an "anomaly" should be relative to a recent time
period. The latter is important because if too short a timescale is chosen then a relatively prolonged
period of IUU activity will be diagnosed as "normal". For the 2016 and 2018b IUU events, this
lagged time period was chosen as 8 days and for the 2018a event, 3 days. These choices were made
by iteratively exploring the results of our analysis and choosing time periods that best captured the
non-stationarity of the system, as well as the timescales of each IUU event.
Once the lagged timescale was chosen, each between vessel distance distribution was compared
with those from the respective lagged time period. This comparison was made using the Kolmogorov-
Smirnov (KS) statistic, which measures the distance between two PDFs. The result is a set of
(lagged) KS statistics for each time period. To summarize this lagged information, we computed
various moments over these sets. In particular, we computed the mean lagged KS statistic per time
6
period, as well as the kurtosis. These each provide information about how anomalous a given time
period is based upon the geospatial organization of vessels in the region.
The last step is to compute the significance of these anomaly indexes. We do so by repeating
the calculation of the two anomaly indexes (the mean and kurtosis of the lagged KS statistic sets)
but for three null periods. These null periods are those immediately after the 2016 and 2018 IUU
events. They were chosen because they are the least likely to have IUU events: the challenge here
is to precisely identify times when no illegal activities were conducted, which is difficult because
reporting of illegal activities is not accurate, and we could not simply choose time periods at random.
As a consequence, we chose the periods after the 2016 and 2018 events because after the preceding
naval/coast-guard intervention, any further illegal activity would be highly unlikely during these
periods. With these null periods, significant anomalies were then computed as those greater than
the 99th percentile of the null distributions.
RESULTS
Between vessel distance distributions change over time (see Fig. 2A for the IUU event that occurred
in March 2016, where the Lu Yan Yuan Yu 010 was caught fishing illegally and ultimately scuttled
by the Argentine coast guard, and 2B and C for results for the two other case studies in 2018).
Between vessel distance distributions generally have a mode at short spatial distances (<50 km;
this is identified by the red bands across time in each panel in Figure 2). This is the spatial scale of
local fleets, as can be seen on the map in Fig. 1A, which aggregate around specific fishing hotspots
(Sabatini et al. 2012). In addition to this local structure, there is spatial structure in the tails of
these between vessel distance distributions, and changes through time can be observed, potentially
revealing anomalous spatial behaviors in legally operating vessels (those that transmit AIS data) as
they respond to nearby vessels committing illegal fishing (Fig. 2; red lines denote the approximate
time of IUU activity). However, from visual inspection of these between vessel distributions through
time, it is not immediately clear if there is a spatial signature relating to IUU activity.
To quantitatively and objectively find a signal of IUU activity we compared every between vessel
distance distribution with those from a lagged set, using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic. The
lagged KS statistics through time, for each IUU case-study, can be seen in Figure 3. In each we
7
see a strong signal of the IUU events: the KS statistic rises around the time of each event (Fig. 3,
black vertical lines), identifying that as these events occur, the spatial organization of vessels in the
region becomes quite distinct from previous times. Notably, there is nuance to these changes, with
the 2016 event producing a pronounced and relatively long period of elevated KS statistic values,
relative to the two 2018 events. Interestingly, this rise in the KS statistic in 2016 occurs after the
IUU event, whereas there appears to be an elevated signal proceeding the events in 2018, especially
2018a (Fig. 3B).
For every time period, the lagged KS statistic sets were summarized using the mean and kurtosis
moments. These define two spatial anomaly indexes (Figures 4 and 5 respectively). The mean
anomaly index identifies each IUU event quite clearly (Fig. 4): for each, there are elevated levels of
this anomaly index during the period of illegal activity. Interestingly, for the 2016 event the mean
anomaly index peaks after the reported date of 2016 IUU event; for the 2018a event, the anomaly
peaks approximately at the time of the IUU event, and for the 2018b event, the anomaly peak
occurs before the event. This suggests that anomalous spatial behavior can precede the ultimate
intervention of the illegal activity.
This is mirrored by the second spatial anomaly index: the kurtosis of the lagged KS statistic sets
(Fig. 5). This kurtosis anomaly index shows an even clearer precursor signal for all case-studies.
Furthermore, for the 2018b event this index identifies anomalous geospatial patterns in times well
before the period IUU activity. This is evidence to suggest that while the other precursor signals
might be indicative of the impact of a coast-guard intervention on the geospatial organization of
legally operating and visible fleets, these early-warning signals seen in 2018b may be indicative of
the response of the "good" vessels to that actual IUU activity committed by dark fleets.
DISCUSSION
To detect IUU fishing quickly, and even make predictions of where it is likely to happen, a new data
analytic approach was developed based on concepts from complex systems, specifically multiscale
anomaly detection. The approach uses a novel anomaly detection algorithm to identify spatial
behaviors exhibited by legally operating and visible (through the transmission of AIS location data)
vessels, as they respond to nearby illegal activities. Specifically, changes in between vessel distance
8
distributions were quantified using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic. Then, a moving window was
used to emulate a real-time situation in which an anomaly index âĂŞmoments from the lagged KS
statistic setsâĂŞ is computed as new data arrives. Two anomaly indexes were explored: the mean
and kurtosis of the lagged KS statistic sets. These indexes identified anomalous periods, based on
the geospatial organization of vessels in the Patagonia shelf region, occurring before, during and after
the time of known historical IUU events. Importantly, precursor signals were identified, suggesting
the possibility that legally operating vessels do respond anomalously in response to nearby IUU
activity. This highlights an opportunity to advance predictive data analytics for IUU activities at
sea, globally and in near real-time, and not just retrospective analyses. This has immediate utility
marine conservation and fisheries management.
This method for IUU detection is distinct from other approaches, which have to date focused
solely on the spatial dynamics of vessels one at a time. In contrast, our approach makes use of
the spatial characteristics of whole fleets and assumes that any illegal activity will be revealed by
the anomalous spatial behavior of nearby vessels. The utility of this approach was verified for the
Patagonia Shelf, a highly productive and busy area for fisheries. We chose this area for a few
reasons: first, this area has experienced in the past and continues to suffer chronic exposure to IUU
fishing. Second, this is also a congested oceanic area, meaning that at any given time there are
numerous vessels both fishing, shipping and recreational operating in the area. This is important
because for our spatial anomaly detection algorithm to work, there needs to be vessels proximate to
the IUU event. This is, on the one hand, an opportunity, for most of the world's fisheries operate
in only a fraction of the world's oceans (albeit a large fraction), and recent work has shown that
in most of these fishing regions, there are often many vessels from numerous nations (Kroodsma
et al. 2018). However, this is also a major challenge, for there remain many areas of the world's
oceans where IUU activity occurs in relatively isolated and remote locations. For example, recent
work has highlighted the high seas (i.e. areas far from the exclusive economic zones) as areas where
illegal activities occur constantly (Cullis-Suzuki and Pauly 2010). This means that there exists
a key spatial scale at which people/vessels do not react to nearby illegal activities, and at which
our spatial anomaly detection algorithm will cease to be useful. This spatial scale is yet unknown,
and will also be location and event specific, highlighting further need to examine the spatial and
temporal scales of the spatial behavior of vessels.
9
New and improved methods for detecting and predicting IUU fishing will help us achieve Sus-
tainable Development Goal 14 (life below water) in one major way; it will improve the accuracy of
our estimates of aggregate fishing pressure on fish stocks. Currently, impacts of IUU fishing can be
accounted for through indirect means (Pauly and Zeller 2016), and at coarse spatial scales (i.e. at
the scale of exclusive economic zones). Even though limited, results from these assessments suggest
that globally IUU fishing accounts for 20% of total fish catch (Sumaila et al. 2006; Shaver and
Yozell 2018). This information has motivated nations to combat illegal fishing, and the next step
is to improve the operational capacity for (maritime) law enforcement groups (i.e. coast guards)
through finer-resolution data products. Most current analyses of vessel location data provide infor-
mation on potential dark-fleet activity after it has occurred. In order to curb illegal fishing, and
as a consequence overharvesting of fish stocks, pre-emptive capacity is required. This is what our
analysis provides, and although only demonstrated for the Patagonia shelf for a limited number of
case studies, vessel location data are now global, and hence, there is an opportunity to monitor
anomalous spatial behaviors across the world's oceans. Before doing so, two major caveats to note
are 1) we only performed our analysis on three incidences of illegal fishing, this is well below what
would normally be necessary to verify the accuracy and precision of an algorithm and 2) our ap-
proach does not confirm IUU activity, rather it is suggestive of dark fleet IUU activity, which can
be used to direct the attention of coast guards and navies for example.
An important benefit of our approach is that it requires only minimal spatial information,
specifically the algorithm only needs the location of vessels through time. Many current approaches
to detecting IUU fishing rely on additional information like the vessel Maritime Mobile Service
Identity (MMSI) number and the historical trajectory of vessels. While a relatively straightforward
goal, in practice it is very difficult tracking vessels from raw AIS data. Spoofing is rife (by our
estimates, the raw AIS data that we worked with included 12-20% of vessels spoofing daily through
changing their MMSI number). Methods have been applied to deal with this (e.g. Patroumpas et al.
2017), and some successes have been made, but it remains a challenge. Another route to detecting
IUU fishing is, once a dark fleet vessel has been identified (by their MMSI number say), to then
trace their spatial history and track them forward in time. The full spatiotemporal trajectory of
vessels reveals rich information about their past and present activities, and this has been used to
great effect to help in the detection of IUU fishing and can be used to capture dark fleet vessels
10
when they come to port (Miller et al. 2016). However, there are again challenges to associating with
tracking vessels through time (primarily because of spoofing). Our approach needs none of this.
With simply the location of vessels in a given spatial region at a given time, we can infer anomalous
multiscale fleet behavior, which we show can be associated with illegal activities. This approach is
agnostic to vessel identity and a vessel's spatial history. As a consequence, the information mined
from these data makes the least assumptions about the vessels and regions being studied and is
thus arguably more robust.
Monitoring the changing multiscale spatial behavior of fishing fleets has utility beyond detecting
and predicting illegal fishing. A variety of bad things happen at sea, including narcotics, arms and
human trafficking (Tickler et al. 2018). There is active slavery in many areas of the world's oceans,
and geopolitical machinations are implemented through both official (naval) and unofficial actors
(e.g. fishing vessels; Fravel 2011). All these kinds of activities happen in and around vessels
operating legally by "good" actors. Furthermore, the level of information sharing and contextual
knowledge of skippers and crew on vessels is known to be high (Johannes et al. 2000), meaning that
they know what is happening around them. Harnessing this knowledge-capital is an opportunity for
dealing with maritime illegal activities broadly defined: given this analysis here of illegal fishing, it is
likely that other illegal activities committed by "dark vessels" will lead to some form of anomalous
spatial behavior in other nearby vessels. Indeed, it would be fascinating to create a typology of
anomalous spatial behaviors, with different archetypes associated with different illegal activities.
The typology could, for example, include descriptions of whether vessels group together, or spread
apart, or create spatial sub-modules, and if so, if there is a typical spatial scale of clustering. This
information could inform heuristics for faster identification of IUU activity; i.e.
if observed fleets
are exhibiting spatial behaviors X and Y, then illegal activity Z could be occurring nearby.
An important and obvious next step in our approach to detecting and predicting IUU activity
is to improve upon the algorithm. Between vessel distributions do well at capturing the spatial
organization of fleets, however, there are many other ways in which this could have been done. From
a mathematical perspective, this simple first step is to put a metric/weight on the edges defining
interactions between vessels. Spatial distance is an obvious choice, but other metrics could have been
derived from correlations in heading or velocity for example. With different measures of association
between vessels, different spatial behavioral anomalies could be detected/classified. Furthermore,
11
methods from the study of complex systems, specifically collective behavior in nature (Rosenthal
et al. 2015) and people (Cattuto et al. 2010), have used such measures of association between
agents comprising the system, in conjunction with dimensional reduction/denoising algorithms, to
identify signals of change otherwise lost in the noise (Jolliffe 2011; Coifman and Lafon 2004). These
approaches have been applied to big spatial datasets to find a signal of anomalous behaviors, and it
is likely a fruitful (and key) next step in the continued development of IUU detection and prediction
algorithms.
CONCLUSION
To conclude, combating IUU fishing is key to improving the sustainability of fisheries around the
world, and to secure the health of our oceans now and in the future. Important secondary outcomes
are diminished geopolitical tension and economic impacts on local economies. Current IUU mon-
itoring relies on detecting spoofing in vessel location records, which is retrospective and confined
to identifying anomalous spatial behavior of vessels one at a time. Both are useful but limited in
their ability to inform enforcement agencies like coast guards about the occurrence of IUU activity.
To overcome these challenges, we have developed an approach to IUU detection, and even predic-
tion, that examines the multiscale spatial behavior of whole fleets, those groups of vessels that are
visible and are legally operating, as they respond anomalously to nearby dark fleet activity. We
have shown that this approach identifies consistent precursor signals of IUU activity for a number
of known IUU events on the Patagonia shelf, as well as clear identification of the ultimate interven-
tion by the coast-guard. This is a promising new tool for detecting, predicting and deterring IUU
fishing. Future research will focus on expanding the analysis to other geographic regions, and for
other illegal activities, not just fishing, for example, narcotics trafficking and piracy. If the "good"
vessels and fleets continually exhibit anomalous multiscale behaviors across regions and events, then
it is possible to create near real-time and global indicators of IUU activity, broadly defined. This
new information will improve enforcement of maritime laws, and ultimately the sustainability of
our seas.
12
References
Béné, C., R. Arthur, H. Norbury, E. H. Allison, M. Beveridge, S. Bush, L. Campling, W. Leschen,
D. Little, D. Squires, et al. (2016). Contribution of fisheries and aquaculture to food security and
poverty reduction: assessing the current evidence. World Development 79, 177 -- 196.
Bisbal, G. A. (1995). The southeast South American shelf large marine ecosystem: Evolution and
components. Marine Policy 19 (1), 21 -- 38.
Cabral, R. B., J. Mayorga, M. Clemence, J. Lynham, S. Koeshendrajana, U. Muawanah, D. Nu-
groho, Z. Anna, A. Ghofar, N. Zulbainarni, et al. (2018). Rapid and lasting gains from solving
illegal fishing. Nature ecology & evolution 2 (4), 650.
Cattuto, C., W. Van den Broeck, A. Barrat, V. Colizza, J.-F. Pinton, and A. Vespignani (2010).
Dynamics of person-to-person interactions from distributed rfid sensor networks. PloS one 5 (7),
e11596.
Coifman, R. and S. Lafon (2004). Diffusion maps: Applied and computational harmonic analysis.
Cullis-Suzuki, S. and D. Pauly (2010). Failing the high seas: a global evaluation of regional fisheries
management organizations. Marine Policy 34 (5), 1036 -- 1042.
de Souza, E. N., K. Boerder, S. Matwin, and B. Worm (2016). Improving fishing pattern detection
from satellite AIS using data mining and machine learning. PloS one 11 (7), e0158248.
Ford, J. H., D. Peel, D. Kroodsma, B. D. Hardesty, U. Rosebrock, and C. Wilcox (2018). Detecting
suspicious activities at sea based on anomalies in automatic identification systems transmissions.
PloS one 13 (8), e0201640.
Fravel, M. T. (2011). China's strategy in the South China Sea. Contemporary Southeast Asia: A
Journal of International and Strategic Affairs 33 (3), 292 -- 319.
Gai, P. and S. Kapadia (2010). Contagion in financial networks. Proceedings of the Royal Society
A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 466 (2120), 2401 -- 2423.
Johannes, R. E., M. M. Freeman, and R. J. Hamilton (2000). Ignore fishers' knowledge and miss
the boat. Fish and Fisheries 1 (3), 257 -- 271.
13
Jolliffe, I. (2011). Principal component analysis. Springer.
Kroodsma, D. A., J. Mayorga, T. Hochberg, N. A. Miller, K. Boerder, F. Ferretti, A. Wilson,
B. Bergman, T. D. White, B. A. Block, et al. (2018). Tracking the global footprint of fisheries.
Science 359 (6378), 904 -- 908.
Levin, S. A. (1998). Ecosystems and the biosphere as complex adaptive systems. Ecosystems 1 (5),
431 -- 436.
Litt, B. and J. Echauz (2002). Prediction of epileptic seizures. the LANCET Neurology 1 (1), 22 -- 30.
Lubchenco, J. and K. Grorud-Colvert (2015). Making waves: The science and politics of ocean
protection. Science 350 (6259), 382 -- 383.
Miller, D. D., U. R. Sumaila, D. Copeland, D. Zeller, B. Soyer, T. Nikaki, G. Leloudas, S. T.
Fjellberg, R. Singleton, and D. Pauly (2016). Cutting a lifeline to maritime crime: marine
insurance and IUU fishing. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 14 (7), 357 -- 362.
Miller, N. A., A. Roan, T. Hochberg, J. Amos, and D. A. Kroodsma (2018).
Identifying global
patterns of transshipment behavior. Frontiers in Marine Science 5, 240.
Motter, A. E. (2004). Cascade control and defense in complex networks. Physical Review Let-
ters 93 (9), 098701.
Österblom, H. and Ö. Bodin (2012). Global cooperation among diverse organizations to reduce
illegal fishing in the Southern Ocean. Conservation biology 26 (4), 638 -- 648.
Patroumpas, K., E. Alevizos, A. Artikis, M. Vodas, N. Pelekis, and Y. Theodoridis (2017). Online
event recognition from moving vessel trajectories. GeoInformatica 21 (2), 389 -- 427.
Pauly, D. (2018). A vision for marine fisheries in a global blue economy. Marine Policy 87, 371 -- 374.
Pauly, D. and D. Zeller (2016). Catch reconstructions reveal that global marine fisheries catches
are higher than reported and declining. Nature communications 7, 10244.
Petrossian, G. A. (2018). A micro-spatial analysis of opportunities for IUU fishing in 23 Western
African countries. Biological Conservation 225, 31 -- 41.
14
Pramod, G., K. Nakamura, T. J. Pitcher, and L. Delagran (2014). Estimates of illegal and unre-
ported fish in seafood imports to the USA. Marine Policy 48, 102 -- 113.
Rosenthal, S. B., C. R. Twomey, A. T. Hartnett, H. S. Wu, and I. D. Couzin (2015). Revealing the
hidden networks of interaction in mobile animal groups allows prediction of complex behavioral
contagion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112 (15), 4690 -- 4695.
Sabatini, M., R. Akselman, R. Reta, R. Negri, V. Lutz, R. Silva, V. Segura, M. Gil, N. Santinelli,
A. Sastre, et al. (2012). Spring plankton communities in the southern Patagonian shelf: Hy-
drography, mesozooplankton patterns and trophic relationships. Journal of Marine Systems 94,
33 -- 51.
Shaver, A. and S. Yozell (2018). Casting a wider net: The security implications of illegal, unreported,
and unregulated fishing.
Sumaila, U. R., J. Alder, and H. Keith (2006). Global scope and economics of illegal fishing. Marine
Policy 30 (6), 696 -- 703.
Sutter, R. G. (2012). Chinese foreign relations: Power and policy since the Cold War. Rowman &
Littlefield.
Tickler, D., J. J. Meeuwig, K. Bryant, F. David, J. A. Forrest, E. Gordon, J. J. Larsen, B. Oh,
D. Pauly, U. R. Sumaila, et al. (2018). Modern slavery and the race to fish. Nature communica-
tions 9 (1), 4643.
United Nations Department of Economic and S. Affairs (2016). The Sustainable Development Goals
Report 2016.
Worm, B. and T. A. Branch (2012). The future of fish. Trends in ecology & evolution 27 (11),
594 -- 599.
15
Table 1: Description of Patagonia Shelf IUU Events
Date
Fleets
involved
Context
Data
March
15, 20161
China,
Argentina
A Chinese fishing vessel, the Lu Yan
Yuan Yu 010, was fishing in Ar-
gentina's exclusive economic zone.
The Argentina Navy fired warning
shots which resulted in the Chinese
fishing vessel attempting to crash
with the Navy vessel. The Argen-
tine Navy opened fire and sunk the
vessel. Four members were rescued
by the Navy while the others were
rescued by other Chinese fishing ves-
sels.
February
2, 20182
Spain,
Argentina
A Spanish fishing vessel, the Playa
Pesmar Uno, was intercepted by the
Argentina Navy for illegally oper-
ating in Argentina's EEZ which re-
sulted in a heavy fine.
February
21, 20183
China,
Argentina
The Argentina Navy warned a Chi-
nese Fishing Vessel, the Jing Yuan
626, to halt because they were op-
erating inside their exclusive eco-
nomic zone. The vessel ignored the
warning and escaped into interna-
tional waters. Additional Chinese
fishing vessels attempted to collide
with the Navy vessel to intervene in
the chase. The Argentina Navy was
unable to capture the Chinese fish-
ing vessels and issued orders for the
capture of the five vessels.
The time scale includes observa-
tions from March 1 - March 31
2016 and the spatial scale isolates
the ocean region outside of Puerto
Madryn along the Argentina coast.
The final subset of the data pro-
vides 749 unique vessels in 1.263
million square kilometers (1,000.76
km x 1,262.30 km) from March 1 -
March 31 2016 for a balanced panel
of 2,786,280 observations.
The time scale includes observa-
tions from January 15 - February 15
2018 and the spatial scale isolates
the ocean region outside of Puerto
Madryn along the Argentina coast.
The final subset of the data pro-
vides 777 unique vessels in 1.263
million square kilometers (1,000.76
km x 1,262.30 km) from January 15
- February 15 2018 for a balanced
panel of 2,983,680 observations.
The time scale includes observa-
tions from February 5 - March 10
2018 and the spatial scale isolates
the ocean region outside of Puerto
Madryn along the Argentina coast.
The final subset of the data pro-
vides 828 unique vessels in 1.263 mil-
lion square kilometers (1,000.76 km
x 1,262.30 km) from February 5 -
March 10 2018 for a balanced panel
of 3,378,240 observations.
1 www.cnn.com/2016/03/15/americas/argentina-chinese-fishing-vessel/index.html
2 www.laht.com/article.asp?CategoryId=14093&ArticleId=2450374
3 www.reuters.com/article/us-argentina-china-fishing/argentina-calls-for-capture-of-five-chinese-fishing-boats-idUSKCN1GK35T
16
Figure 1: The map shows the location for each vessel on March 15, 2016 at 12PM, with lines connecting nearest five
neighbors (chosen for visual clarity). This highlights the spatial network of interactions defining a complex fisheries
system. B) A between vessel distance distribution (km) for all vessels. These between vessel distance distributions
are used to characterize the multiscale spatial organization of fleets operating in this region. Essentially, changes in
between vessel distance distributions reveal IUU events.
17
(A)2016−03−15 12:00:00(B)0.0000.0010.0020.00302505007501000Distance (km)Probability Figure 2: Between vessel distance probability density functions (color scale) through time for three time periods
where illegal fishing occurred on the Patagonia shelf: 2016, 2018a and 2018b (see Table 1 for details of these events;
red lines in each panel). These between vessel distance distributions have a distinct mode at short distances. This
identifies the scale of local fleets in the region. But there exist other minor modes too, identifying smaller fleets
operating in the region. Notably, these distributions change shape over time. These changes in the multiscale
geospatial organization of vessels in the region can be used to identify anomalous behaviors indicative of illegal
activities.
18
Figure 3: A moving window is used to compare a given time period, based on its between vessel distance
distribution (the horizontal axis), with those from a specific lagged period (the vertical axis). The comparison is
made using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) statistic (i.e. the color scale). The KS statistic essentially captures how
different a given time period is, based on the geospatial organization of vessels, compared to other lagged times. For
each IUU event (black vertical lines), we observe an increase in the lagged KS statistic. This highlights that the
geospatial organization of vessels in and around an illegal activity is relatively anomalous.
19
Figure 4: Moments from the lagged KS statistic sets can be used to create anomaly indexes. Here, the mean
lagged KS statistic is plotted over time. For each IUU event (vertical red lines) this anomaly index peaks immediately
before, during and after the events. "Significant" anomalous times (red markers) are identified by comparing values to
those created from null periods where IUU activities were suspected to not have occurred. These significant anomalies
again all fall on the times when IUU events occurred, highlighting that this method can be used to identify when
these kinds of events occurred. Importantly, precursor signals are observed, suggesting that predicting IUU activities
may be possible.
20
Figure 5: Moments from the lagged KS statistic distributions can be used to create anomaly indexes. Here,
the kurtosis of the lagged KS statistic sets is plotted over time. "Significant" anomalous times (red markers) are
identified by comparing values to those created from null periods where IUU activities were suspected to not have
occurred. This anomaly index reveals strong precursor signals before all IUU events. This signal may be indicative
of the naval/coast-guard intervention, but potentially more powerful, it may also be indicative of IUU activity itself,
especially in (B) the 2018a case-study, where the precursor anomalies occur well before the intervention.
21
|
1811.07799 | 1 | 1811 | 2018-11-19T16:55:30 | Distributed Learning of Average Belief Over Networks Using Sequential Observations | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.LG",
"eess.SY"
] | This paper addresses the problem of distributed learning of average belief with sequential observations, in which a network of $n>1$ agents aim to reach a consensus on the average value of their beliefs, by exchanging information only with their neighbors. Each agent has sequentially arriving samples of its belief in an online manner. The neighbor relationships among the $n$ agents are described by a graph which is possibly time-varying, whose vertices correspond to agents and whose edges depict neighbor relationships. Two distributed online algorithms are introduced for undirected and directed graphs, which are both shown to converge to the average belief almost surely. Moreover, the sequences generated by both algorithms are shown to reach consensus with an $O(1/t)$ rate with high probability, where $t$ is the number of iterations. For undirected graphs, the corresponding algorithm is modified for the case with quantized communication and limited precision of the division operation. It is shown that the modified algorithm causes all $n$ agents to either reach a quantized consensus or enter a small neighborhood around the average of their beliefs. Numerical simulations are then provided to corroborate the theoretical results. | cs.MA | cs | Distributed Learning of Average Belief
Over Networks Using Sequential Observations (cid:63)
Kaiqing Zhang, Yang Liu, Ji Liu, Mingyan Liu, Tamer Ba¸sar
8
1
0
2
v
o
N
9
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
9
9
7
7
0
.
1
1
8
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract
This paper addresses the problem of distributed learning of average belief with sequential observations, in which a network
of n > 1 agents aim to reach a consensus on the average value of their beliefs, by exchanging information only with their
neighbors. Each agent has sequentially arriving samples of its belief in an online manner. The neighbor relationships among
the n agents are described by a graph which is possibly time-varying, whose vertices correspond to agents and whose edges
depict neighbor relationships. Two distributed online algorithms are introduced for undirected and directed graphs, which are
both shown to converge to the average belief almost surely. Moreover, the sequences generated by both algorithms are shown
to reach consensus with an O(1/t) rate with high probability, where t is the number of iterations. For undirected graphs, the
corresponding algorithm is modified for the case with quantized communication and limited precision of the division operation.
It is shown that the modified algorithm causes all n agents to either reach a quantized consensus or enter a small neighborhood
around the average of their beliefs. Numerical simulations are then provided to corroborate the theoretical results.
1 Introduction
Considerable interest in developing algorithms for dis-
tributed computation and decision making problems of
all types has arisen over the past few decades, includ-
ing consensus problems [2], multi-agent coverage prob-
lems [3], power distribution system management [4, 5],
and multi-robot formation control [6]. These problems
have found applications in different fields, including sen-
sor networks [7], robotic teams [6], social networks [8],
internet of things [9], and electric power grids [4, 10].
For large-scale complex networks, distributed compu-
tation and control are especially promising, thanks to
their attractive features of fault tolerance and cost sav-
ing, and their ability to accommodate various physical
constraints such as limitations on sensing, computation,
and communication.
(cid:63) This paper builds on some earlier results presented at
the 2017 American Control Conference [1]. Corresponding
author: Kaiqing Zhang.
1 K. Zhang and T. Ba¸sar are with the Department of Elec-
trical and Computer Engineering at University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign ({kzhang66, basar1}@illinois.edu).
Y. Liu is with the School of Engineering and Applied Sciences
at Harvard University and the Department of Computer Sci-
ence and Engineering at University of California, Santa Cruz
([email protected]). J. Liu is with the Department of Elec-
trical and Computer Engineering at Stony Brook University
([email protected]). M. Liu is with the Electrical En-
gineering and Computer Science Department at University
of Michigan ([email protected]).
Among the distributed control and computation prob-
lems, the consensus problem [2, 11] is one of the most
basic and important task. In a typical consensus pro-
cess, the agents in a given group all try to agree on
some quantity by communicating what they know only
to their neighboring agents. In particular, one impor-
tant type of consensus process, called distributed aver-
aging [12], aims to compute the average of the initial
values of the quantity of interest to the agents. Exist-
ing work has developed elegant solutions to such con-
ventional distributed averaging problems, such as lin-
ear iterations [13]; gossiping [14, 15]; push-sum [16], also
known as weighted gossip [17]; ratio consensus [18]; and
double linear iterations [19].
In the present work, we extend the conventional dis-
tributed averaging problem setting to the case where
each distributed agent has its local belief/measurement
arriving sequentially. In the previous studies of dis-
tributed averaging, each agent i was assumed to hold
xi(1) at initial time t = 1, which corresponds to the
true belief, and the subsequent averaging and commu-
nication processes are carried out entirely over xi(1),
i ∈ {1, 2, . . . , n}. In contrast, we consider here the case
where a series of local observations, denoted by xi(t),
t ∈ {1, 2, . . .}, is available to each agent i, which are
used to estimate the unknown true belief ¯xi. We refer
to this setting as distributed learning of average belief
using sequential observations.
Consider the motivating example of a sensor network,
where each sensor needs to take a sequence of local mea-
Preprint Accepted to Automatica
20 November 2018
surements in order to obtain an accurate estimate of a
local mean (or belief as referred to earlier) due to envi-
ronmental and instrumentation noises; at the same time
we have the goal of estimating the global/field mean
through message exchange among sensors. It is clear that
in this case there are multiple averaging processes taking
place simultaneously, one globally among sensors, and a
local one at each sensor. This is the main difference be-
tween our problem and traditional distributed averaging
which only focuses on the global averaging process by
assuming that the local mean is already available.
In general, the setting considered here belongs to the
family of problems on distributed learning and control.
We note that the distributed learning settings with noisy
observations have also been investigated in several previ-
ous studies, e.g. [7, 20]. The key differences between our
work here and those studies are the following: (1) in our
formulation, uncertainties are not modeled as coming
from external noise sources independent of the sample
observations, as the case in the previous study [20]; (2)
our algorithms are not developed based on a distributed
estimation framework as in [7], where the observability
of the system need to be assumed. Therefore, we note
that there are multiple averaging processes going on si-
multaneously in our setting -- a global one among the
agents, and a local one at each agent. Similar ideas have
been exploited in [21] and [22] for two different prob-
lems, distributed inference and estimation, respectively.
In the classical literature on distributed averaging and
consensus, however, only the global averaging process is
considered since the local mean is already available. It
would be desirable to embed the multiple underlying av-
eraging processes here into the same updating procedure
as in the classical distributed averaging process, with-
out much modification. In particular, we should manage
to integrate the new measurements/samples that occur
in an online fashion into the classical distributed aver-
aging process, which serves as the goal of the present
work. To this end, we introduce two distributed online
algorithms and formally establish their convergence and
convergence rates.
To implement the algorithms, the agents are required
to send, receive, as well as evaluate the running aver-
age of local beliefs with infinite precision. However, in a
realistic network of agents, messages with only limited
length are allowed to be transmitted among agents due
to the capacity constraints of communication links. This
is usually referred to as quantized communication in dis-
tributed averaging, see previous works on reaching quan-
tized consensus under such quantization [23 -- 25]. Addi-
tionally, in the distributed belief averaging algorithms
considered here, limited precision of belief averages may
occur due to the division operation in the local update
at each agent. This is similar but more involved than
the previous works on distributed averaging with inte-
ger/quantized values at each agent [11, 26, 27]. We thus
discuss the convergence of the proposed algorithms in
the presence of these two quantization effects. We can
show that under certain conditions, the quantized up-
date can converge to a small neighborhood of the actual
average belief with bounded errors, even with such joint
quantization effects.
The main contributions of this paper are threefold.
First, we propose a new setting of distributed averaging
using sequential observations, and develop two easily-
implementable distributed algorithms for undirected
and directed graphs, respectively. Second, we establish
almost sure convergence and polynomial convergence
rate with high probability for both algorithms. In ad-
dition, we investigate the effects of quantized commu-
nication and limited precision of the division operation
on the algorithm for undirected graphs, and provide a
convergence analysis under certain conditions.
This paper builds on some earlier results presented in [1],
but presents a more comprehensive treatment of the
problem. Specifically, the paper establishes the conver-
gence rate for the algorithm over directed graphs, and
characterizes the effects of two types of quantization on
the algorithm over undirected graphs, which were not
included in [1].
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. The prob-
lem is formulated and stated in Section 2. Two algo-
rithms are presented to solve the problem over undi-
rected and directed graphs, in Section 3, along with re-
sults on their convergence rates. In Section 4, the con-
vergence results for the algorithm under system quanti-
zation are provided, for both static and dynamic graphs.
The analysis of the algorithms and proofs of the main
results are given in Section 5. The theoretical results are
verified by numerical simulations in Section 6, followed
by conclusions in Section 7.
2 Problem Formulation
Consider a network consisting of n > 1 agents, with the
set of agents denoted by N = {1, 2,··· , n}. The neigh-
bor relationships among the n agents are described by
a time-varying n-vertex graph N(t) = (N ,E(t)), called
the neighbor graph, with E(t) denoting the set of edges
at time t. Note that the graph N(t) can be either undi-
rected or directed. The n vertices represent the n agents
and the edges indicate the neighbor relationships. Specif-
ically, if the communications among agents are bidirec-
tional, the graph N(t) is undirected, and agents i and j
are neighbors at time t if and only if (i, j) is an edge in
N(t). We use Ni(t) to denote the set of neighbors of agent
i, i.e., the degree of vertex i at time t. We also define
N +
the agent i itself. Otherwise, if the communications are
unidirectional, we say that an agent j is an out-neighbor
of agent i at time t if agent i can send information to
agent j at time t. In this case, we also say that agent i is
i (t) := Ni(t)(cid:83){i} as the set of neighbors including
2
an in-neighbor of agent j at time t. Then, agent j is a out-
neighbor of agent i (and thus agent i is an in-neighbor of
agent j) at time t if and only if (i, j) is a directed edge in
N(t). Thus, the neighbor graph N(t) becomes directed,
in which the directions of edges represent the directions
of information flow. By a slight abuse of notation, we
use Ni(t) to denote the set of out-neighbors of agent i
at time t, and also let N +
oi(t) to denote the number of out-neighbors of agent i at
time t, or equivalently, the out-degree of vertex i in N(t).
i (t) = Ni(t)(cid:83){i}. We also use
We assume that time is discrete in that t takes val-
ues in {1, 2, . . .}. Each agent i receives a real-valued
scalar 2 xi(t) at each time t. We assume that the sam-
ples {xi(t)}∞
t=1 form an independent and identically dis-
tributed (i.i.d.) process, and the sequence is generated
according to a random variable Xi with distribution
fXi(·). For simplicity, we assume that the support set
for Xi is bounded, i.e., there exists a constant K such
that Xi(ω) ≤ K for all i ∈ N and ω, where ω indicates
an arbitrary sample realization. Note that the agents'
observations do not need to be identical, i.e., the fXi (·),
i ∈ N , do not need to be structurally the same. We use
¯xi to denote the expectation of agent i's local observa-
tions, i.e.,
¯xi = E[Xi] ,
and call ¯xi the local belief of agent i. An application con-
text for this problem in sensor networks was described
in the introduction as a motivating example.
At each time step t, each agent i can exchange infor-
mation only with its current neighbors j ∈ Ni(t). Thus,
only local information is available to each agent, i.e.,
each agent i, only knows its own samples, the informa-
tion received from its current neighbors in Ni(t), and
nothing more, while the global connectivity patterns re-
main unknown to any agent in the network.
Suppose that each agent has control over a real-valued
variable yi(t) which it can update from time to time. Let
n(cid:88)
i=1
¯x =
1
n
¯xi ,
(1)
represent the average belief within the network. Our goal
is to devise distributed algorithms for each agent i, over
either undirected or directed graphs, which ensures that
t→∞ yi(t) = ¯x ,
lim
∀i ,
with high probability (w.h.p.) 3 , and their extensions to
the case with quantization effects of the system, as we
will elaborate next.
3 Distributed Learning Algorithms
In this section, we introduce two algorithms for dis-
tributed learning of average belief using sequential ob-
servations over time-varying graphs. We establish both
almost sure convergence and O(1/t) convergence rate
w.h.p. for the algorithms.
3.1 Algorithms
We first consider the case where N(t) is a time-varying
undirected graph. At initial time t = 1, each agent i sets
yi(1) = xi(t), where we note that xi(t) is an i.i.d. sample
of the local belief Xi. For each time t > 1, each agent i
first broadcasts its current yi(t) to all its current neigh-
bors in Ni(t). At the same time, each agent i receives
yj(t) from all its neighbors j ∈ Ni(t). Then, each agent
i updates its variable by setting
(cid:88)
yi(t + 1) = wii(t)yi(t) +
wij(t)yj(t)
j∈Ni(t)
+zi(t + 1) − zi(t) ,
where
t(cid:88)
τ =1
1
t
xi(τ )
zi(t) =
(2)
(3)
is the running average of the data, and wij(t) is the real-
valued weight from the matrix W (t) = [wij(t)] ∈ Rn×n.
The update rule (2) can be written in a more compact
form as
y(t + 1) = W (t)y(t) + z(t + 1) − z(t) ,
(4)
where y(t), z(t) ∈ Rn are the column vectors obtained
by stacking up yi(t)s and zi(t)s, respectively.
We make the following standard assumptions on W (t)
hereafter unless stated otherwise.
Assumption 1 The weight matrix W (t) has the follow-
ing properties at any time t.
almost surely (a.s.). Moreover, we would like to char-
acterize the convergence properties of such algorithms
2 The results in this paper can be straightforwardly ex-
tended to the vector-valued case.
3 Throughout the paper, when we say with high probabil-
ity, we mean that the probability goes to 1 when t goes to
infinity. Note that this is akin to the standard concept of
"convergence in probability" [28]. In particular, our results
of reaching consensus with O(1/t) rate w.h.p. not only im-
ply reaching consensus in probability, but also provide the
convergence rate of the sequence as t → ∞.
3
A.1) W (t) is a symmetric stochastic matrix 4 with posi-
tive diagonal entries, i.e., ∀i, j ∈ N ,
where oi(t) denotes the number of observers at agent i at
time t, and zi(t) is the running average as defined in (3).
The quotient µi(t)/vi(t) can then be shown to converge
to ¯x.
wii(t) > 0, wij(t) = wji(t) ≥ 0, and
n(cid:88)
n(cid:88)
wkj(t) =
wik(t) = 1 .
3.2 Convergence Results
k=1
k=1
A.2) W (t) is consistent with the network connectivity
constraint, i.e., if (i, j) /∈ E(t), then wij(t) = 0.
2
Note that Assumption 1 is a standard one for the con-
ventional distributed averaging problem (without any
sequential observations) [23]. Such weights wij(t) can be
designed in a distributed manner using the well-known
Metropolis weights [13].
Moreover, note that even though zi(t) used in the update
is a running average over time, an agent need not store
all its received samples. Instead, each agent i can only
keep track of zi(t) and update following
zi(t + 1) =
tzi(t) + xi(t + 1)
t + 1
.
(5)
The algorithm (2) requires that the communication be-
tween any pair of neighboring agents be bidirectional.
Such a requirement may not always be satisfied in ap-
plications. For example, different agents may have dis-
tinct transmission radii. In this subsection, we introduce
another algorithm to handle the case when the neigh-
bor graph N(t) is directed, i.e., the communication be-
tween agents is unidirectional. The algorithm makes use
of the idea of the push-sum protocol [16], which solves
the conventional distributed averaging problem for di-
rected neighbor graphs.
Now, we consider the following algorithm (for directed
neighbor graphs). Each agent i has control over two real-
valued variables yi(t) and vi(t), which are initialized as
yi(1) = xi(1) and vi(1) = 1, respectively. At each time
t > 1, each agent i sends the weighted current values
1+oi(t) and vi(t)
1+oi(t) to all its current neighbors and up-
dates its variables according to the rules
yi(t)
µi(t + 1) =
yi(t)
1 + oi(t)
+
vi(t)
vi(t + 1) =
1 + oj(t)
yi(t + 1) = µi(t + 1) + zi(t + 1) − zi(t) ,
1 + oi(t)
j∈Ni(t)
+
(cid:88)
(cid:88)
j∈Ni(t)
yj(t)
1 + oj(t)
vj(t)
,
,
(6)
4 A square nonnegative matrix is called stochastic if its row
sums all equal 1, and called doubly stochastic if its row sums
and column sums all equal 1. Thus, W (t) is also a doubly
stochastic matrix.
4
To establish convergence results, we first introduce some
concepts on the connectivity of time-varying graphs. An
undirected graph G is called connected if there is a path
between each pair of distinct vertices in G. A directed
graph G is called strongly connected if there is a di-
rected path between each ordered pair of distinct ver-
tices in G. By the union of a finite sequence of undi-
rected (or directed) graphs, G1, G2, . . . , Gp, each with
the vertex set V, is meant the undirected (or directed)
graph G with vertex set V and edge set equaling the
union of the edge sets of all the graphs in the sequence.
We say that such a finite sequence is jointly connected
(or jointly strongly connected) if the union of its mem-
bers is a connected (or strongly connected) graph. We
say that an infinite sequence of undirected (or directed)
graphs G1, G2, . . . is repeatedly jointly connected (or re-
peatedly jointly strongly connected) if there is a posi-
tive integer r such that for each k ≥ 0, the finite se-
quence Grk+1, Grk+2, . . . , Gr(k+1) is jointly connected
(or jointly strongly connected).
Now we are ready to present the connectivity assumption
on the undirected neighbor graphs {N(t)}, building upon
which we establish the convergence of system (4).
Assumption 2 The sequence of undirected neighbor
graphs {N(t)} is repeatedly jointly connected.
2
Theorem 1 Let all n agents adhere to the update rule
(2). Suppose that Assumptions 1 and 2 hold. Then,
lim
t→∞ yi(t) = ¯x ,
∀i,
(7)
almost surely. Moreover, the sequence {yi(t)} reaches
consensus for all i ∈ N with the order of O(1/t) w.h.p.2
A precise proof of the theorem is relegated to Section 5,
but here we provide the basic intuition behind it. First,
it is straightforward to verify that
n(cid:88)
i=1
n(cid:88)
i=1
lim
t→∞
1
n
zi(t) =
1
n
¯xi .
(8)
Since y(1) = x(1) = z(1), from (4), it follows that
1(cid:62)y(2) = 1(cid:62)z(2), where 1 denotes the vector whose
entries all equal to 1 and 1(cid:62) denotes its transpose. By
induction, it follows that 1(cid:62)y(t) = 1(cid:62)z(t) for any t,
which implies by ignoring the small perturbation terms
z(t + 1) − z(t) (later we will show that this term con-
verges polynomially fast to the zero vector 0 w.h.p.),
Note that, from (8) and (1),(cid:80)n
y(t + 1) = W (t)y(t) leads all yi(t) to the same value [23].
i=1 zi(t) will converge to
n¯x, and therefore we could expect that each yi(t) will
converge to ¯x since 1(cid:62)y(t) = 1(cid:62)z(t).
Likewise, we impose the following assumption on the
connectivity of the neighbor graph N(t) when it is di-
rected.
Assumption 3 The sequence of directed neighbor
graphs {N(t)} is repeatedly jointly strongly connected. 2
Now we are ready to present the convergence result for
the update rule (6) for directed neighbor graphs, which
shows that it also achieves the same convergence result
as update rule (4) for undirected neighbor graphs.
Theorem 2 Let all n agents adhere to the update rule
(6). Suppose that Assumptions 1 and 3 hold. Then,
lim
t→∞
µi(t)
vi(t)
= ¯x ,
∀i ,
(9)
a.s. Moreover, the sequence {µi(t)/vi(t)} reaches con-
sensus for all i ∈ N with the order of O(1/t) w.h.p. 2
Proof of this theorem is given later in Section 5.
Based on Theorems 1 and 2, we also obtain the following
corollary which quantifies the convergence performance
of the update rules for a finite time t. The proof is de-
ferred to Section 5.
Corollary 1 For the update (2), there exist constants
λ1 ∈ [0, 1) and C1, C2 > 0, such that after t ≥ (2C2)−1 ·
log
iterations,
(cid:17)
(cid:16)
2
δ(1−2e−2C2 )
yi(t) − ¯x ≤ C1λt
1 + (C2 + K + ¯xi)/t, ∀i ∈ N
holds with probability at least 1− δ. The same finite-time
performance also holds 5 for the update (6).
4 Quantization Effects
In this section, we investigate the effects of two common
sources of quantization on algorithm (2). Specifically,
the quantization includes quantized communication and
limited precision of the division operation, which are
common in realistic distributed computation systems.
The joint effects of the two quantization are considered
over both static and dynamic neighbor graphs.
5 Note that the constants λ1, C1, C2 for the results of up-
dates (2) and (6) may be different.
5
4.1 Static Graphs
The algorithm (2) requires the agents to send and receive
real-valued variables y(t) at each iteration. However, in
a realistic network, with limited capacity of communica-
tion links, the messages transmitted among agents can
have only limited length. On the other hand, both up-
dates (3) and (5) require one step of division operation.
As such, the result z(t) may only have limited precision
due to the finite digits of representing divided numbers
in realistic digital computers. This effect can be viewed
as one type of quantization on the value of z(t). With
these two quantization effects, the precise belief averag-
ing cannot be achieved in general (except in some spe-
cial cases). We first analyze the performance of system
(4) subject to these effects over a static neighbor graph.
To this end, we impose the following standard assump-
tion on the static graph and the corresponding weight
matrix.
Assumption 4 The communication graph N(t) is static
and connected, i.e., N(t) = (N ,E) for all t where (N ,E)
is a connected undirected graph. Accordingly, there exists
a matrix W which satisfies Assumption 1 in that W (t) =
W for all t, and has the following properties:
A.1) W has dominant diagonal entries, i.e., wii > 1/2
for all i ∈ N .
A.2) For any (i, j) ∈ E, we have wij ∈ Q+, where Q+ is
the set of rational numbers in the interval (0, 1).
2
Note that conditions A.1) and A.2) are specifically
needed for the convergence of quantized systems as
in [25]. In a practical implementation, it is not restrictive
to have rational numbers as weights and require dom-
inant diagonal weights. As reported in [25, Appendix
A], the quantized update may fail to converge even in
the deterministic setting of distributed averaging. Thus,
conditions A.1) and A.2) are essential here since our
analysis will rely on the results developed in [25].
Let zi(t) denote the value of z(t) after the division in (3),
or equivalently (5). We impose an assumption on zi(t)
as follows.
Assumption 5 There exists a precision ∆ > 0 such
that zi(t) is multiples of ∆ for any time t and i ∈ N . 2
It follows from Assumption 5 that the decimal part of
zi(t) can only have a finite number of values. For no-
tational convenience, we introduce the following defini-
tions. Define the sets B and C as,
B := {b : b = k∆ + ∆/2, k = 0, 1,···},
C := {b : b = k∆, k = 0, 1,···}.
(10)
(11)
Let R : R → R be the operation that rounds the value
to the nearest multiples of ∆, i.e.,
R(x) = argmin
b∈C
b − x.
(12)
Hence, we have zi(t) = R(zi(t)). In particular, if x ∈ B
for some k > 0, we define the value of R(x) as R(x) :=
(k + 1)∆. In practice, the value of the quantized zi(t)
(cid:80)
can be evaluated by simply keeping track of the summa-
tion of all the previous data at time t, i.e., define si(t) :=
τ≤t xi(τ ), and then calculate zi(t) = R(si(t)/t). In
this regard, the imprecision caused by the division op-
eration will not accumulate over time.
To avoid the information loss caused by the quantized
communication, we adopt the following update:
y(t + 1) = WQ(y(t)) + y(t)−Q(y(t)) + ∆z(t + 1) , (13)
where Q : Rn → Rn denotes the operation of element-
wise quantization on a vector, and ∆z(t + 1) := z(t +
1) − z(t). The deterministic quantizer Q can be either
truncation quantizer Qt, the ceiling quantizer Qc, or the
rounding quantizer Qr, which round the values to, re-
spectively, the nearest lower integer, the nearest upper
integer, or the nearest integer. For more discussion on
the types of deterministic quantizers, see [25, Section
IV]. Without any loss of generality, we analyze the sys-
tem with a truncation quantizer Qt.
Since W is column stochastic (i.e., 1(cid:62)W = 1(cid:62)), from
equation (13), we have
1(cid:62)y(t + 1) = 1(cid:62)y(t) + 1(cid:62)(cid:0)z(t + 1) − z(t)(cid:1).
(14)
Hence, the property that 1(cid:62)y(t) = 1(cid:62) z(t) for any t
also holds under quantized communication provided
1(cid:62)y(1) = 1(cid:62) z(1). In addition, we define m(t) and M (t)
as follows:
m(t) := min
i∈N(cid:98)yi(t)(cid:99), M (t) := max
i∈N (cid:98)yi(t)(cid:99), ∀t ≥ 0 ,
where (cid:98)·(cid:99) denotes the floor function. Let αi = 1−wii +γ,
and γ > 0 be a sufficiently small positive scalar 6 that
guarantees αi < 0.5. As shown in [25], the value of γ
is not necessarily known and is only used here for the
convenience of analysis. Define α := max
i∈N αi, which is
also upper bounded by 0.5, and a value ¯xR as
(cid:88)
i∈N
¯xR :=
1
n
R(¯xi) .
(15)
If ¯xi /∈ B,∀i ∈ N , then the value of ¯xR corresponds to
the average of all beliefs with limited precisions. Note
that the difference between ¯xR and the actual average
belief ¯x is no greater than ∆/2 by definition. We will
show that the quantized system (13) will converge to
the neighborhood of ¯xR a.s., provided that ¯xi /∈ B,∀i ∈
N . Formally, we have the following proposition on the
convergence of system (13).
Proposition 1 Let all n agents adhere to the update rule
(13). Under Assumptions 4 and 5, if ¯xi /∈ B,∀i ∈ N ,
then almost surely either
1) the system reaches quantized consensus to the value
¯xR defined in (15), i.e.,
(cid:40) (cid:98)yi(t)(cid:99) = (cid:98)yj(t)(cid:99), ∀i, j ∈ N ,
yi(t) − ¯xR < 1, ∀i ∈ N ,
which implies that yi(t) − ¯x < 1 + ∆/2,∀i ∈ N , or
2) all n agents' values live in a small neighborhood around
¯xR in that(cid:40) yi(t) − yj(t) ≤ αi + αj, ∀i, j ∈ N ,
yi(t) − ¯xR ≤ 2α, ∀i ∈ N ,
which implies that yi(t) − ¯x < 2α + ∆/2,∀i ∈ N . 2
Proposition 1 states that under the condition that ¯xi /∈
B,∀i ∈ N , system (13) will either reach a quantized con-
sensus with error smaller than 1+∆/2 to the actual aver-
age belief ¯x, or enter a bounded neighborhood of ¯x with
size smaller than 2α + ∆/2. This result can be viewed as
extension of the one for standard distributed averaging
with quantized communications [25]. Notably, the quan-
tization effect caused by the division operation enlarges
the error away from exact consensus by an amount of
∆/2, which is usually small in practice. The proof of
the proposition is provided in Section 5.
Remark 1 It is worth noting that the limiting behav-
ior of the quantized system (13) differs from the results
in [25] in three ways: i) quantized communication does
not necessarily cause exact cyclic behavior of y(t) due to
the randomness in the sequential data sample xi(t); ii)
limited precision of z(t) induces inevitable mismatch to
the convergent point from the actual average belief ¯x by
a small amount; instead, the system can only converge
to some value ¯xR close to ¯x up to a small deviation; iii)
the convergence result holds almost surely, instead of in
2
deterministic finite number of iterations.
4.2 Dynamic Graphs
6 The exact characterization of how γ is selected is given
in [25].
In this subsection, we extend the previous convergence
result over static graphs to dynamic graphs. It follows
6
from [29] that even without sequential data samples, i.e.,
∆z(t + 1) ≡ 0, there exist counterexamples which show
that quantized communication could prevent consen-
sus update from converging for general dynamic graphs.
Therefore, we consider a special class of dynamic graphs,
namely, the probabilistic dynamic graphs model, where
each link has a positive probability to appear in the
graph at any time t. The probabilistic model is formally
detailed in the following assumption. We note that this
is still a fairly large class of graphs.
Assumption 6 The neighbor graph N(t) is dynamic.
Specifically, there exists an underlying graph (N ,E) and
a corresponding matrix W satisfying Assumption 1 and
Assumption 4. At each time t, W (t) is constructed from
W as follows:
wij(t) =
and wii(t) = 1−(cid:80)
wij, if (i, j) ∈ E(t) ,
if (i, j) /∈ E(t) ,
0,
wij(t). Moreover, let {Ft}t≥1 be
the σ-field generated by the random graphs {N(τ )}τ≤t,
i.e., Ft = σ(N(1),··· , N(t)). Then, P rob[(i, j) ∈
E(t)Ft−1] ≥ p for all t and all (i, j) ∈ E, where p > 0 is
a positive constant and (N ,E) is a connected undirected
2
graph.
j∈Ni
(cid:40)
We note that Assumption 6, a probabilistic model for
dynamic graphs, is different from the deterministic mod-
els in Assumptions 2 and 3. This probabilistic model has
been adopted in many prior work on distributed averag-
ing, including asynchronous gossiping graphs [30], wire-
less sensor networks subject to probabilistic link fail-
ures [31], and conventional distributed averaging with
quantized communication [29].
The update rule over the dynamic graph thus becomes
y(t + 1) = W (t)Q(y(t)) + y(t) − Q(y(t)) + ∆z(t + 1) .
(16)
The following proposition describes the limiting behav-
ior of system (16), the proof of which is provided in Sec-
tion 5.
Proposition 2 Let all n agents adhere to the update rule
(16). Under Assumption 6, if ¯xi /∈ B,∀i ∈ N , then the
result in Proposition 1 still holds.
2
5 Analysis
In this section, we provide proofs of the results presented
in Sections 3 and 4.
5.1 Preliminaries
The proofs for the results in Section 3 will appeal to
the stability properties of discrete-time linear consensus
processes. We begin with the idea of a certain semi-norm
which was introduced in [15]. Let · be the induced
infinity norm on Rm×n. For M ∈ Rm×n, define
M∞ = min
c∈R1×n
M − 1c .
It has been shown in [15] that · ∞ is a semi-norm,
namely that it is positively homogeneous and satisfies
the triangle inequality. Moreover, this particular semi-
norm is sub-multiplicative (see Lemma 1 in [32]). In par-
ticular, from Lemmas 2 and 3 in [32], for any x ∈ Rn
and nonnegative matrix A ∈ Rn×n, we have
(cid:18)
(cid:19)
xi − min
j
xj
(17)
x∞ =
A∞ =
1
2
1
2
max
i
n(cid:88)
k=1
max
i,j
aik − ajk .
Moreover, from [33], A∞ ≤ 1 if A is a stochastic matrix.
We first introduce the notion of internal stability, which
has been proposed and studied in [32].
Consider a discrete-time linear consensus process mod-
eled by a linear recursion equation of the form
x(k0) = x0 ,
x(k + 1) = S(k)x(k) ,
(18)
where x(k) is a vector in Rn and S(k) is an n×n stochas-
tic matrix. It is easy to verify that the equilibria of (18)
include points of the form a1. We say that the system
described by (18) is uniformly exponentially consensus
stable if there exist a finite positive constant γ and a
constant 0 ≤ λ < 1 such that for any k0 and x0, the
corresponding solution satisfies
x(k)∞ ≤ γλk−k0x0∞ ,
k ≥ k0 .
Uniform exponential consensus stability implies that so-
lutions of (18) approach a consensus vector (i.e., all the
entries of x(t) have the same value) exponentially fast.
Exponential consensus stability can be characterized by
graph connectivity. Toward this end, we need the fol-
lowing concept. The graph of a nonnegative symmetric
matrix M ∈ Rn×n, denoted by γ(M ), is an undirected
graph on n vertices with an edge between vertex i and
vertex j if and only if mji (cid:54)= 0 (and thus mij (cid:54)= 0).
Lemma 1 Let F denote a compact subset of the set of
all n × n symmetric stochastic matrices with positive di-
agonal entries. Suppose that F (1), F (2), . . . is an infi-
nite sequence of matrices in F. Then, the discrete-time
linear recursion equation x(k + 1) = F (k)x(k), k ≥ 1,
is uniformly exponentially consensus stable if and only
if the sequence of graphs γ(F (1)), γ(F (2)), γ(F (3)) . . . is
2
repeatedly jointly connected.
7
This lemma is a direct consequence of Theorem 4 in [32].
Now we turn to input-output stability of discrete-time
linear consensus processes. Toward this end, we rewrite
the equation (18) in an input-output form as follows:
x(k + 1) = S(k)x(k) + B(k)u(k) ,
y(k) = C(k)x(k) .
(19)
(20)
We are interested in the case when B(k) and C(k) are
stochastic matrices for all k. We say that the system de-
fined by (19)-(20) is uniformly bounded-input, bounded-
output consensus stable if there exists a finite constant η
such that for any k0 and any input signal u(k) the cor-
responding zero-state response satisfies
y(k)∞ ≤ η sup
k≥k0
sup
k≥k0
u(k)∞ .
It is worth noting that y(t) may not be bounded
even though the system is uniformly bounded-input,
bounded-output consensus stable.
The following result establishes the connection between
uniform bounded-input, bounded-output stability, and
uniform exponential stability.
Proposition 3 (Theorem 2 in [34]) Suppose that (18)
is uniformly exponentially consensus stable. Then, the
system (19)-(20) is uniformly bounded-input, bounded-
2
output consensus stable.
5.2 Proof of Theorem 1
The system (4) can be viewed as a linear consensus sys-
tem with input u(t) = z(t + 1) − z(t), S(t) = W (t) a
stochastic matrix, and B(t) = C(t) = I, where I is the
identity matrix, which is also a stochastic matrix. Let
Φ(t, τ ) be the discrete-time state transition matrix of
S(t), i.e.,
Φ(t, τ ) =
S(t − 1)S(t − 2)··· S(τ ) if t > τ ,
if t = τ .
I
(21)
(cid:40)
It is easy to verify that Φ(t, τ ) is a stochastic matrix
for any t ≥ τ . Then, the output is given by y(t) =
Φ(t, 1)y(1) + y(t), where y(t) is the zero-state response
and the first component on the right-hand side is the
zero-input response. It then follows that
y(t)∞ ≤ Φ(t, 1)y(1)∞ + y(t)∞
≤ Φ(t, 1)y(1)∞ + sup
τ≥t
y(τ )∞ .
(22)
Since the sequence of neighbor graphs is repeat-
edly jointly connected, by Lemma 1, the system
8
y(t + 1) = W (t)y(t) is uniformly exponentially con-
sensus stable, and thus the system (4) is uniformly
input-bounded, output-bounded consensus stable by
Proposition 3. Since Φ(t, 1)y(1)∞ converges to 0 ex-
ponentially fast, to prove the theorem, it suffices to
show that supτ≥t y(τ )∞ converges to 0 almost surely
with the order of O(1/t) with high probability, and
the consensual value reached by the sequence {yi(t)}
is indeed ¯x. Since supτ≥t y(τ )∞ ≤ η supτ≥t u(τ )∞
for some constant η, and noting that from (17),
supτ≥t u(τ )∞ ≤ 2 supτ≥t maxi ui(τ ),
it will be
enough to study the convergence of supτ≥t maxi ui(τ ).
Note that ui(t) = zi(t + 1) − zi(t) for any i ∈ N , and
(cid:80)t
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
k=1 xi(k)
t + 1
−
k=1 xi(k)
t
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
(cid:80)t+1
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
k=1 xi(k)
zi(t + 1) − zi(t) =
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)t · xi(t + 1) −(cid:80)t
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:80)t
t(t + 1)
=
.
+
t + 1
k=1 xi(k)
t(t + 1)
≤ xi(t + 1)
have that (cid:80)t
(cid:80)t
1(cid:62)z(t) and thus (cid:80)
Strong Law of Large Numbers), we have(cid:80)
converges to(cid:80)
Recall that Xi(ω) ≤ K for some constant K.
Also, by the Strong Law of Large Numbers, we
k=1 xi(k)/t converges to ¯xi a.s. Thus,
k=1 xi(k)/[t(t + 1)] converges to 0 a.s., which implies
that almost surely, the sequence {yi(t)} reaches to a con-
sensual value ¯y for all i ∈ N . Moreover, since 1(cid:62)y(t) =
i∈N zi(t)/n holds
for any t ≥ 0, and also zi(t) converges to ¯xi a.s. (by the
i∈N yi(t)/n
i∈N ¯xi/n = ¯x a.s. Therefore, we obtain
that the consensual value ¯y equals the value of ¯x, which
concludes the first argument in Theorem 1.
i∈N yi(t)/n = (cid:80)
In addition, using the Chernoff bound, for any δ > 0,
with a probability of at least 1 − 2e−2δt, we have
(cid:80)t
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
k=1 xi(k)
t
− ¯xi
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ δ .
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ δ
(cid:19)
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ δ
(cid:19)
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) > δ
(cid:19)
− ¯xi
k=1 xi(k)
− ¯xi
k=1 xi(k)
τ
sup
τ≥t
∀τ ≥ t,
τ
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:80)τ
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:80)τ
(cid:18)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:80)τ
Then,
P
(cid:18)
(cid:18)
≥ 1 −(cid:88)
≥ 1 −(cid:88)
τ≥t
= P
τ≥t
P
k=1 xi(k)
− ¯xi
2e−2δτ = 1 − 2e−2δt
τ
1 − e−2δ ,
which implies that w.h.p.,
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:80)τ
k=1 xi(k)
τ
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ ¯xi + δ ,
Note that both S(t) and B(t) are stochastic matrices.
The following lemma shows the uniformly exponentially
consensus stability of the zero-input response (i.e., the
input ∆z(t) = 0).
(23)
sup
τ≥t
and furthermore,
Lemma 2 Under Assumptions 1 and 3, the system h(t+
1) = S(t)h(t) is uniformly exponentially consensus sta-
ble, with h(t) and S(t) defined in (25) and (26), respec-
2
tively.
Proof: From Lemma 1 (a) in [35], we know that under
Assumptions 1 and 3, there exist constants C(cid:48) > 0 and
λ ∈ (0, 1) such that for any i ∈ N
zi(τ + 1) − zi(τ ) ≤ K + ¯xi + δ
t + 1
sup
τ≥t
,
(24)
which is decreasing uniformly with the order of O(1/t).
From (22), this means that the sequence {y(t)} reaches
consensus with the rate of O(1/t), which completes the
proof.
5.3 Proof of Theorem 2
The proof of Theorem 2 also relies on the concept of
uniformly exponentially consensus stability and Propo-
sition 3. Define the state in update (7) as
hi(t) :=
, ∀i ∈ N .
µi(t)
vi(t)
(25)
For notational convenience, we also define, for any time
t,
∆zi(t) := zi(t) − zi(t − 1),
li(t) :=
1
1 + oi(t)
, ∀i ∈ N .
We first rewrite the update (6) as an input-output sys-
tem of the form (19)-(20). In particular, from (6), we
have
j∈N +
i (t) lj(t)(wj(t) + ∆zj(t))
(cid:80)
(cid:80)
li(t) +(cid:80)
j∈N +
j∈Ni(t) lj(t) · vj(t)/vi(t)
i (t) lj(t)vj(t)
li(t) (1 + ∆zi(t)/µi(t))
hj(t) ·
lj(t) +(cid:80)
hi(t + 1) =
= hi(t) ·
(cid:88)
+
j∈Ni(t)
lj(t) (1 + ∆zj(t)/wj(t))
i (t),k(cid:54)=j lk(t) · vk(t)/vj(t)
k∈N +
where we recall that N +
i (t) is the set of neighbors in-
cluding agent i at time t. Let the entries of S(t) and B(t)
in (19) be
(cid:80)
lj(t)vj(t)
i (t) lj(t)vj(t)
j∈N +
sij(t) =
, bij(t) = sij(t),
(26)
respectively. Then, the update (6) can be written as
h(t + 1) = S(t)h(t) + B(t) (∆z(t) (cid:11) v(t)) ,
(27)
where (cid:11) denotes the Hadamard (element-wise) division
operation.
Hence, there exists a constant C = C(cid:48)/(λ · h(0)∞) > 0
such that
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)hi(t + 1) − 1(cid:62)y(t)
n
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ C(cid:48) · λt.
(cid:19)
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
hi(t) − min
hi(t) − 1(cid:62)y(t − 1)
hj(t) − 1(cid:62)y(t − 1)
hj(t)
n
j
i
max
(cid:18)
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) max
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) max
i
j
1
2
n
· λt = C · h(0)∞ · λt.
+
≤ C(cid:48)
λ
h(t)∞ =
1
2
≤ 1
2
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
(28)
By definition, the update is uniformly exponentially con-
sensus stable, which completes the proof.
We are now in a position to prove Theorem 2.
Proof of Theorem 2: The system (27) can be viewed as a
linear consensus system with input u(t) = ∆z(t) (cid:11) v(t)
and C(t) = I. Recall the definition of Φ(t, τ ) in (21), we
can write the output as
,
h(t) = Φ(t, 1)h(1) + h(t) ,
where Φ(t, 1) is as defined in (21), h(t) and Φ(t, 1)h(1)
are the zero-state and zero-input responses, respectively.
Since
h(t)∞ ≤ Φ(t, 1)h(1)∞ + sup
τ≥t
h(τ )∞ ,
and Φ(t, 1)h(1)∞ converges to zero exponentially fast
according to Lemma 2, it suffices to study the conver-
gence rate of supτ≥t h(τ )∞.
In addition, by Proposition 3 and Lemma 2, the
update (27)
is uniformly input-bounded, output-
bounded consensus
that
supτ≥t y(τ )∞ ≤ η supτ≥t u(τ )∞ for some constant
stable. Hence,
follows
it
9
η > 0. It is thus sufficient to bound the convergence
rate of supτ≥t maxi ∆zi(τ )/vi(τ ). By Lemma 3 in [19],
there exists a constant > 0, such that for any i ∈ N ,
the state vi(t) that follows the update (7) is lower
bounded by . Thus we obtain
Under A.2) in Assumption 4, there exist co-prime posi-
tive integers aij and bij such that wij = aij/bij. Let Bi
be the least common multiple of the integers {bij : ∀j ∈
Ni}, where Ni is the set of neighbors of agent i on the
static graph (N ,E). Define the decimal part of yi(t) as
ci(t) := yi(t) − (cid:98)yi(t)(cid:99). Then, ci(t) ∈ [0, 1) satisfies
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ∆zi(t)
vi(t)
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ 1
· zi(t) − zi(t − 1) .
(29)
ci(t) =yi(t) − (cid:98)yi(t)(cid:99)
From the proof of Theorem 1, this implies that i)
∆zi(τ )/vi(τ ) converges to zero a.s.; ii) ∆zi(τ )/vi(τ )
also converges with a rate of O(1/t) w.h.p., which com-
pletes the proof.
=
=
j∈Ni
+ yi(t − 1) + ∆zi(t)
(cid:88)
(cid:88)
5.4 Proof of Corollary 1
From (22), we further obtain that
y(t)∞ ≤ Φ(t, 1)y(1)∞ + sup
τ≥t
zi(τ + 1) − zi(τ ) ,
1. Also,
Φ(t, 1)y(1)∞ ≤ C1λt
for some constant η > 0. Since Φ(t, 1) is a stochas-
tic matrix, there exists a λ1 ∈ [0, 1) and C1 >
0 such that
from
(24), we know that there exists C2 > 0 such that
supτ≥t zi(τ + 1) − zi(τ ) ≤ C2/t with probability at
least 1 − [2e−2(C2−K−¯xi)t]/[1 − e−2(C2−K−¯xi)]. Letting
δ = [2e−2(C2−K−¯xi)t]/[1 − e−2(C2−K−¯xi)], we obtain
the desired expression for t = t(δ), which completes
the proof of the first argument. The second argument
also holds due to (29), which relates ∆zi(t)/vi(t) to
zi(t) − zi(t − 1). This concludes the proof.
5.5 Proof of Proposition 1
The proofs for the results in Section 4 will depend on
the results in [25] and [29]. To prove Proposition 1, we
first state the following lemma, which is in the spirit of
Proposition 1 in [29].
Lemma 3 Consider the quantized system (13). Under
Assumptions 4 and 5, if ¯xi /∈ B,∀i ∈ N , then almost
surely, the values of yi(t), t ∈ {1, 2, . . .}, belong to a finite
set for all i ∈ N .
2
Proof: As shown in [25], the three types of quantizers
from communications, i.e., truncation quantizer Qt, ceil-
ing quantizer Qc, and rounding quantizer Qr, are all re-
lated and can be transformed to each other. Thus, it is
sufficient to analyze the quantized update (13) using any
one of the types 7 . Without any loss of generality, we
focus here on the truncation quantizer, i.e., Q(·) = (cid:98)·(cid:99).
7 Note that the update (13) using rounding and truncation
quantizers are identical, while the update using ceiling quan-
tizer Q is slightly different since Qc(x) = −Qt(−x), which
wij((cid:98)yj(t − 1)(cid:99) − (cid:98)yi(t − 1)(cid:99)) − (cid:98)yi(t)(cid:99)
((cid:98)yj(t − 1)(cid:99) − (cid:98)yi(t − 1)(cid:99)) − (cid:98)yi(t)(cid:99)
aij
bij
j∈Ni
+ ci(t − 1) + (cid:98)yi(t − 1)(cid:99) + ∆zi(t)
=ci(t − 1) +
Zi(t)
Bi
+ ∆zi(t),
(30)
where Zi(t) ∈ Z is an integer. Note that ∆z(t) can only
take values of multiples of ∆. Hence, ci(t) ∈ [0, 1) can
only take a finite number of values.
We first show that as t → ∞, zi(t + 1) − zi(t) = 0 a.s.
In particular, let Rh(x) denote the operation of finding
the belief in B that is closest to x, i.e.,
b − x.
(31)
Rh(x) = argmin
b∈B
Recall the definition of the belief set B in (10). Since ¯xi /∈
B, we have ¯xi−Rh(¯xi) > 0,∀i ∈ N . By the Strong Law
of Large Numbers, we have limt→∞ zi(t) − ¯xi = 0 a.s.
Thus, for any sample realization ω, let δ = ¯xi−Rh(¯xi);
then there exists an integer Ti such that zi(t)(ω) − ¯xi ≤
δ for any t ≥ Ti. In addition, for any x ∈ R, if x− ¯xi ≤
¯xi−Rh(¯xi), then R(x) = R(¯xi). Hence, for any t ≥ Ti,
it follows that
zi(t + 1) = R(zi(t + 1)) = R(¯xi) = R(zi(t)) = zi(t),
for this realization ω. Therefore, we obtain
wij((cid:98)yj(t)(cid:99) − (cid:98)yi(t)(cid:99))
yi(t + 1) =yi(t) +
(cid:88)
j∈Ni
(M (t) − (cid:98)yi(t)(cid:99))
wij
(cid:88)
j∈Ni
≤ci(t) + (cid:98)yi(t)(cid:99) +
≤ci(t) + M (t).
This reduces to the argument of Proposition 1 in [25],
which implies that (cid:98)yi(t + 1)(cid:99) ≤ M (t), and thus {M (t)}
is a non-increasing sequence. Similarly, we can show that
changes the sign of the last two terms z(t + 1) − z(t). How-
ever, as we show in the proof, this difference term does not
invalidate the result in Lemma 3.
10
{m(t)} is a non-decreasing sequence. Therefore, the in-
teger part of yi(t) (i.e., (cid:98)yi(t)(cid:99)) takes values in the finite
set {m(Ti), m(Ti)+1,··· , M (Ti)−1, M (Ti)}. Since both
the integer and the decimal parts take finite numbers of
values, so does the value of y(t). Note that the argument
above holds for any realization ω in the sample space,
which completes the proof.
Lemma 3 implies that with sufficiently long time, the
limited precision of the running average of the data be-
comes negligible almost surely in the analysis of the
quantized system (13).
We next prove Proposition 1.
Proof of Proposition 1: From the proof of Lemma 3, if
¯xi /∈ B,∀i, for any realization ω, there exists a Ti for each
i ∈ N , such that for t ≥ Ti, the term ∆zi(t) will be zero.
Let T0 = maxi∈N Ti; then from the iteration T0 on, the
system (13) reduces to system (11) in [25] with initial
values yi(T0),∀i ∈ N . Moreover, we have obtained that
for any t ≥ T0, it holds that zi(t) = R(¯xi). Hence, the
average of y(T0) satisfies
1(cid:62)y(T0)
n
1(cid:62) z(T0)
n
=
1
n
=
R(¯xi) = ¯xR,
(cid:88)
i∈N
since 1(cid:62)y(T0)/n = 1(cid:62) z(T0)/n holds for all time t.
Then, the statement in Proposition 1 follows directly
from Proposition 4 in [25]. Moreover, note that the dif-
ference between ¯xR and actual average belief ¯x is no
greater than ∆/2, since R(¯xi) − ¯xi < ∆/2,∀i ∈ N .
This further bounds the deviation between yi(t) and ¯xi.
Note that the argument above holds for any realization
ω, which completes the proof.
5.6 Proof of Proposition 2
The proof of Proposition 2 is similar to that of Proposi-
tion 1, where the key is to ensure that yi(t) only takes
a finite number of values a.s. We thus first present the
following lemma.
2
Lemma 4 Consider the quantized system (16). Under
Assumption 6, if ¯xi /∈ B,∀i ∈ N , then almost surely, the
values of yi(t), t ∈ {1, 2, . . .}, belong to a finite set for all
i ∈ N .
Proof: The proof for that the integer part (cid:98)yi(t)(cid:99) can
only take a finite number of values is identical to that
in Section 5.5. Moreover, by Assumption 6, wij(t) takes
values of either wij = aij/bij or 0. Thus, for the deci-
mal part, there still exists the least common multiple B(cid:48)
for the integers {bij : ∀j ∈ N , j (cid:54)= i}. Note that by As-
i
sumption 6, we need to consider all other agents j ∈ N ,
j (cid:54)= i, which are possibly connected with agent i. There-
fore, ci(t) = ci(t − 1) + Zi(t)/B(cid:48)
i + ∆zi(t) still holds for
some time-varying integer Zi(t), which implies that ci(t)
can only take a finite number of values. The rest of proof
follows directly from the proof of Lemma 3.
Similarly, as shown in the proof of Lemma 3, the limited
precision of the running average of the data becomes neg-
ligible a.s. with sufficiently long time. Thus, by Lemma
4, the proof of Proposition 2 follows from that of Theo-
rem 2 in [29], and we will not repeat it here for brevity.
Remark 2 Note that for the case when ¯xi ∈ B for some
i ∈ N , it is not clear whether the convergence results
in [25] and [29] can be extended to the setting here with the
joint quantization effects. In this case, the term ∆zi(t)
becomes a random variable that does not vanish to zero,
since the consecutive samples zi(t) and zi(t+1) are drawn
around ¯xi and can be truncated to either ¯xi + ∆/2 or
¯xi − ∆/2. Therefore, the term ∆zi(t) can take values of
∆, −∆, or 0, randomly at any time t. Based on extensive
simulations, we conjecture that the random error ∆zi(t)
will not accumulate, and that systems (14) and (16) will
asymptotically enter a small neighborhood around the de-
sired average belief a.s. We will illustrate this via numer-
ical simulations in Section 6, but a formal proof of this
2
result is yet not available.
6 Numerical results
In this section, we illustrate the convergence perfor-
mance of the proposed algorithms through numerical
examples. We consider a network of n = 10 agents.
Throughout the discussion of our numerical results, the
local beliefs of each agent ¯xi are generated uniformly
from [0, 100], and the sequential samples {xi(t)}∞
t=1 are
generated from a normal distribution with each local
belief ¯xi as the mean and 10 as the variance. At any
time t, we use the average error
(cid:80)n
i=1 yi(t) − ¯x
n
e(t) :=
to capture the convergence performance.
6.1 Undirected Graphs
We first study the convergence performance over a
static undirected graph. We test the proposed algorithm
on connected Random Geometric Graphs (RGG). The
RGGs are generated following [25] with connectivity ra-
dius R selected as R =(cid:112)10 ∗ log(n)/n = 1. This choice
of connectivity radius has been adopted by many in the
literature on RGG [25]. The doubly stochastic matrix W
is generated following the Metropolis weights [13]. For
each fixed W , we have repeated the simulation 20 times
(in terms of different realizations of agents' observed
samples) and present simulation results on convergence
11
(a) Convergence of the average error
Fig. 2. Performance evaluation over a time-varying undi-
rected graph
(b) Comparison with deterministic Distributed Averag-
ing
Fig. 1. Performance evaluation over a static undirected graph
in Fig. 1a (with the curve representing average error
and shaded region for variance).
It can be readily seen that our algorithm converges nicely
with bounded variance. Moreover, comparing its conver-
gence with that of the deterministic distributed averag-
ing algorithm, where true beliefs are revealed to each
agent at the initial time step, we see a clear (order-wise)
gap between these two scenarios, which is primarily due
to the sequential arriving nature of the data in our se-
quential data arriving setting (notice that in Fig. 1b we
have changed the y-axis to log scale). This also validates
the proved O(1/t) convergence rate of the algorithm,
which is order-wise slower than the deterministic sce-
nario (which is exponentially fast).
We then investigate the convergence performance over a
time-varying undirected graph. Following [29], we gen-
erate random probabilistic dynamic-graphs on the ba-
sis of a connected union graph. In particular, given a
union graph (N ,E), the agents i and j with (i, j) ∈ E are
connected with probability p, generating a time-varying
N(t). We make sure that the generated graph is con-
nected. Note that such time-varying graphs satisfy both
Assumptions 2 and 6. The Metropolis weights are then
calculated over this N(t) at each time t. As shown in Fig.
2, a higher value of p leads to a faster convergence rate as
expected. Moreover, a smaller variance is incurred when
the graph has less variability over time. In any case, the
polynomial convergence rate shown in Theorem 1 is cor-
roborated.
6.2 Directed Graphs
We next investigate the convergence performance over
directed graphs. To generate random directed graphs,
we first generate undirected RGGs and then randomly
delete some of the unidirectional edges between agents.
With a fixed union graph, a time-varying graph is gen-
erated in the same way as in Section 6.1. Thus, the
graphs satisfy Assumption 3. We have tested the update
(6) for both static and time-varying graphs. It can be
seen in Fig. 3 that the network-wide belief averaging is
successfully achieved at polynomial rate, which corrob-
orates the theoretical results in Theorem 2. Similarly, a
higher value of p results in a faster convergence rate and
a smaller variance.
(a) Convergence of the average error over a static graph
(b) Convergence of the average error over a time-varying
graph
Fig. 3. Performance evaluation over a directed graph
12
51015202530Time step5101520Average errorConvergence rate with standard deviation2040608010010−410−2100Time stepAverage error Deterministic Distributed AveragingDistributed Averaging w/ Sequential ObservationConvergence gap50100150200Time step102030Average errorp=0.1p=0.8520406080100Time step024Average errorConvergence rate with standard deviation20406080100Time step05101520Average errorp=0.1p=0.85 6.3 Quantization
In addition, we also study the effects of the two sources
of quantization considered in Section 4. To satisfy con-
ditions A.1) and A.2) in Assumption 4, we adopt a mod-
ified Metropolis weight as in [25]. Specifically, we let
1
, (i, j) ∈ N(t) ,
(32)
(a) Convergence of the average error
wij(t) =
C(1 + max{ni(t), nj(t)})
with C > 1 and wii(t) selected such that(cid:80)n
j=1 wij(t) =
1. Moreover, we choose the communication quantizer Q
to be the truncation operator, and the precision 8 ∆ to
be 0.1. We first consider the case when the local belief
¯xt /∈ B for any i ∈ N . It is demonstrated in Fig. 4 that
over a static undirected graph, the average error e(t) in-
deed converges in around 130 iterations under the quan-
tization we consider. In contrast to the results without
quantization, however, the convergence of the error e(t)
is stalled at somewhere above zero (note that we have
log scale y-axis in Fig. 4a). In fact, as shown in Fig. 4b,
the local state yi(t) converges to the neighborhood of
the average belief at a very fast rate. In the middle of
convergence, oscillation of the states is observed, which
is similar to the cyclic behavior as reported in [25]. Due
to the stochastic nature of the sequential data, the os-
cillation may not be exact cyclic. Eventually, the local
state values converge to the quantized consensus that
deviates from the actual average belief by less than 1.
More examples have been observed to have similar con-
vergence results as shown in Fig. 4, which corroborate
the convergence results in Proposition 1.
Likewise, as shown in Fig. 5a, over a time-varying graph,
the average error e(t) converges (in around 300 and 600
iterations for p = 0.85 and p = 0.1, respectively), at a
relatively slower rate than the case with a static graph.
Moreover, the error e(t) still fails to converge to exactly
zero due to the quantization effects. Furthermore, the
convergence behavior of the local states yi(t) in Fig. 5b
resembles what is shown in Fig. 4b, while it takes longer
time to converge to quantized consensus. Additionally,
we are also interested in the convergence performance
when some local beliefs ¯xi are inside the belief set B.
We thus specifically round the random beliefs ¯xi to the
set B by finding the value in B that is closest to ¯xi in
magnitude. Fig. 6a illustrates that the local states also
fail to reach exact consensus to the average belief. In-
terestingly, the states here do not achieve the quantized
consensus as in Fig. 4b and Fig.5b, while keep oscillat-
ing (though not exact cycling) around the neighborhood
of the consensual belief. This somehow reflects the dif-
ficulty we encountered in theoretical analysis, that the
8 Note that in practice, the precision may be smaller than
0.1. We choose such a relatively large value just to better
illustrate the convergence results.
13
(b) Convergence of the local state yi(t)
Fig. 4. Performance evaluation under quantization over a
static graph. In (b), each curve corresponds to the evolution
of local state yi(t) at each agent.
(a) Convergence of the average error
(b) Convergence of the local state yi(t) with p = 0.85
Fig. 5. Performance evaluation under quantization over a
time-varying graph. In (b), each curve corresponds to the
evolution of local state yi(t) at each agent.
50100150200250300Time step100Average error0300Time step020406080Local values15016017037.53838.527028029037.538100200300400500600700800Time step100Average errorp=0.1p=0.850800Time step050100Local values14515015516016517045.54646.572073074075076077045.546 (a) Convergence of the average error
(b) Convergence of the local state yi(t)
Fig. 6. Performance evaluation under quantization when
¯xi ∈ B for all i ∈ N . In (b), each curve corresponds to the
evolution of local state yi(t) at each agent.
difference of the running average with limited precision
will randomly take values from ∆, −∆, or 0 (see Remark
2). The random error ∆zi(t) does not accumulate over
time and the size of the neighborhood is bounded to be
within 1.
6.4 Convergence Speed
We also numerically investigate how the convergence
speed is influenced by the quantization effects. As shown
in Fig. 7, we compare the convergence of the average er-
rors under various levels of quantization. Note that ∆ =
0 represents the case where only communication quanti-
zation exists and the division operation leads to no pre-
cision errors. As expected, a higher level of quantization
leads to a slower convergence rate and a larger steady-
state error. Surprisingly, however, the convergence rate
is insensitive to either sources of quantizations. This im-
plies that O(1/t) seems to be an inherent convergence
rate in the distributed averaging problem using sequen-
tial data. Thus, we conjecture that the rate to reach con-
sensus under quantization is still in the order of O(1/t),
whose proof is left for future work.
7 Conclusion
In this paper, we have studied distributed learning of av-
erage belief over networks with sequential observations,
14
Fig. 7. Performance evaluation under various levels of quan-
tizations.
where in contrast to the conventional distributed averag-
ing problem setting, each agent's local belief is not avail-
able immediately and can only be learned through its
own observations. Two distributed algorithms have been
introduced for solving the problem over time-varying
undirected and directed graphs, and their polynomial
convergence rates have been established. We have also
modified the algorithm for the practical case in which
both quantized communication and limited precision of
division operation occur. Numerical results have been
provided to corroborate our theoretical findings.
For future work, we plan to investigate other important
aspects of the proposed scheme for distributed learning
of average belief with sequential data, e.g., the case un-
der malicious data attack or with privacy requirement
among agents. It is also interesting to connect the pro-
posed scheme with other distributed and multi-agent
learning algorithms [22, 36 -- 39].
Acknowledgements
The work of K. Zhang and T. Ba¸sar was supported in
part by Office of Naval Research (ONR) MURI Grant
N00014-16-1-2710, and in part by US Army Research
Office (ARO) Grant W911NF-16-1-0485. The work of
M. Liu is partially supported by the NSF under grants
ECCS 1446521, CNS-1646019, and CNS-1739517. The
authors also thank Zhuoran Yang from Princeton Uni-
versity for the helpful discussion that improves the final
version of the paper.
References
[1] Y. Liu, J. Liu, T. Ba¸sar, and M. Liu. Distributed belief
averaging using sequential observations. In Proceedings of the
2017 American Control Conference, pages 680 -- 685, 2017.
[2] A. Jadbabaie, J. Lin, and A. S. Morse. Coordination of
groups of mobile autonomous agents using nearest neighbor
rules. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 48(6):988 --
1001, 2003.
[3] J. Cort´es, S. Mart´ınez, T. Karata¸s, and F. Bullo. Coverage
control for mobile sensing networks. IEEE Transactions on
Robotics and Automation, 20(2):243 -- 255, 2004.
100200300400500600700Time step100Average error700Time step3040506070Local values66068070053.854 [4] K. Zhang, W. Shi, H. Zhu, E. Dall'Anese, and T. Ba¸sar.
Dynamic power distribution system management with a
locally connected communication network. IEEE Journal of
Selected Topics in Signal Processing, 12(4):673 -- 687, 2018.
[5] K. Zhang, L. Lu, C. Lei, H. Zhu, and Y. Ouyang. Dynamic
operations and pricing of electric unmanned aerial vehicle
systems and power networks. Transportation Research Part
C: Emerging Technologies, 92:472 -- 485, 2018.
[6] L. Krick, M. E. Broucke, and B. A. Francis. Stabilisation
of infinitesimally rigid formations of multi-robot networks.
International Journal of Control, 82(3):423 -- 439, 2009.
[7] S. Kar, J. M. Moura, and K. Ramanan. Distributed
estimation in sensor networks: Nonlinear
parameter
observation models and imperfect communication.
IEEE
Transactions on Information Theory, 58(6):3575 -- 3605, 2012.
[8] J. Liu, N. Hassanpour, S. Tatikonda, and A. S. Morse.
Dynamic threshold models of collective action in social
networks.
In Proceedings of the 51st IEEE Conference on
Decision and Control, pages 3991 -- 3996, 2012.
[9] T. Chen, S. Barbarossa, X. Wang, G. B. Giannakis, and
Z. Zhang. Learning and management for Internet-of-Things:
Accounting for adaptivity and scalability. Proc. of the IEEE,
November 2018.
[10] K. Zhang, W. Shi, H. Zhu, and T. Ba¸sar. Distributed
equilibrium-learning for power network voltage control with a
locally connected communication network. In IEEE Annual
American Control Conference, pages 3092 -- 3097. IEEE, 2018.
[11] A. Kashyap, T. Ba¸sar, and R. Srikant. Quantized consensus.
Automatica, 43(7):1192 -- 1203, 2007.
[12] L. Xiao and S. Boyd. Fast linear iterations for distributed
averaging. Systems and Control Letters, 53(1):65 -- 78, 2004.
[13] L. Xiao, S. Boyd, and S. Lall. A scheme for robust distributed
sensor fusion based on average consensus. In Proceedings of
the 4th International Conference on Information Processing
in Sensor Networks, pages 63 -- 70, 2005.
[14] S. Boyd, A. Ghosh, B. Prabhakar, and D. Shah. Randomized
IEEE Transactions on Information
gossip algorithms.
Theory, 52(6):2508 -- 2530, 2006.
[15] J. Liu, S. Mou, A. S. Morse, B. D. O. Anderson, and
C. Yu. Deterministic gossiping. Proceedings of the IEEE,
99(9):1505 -- 1524, 2011.
[16] D. Kempe, A. Dobra, and J. Gehrke.
Gossip-based
computation of aggregate information. In Proceedings of the
44th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer
Science, pages 482 -- 491, 2003.
[17] F. B´en´ezit, V. Blondel, P. Thiran, J. N. Tsitsiklis, and
M. Vetterli. Weighted gossip: Distributed averaging using
non-doubly stochastic matrices. In Proceedings of the 2010
IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory,
pages 1753 -- 1757, 2010.
[18] A. D. Dom´ınguez-Garc´ıa, S. T. Cady, and C. N.
Hadjicostis. Decentralized optimal dispatch of distributed
energy resources. In Proceedings of the 51st IEEE Conference
on Decision and Control, pages 3688 -- 3693, 2012.
[19] J. Liu and A. S. Morse. Asynchronous distributed averaging
In Proceedings of the 2012
using double linear iterations.
American Control Conference, pages 6620 -- 6625, 2012.
[20] M. Huang and J. H. Manton. Coordination and consensus
of networked agents with noisy measurements: Stochastic
algorithms and asymptotic behavior.
SIAM Journal on
Control and Optimization, 48(1):134 -- 161, 2009.
[21] S. Kar and J. M. Moura. Consensus+innovations distributed
inference over networks: Cooperation and sensing in
15
networked systems.
30(3):99 -- 109, 2013.
IEEE Signal Processing Magazine,
[22] M. A. Rahimian and A.
Distributed
estimation and learning over heterogeneous networks.
In
Communication, Control, and Computing (Allerton), 2016
54th Annual Allerton Conference on, pages 1314 -- 1321, 2016.
Jadbabaie.
[23] A. Nedi´c, A. Olshevsky, A. Ozdaglar, and J. N. Tsitsiklis.
On distributed averaging algorithms and quantization effects.
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 54(11):2506 -- 2517,
2009.
[24] R. Carli, F. Fagnani, P. Frasca, and S. Zampieri.
Gossip consensus algorithms via quantized communication.
Automatica, 46(1):70 -- 80, 2010.
[25] M. El Chamie, J. Liu, and T. Ba¸sar. Design and analysis of
distributed averaging with quantized communication. IEEE
Transactions on Automatic Control, 61(12):3870 -- 3884, 2016.
[26] K. Cai and H. Ishii. Quantized consensus and averaging on
gossip digraphs. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,
56(9):2087 -- 2100, 2011.
[27] T. Ba¸sar, S. R. Etesami, and A. Olshevsky.
Fast
convergence of quantized consensus using Metropolis chains.
In Proceedings of the 53rd IEEE Conference on Decision and
Control, pages 1330 -- 1334. IEEE, 2014.
[28] R. Durrett. Probability: Theory and Examples. Cambridge
University Press, 2010.
[29] M. El Chamie, J. Liu, T. Ba¸sar, and B. A¸cıkme¸se. Distributed
averaging with quantized communication over dynamic
graphs.
In Proceedings of the 55th IEEE Conference on
Decision and Control, pages 4827 -- 4832. IEEE, 2016.
[30] J. Lavaei and R. M. Murray. Quantized consensus by means of
gossip algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,
57(1):19 -- 32, 2012.
[31] S. Patterson, B. Bamieh, and A. El Abbadi. Convergence
rates of distributed average consensus with stochastic
link failures.
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,
55(4):880 -- 892, 2010.
[32] J. Liu, A. S. Morse, A. Nedi´c, and T. Ba¸sar. Internal stability
of linear consensus processes. In Proceedings of the 53rd IEEE
Conference on Decision and Control, pages 922 -- 927, 2014.
[33] E. Seneta. Non-negative Matrices and Markov Chains.
Sringer, 2006.
[34] J. Liu, T. Ba¸sar, and A. Nedi´c.
Input-output stability of
linear consensus processes. In Proceedings of the 55th IEEE
Conference on Decision and Control, pages 6978 -- 6983, 2016.
[35] A. Nedi´c and A. Olshevsky. Distributed optimization
IEEE Transactions on
over time-varying directed graphs.
Automatic Control, 60(3):601 -- 615, 2015.
[36] O. Shamir. Fundamental limits of online and distributed
In
algorithms for statistical
Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pages
163 -- 171, 2014.
learning and estimation.
[37] W. Zhang, P. Zhao, W. Zhu, S. C. Hoi, and T. Zhang.
Projection-free distributed online learning in networks.
In
International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 4054 --
4062, 2017.
[38] K. Zhang, Z. Yang, H. Liu, T. Zhang, and T. Ba¸sar.
Fully decentralized multi-agent reinforcement learning with
networked agents. In International Conference on Machine
Learning, pages 5867 -- 5876, 2018.
[39] K. Zhang, Z. Yang, and T. Ba¸sar. Networked multi-agent
reinforcement learning in continuous spaces. In Proceedings
of the 57rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 2018.
|
1709.05793 | 1 | 1709 | 2017-09-18T07:21:33 | MAX-consensus in open multi-agent systems with gossip interactions | [
"cs.MA",
"math.OC"
] | We study the problem of distributed maximum computation in an open multi-agent system, where agents can leave and arrive during the execution of the algorithm. The main challenge comes from the possibility that the agent holding the largest value leaves the system, which changes the value to be computed. The algorithms must as a result be endowed with mechanisms allowing to forget outdated information. The focus is on systems in which interactions are pairwise gossips between randomly selected agents. We consider situations where leaving agents can send a last message, and situations where they cannot. For both cases, we provide algorithms able to eventually compute the maximum of the values held by agents. | cs.MA | cs | MAX-consensus in open multi-agent systems with
gossip interactions
Mahmoud Abdelrahim, Julien M. Hendrickx and W.P.M.H. Heemels
7
1
0
2
p
e
S
8
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
3
9
7
5
0
.
9
0
7
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract -- We study the problem of distributed maximum
computation in an open multi-agent system, where agents can
leave and arrive during the execution of the algorithm. The
main challenge comes from the possibility that the agent holding
the largest value leaves the system, which changes the value to
be computed. The algorithms must as a result be endowed
with mechanisms allowing to forget outdated information. The
focus is on systems in which interactions are pairwise gossips
between randomly selected agents. We consider situations where
leaving agents can send a last message, and situations where
they cannot. For both cases, we provide algorithms able to
eventually compute the maximum of the values held by agents.
I. INTRODUCTION
Multi-agent systems involve interacting elements with
computing capabilities, also called agents or nodes, who
communicate with each other to achieve a collective control
task that is more difficult or sometimes even impossible to
be performed by an individual agent. This configuration of
multi-agent systems has a great benefit to model and solve
many problems in different fields of applications including
sensor networks [1] -- [3], computer networks [4], [5] and
social science [6] -- [8]. One of the common problems that has
been studied in these applications is the consensus of multi-
agent systems on aggregate functions such as, e.g., MIN,
MAX, SUM and AVERAGE. For instance, in a group of
distributed sensors, it can be required to compute the average
temperature of a specific region or to elect the sensor with
maximum power resource to preserve the communication
over a costly link or to reduce energy for a wireless sensor
network, see, e.g., [9] -- [11].
Most existing results of the literature rely on the assump-
tion that the system composition is static, i.e., the set of
Mahmoud Abdelrahim is with the Department of Mechanical Engi-
neering, Assiut University, Egypt. Julien Hendrickx is with the ICTEAM
institute, Universit´e catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Maurice Heemels is with the Control Systems Technology Group, De-
partment of Mechanical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technol-
ogy, the Netherlands. Email addresses: [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected].
Mahmoud Abdelrahim and Maurice Heemels were supported by the
Innovational Research Incentives Scheme under the VICI grant "Wireless
control systems: A new frontier in automation" (No. 11382) awarded by
NWO (The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research) and STW
(Dutch Technology Foundation). Julien Hendrickx's work is partially sup-
ported by the Belgian Network DYSCO (Dynamical Systems, Control,
and Optimization), funded by the Interuniversity Attraction Poles Program,
initiated by the Belgian Science Policy Office, and by the Concerted
Research Action (ARC) programme supported by the Federation Wallonia-
Brussels.
agents present in the system does not change after the initial
time, see, e.g., [10], [12] -- [14] and the references therein.
However, this requirement can be difficult to satisfy in some
implementation scenarios where new agents can join and/or
existing agents can leave the network at any time instant.
This phenomenon is known in the literature as "network
churn" [15], [16], "dynamic network" [17] -- [19] or "open
multi-agent systems" [20] -- [22]. In this case, the consensus
problem on aggregate estimates becomes more challenging to
handle compared to the case of static networks. For instance,
consider the paradigmatic problem of MAX-consensus with
distributed communications and assume that the agent with
the largest state value has left the network after all the
agents have converged to its state value. In this case, all
the existing nodes in the network will then hold outdated
information. This scenario cannot occur in static networks,
which highlights one of the inherent challenges of open
multi-agent systems.
In this paper, we investigate the problem of MAX-
consensus in open multi-agent systems with distributed com-
munications. The agents are assumed to be anonymous, do
not have global identifiers, and all run the same algorithm.
We further assume that interactions only occur via pairwise
"gossip" exchanges between randomly selected agents in the
sense that, at any (discrete) time instant, (only) two agents are
selected randomly to exchange their information, update their
MAX estimates and possibly other variables. To cope with
the dynamic nature of the network, two different solutions
are proposed depending on whether or not it is possible for
the leaving agents to announce their departures.
In the case in which announcements are made, our algo-
rithm relies on a variable that describes how "up-to-date"
agents are with respect to recent departures, and priority
is given to information coming from the most "up-to-date"
agents. In the case where agents disappear without sending
a last message, our algorithm maintains an estimate of
the age of the information, and estimates corresponding to
information deemed too old are discarded.
We will show that our two approaches ensure that outdated
information can be forgotten, and that the consensus on the
MAX value can be achieved (with high probability) if the
system composition stops evolving.
The problem of MAX-consensus in multi-agent systems
has been studied in, e.g., [10], [11], [23], [24]. Among
existing techniques, the work of [10] has considered MAX-
consensus with random gossip interactions between agents,
on a static network. Compared to existing works of the
literature, our result is adapted to the problem of MAX-
consensus in multi-agent systems when the network is open,
which has not been considered in the previously mentioned
works. Our proposed approach encompasses the result of
pairwise gossip interaction in static networks in [10] as a
particular case.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows.
Notations are given in Section II. The problem is formulated
in Section III. In Section IV, we treat the case where leaving
agents send a last message, and in Section V, we treat the
case where they do not. Numerical simulations are given
in Section VI. Conclusions and discussions are provided in
Section VII.
II. NOTATION
Let R := (−∞,∞), R(cid:62)0 := [0,∞), N := {0, 1, 2, . . .},
N(cid:62)1 := {1, 2, . . .} and N(cid:62)T := {T, T + 1, . . .} for T ∈
N. We denote by 0n and 1n the vectors in Rn whose all
elements are 0 or 1, respectively. We write AT to denote
the transpose of A, and (x, y) ∈ Rnx+ny to represent the
vector [xT , yT ]T for x ∈ Rnx and y ∈ Rny. The symbol In
stands for the identity matrix of dimension n. For a random
variable R, the symbol E(R) denotes the expectation of R.
III. PROBLEM STATEMENT
Consider a connected time-varying graph G(t) =
(V(t),E(t)), where V(t) and E(t) denote, respectively, the
set of existing agents and the set of edges in the graph
at time t ∈ N. The graph G(t) is dynamic in the sense
that new agents can join and/or existing agents can leave
at any time t. Hence, the cardinality of V(t), denoted by
N (t), is not necessarily constant for all t ∈ N. The agents
communicate with each other in a pairwise randomized
gossip fashion [9]. In other words, at any time instant t ∈ N,
there are three possibilities: (i) an agent joins the system
and N (t + 1) = N (t) + 1, (ii) an agent leaves the system
and N (t + 1) = N (t) − 1, or (iii) two randomly selected
agents i, j ∈ V(t), i (cid:54)= j communicate with each other (Note
that these discrete-time instants may be interpreted as the
sampling of an asynchronous process at those times where
an event occurs). Joining agents are assumed to know that
they join the system. Leaving agents may or may not be able
to send one last message (to one other agent) before leaving,
which are two cases of interest, which will be discussed in
Section IV and V, respectively.
Every agent i has two special states: xi ∈ R is its intrinsic
value, which is constant and determined arbitrarily when
joining the system, and yi(t) is its estimated answer at time
t ∈ N for the MAX value. Our goal is to estimate the
maximum intrinsic value of all the agents present in the
system, so we would ideally want, when no more agents
are joining or leaving the network after time T ∈ N, that
there is a time T ∗ ∈ N (cid:62) T such that yi(t) = MAX(t) :=
maxj∈V(t) xj, for all i ∈ V(t) and for t ∈ N (cid:62) T ∗. Agents
may then have other states that they use to reach this goal.
If the network would be static, i.e., G(t) is time-invariant,
the estimation of the maximum could be achieved in finite
time by starting from yi(0) = xi(0) for every agent, and
setting yi(t + 1) = yj(t + 1) = max(yi(t), yj(t)) whenever
time t ∈ N, see, e.g., [10].
agents i and j interact at
The main challenge in a dynamic or open network lies
with the need for the algorithm to take new agents into
account and to eventually discard information related to
agents no longer present in the system to ensure that maxj xj
is eventually recovered once the system composition stops
evolving. Classical algorithms such as that in [10] do not
guarantee this: outdated values from agents no longer in the
system may never be discarded.
Note that an alternative and maybe more natural goal
would be to have the yi(t), i ∈ V(t) track MAX(t) =
maxj∈V(t) xj sufficiently accurately. This more ambitious
goal is left for future studies, see Section VII for further
discussions on this issue.
Finally, we chose to make the following assumption for
the sake of simplicity of exposition.
Assumption 1. The graph G(t) = (V(t),E(t)) is complete
for all t ∈ N.
(cid:3)
This means that every pair of distinct agents in the network
can communicate directly with each other. The algorithms we
develop would actually also work on general dynamic graphs
under suitable connectivity assumptions, but
the analysis
would be more complex.
IV. DEPARTURES ARE ANNOUNCED
A. Algorithm description
If leaving agents announce their departure (to one other
agent), then we can benefit from this knowledge to correct
the outdated information. For that purpose, we introduce an
auxiliary variable κi(t) ∈ N at each agent, meant to represent
the "level of information" available to i about the departures
up to time t ∈ N. It will in general not be equal to the actual
number of departures, nor converge to it. The algorithm
is designed to ensure that those with the largest value κi
have valid estimates, i.e. their yi(t) correspond to the xj of
agents present in the system. For this purpose, information
coming from agents with higher κi will be given priority
over information coming from agents with lower values, and
it will be made sure that agents with a lower value of κi will
never have influenced those with a higher value.
The algorithm is summarized as follows. Initially, every
existing agent at t = 0 sets yi(0) = xi and κi = 0, i ∈ V(0),
as shown in Algorithm 1.
Algorithm 1 Intialization algorithm
At time t = 0, every existing node i ∈ V(0) initializes its
state as
1: yi(0) = xi
2: κi(0) = 0
When a new agent n joins the group at time t ∈ N, it
initializes its counter κn(t) and its estimate yn(t) according
to Algorithm 2.
Algorithm 2 Joining algorithm
Assume at any time t ∈ N(cid:62)1, a new agent n wants to join,
i.e., V(t + 1) = V(t) ∪ {n}. Agent n initializes its state as
1: yn(t) = xn
2: κn(t) = 0
If an agent (cid:96) leaves the system, it sends a last message
containing its counter value κ(cid:96) to a randomly selected agent
m. The reaction of m is governed by Algorithm 3, which
can be interpreted as follows: If the counter κ(cid:96)(t) of the
leaving agent (cid:96) is less than κm(t), then agent m ignores this
departure since the information of (cid:96) is deemed less up-to-date
than its own and has not influenced it. On the other hand, if
κ(cid:96)(t) (cid:62) κm(t), then (cid:96) may have influenced m and possibly
agents i with values κi higher than κm, but no larger than
κ(cid:96). To ensure that none of the agents with the highest values
κ hold the now outdated value xl, m will reset its ym to
xm, which is by definition a valid value, and set its κm to
κ(cid:96) + 1, a value above that of all those who could have been
influenced by (cid:96).
Algorithm 3 Departure algorithm
Assume at time t ∈ N, agent (cid:96) leaves, i.e., V(t + 1) =
V(t) \ {(cid:96)}.
Agent (cid:96) picks a random agent m to inform, and agent m
updates its state as follows
1: if κ(cid:96)(t) < κm(t) then
ym(t + 1) = ym(t)
2:
κm(t + 1) = κm(t)
3:
4: else if κ(cid:96)(t) (cid:62) κm(t) then
5:
6:
7: end if
ym(t + 1) = xm
κm(t + 1) = κ(cid:96)(t) + 1
The gossip communication between agents is performed
via Algorithm 4 (values not explicitly updated remain con-
stant between t and t + 1). When κi(t) = κj(t), this implies
that agents i and j either have not been informed about
any departure from the group, i.e., κi(t) = κj(t) = 0, or
have equal information level about the departure of one or
more agents. In either case, agents i and j can exchange
their information to update their estimate for the MAX
value. When κi(t) > κj(t), agent i's information about past
departures is deemed more up to date. Agent j is then not
allowed to transfer its estimate yj to avoid infecting i with
possibly outdated information (unless its estimate is actually
its own value, which is by definition valid). Therefore, agent
j restarts to max(yi(t), xj) and increments its counter to
κj(t + 1) = κi(t) in order to alert other future agents
who have not been informed yet to restart. The case when
κj(t) > κi(t) is completely symmetric.
yi(t + 1) = yj(t + 1) = max(yi(t), yj(t))
Algorithm 4 Gossip algorithm
At each time step t ∈ N, two agents i, j ∈ V(t) are picked
randomly (with possibly i = j)
1: if κi(t) = κj(t) then
2:
3: else if κi(t) > κj(t) then
4:
5:
6: else
7:
8:
9: end if
yi(t + 1) = yj(t + 1) = max(xi, yj(t))
κi(t + 1) = κj(t)
yi(t + 1) = yj(t + 1) = max(yi(t), xj)
κj(t + 1) = κi(t)
B. Eventual Correctness
We now show that the algorithm described in the previous
subsection is correct in the sense that, with high probability
(and even almost surely), it eventually settles on the correct
value if arrivals and departures stop.
Remember that V(t) := {1, . . . ,N (t)} denotes the group
of agents present at time t, and let X := {x1, . . . , xN (t)} be
the set of intrinsic values of nodes in V(t). Assume that after
some time T ∈ N no agent leaves and no new agent joins
the system, so that V(t) = V(T ) = V, E(t) = E(T ) = E
and N (t) = N (T ) = N for all t ∈ N(cid:62)T . Then, we need
to show that all the currently existing agents V(T ) in the
network will successfully reach the correct maximum value.
For that purpose, we define the following property.
Definition 1. We say that an algorithm is eventually correct
if for any T ∈ N with G(t) = (V,E) for all t ∈ NT , there
exists a T ∗ ∈ N(cid:62)T such that yi(t) = maxj∈V xj for all
i ∈ V and all t ∈ NT ∗.
Denote K(t) := max
i∈V(t)
κi(t), MAX(t) = max
i∈V(t)
xi and
XK(t) := {xi : i ∈ V(t) ∧ κi(t) = K(t)}. We state the
following result.
Lemma 1. For all t ∈ N and any j ∈ V(t), if κj(t) = K(t)
then yj(t) ∈ XK(t) ⊆ X(t).
Lemma 1 states that, at any time t ∈ N, if the counter value
of an agent j ∈ V(t) is equal to the maximum value K(t),
then its estimate yj(t) is equal to an intrinsic value xi ∈
XK(t) of one of the agents present in the system at this
time t and whose value κi is K(t).
Proof. Consider any agent j ∈ V(t) with κj(t) = K(t). We
have three scenarios:
(a) Agent j has just joined the system at time t. Hence,
κj(t) = 0 and yj(t) = xj according to Algorithm 2.
Since κj(t) = K(t), this implies that K(t) = 0. Hence,
Ki(t) = 0 for all i ∈ V(t). Consequently, it holds that
yj(t) ∈ XK(t) = X(t).
(b) K(t) > K(t− 1) (and j is not a new agent). In this case,
since at most one agent can change its counter at any time,
there is exactly one agent j with κj(t) = K(t). This implies
that an agent (cid:96) ∈ V(t− 1) with κ(cid:96)(t− 1) = K(t− 1) has left
at time t and informed agent j about its departure, otherwise
κj(t) (cid:54)= K(t) or K(t) ≯ K(t − 1). Consequently, agent j
restarts according to lines 7-9 in Algorithm 3 and we have
that κj(t) = K(t− 1) + 1 = K(t) and yj(t) = xj ∈ XK(t).
(c) K(t) = K(t − 1) (and j is not a new agent). We have
two possibilities:
c1) κj(t) > κj(t − 1), i.e., agent j has increased its counter
value at time t such that κj(t) = K(t) = K(t − 1), which
can happen by one of the following actions:
- an agent i ∈ V(t − 1) with κi(t − 1) = K(t − 1) −
1 (cid:62) κj(t − 1) has left the group and informed agent j
about its departure. Consequently, in view of lines 4-6
in Algorithm 3, agent j has incremented its counter to
κj(t) = κi(t − 1) + 1 = K(t − 1) = K(t), otherwise
κj(t) (cid:54)= K(t − 1) and yj(t) = xj ∈ XK(t).
- no departure occurred but agent j has interacted with
an agent i ∈ V(t − 1) with κi(t − 1) = K(t − 1).
Consequently, in view of lines 4-6 in Algorithm 4, we
obtain κj(t) = κi(t − 1) = K(t − 1) = K(t) and
yj(t) = max(xj, yi(t − 1)) ∈ XK(t).
c2) κj(t) = κj(t−1), i.e., agent j did not increase its counter
value at time t. Then, since K(t) = K(t − 1), it holds that
κj(t − 1) = K(t − 1) and we know that yj(t − 1) = xi for
some xi ∈ X(t − 1). There are two different possibilities:
- yj(t) (cid:54)= yj(t − 1), which can only happen if agent j
has interacted via algorithm 4 with an agent h with
κh(t − 1) = K(t − 1). Hence, in view of line 3 in
algorithm 4, it holds that yj(t) = yh(t − 1) ∈ XK(t).
- yj(t) = yj(t − 1) = xi. We know that agent i did
not leave because otherwise it would have been true
that agent i has informed some neighbour m about its
departure and resulted in κm(t) = κi(t − 1) + 1 =
K(t − 1) + 1, which leads to case (b) not case (c).
Hence, since i ∈ V(t), it holds that yj(t) ∈ XK(t).
This completes the proof of Lemma 1.
Theorem 1. Suppose that Assumption 1 holds. Then, Algo-
rithm 1-4 is eventually correct.
(cid:3)
Proof. The proof of Theorem 1 relies on Lemma 1 and the
result developed in [10]. Note that an essential difference
between our problem and the setup in [10] is that the gossip
interaction between agents (as in Algorithm 4) depends
considerably on their counter values, which is not the case
in static networks as in [10]. Therefore, we will invoke their
result twice, once on the counter values κi to show that all
agents eventually have the maximal counter value K(T ), and
once on the actual estimate yi(t) to show that they eventually
reach MAX(T ).
After time T , only Algorithm 4 is applied. Ignoring for
the moment its effect on the yi(t), observe that it performs
a classical gossip operation on the κi(t), in the sense that an
interaction between i and j results in κi(t+1) = κj(t+1) =
max(κi(t), κj(t)). Theorem 4, 5 in [10], applied to complete
graphs following Assumption 1, allows us then to guarantee
that the counters of all agents converge to the maximum
counter value K(T ) in a finite time T ∗
1 with the following
properties
E(T ∗
1 − T ) (cid:54) (N − 1)hN−1,
(cid:80)n
where hn denotes the nth harmonic number, i.e., hn :=
k . Moreover, we have, with probability 1 − that
(cid:32)
1 − T is bounded by
T ∗
(N − 1)hN−1
(cid:19)(cid:32)
(cid:18)N
(cid:33)(cid:33)
(cid:115)
1
k=1
1+log
1+
1+
(1)
1
log N
.
(2)
After T , since κi(t) = K(t) for all i, it follows from
Lemma 1 that all yi(t) correspond to actual values xj, j ∈ V.
Moreover, since one can easily verify that yi(t) (cid:62) xi at all
times, there holds maxi∈V yi(t) = maxi∈V xi = MAX(t) =
MAX(T ). It is therefore sufficient to show that all yi(t)
eventually settle on the same value.
1 as on T ∗
For this purpose, observe that when all agents have the
same κi(t) = K(t), Algorithm 4 reduces to its line 2,
yi(t + 1) = yj(t + 1) = max(yi(t), yj(t)), which is again a
classical pairwise gossip. We can then re-invoke Theorem
4, 5 in [10] to show the existence of a T ∗ after which
yi(t) = maxi∈V yi(T ∗) = maxi∈barV xi = MAX, with
the same bounds on T ∗ − T ∗
1 − T . In particular,
E(T ∗ − T ) (cid:54) 2(N − 1)hN−1, and there is a probability
1− that T ∗− T is at most twice the expression in (2). This
(cid:3)
achieves the proof of Theorem 1.
Remark 1. Note that, since we apply the result of [10] twice
to prove that Algorithm 1-4 is eventually correct, the upper
bound that we obtain on the time needed to achieve this
property is conservative. This comes from the fact that, in
Algorithm 1-4, the agents update their counters and their
(cid:3)
estimates simultaneously and not sequentially.
V. DEPARTURES ARE NOT ANNOUNCED
A. Algorithm description
Leaving agents may not always be able to announce
their departure, such as in case of unforeseen failures or
disconnections. The algorithms in Section IV can no longer
be applied in such a more challenging setting. Therefore,
we now propose an alternative algorithm that does not use
messages from departing agents. The idea is to have each
agent maintain a variable Ti representing the "age" of its
information. This age Ti
is kept at 0 when the agent's
estimate yi(t) of MAX(t) corresponds to (only) its own
value xi, as the validity of its information is then guaranteed.
Otherwise Ti is increased by 1 every time agent i interacts
with another agent, as the information gets "older". When an
agent i changes its estimate yi(t) by adopting the estimate
yj(t) of an agent j, it also sets Ti(t) to the value Tj(t), which
corresponds to the age of the new information it now holds.
Finally, when Ti(t) reaches a threshold T ∗, the information
yi(t) is considered too old to be reliable and is discarded;
yi(t) is reset to xi and Ti(t) to 0. We defer the discussion
on the value of T ∗ to Section VII, but already note that it
should depend on (bounds of) the system size, or (possibly)
change with time.
Formally, the behavior of an agent joining the system is
governed by Algorithm 5, while the update of Ti(t) and
the gossip interactions are governed by Algorithms 6 and 7
(where we use yi(t+),Ti(t+) to denote intermediate values
the variables yi,Ti may take during the computation leading
to their values at t + 1). Observe that when i and j have
the same estimate yi(t) = yj(t) they update the age of
information to the smallest among Ti(t) and Tj(t). Observe
also that the algorithms guarantee that yi(t) (cid:62) xi for every
i at all times, since yi(t) can never decrease except when it
is re-initialized at xi. Finally, there is no algorithm for the
departure, since agents are not assumed to be able to take
any action when other agents leave as this is not announced.
Algorithm 5 Joining algorithm
Assume at time t ∈ N(cid:62)1, a new agent n wants to join. Agent
n initializes its state as follows
1: yn(t) = xn
2: Tn(t) = 0
Algorithm 6 UpdateTimer
When agent i calls this procedure1:
1: if yi(t) = xi then
Ti(t+) = 0
2:
yi(t+) = xi
3:
4: else
Ti(t+) = Ti(t) + 1
5:
yi(t+) = yi(t)
6:
7: end if
8: if Ti(t) = T ∗ then
9:
10:
11: end if
yi(t+) = xi
Ti(t+) = 0
(cid:46) guaranteed validity of estimate
(cid:46) estimate gets one period older
(cid:46) Reset if threshold reached
Algorithm 7 Gossip algorithm
At each time step t, two agents i, j are picked randomly
1: UpdateTimer(i), UpdateTimer(j)
2: if yi(t+) > yj(t+) then
yj(t + 1) = yi(t+)
3:
Tj(t + 1) = Ti(t+)
4:
5: else if yj(t+) < yi(t+) then
6:
7:
8: else if yj(t+) = yi(t+) then
9:
10: end if
yi(t + 1) = yj(t+)
Ti(t + 1) = Tj(t+)
Ti(t + 1),Tj(t + 1) := min(Ti(t+),Tj(t+))
B. Eventual Correctness
We now discuss the eventual correctness of the algorithm
described above. For space reasons, only sketches of proofs
will be presented. We use the same conventions as in Section
IV-B. We first prove that outdated values are eventually
discarded if agents stop leaving or arriving.
Lemma 2. If no arrival or departure takes place after time
T ∈ N, then almost surely there exists a time T (cid:48) ∈ N
after which every estimate yi corresponds to the value of
an agent present in the system, i.e., for t ∈ N (cid:62) T (cid:48), for
all i there exists a j ∈ V(t) = V such that yi(t) = xj. As
a consequence, yi(t) (cid:54) MAX(T ) = maxj∈V xj for every
i ∈ V(t) = V and t ∈ N (cid:62) T (cid:48).
Proof. Observe first that agents can only set their yi to their
own xi or to the value yj of some other agent. Hence, since
the set of values xi remains unchanged after T , values yi(t)
for times t (cid:62) T that are not equal to some xj, j ∈ V, must be
equal to some yj(T ), i.e., must have been held as estimated
at time T . We show that these outdated values are eventually
discarded.
Let z ∈ R be such an outdated value, that is, yi(T ) = z
for some i ∈ V but z = xj for no j ∈ V. Let then D(t) =
{i ∈ V : yi(t) = z} be the set of agents holding z as estimate
at time t, and τ (t) = min{Ti(t) : i ∈ D(t)} be the minimal
age of information at t for those holding this outdated value
as estimate. As long as D(t) is non-empty, there must hold
τ (t) (cid:54) T ∗ due to the reset in Algorithm 6. We will show
that τ (t) must keep increasing if D(t) remains non-empty,
leading to a contradiction.
Every time an agent i ∈ D(t) for which Ti(t) = τ (t)
interacts with some other agent, It follows from Algorithm
7 and the timer update in Algorithm 6 that it must increase
its counter Ti by 1, unless it changes its value yi and no
longer belongs to D(t + 1). In both cases the set of agents
in D(t) with this Ti
taking this value has decreased by
1. Besides, since z is equal to no xi, the only way an
agent i can join D(t + 1) if it was not in D(t) is by
interacting with an agent j ∈ D(t), and the rules of the
algorithm imply then that Ti(t + 1) = Tj(t) + 1 (cid:62) τ (t) + 1.
Hence τ (t) = mini∈D(t) Ti(t) never decreases, and when
it
the number of agents in D(t) for
which Ti(t) = τ (t) either remains constant, or decreases
as soon as one of them is involved in an interaction (once
it reaches 0, τ (t) automatically increases). Since all agents
are almost surely repeatedly involved in interactions, this
means τ (t) will almost surely eventually increase as long
as D(t) is nonempty, in contradiction with the fact that it
cannot exceed T ∗. D(t) must thus almost surely eventually
be empty, which means that any outdated value is thus almost
surely eventually discarded, so that after some time T (cid:48) every
estimate yi(t) corresponds to a xj for j ∈ V.
(cid:3)
Let us now prove that the agents' estimates yi eventually
increasing,
is not
take the correct value MAX with a high probability.
Theorem 2. For all > 0, there exists a (sufficiently large)
T ∗ ∈ N such that, if no arrival or departure takes place
after time T ∈ N, then there exists a time T (cid:48)(cid:48) ∈ N (cid:62) T after
which yi(t) = MAX(T ) = maxj∈V xj holds for every i ∈ V
with a probability at least 1 − .
Proof. Let m be an agent holding the maximal value after
time T : xm = MAX = maxi∈V xi. It follows from Lemma
2 that ym(t) (cid:54) MAX holds after some T (cid:48), which implies
ym(t) = MAX = xm, since one can verify that yi(t) (cid:62) xi
holds for all agents at all times. The timer update Algorithm
6 implies then that Tm(t) = 0 at all times after T (cid:48).
Let us now fix some arbitrary time t0 (cid:62) T (cid:48) and let C(t) ⊆
V be the set of agents i such that (i) yi(t) = MAX, and
(ii) Ti (cid:54) t − t0. The set C(t0) contains at least agent m.
Moreover, for t ∈ [t0, t0 + T ∗ − 1], there holds C(t) ⊆
C(t + 1). Indeed, observe first that no agent of C(t) "resets"
because the Ti of agents in C(t) are by definition smaller
than T ∗. Moreover, agents in C(t) do not change their value
yi either because it follows from Lemma 2 that no agent j
has a value yj (cid:62) yi = MAX, so condition (i) still holds.
Besides, the timer Ti increase by at most 1 at each iteration
so condition (ii) also holds. Observe now that whenever an
agent i ∈ C(t) interacts with an agent j (cid:54)∈ C(t) at a time
t ∈ [t0, t0+T ∗−1], agent j will set yj(t+1) to yi(t) = MAX
and join C(t + 1). A reasoning similar to that the analysis of
classical pairwise gossip algorithm in [10] shows then that,
for every , there exists of a τ given by (2) such that with
probability at least 1 − , all agents will be in C(t) after
t0 + τ and at least until t0 + T (provided T (cid:62) τ). There
would thus hold yi = MAX for all i. Since this holds true
for any arbitrary t0 (cid:62) T (cid:48), it follows that for every i and
t (cid:62) T (cid:48) + τ, yi(t) = MAX holds with probability at least
1 − .
(cid:3)
The proofs of eventual correctness show that the value of
the threshold T ∗ is subject to a trade-off: We see from the
proof of Lemma 2 that the time needed to discard outdated
values increases when T ∗ is increased. On the other hand,
a sufficiently large threshold is needed in Theorem 2. In its
proof, we see that larger thresholds allow larger τ, which
imply smaller probabilities of some agent not having the
correct value.
Besides, we see in Theorem 2 that T ∗ must be sufficiently
larger than the expression (2), which depends on N , the even-
tual size of the system. This implies that agent must know at
least a bound on this size, unlike in the algorithm developed
in Section IV when leaving agents could send a last message.
One theoretical solution to avoid this problem would be to
let T ∗ slowly grow with time, so that it would eventually
always be sufficiently large if the system composition stops
changing (This growth should be sufficiently slow for the
argument of Lemma 2 still to be valid). However, the system
would also become slower and slower in discarding outdated
information.
VI. SIMULATIONS
We demonstrate the application of our algorithms on a
group of 25 agents: Initially, the intrinsic states xi of all
agents were assigned to random integer values between 0
and 1000. The largest two values of xi are found to be x9 =
936 and x13 = 815. The estimates yi(0) for all agents are
initialized to xi and all the counters κi(0) and ages Ti(0)
are initialized to 0. Agent 9 with the highest value, x9 =
(a)
(b)
(c)
Fig. 1. Evolution with time of the agent estimates yi(t) for the algorithm of
Section IV where departures can be announced (a), and of Section V where
departures are not announced, for tresholds T ∗ = 40 (b) and T ∗ = 200
(c). (The scale is different in (a)). Departure of the agent with highest value
is represented by a dashed line.
936 leaves at t = 200. Pairwise interactions between two
randomly selected agents take place at every other time.
We have simulated the two algorithms, with two thresholds
T ∗ for that of Section V, and the results are represented
in Fig. 1. We note that in the three cases, all the agents
first converge to the MAX value of x9 = 936 in a bit
more than 100 time steps, before agent 9 leaves the network.
After the departure of agent 9 at t = 200, we see that the
algorithm of Section IV that uses messages from departing
agents reconverges to the new maximal value x13 = 815 in
137 time steps. The performance of the algorithm of Section
V without messages from leaving agents are significantly
worse. For a threshold T ∗ = 40, we see that it takes 506 time
steps to reconverge to the new maximal value, but the system
later suffers from several spurious resets. These are caused by
agents reaching the threshold by chance. The probability of
this occurring can be significantly reduced by taking a higher
threshold, but this results in an even longer time to react to
the departure of 9, as seen in Fig. 1(c) with T = 200. 2439
time-steps are indeed needed to re-obtain the correct value,
Time[s]020040060080010001200MAX estimates for agents020040060080010000500100015002000250030003500400002004006008001000Time[s]MAX estimates for agents0500100015002000250030003500400002004006008001000Time[s]MAX estimates for agents mostly because it takes very long before the agents abandon
their former estimate. This clearly illustrates the trade-off
on the threshold value T ∗: a too small value will result in
spurious resets as soon as some agents "have not heard"
about the agent with the highest value for too long. But a
too large threshold will result in a significant delay before
agents decide that an agent has probably left the system.
We also performed comparisons between the two ap-
proaches on the convergence time to reach consensus after
the agent with MAX has left the group for other numbers
of nodes. The results are summarized in Table I. We take
T ∗ = 1.1N (0) with the algorithm of Section V. We observe
that when the number of agents increases, the algorithm of
Section IV requires proportionally much fewer iterations to
reach consensus, as expected and already observed in Fig. 1.
Moreover, it also achieves a stronger version of the property
of eventual correctness than the algorithm of Section V, as it
avoids spurious resets, as discussed above. It does however
require the possibility of sending messages when leaving.
Number of nodes
Iterations to reach MAX-consensus
Algorithm 1-4
Algorithm 1, 5-7
10
20
30
50
100
64
162
599
1885
6580
21
129
194
246
628
TABLE I
COMPARISON BETWEEN THE TWO TECHNIQUES WITH DIFFERENT
NUMBER OF NODES.
VII. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
We have investigated the distributed MAX-consensus
problem for open multi-agent systems. Two algorithms have
been proposed depending on whether the agents who leave
the network can inform another existing agent about their
departure or cannot. The eventual correctness has been
proven for both.
Taking a step back, we see two main challenges in the
design of algorithms for open multi-agent systems, as also
briefly noted in [20]:
to departures and arrivals,
Robustness and dynamic information treatment: The al-
gorithms should be robust
in
the sense that they should keep updating their estimates to
discard outdated information. Moreover, novel information
held by arriving agents should be taken into account, and
outdated information, for example, related to agents no
longer in the system, should eventually be discarded.
Performance in open context: The performance of classical
multi-agents algorithms is often measured by the rate at
which they converge to an exact solution or a desired sit-
uation (or the time to reach such a situation). This approach
is no longer relevant in a context where agents' departures
and arrivals keep "perturbing" the system, and possibly
the algorithm goal (as is the case here). Rather, efficient
algorithms would be those for which the estimated answer
remains "close" to some "instantaneous exact solution",
according to a suitable metric.
The algorithms we have developed here do answer the first
issue of robustness and information treatment for the problem
of distributed maximum computation. The characterization
and optimization of their performance in an open context,
however, remains unanswered at present and could be the
topic of further works. We note that the behavior of a gossip
averaging algorithm in an open multi-agent system was
characterized in [20], but this algorithm was not designed
to compute a specific value, as is the case here.
In particular, we observe that both algorithms would suffer
from occasional apparently unnecessary resets. This may
happen after the departure of an agent that did not have the
largest value in the algorithm of Section IV, or when an agent
has been isolated for too long from that with the highest value
in the algorithm of Section V. We do not know at this stage if
these spurious resets can be entirely avoided, especially when
leaving agents cannot send a final message. In this case, it is
indeed impossible to know for sure whether the agent with
the highest value has left or has just not communicated for a
while. There are, however, several possibilities to mitigate
the damage of these spurious resets and to play on the
trade-off between the effect of these perturbation and the
speed at which the system reacts. A simple solution could
be for example to apply an additional filtering layer when the
algorithm requires an important decrease of yi. In this case,
a new estimate yi would follow yi except that sharp decrease
would be replaced by gradual ones. We also observe that our
second algorithm will either only work when the system size
is not too large with respect to T ∗ (case of a fixed threshold)
or eventually work for all size but gradually become slower
and slower to react (case of a growing T ∗). Whether this
can be avoided in a context when leaving agents do not warn
others about their departure also remains an open interesting
question.
REFERENCES
[1] R. Olfati-Saber and N. F. Sandell, "Distributed tracking in sensor
networks with limited sensing range," In Proceedings of the 2008
American Control Conference, Washington, U.S.A., pp. 3157 -- 3162,
2008.
[2] L. Shi, A. Capponi, K. Johansson, and R. Murray, "Resource op-
timisation in a wireless sensor network with guaranteed estimator
performance," IET Control Theory and Applications, vol. 4, no. 5,
pp. 710 -- 723, 2010.
[3] O. Demigha, W. Hidouci, and T. Ahmed, "On energy efciency in
collaborative target tracking in wireless sensor network: A review,"
IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 1210 --
1222, 2012.
[4] V. Cerf and R. Kahn, "A protocol
for packet network inter-
communication," IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 22,
no. 5, pp. 637 -- 648, 1974.
[5] S. Muthukrishnan, B. Ghosh, and M. Schultz, "First and second order
diffusive methods for rapid, coarse, distributed load balancing," Theory
of Computing Systems, pp. 331 -- 354, 1998.
[6] R. Hegselmann and U. Krause, "Opinion dynamics and bounded
confidence models, analysis, and simulation," Journal of Artifical
Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1 -- 33, 2002.
[7] V. Blondel, J. Hendrickx, and J. Tsitsiklis, "Continuous-time average-
preserving opinion dynamics with opinion-dependent communica-
tions," SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, vol. 48, no. 8,
pp. 5214 -- 5240, 2010.
[8] J. Liu, N. Hassanpour, S. Tatikonda, and A. Morse, "Dynamic thresh-
old models of collective action in social networks," In Proceedings of
the 51st IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Hawaii, U.S.A.,
pp. 3991 -- 3996, 2012.
[9] S. Boyd, A. Ghosh, B. Prabhakar, and D. Shah, "Randomized gossip
algorithms," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 52, no. 6,
pp. 2508 -- 2530, 2006.
[10] F. Iutzeler, P. Ciblat, and J. Jakubowicz, "Analysis of max-consensus
algorithms in wireless channels," IEEE Transactions on Signal Pro-
cessing, vol. 60, no. 11, pp. 6103 -- 6107, 2012.
[11] S. Giannini, A. Petitti, D. D. Paola, and A. Rizzo, "Asynchronous
max-consensus protocol with time delays: Convergence results and
applications," IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems-I, vol. 63,
no. 2, pp. 256 -- 264, 2016.
[12] R. Olfati-Saber, J. Fax, and R. Murray, "Consensus and cooperation
in networked multi-agent systems," In Proceedings of the IEEE, pp.
215 -- 233, 2007.
[13] J. Hendrickx, A. Olshevsky, and J. Tsitsiklis, "Distributed anonymous
discrete function computation," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Con-
trol, vol. 56, no. 10, pp. 2276 -- 2289, 2011.
[14] W. Ren, R. Beard, and E. Atkins, "A survey of consensus problems
in multi-agent coordination," In Proceedings of the 2005 American
Control Conference, Portland, U.S.A., pp. 1859 -- 1864, 2005.
[15] D. Stutzbach and R. Rejaie, "Understanding churn in peer-to-peer
networks," In Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCOMM conference on
Internet measurement, Rio de Janeriro, Brazil, pp. 189 -- 202, 2006.
[16] F. Kuhn, S. Schmid, and R. Wattenhofer, "Towards worst-case churn
resistant peer-to-peer systems," Distributed Computing, vol. 2, no. 4,
pp. 249 -- 267, 2010.
[17] M. Jelasity, A. Montresor, and O. Babaoglu, "Gossip-based aggre-
gation in large dynamic networks," ACM Transactions on Computer
Systems, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 219 -- 252, 2005.
[18] F. Kuhn, N. Lynch, and R. Oshman, "Distributed computation in
dynamic networks," In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM symposium on
Theory of computing, Massachusetts, U.S.A., pp. 513 -- 522, 2010.
[19] C. Dutta, G. Pandurangan, R. Rajaraman, Z. Sun, and E. Viola, "On
the complexity of information spreading in dynamic networks," In
Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete
Algorithms, pp. 717 -- 736, 2013.
[20] J. Hendrickx and S. Martin, "Open multi-agent systems: Gossiping
with deterministic arrivals and departures," In Proceedings of
the
54th Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and
Computing, Monticello, Illinois, U.S.A.
[21] T. Huynh, N. Jennings, and N. Shadbolt, "An integrated trust and
reputation model for open multi-agent systems," Autonomous Agents
and Multi-Agent Systems, vol. 13, no. 2, p. 119154, 2006.
[22] I. Pinyol and J. Sabater-Mir, "Computational
trust and reputation
models for open multi-agent systems: a review," Artificial Intelligence
Review, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 1 -- 25, 2013.
[23] B. Nejad, S. Attia, and J. Raisch, "Max-consensus in a max-plus alge-
braic setting: The case of xed communication topologies," In Proceed-
ings of the International Symposium on Information, Communication
and Automation Technologies, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, pp.
1 -- 7, 2009.
[24] S. Zhang, C. Tepedelenlioglu, M. Banavar, and A. Spanias, "Max
consensus in sensor networks: Non-linear bounded transmission and
additive noise," IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 16, no. 24, pp. 9089 -- 9098,
2016.
|
1010.0145 | 1 | 1010 | 2010-10-01T12:37:26 | Multi-Agent Programming Contest 2010 - The Jason-DTU Team | [
"cs.MA"
] | We provide a brief description of the Jason-DTU system, including the methodology, the tools and the team strategy that we plan to use in the agent contest. | cs.MA | cs |
Multi-Agent Programming Contest 2010
--
The Jason-DTU Team
Jørgen Villadsen, Niklas Skamriis Boss, Andreas Schmidt Jensen, and
Steen Vester
Department of Informatics and Mathematical Modelling
Technical University of Denmark
Richard Petersens Plads, Building 321, DK-2800 Kongens Lyngby, Denmark
Abstract. We provide a brief description of the Jason-DTU system,
including the methodology, the tools and the team strategy that we plan
to use in the agent contest.
Updated 1 October 2010: Appendix with comments on the contest added.
1
Introduction
1. The name of our team is Jason-DTU. We participated in the contest for the
first time in 2009 where we finished number 4 out of 8 teams [2].
2. The members of the team are as follows:
-- Jørgen Villadsen, PhD
-- Niklas Skamriis Boss, MSc
-- Andreas Schmidt Jensen, MSc
-- Steen Vester, BSc (currently MSc student, new in the team this year)
We are affiliated with DTU Informatics (short for Department of Informatics
and Mathematical Modelling, Technical University of Denmark, and located
in the greater Copenhagen area).
3. We use the Jason platform, which is an interpreter for AgentSpeak, an agent-
oriented programming language [1].
4. The main contact is associate professor Jørgen Villadsen, DTU Informatics,
email: [email protected]
5. We expect that we will have invested approximately 100 man hours when
the tournament starts.
2 System Analysis and Design
1. We intend to use three types of agents: a leader, a scout and the regular
herders. The leader is a herder with extra responsibilities and the scout
will initially explore the environment. We do not use a specific requirement
analysis approach.
2. We design our system using the Prometheus methodology as a guideline [3].
By this we mean that we have adapted relevant concepts from the method-
ology, while not following it too strictly.
3. The agents navigate using the A* algorithm [4]. We also implement algo-
rithms that enable the agents to move in a formation and to detect groups
of cows.
4. Communication is primarily between individual agents and the leader. Each
agent has a role based on their type. Coordination is done by the leader.
5. We have chosen to have a centralized coordination mechanism in form of a
leader.
3 Software Architecture
1. We use the Jason platform and the AgentSpeak programming language to
specify the goals an agent must pursue. Furthermore, we are able to use Java
using so-called internal actions.
2. We use the architecture customization available in the Jason platform. Each
agent is associated with an agent architecture which contains basic function-
ality such as connecting to the server and sharing knowledge. This enables
us to implement and custumize the agents in a rather elegant way.
3. We use the Jason platform within the Eclipse IDE.
4 Agent Team Strategy
1. We use mainly the A* algorithm to avoid obstacles and we do not use any
algorithms for opponent blocking at the moment.
2. The team leader handles coordination. Each herder will get delegated a po-
sition from which it must herd.
3. We do not employ a distributed optimization technique, however, the leader
chooses an agent which is currently closest to the goal.
4. All knowledge is shared between the agents. This means that every agent
knows everything about the environment. Furthermore, each agent commu-
nicates with the leader.
2
5. We plan to consider a more autonomous and decentralized approach where
each agent is able to decide without having to ask the leader.
6. Our agents do not perform any background processing while the team is idle,
i.e. between sending an action message to the simulation server and receiving
a perception message for the subsequent simulation step.
7. We do not have a crash recovery measure.
Whereas classical multi-agent systems have the agent in center, there have
recently been a development towards focusing more on the organization of
the system. If time permits we would like to investigate the pros and cons
of a more organizational approach [5].
References
1. Rafael H. Bordini, Jomi Fred Hubner, and Michael Wooldridge. Programming Multi-
Agent Systems in AgentSpeak Using Jason. John Wiley & Sons, 2007.
2. Niklas Skamriis Boss, Andreas Schmidt Jensen, and Jørgen Villadsen. Building
Multi-Agent Systems Using Jason. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelli-
gence, Springer Online First 6 May 2010.
3. Lin Padgham and Michael Winikoff. Developing Intelligent Agent Systems: A Prac-
tical Guide. John Wiley & Sons, 2007.
4. Stuart Russell and Peter Norvig. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach (Second
Edition). Prentice Hall, 2003.
5. Andreas Schmidt Jensen. Multi-Agent Systems: An Investigation of the Advantages
of Making Organizations Explicit. MSc Thesis, Department of Informatics and
Mathematical Modelling, Technical University of Denmark, 2010.
Acknowledgements
Thanks to Mikko Berggren Ettienne (BEng student) for joining the team.
More information about the Jason-DTU team is available here:
http://www.imm.dtu.dk/~jv/MAS
3
Appendix
We gained the insight about the practical use of multi-agent systems that do-
main specific knowledge is quite important in a multi-agent system like the one
in the contest. General concepts of search algorithms, belief sharing, communi-
cation and organization are important too and provide a solid basis for a good
solution. However, we think that domain specific topics such as understanding
cow movement, refinement of herding strategy, obstruction of enemy goals etc.
were even more important to obtain success. We definitely spent most of our
time doing domain specific refinements and performance tests.
The scenario had some nice properties like uncertainty about the environ-
ment, nondeterministic cow movement and the need for agent cooperation to
obtain good herding results. These properties made sure that good solutions
were non-trivial and gave motivation for experimenting with a lot of different
approaches. Interaction with an enemy team is also very interesting. Though,
we feel that care should be taken when designing a scenario so it will not be
too easy to implement a near-perfect destructive strategy which will ruin the
motivation for pursuing other ideas.
We used a centralized structure with one leader delegating targets to all
other agents which gave an overall control of our team. The leader divided the
agents into groups which had different purposes. For example we had a couple
of herding groups and a group responsible for making life harder for our oppo-
nents herders. Originally we used fixed groups (with fixed sizes) of agents with
quite static responsibilities. We learned that it can be important for agents to
switch roles if the environment acts in a way that makes this preferable. We did
some experiments with this when forming groups of herders. In some cases the
environment (and our agents) acted in such a way that it was more optimal for
agents to switch to other groups than to stick with the predefined groups.
We have a few ideas for potential extensions of the cow-and-cowboys-scenario.
One issue is that changes should be made so that a destructive approach will
not be as beneficial as it was this year. One suggestion is to restrict the number
of agents that can be in the corral of the enemy at any time, for example by
automatically teleport additional agents to their own corral, but of course this
makes the scenario quite unrealistic. Some other ideas are to let the cows be
controlled by one or more teams and perhaps allowing the number of cows to
increase or decrease over time.
We prefer to stay with a variant of the current scenario for the coming year
but eventually a less toy-like scenario might be introduced. Perhaps some kind
of scenario within health, food, energy, climate or engineering would be possible.
Alternatively one could move towards computer games (say, World of Warcraft).
We think that the contest was organized very well and that the information
regarding protocols and rules were quite clear. Even though several members of
the team had not participated in an event like this before we did not experience
any problems communicating with the servers and we feel that the information
level overall was quite good. The live chat was also a positive feature.
4
|
1901.05671 | 1 | 1901 | 2019-01-17T08:00:12 | H${}^2$CM-based holonic modeling of a gas pipeline | [
"cs.MA"
] | A gas pipeline is a relatively simple physical system, but the optimality of the control is difficult to achieve. When switching from one kind of gas to another , a volume of useless mixture is generated. Therefore, the control needs to both respond to the demand and minimize the volume of lost gas. In case of stable and perfectly known demand, scheduling techniques can be used, but in other cases , calculation times are incompatible with an industrial application. This article introduces the application of H${}^2$CM (Holonic Hybrid Control Model) generic architecture on this specific case. The study case is extensively presented. Then, the defined holonic architecture (H${}^2$CM compatible) is detailed, and the role and functions of each holon are presented. Finally, a tentative general control algorithm is suggested, which gives an insight on the actual algorithms that will be developed in perspective of this work. | cs.MA | cs | H²CM-based holonic modeling of a gas pipeline
C. Indriago*, L. Ghomri**, O. Cardin***
*Universidad Politécnica Antonio José de Sucre.
(CENIPRO Centro de Investigación de Procesos)
Barquisimeto-Venezuela.
(e-mail: [email protected])
**Manufacturing Engineering Laboratory of Tlemcen
Department of Electrical Engineering and Electronics
Abou-Bekr Belkaïd University
Tlemcen -- Algeria
(e-mail: [email protected]).
***LUNAM Université, IUT de Nantes -- Université de Nantes, LS2N UMR CNRS 6004
(Laboratoire des Sciences du Numérique de Nantes),
2 avenue du Prof. Jean Rouxel -- 44475 Carquefou
(e-mail: [email protected]).
Abstract. A gas pipeline is a relatively simple physical system, but the optimality
of the control is difficult to achieve. When switching from one kind of gas to an-
other, a volume of useless mixture is generated. Therefore, the control needs to
both respond to the demand and minimize the volume of lost gas. In case of stable
and perfectly known demand, scheduling techniques can be used, but in other cas-
es, calculation times are incompatible with an industrial application. This article
introduces the application of H²CM (Holonic Hybrid Control Model) generic ar-
chitecture on this specific case. The study case is extensively presented. Then, the
defined holonic architecture (H²CM compatible) is detailed, and the role and func-
tions of each holon are presented. Finally, a tentative general control algorithm is
suggested, which gives an insight on the actual algorithms that will be developed
in perspective of this work.
Keywords: Hybrid dynamic systems, Holonic Hybrid Control Model, Pipe-line
transport system.
2
1
Introduction
Hybrid dynamic systems (HDS) are dynamic systems integrating explicitly and
simultaneously continuous systems and discrete event systems. They require for
their description the use of continuous time models, discrete event models and the
interface between them [1]. The hybrid character of the system either owes to the
system itself or to the control applied to this system. Typical examples of such
systems are communication protocols, manufacturing systems, transportation sys-
tems, power electronics, etc.
Modeling, analysis and control of HDS are crucial concerns. Two of the most
important formalisms for the modeling and analysis of HDS are hybrid automata
[2] and hybrid Petri nets [3]. Hybrid automata can consider any continuous dy-
namics in a location, and the commutation from one location to the other one is
synchronized by a discrete event. It is then possible to model any type of system.
The main modeling drawback of the hybrid automata is the explosion of the num-
ber of locations in case of real life systems. To overcome this problem, hybrid Pe-
tri nets consider a state as a marking with a continuous and a discrete part. They
provide very compact and readable models very useful for engineers. However, in
order to perform a formal analysis, it is necessary to come back to the hybrid au-
tomata which are known for their analysis power. This analysis requires the con-
struction of the reachable state space. This operation is all the more complex be-
cause the discrete part is strongly nonlinear and the time is often non-
deterministic. The calculation algorithms of the reachable state space only termi-
nate under very restrictive constraints, for example for timed models or some line-
ar hybrid automata where the continuous dynamics are constant. The reachable
state space is described with a set of inequalities over the state variables, thus al-
lowing both the performance analysis of the system and the synthesis of the con-
trol.
Most realistic formal approaches consider either continuous approaches with
few commutations or discrete approaches with a very poor continuous dynamics
(clocks). Since these systems are strongly nonlinear, any change in one or several
parameters often forces us to completely redo the study of the problem. When the
HDS become more complex, the analysis tools also become more complex, turn-
ing them into loosely flexible systems with high calculation times, which do not
react fast enough to unexpected events. In order to provide flexibility to the HDS,
the researchers have studied the possibility of implementing flexible control archi-
tectures on complex dynamic systems [4][5].
Holonic Hybrid Control Model (H²CM) [5] is a holonic architecture developed
with the aim of giving flexibility to HDS control and it is based on the holonic ar-
chitecture of discrete systems called PROSA [6]. It is composed of three basic ho-
lons:
• the product holon, which has all the information of the product;
• the resource holon, which is an abstraction of the resource;
3
• the order holon, which takes the information of both holons and generates the
scheduling of the services to implement.
An example of a complex HDS is the pipeline system [7], which is a very im-
portant transport system that guarantees a regular supply of products and a rapid
adaptation to market demand, thus significantly reducing costs and delays of
product transportation. Pipeline systems are continuous operation systems that
work with several products, resulting in a contaminated mixing zone on the con-
tact of two products that are transported sequentially. Therefore, a greater number
of batches transported will produce a larger number of contaminated product
batches. With the objective of minimizing contaminated product batches, optimi-
zation methods are used that generate the batch sequence scheduling to be trans-
ported, with the restriction that these methods have high calculation times and are
not flexible to changes in transport demand.
The objective of this article is to propose the implementation of the H²CM ar-
chitecture to a pipeline transport system in order to provide operational flexibility
in the phase of changes in the demand for products, keeping the optimization crite-
ria of the generation of contaminated product. This preliminary study extends the
performance evaluation of H²CM that was made on a water tanks system [8] with
the notion of switching costs (contaminated product volume) and the dynamics of
the pipeline (delay between the switch and the final tank filling).
The study case is extensively presented in the next section. Then, the defined
holonic architecture (H²CM compatible) is detailed, and the role and function of
each holon are presented. Finally, a tentative general control algorithm is suggest-
ed, which gives an insight on the actual algorithms that will be developed in per-
spective of this work.
2
Case study: pipeline presentation
2.1 Description of the ASR multi-product pipeline
The transportation of fuels by pipeline is increasingly spread throughout the
world. This is explained by an increase in the quantities of transported products.
This situation requires companies to further develop their logistics. It is in this ob-
jective that the Algerian oil companies have an investment program, aimed at se-
curing the country's petroleum products, through an intelligent network of pipe-
lines, responding to the real need of the different zones of the country.
The transportation by pipeline contributes to the reduction of both costs, deliv-
ery times, road traffic and also ensures mass transport respecting the environment
with the most security. If pipelines did not exist, it would be inevitable to have
thousands of trucks and railcars that circulate on roads, highways and railways to
carry out the same transport.
The current technology is oriented towards multi-product pipelines. The latter
has the disadvantage of creating a mixing or a contaminated product zone between
4
two products in contact (Fig. 1), which circulate sequentially in the pipeline. The
contaminated product is generated at each contact of two different products of
fuels. So a sequence of several batches promotes proportionately several batches
of contaminated product, requiring a large space for their storage.
Fuel A
Contaminated mixture
Fuel B
Fig. 1. Typical sequence with two products and one contaminated area
In this paper, we focus our study on a typical pipeline of the National Petroleum
Algerian Company (SONATRACH). It is the multi-product ASR pipeline (Abbre-
viation for the three cities: Arzew, Sidi Bel Abbès and Remchi in the west of Al-
geria, through which the pipeline passes). The pipeline transports fuel from the
Arzew refinery to the storage and distribution sites of Sidi Bel Abbes and Remchi.
They feed the regions West and South-West of Algeria in fuels (diesel fuel and
gasolines). The demand of the region, leads to the introduction into the ASR pipe-
line of important sequences of several batches to meet the needs of the region.
This results in numerous interfaces, zones of birth of the mixtures and high levels
of the contaminated product stock at the depot of Remchi.
In view of the contamination constraints and the high demand of fuel, it will be
interesting to study the optimization of the multi-product fuel transport. The objec-
tive will therefore be the minimization of the contaminated product stocks on one
hand, and the satisfaction of the of the demands of the two distribution depots of
pure products on the other hand,
2.2 Physical data of the pipeline:
The multi-product ASR pipeline is located in the west of Algeria. Its profile ex-
tends over a length of about 168 𝑘𝑚, from the refinery of Arzew passing by Sidi
Bel Abbes depot and arriving at the final depot of Remchi. The pipeline receives
the liquid fuels from the Arzew refinery and supplies the storage and distribution
depots in Sidi Bel Abbes and Remchi (Fig. 2).
Table 1 below shows the storage capacities of each depot in the different fuels.
In table 2 we represent the daily demand at the two depots level.
5
3
Holonic Modelling
3.1 H²CM overview
H2CM generic architecture is based on the three basic holons of PROSA, intro-
duced in Fig. 4 (a). Two main features can be highlighted:
1. Each resource is granted with an order and a product along its life. The order
holon is in charge of the monitoring of the resource whereas the product holon
is in charge of the recipe to be applied on the actual product. The content and
objectives of the order and product holons are constantly evolving, but the
structure remains constantly the same;
2. A recursivity link is present on the resource holon (Fig. 4 (b)). Indeed, each
compound resource can be fractally decomposed into one or several holarchies,
comprising one or several resources and their associated order and product ho-
lons. The aggregation relations created here can be changed along the working
of the system; holarchies can be created and destroyed online.
Fig. 2. Longitudinal profile of the multi-product pipeline ASR.
Sidi Bel Abbes
Distribution depot
Remchi Distribu-
tion depot
Refinery
PG
SG
GE
PG
C1 C2
SG
UG
GE
Product 1 Product 2
Product 1
Product 3
contaminated product
Fig. 3. Structure of the ASR structure.
6
Table 1. Capacities, initial volumes and safety stocks of products and contaminated prod-
ucts in the two depots.
Sidi Bel Abbes depot
Remchi depot
Capacity
[m3]
6000
1700
Initial
stock
[m3]
814
809
Security
stock
[m3]
1200
Capacity
[m3]
Initial
stock
[m3]
22000
5572.4
Security
stock
[m3]
4400
340
9500
3394.6
1900
450
196
90
1000
996
200
5000
3284.7
1000
500
396.5
500
405
Fuels
Diesel
Pure
gasoline
Super
gasoline
Unleaded
gasoline
Contaminated
product type 1
Contaminated
product type 2
Table 2. Daily demand in the two depots.
Product
Diesel
Pure gasoline
Super gasoline
unleaded gasoline
Daily demand
Sidi Bel Abbes depot
Rechi depot
1200
80
400
3000
150
800
150
The order holon is globally responsible for the scheduling of the system. It is very
representative of the dual working of every holons: one part is dedicated to the ne-
gotiation mechanisms in look-ahead mode in order to determine the future sched-
uling and holarchies of the system, while the other part of the holon is dedicated to
the system in real time mode through the application of the scheduling resulting
from the previous negotiations.
The product holon is dedicated to store and communicate the products recipes
which are deduced from a Master Recipe. In H2CM, this Master Recipe can be de-
fined as a generic recipe, i.e. a sequential list of operations to be applied to the
product to obtain a final product from raw materials (BOM -- Bill of Materials),
from which the actual recipe can be derived according to the conditions of the sys-
tem. In HDS context, a service-oriented specification, as proposed in [9, 10], is
well suited for the product specification. The distinction made in this article, with
7
respect to the definition used in [9, 10], is that the parameters and variables of the
service can be continuous or discrete.
By nature, HDS are large systems, constituted of many components. Therefore,
a lot of resource holons are necessary to control the system. As Fig. 4 (b) defined a
recursivity of the resources, so the smallest resource holon to be defined is called
atomic resources and can be expressed as "the maximal aggregation of elements
whose system of differential equations can be inversed in a short delay relatively
to the dynamics of the system". Considering compound resources, the negotiation
mechanism is meant to determine the best solution recursively, interrogating the
aggregated resources until atomic ones. Resources holons are part of the negotia-
tion mechanisms and their function is to evaluate and transmit to the order holon
the best possible variables values to obtain the desired function and services. Re-
source holons also have the responsibility for the devices online control, i.e. the
role of controllers of the system.
Fig. 4. a) H2CM basic holons b) H2CM diagram
Another resource holon's specificity is its structure. Classically, it is composed
by a physical part and a logical part, see Fig. 4 (a). The physical part is represent-
ed by the shop floor. The logical part of the resource holon is an abstraction of the
physical part and contains the conversion models from continuous states to dis-
crete states and vice-versa. The models used are hybrid models that change their
state using threshold levels of continuous variables. The abstraction of physical
part can be developed by any industrial computer with communication capability.
3.2 Description of holons and services in the case of a pipeline
The work developed in this paper focuses on the multi-product ASR pipeline link-
ing the Arzew refinery to the storage and distribution centers of Sidi Bel Abbes
and Remchi. The latter deserves the centers in fuels namely: Diesel, Super Gaso-
line, Unleaded Gasoline and Normal Gasoline. From the holonic point of view, the
ASR pipeline will be divided into three composite holons (see Fig. 5) which will
offer three different types of services.
8
The first composite holon to be defined is the Arzew refinery, composed by the
finished product tanks system and the pipe and pump system. The service offered
by the holon of the Arzew refinery is the supply of fuel products. Looking at Fig.
6, the refinery resource holon has an associated product holon and an order holon.
The product holon has contaminated product information, such as the volume gen-
erated in each product mix and the variation of product density during mixing. The
order holon will have the task of scheduling and executing the product supply ser-
vice. The order holon will perform a scheduling using off-line optimization meth-
ods, so it will need the atomic resources holon information and the store holons in-
formation, obtained by holons negotiation. A second task of the order holon is
based on the supervision of real-time scheduling, if any disturbance occurs in the
execution of the same, the holon order must take corrective measures with the new
information and perform a re-scheduling, this procedure will be discussed in the
next section.
Fig. 5. Distribution level holonic architecture
On the other hand the refinery resource holon is composed of tank holons,
which for the case under study is considered an inexhaustible supply. Therefore,
its function is to switch the supply valve depending on the product to be supplied.
If there was no inexhaustible supply, this holon should supply the level status of
each product to be considered during the scheduling. The other holon available in
the refinery holon is the pipeline holon, its task is based on determining the avail-
ability of the pipeline as well as providing the products density measure service
and the control pumps service during product supply.
The other two holons represented in Fig. 5 are the products depots holons of
Sidi Bel Abbès and Remchi. Both composite holons are made up of diesel tanks,
Super gasoline tank, and normal gasoline tank, this latter depot additionally has
unleaded gasoline tank and contaminated product tank. Both depots offer the ser-
9
vice of storage of finished product (normal gasoline, super gasoline and diesel). In
addition, Remchi depot offers the storage service of unleaded gasoline and con-
taminated product, see Fig. 7.
Each holon depot also has associated a product holon and an order holon. The
information possessed by the product holon is the characteristic of each products
to be received, among them we must highlight the products density since this in-
formation is used to monitor the products in the pipeline. The order holon contains
information on the capacity of each tank resource holon. The method used to ob-
tain this information from the compound holons is detailed in [5], [11]. The ser-
vice provided by the order holon is based on online monitoring filling of the prod-
uct tanks. If there is a change in the demand, it establishes a new negotiation with
the refinery holon to obtain a corrective action.
Fig. 6. Refinery Composite Holon
This description of the adaptation of H²CM reference architecture to this new
case study outlines the adaptability of the architecture, that was intended generic
enough to cope with multiple type of HDS.
4
Algorithms
The main goal of the product supply scheduling algorithm is to minimize the
amount of contaminated product while supplying the tanks to ensure the demand.
For this, it is necessary to execute an optimization method that guarantees the de-
sired objective. Usual optimization methods have high calculation times which
make them difficult to implement online. Thus, the system can perform a first
schedule using optimal methods since it has sufficient time to perform the calcula-
10
tion, but this schedule needs to be updated in real time using other techniques.
This reschedule is obtained by negotiating between the refinery holon and the de-
pot holons.
Fig. 7. Depot Composite Holon
Once the schedule is calculated (by any method), the scheduling supervision
process begins. Once an unforeseen event is present in the product supply process,
the order holon needs to make a decision based on the information obtained
through the negotiation of the holons the resolve this new disturbance. It is obvi-
ously difficult to exhaustively list all the disturbances that may occur in the sys-
tem, but the following ones can be considered as the most frequent and impacting:
1. Variation in demand for products depots;
2. Variation of the tanks capacity of contaminated product;
3. Decreased pump performance of the pipeline system.
These disturbances, when occurring on a system controlled by a schedule
based on optimal methods without adjustments in line, can cause changes in the
system that result in a shutdown of the functions in the transport system. For this,
an online scheduling algorithm is proposed, that aims to find a solution to the pre-
sented perturbation, see Fig. 8.
In Fig. 8 is observed that once the disturbance is presented, the incidence on
the current planning is calculated as a function of time. If the present disturbance
is not so aggressive that immediate changes are needed, then re-scheduling will be
performed by optimal methods, otherwise re-scheduling will be done by any other
computational method that is fast enough to find a solution. An online schedule
algorithm for tanks filling minimizing the number of switches of the unique server
was proposed in [8], and might be adapted to this specific case study. The main
idea is to try and maximize the duration the server remains in the same position,
while avoiding the situation where the rest of tank are empty at the same time.
11
Therefore, the algorithm tries to anticipate the reservation of the server if the time
slot where some tank would be empty is already scheduled to another tank. A
timelapse is also defined. This timelapse represents the length of the reservation a
tank tries to schedule. If no solution can be found by the system with the prede-
termined timelapse, then the algorithm loops with a shorter timelapse. The calcu-
lation time of the algorithm is very short, which makes us believe that this kind of
scheduling, although it does not guarantee the best minimization of the amount of
generated contaminated product, is a good candidate for a pertinent control in the
situations where the input data are frequently disturbed.
Fig. 8. Scheduling and re-scheduling Algorithm
The algorithms that need to be developed in this case study greatly differ from
the ones previously published [8]. Indeed, the former was related to a single server
of water and no setup times, while this is related to a single server generating set-
up wastes denoted contaminated product in this description.
5
Conclusion
Pipeline transport systems are complex HDS that can be scheduled by optimal
methods, but they have little flexibility facing disturbances, which makes them
difficult to control using online methods. To this end, the H2CM implementation
on HDS was previously proposed [5] in order to give flexibility to those systems.
12
To demonstrate the application of H2CM on HDS, a case study of the multi-
product ASR pipeline was used in this article. This preliminary work outlined the
adaptation of H²CM to this specific case study and showed it was suitable for
modelling. Some elements were given about the definition of the future algorithms
that will control the whole architecture, with the objective of finding solutions
through optimal and non-optimal methods, and also allowing online monitoring
and re-scheduling of the system in presence of any deviation.
The perspectives of this preliminary work deal with the actual coding of the ar-
chitecture and the performance evaluation compared to the scheduling techniques
with a perfectly known demand in order to evaluate the optimality of the holonic
control. Then, a study will be performed in order to evaluate the robustness of the
control in case of demand variation. The H²CM based control is meant to absorb
those uncertainties in real time, which needs to be verified.
6
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
References
Pettersson S, Lennartson B, others (1995) Hybrid modelling focused on hybrid Petri
nets. In: 2nd Eur. Workshop Real-Time Hybrid Syst. pp 303 -- 309
Alur R, Courcoubetis C, Halbwachs N, Henzinger TA, Ho P-H, Nicollin X, Olivero
A, Sifakis J, Yovine S (1995) The algorithmic analysis of hybrid systems. Theor
Comput Sci 138:3 -- 34
David R, Alla H (2001) On hybrid Petri nets. Discrete Event Dyn Syst 11:9 -- 40
Chokshi N, McFarlane D (2008) A distributed architecture for reconfigurable con-
trol of continuous process operations. J Intell Manuf 19:215 -- 232
Indriago C, Cardin O, Rakoto N, Castagna P, Chacòn E (2016) H 2 CM: A holonic
architecture for flexible hybrid control systems. Comput Ind 77:15 -- 28
Van Brussel H, Wyns J, Valckenaers P, Bongaerts L, Peeters P (1998) Reference ar-
chitecture for holonic manufacturing systems: PROSA. Comput Ind 37:255 -- 274
Bennacer D, Saim R, Abboudi S, Benameur B, others (2016) Interface calculation
method improves multiproduct transport. Oil Gas J 114:74 -- +
Indriago C, Cardin O, Bellenguez-Morineau O, Rakoto N, Castagna P, Chacòn E
(2016) Performance evaluation of holonic control of a switch arrival system. Con-
curr Eng 1063293X16643568
Gamboa Quintanilla F, Cardin O, Castagna P (2014) Product Specification for Flex-
ible Workflow Orchestrations in Service Oriented Holonic Manufacturing Systems.
In: Serv. Orientat. Holonic Multi-Agent Manuf. Robot. Springer, pp 177 -- 193
10. Gamboa Quintanilla F, Cardin O, L'Anton A, Castagna P (2016) A Petri net-based
methodology to increase flexibility in service-oriented holonic manufacturing sys-
tems. Comput Ind 76:53 -- 68
Indriago C, Cardin O, Rakoto-Ravalontsalama N, Chacón E, Castagna P (2014) Ap-
plication of holonic paradigm to hybrid processes: case of a water treatment process.
SOHOMA'14 Workshop Serv. Orientat. Holonic Multi-Agent Manuf.
11.
|
1302.4774 | 1 | 1302 | 2013-02-19T23:06:58 | A theoretical framework for conducting multi-level studies of complex social systems with agent-based models and empirical data | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.SI",
"stat.AP"
] | A formal but intuitive framework is introduced to bridge the gap between data obtained from empirical studies and that generated by agent-based models. This is based on three key tenets. Firstly, a simulation can be given multiple formal descriptions corresponding to static and dynamic properties at different levels of observation. These can be easily mapped to empirically observed phenomena and data obtained from them. Secondly, an agent-based model generates a set of closed systems, and computational simulation is the means by which we sample from this set. Thirdly, properties at different levels and statistical relationships between them can be used to classify simulations as those that instantiate a more sophisticated set of constraints. These can be validated with models obtained from statistical models of empirical data (for example, structural equation or multi-level models) and hence provide more stringent criteria for validating the agent-based model itself. | cs.MA | cs | A theoretical framework for conducting
multi-level studies of complex social systems
with agent-based models and empirical data
Chih-Chun Chen
3
1
0
2
b
e
F
9
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
4
7
7
4
.
2
0
3
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
1
Abstract
A formal but intuitive framework is introduced to bridge the gap
between data obtained from empirical studies and that generated by
agent-based models. This is based on three key tenets. Firstly, a
simulation can be given multiple formal descriptions corresponding to
static and dynamic properties at different levels of observation. These
can be easily mapped to empirically observed phenomena and data ob-
tained from them. Secondly, an agent-based model generates a set of
closed systems, and computational simulation is the means by which
we sample from this set. Thirdly, properties at different levels and
statistical relationships between them can be used to classify simula-
tions as those that instantiate a more sophisticated set of constraints.
These can be validated with models obtained from statistical mod-
els of empirical data (for example, structural equation or multi-level
models) and hence provide more stringent criteria for validating the
agent-based model itself.
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
3
1
Introduction
Many social and economic phenomena can be characterised in terms of 'com-
plex systems'. Within this characterisation, entities and patterns of behaviour
emerge at different levels, and interact with one another in non-linear ways.
Agent-based modelling (ABM) is a computational method for modelling and
simulating such systems.
The complex systems perspective has two major strands. From a more
Statistical Mechanics-oriented view, the study of complex systems has fo-
cused mainly on the ways in which lower level micro-properties and inter-
actions give rise to higher level macro-properties (Feldman and Crutchfield,
2003), (Ellis, 2005). The more biologically-based approach tends to focus
more on relating properties at different levels, such as functional modules
in the brain or biochemical pathways and networks (in some cases, such as
feedback, the emergent phenomenon may even be at the micro-level) (Varela,
1979), (Tononi et al., 1994), (Hartwell et al., 1999). Both these strands should
be leveraged in the social sciences.
From a policy point of view, it is important to understand how changes
in rules at the micro-level (which might represent the interaction between
psychology and policy) affect more macro-level behaviours (which might in-
clude those associated with family, organisational, or geographical units). At
the same time, we often have important information about the way decisions
or behaviours of units at different levels relate to each other (for example,
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
4
if several commercial organisations dominate a sector, this can affect both
other organisations within the sector and other sectors).
Currently, the complex systems approach is largely model-dominated
and/or model-driven (whether models are informal, formal, mathematical,
or statistical). While this allows theories to be specified with precision, there
is a risk of alienating those conducting empirical research and hence mod-
els becoming irrelevant or too idealized for real world application. There is
therefore an urgent need to establish robust techniques for analysing and val-
idating models with respect to empirical data, particularly as, unlike in the
physical sciences, idealizations of models do not always have clear isomor-
phism with empirically based studies (Henrickson and McKelvey, 2002). As
ABM is maturing and becoming more widely adopted in the social sciences
(Bonabeau, 2002), (Sawyer, 2001), (Gilbert and Trioitzsch, 2005), (Focus,
2010), it is crucial that the appropriate methods of analysis are applied and
that the conclusions we draw from these analyses are valid. This requires an
understanding of their theoretical basis and rationale.
Furthermore, a rigorously grounded theory allows us to defend the con-
clusions we draw from validating models against empirical data and avoid
the doubts often cast upon the utility and validity of agent-based models
(see, for example (McCauley, 2006)). Related to this are questions regarding
the interpretation and analysis of simulations, for example:
• How many simulations do we need to run to draw a conclusion?
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
5
• How do we interpret differences between simulations?
• How do we use empirical data and simulation-generated data to validate
a model? (Discussions of different aspects of ABM empirical validation
issues can be found in (Kleijnen, 1995)„ (Axtell et al., 1996), (Kleijnen
and Kleijnen, 2001), (Fagiolo, 2003), (Troitzsch, 2004), (Brenner and
Werker, 2007), (Marks, 2007), (Windrum et al., 2007), (Moss, 2008).)
• How do we choose between different agent-based models and parameter
configurations when they are all able to generate empirically valid data?
This article introduces a simple theory of types for describing agent-based
simulations at different levels and relates this to the application of different
established analytical techniques. The theory is based on three fundamental
tenets:
1. Theoretically, an agent-based model generates a finite set of formally
describable closed complex systems, and simulations are the means by
which we sample from this set. In other words, each simulation is an
instantiation of a possible system generated by the model;
2. A simulation can be formally described in terms of properties or phe-
nomena at different levels, with micro-level properties corresponding
to computational states end events, and higher level properties corre-
sponding to sets and/or structures of these states and events. (Higher
level properties such as population behaviour can also be expressed in
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
6
terms of macro-variables and changes in macro-variables, which would
define the sets of event structures; see Section ??)
3. Property descriptions at different levels can be used (either in isolation
or in combination) to classify simulations.
These tenets allow us to build more stringently constrained models relat-
ing phenomena at different levels, which provide stricter criteria for valida-
tion with empirical data. Instead of simply requiring that some phenomenon
'emerges' at the systemic level in simulations, structures of related phenom-
ena (possibly at different scales and/or levels of abstraction) need to be
reproduced with appropriate frequencies or probabilities.
Before commencing, we wish to emphasize that the social sciences cover
a vast landscape of disciplines and domains, and that each domain (and
subdomain) will have its own set of issues to address when both developing
and validating agent-based models. The hope is that each specific domain
will be able to adapt, extend and apply our framework for their specific
purposes.
2 Background and motivation: The applica-
tion of ABM in the study of social systems
Quantitative characterization of dynamic social and economic systems is of-
ten problematic because such systems are complex. By complex, it is meant
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
7
that the behaviour of these systems arises as the result of interactions be-
tween multiple factors at different levels (we will formalise the notion of levels
in Section 4). In the Complex Systems literature (particularly from Statis-
tical Physics) the terms 'non-equilibrium', 'non-linear' and 'non-ergodic' are
often used to refer to describe such system. The difficulty posed by such
systems is that knowledge of micro-behaviour does not guarantee knowledge
of the macro-behaviour, and vice versa. There are two aspects to this.
Firstly, the macro-level behaviour by definition can not be descriptively
or logically reduced to micro-level behaviour; language used to describe the
micro-level is therefore logically distinct from that used to characterise the
macro-level (Darley, 1994), (Bonabeau and Dessalles, 1997), (Kubik, 2003),
(Deguet et al., 2006). This follows from the fact that micro- and macro-level
phenomena require different levels of observation to be manifest (Crutchfield,
1994), (Crutchfield and Feldman, 2003), (Sasai and Gunji, 2008), (Ryan,
2007), (Prokopenko et al., 2009).
Secondly, in contrast to systems in equilibrium in which differences at the
micro-level make little difference to macro-level observations and hence for
which we can predict macro-level behaviour from micro-level observations,
complex systems are sensitive to relatively small perturbations. This sensi-
tivity means that perturbations at the micro-level can have non-linear effects
at the macro-level (Kauffman, 1993), (Holland, 2000), (Yam, 2003), (Ellis,
2005).
The motivation for ABM comes from both these aspects. In ABM, the
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
8
micro-level is specified computationally in the form of state transition rules
(ST Rs) governing the behaviour of computational agents and the macro-level
behaviour is usually represented by system-level global state variables which
aggregate in some way the states or behaviours of the agents in the system.
These two modes of representation can be seen to respectively represent the
logically distinct micro- and macro-level languages. At the same time, ABM
is used to study the effects of perturbations at the micro-level, which are
introduced as differences in initial conditions and/or parameters. The types
of questions that ABM practice typically try to address are:
• How different are the behaviours of simulations generated from different
initial conditions?
• Which parameters is the model most sensitive to?
• Under which parameter configurations and/or ranges is the behaviour
most sensitive or stable?
However, the idea that complex, non-linear relationships exist between
phenomena at different levels is in fact extremely pervasive in empirical
studies. The key difference between such studies and more model-centric
approaches to complexity lies in the methods used to analyse and represent
this complexity.
In empirical studies, the techniques tend to focus more
on interactive statistical associations between phenomena e.g. (Pearl, 1998),
(Krull and MacKinnon, 2001), which tend to be represented in network-based
or hierarchical models, such as Bayesian networks, structural equations, or
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
9
multi-level models. In such representations, the relations between 'levels' are
not formal, but descriptive (based only on our understanding of the phe-
nomena) or statistical (as in the case of multi-level (Gelman, 2006), (Gelman
and Hill, 2006) or modular (Seth, 2008) models). Model-driven studies on
the other hand, tend to consider associations in terms of their fundamental
statistical mechanics (?) or emergent network dynamics (Barab´asi, 2002),
(Dorogovtsev and Mendes, 2003).
This paper seeks to explicitly relate these two perspectives using an ex-
tended ABM framework that permits the representation of properties and
behaviours at any level of abstraction and the relationships between them,
going beyond simple two-level micro-macro/macro-micro relationships.
2.1 Hypotheses, empirical data, models and simula-
tions
Empirical validation is a significant challenge that needs to be overcome in
order for ABM to become more seriously adopted in the Social sciences. We
can classify validation techniques according to the types of hypotheses they
support. To date, the motivation for applying agent-based modelling tends
to be motivated by the following two hypotheses classes:
• Hypotheses concerning the ability of mechanisms and interactions at
the micro-level to give rise to phenomena at the systemic level, for
example, attraction/repulsion -¿ regional segregation. In these cases,
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
10
qualitative data can be used to (weakly) validate the model (i.e. show
that it is not false). At the micro-level, these might be based on findings
from Psychology or on enforced policies. At the systemic level, they
might be anecdotal or event-based observations. This is illustrated in
Figure 1.
• Hypotheses concerning the conditions under which mechanisms and in-
teractions at the micro-level are able to give rise to phenomena at the
systemic level, for example, attraction/repulsion -¿ regional segrega-
tion when the initial diversity of agents exceeds a particular threshold.
With these types of hypotheses, validation would require empirical data
about both the initial configuration and the observed phenomena (e.g.
regional distribution of different ethnic backgrounds at t1 and t2). This
is illustrated in Figure 2.
However, we can also analyse agent-based models with empirical data to
address the following:
• Hypotheses relating micro-level mechanisms to relationships between
phenomena at different levels, including how they might interact to
give rise to global systemic phenomena. For example, we could for-
mulate and validate a model that describes the relationship between
individuals' psychology, policy decisions, regional migration, local un-
employment, and the country's economy. This would require empirical
data relating to each of the phenomena at the different levels. If the
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
11
totality of qualitative effects are observed, then we can say the model is
valid. This can be expressed as a graph or network. If the data we have
is quantitative, the edges of the graph can also be weighted to represent
the strength of the relationships. This is illustrated in Figures 3 and 5.
• Hypotheses about the conditions under which relationships between
phenomena at different levels hold. This would require data from differ-
ent instances of the related phenomena, including their non-occurrence.
For example, we would need to ensure that the cases in which the re-
lationships hold have the same features (or feature combinations) as
hypothesised, and that these features combinations are not found in
the cases in which the relationships do not hold. It is also possible that
this a matter of degree e.g. factor X reduces the strength of association
between phenomena A, B, and C. This is illustrated in Figure 4.
2.2 A general characterisation of ABM
To ensure we have as general a characterisation of ABM as possible, we
do not base our framework on any specific modelling language or software
framework, but instead give an abstract definition that can be easily mapped
to existing ABM frameworks.
We define an ABM as a set of agent types A0, ..., An (global state vari-
ables, e.g. representing resource availability, and dynamic spatial represen-
tations can also be represented as agent types in this abstract formulation)
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
12
and constraints C determining how agents are able to interact in the system
(for example, whether they can communicate directly, synchronously, asyn-
chronously, symmetrically, asymmetrically or via some specified protocol or
topology; this also determines the updating or execution order). Each agent
type Ai consists of a set of variables with defined value ranges and a set
of state transition rules (ST Ri). ST Rs can be seen to represent the range
of possible behaviours for agents (instantiations) of the particular type Ai
and therefore encode the knowledge we have about individual- or micro-level
behaviour. The set of variables and value ranges define the set of states that
agents of the type are able to realise.
We define a state transition rule ST RAi to be a function that maps (i)
a source subsystem state (ϕsource) represented by the values of some subset
of the system's state variables (which might be encapsulated in the agent
itself or belong to other agents and/or elements in the system) to (ii) a
target subsystem state (ϕtarget) represented by some new set of values for
the set of variables when a particular condition cn is satisfied. The mapping
ϕsource → ϕtarget is the state transition, as defined below:
State transition A state transition is a transformation of one subsystem
state to another subsystem state. The state before the transformation is
applied is called the source state and is denoted ϕsource, while the state after
the transformation has been applied is called the target state and denoted
ϕtarget. (The definition for subsystem state is given in Definition ??).
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
13
State transition rule (ST R)
ST RAi(cn) = ϕsource → ϕtarget,
(1)
where cn ∈ CN, and CN denotes the set of conditions that can be distin-
guished by agents of the type Ai.
* The condition cn under which an ST R is executed might be dependent
on the agent's own state qa, the state qe of its environment or neighbourhood
e (which might itself be made up of other agents' states), or both. State
transition rules might also be expressed implicitly in terms of constraints on
permissible action as well as explicitly in terms of conditional state changes,
but these are formally equivalent.
In the most general terms therefore (abstracting away from particular
formal languages or modelling frameworks), an agent-based model is a set
of agent types with a set of constraints governing the interactions between
agents.
3 Agent-based models as both generators and
classifiers of system types
To truly understand what we are doing when we run simulations of agent-
based models, it is necessary to delve a little into some of the technical
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
14
computational details of simulation. Although the practice of agent-based
modelling should be seen as abstracted from computational matters (just
as programming languages are seen as distinct from machine code), when
running simulations, the realisation of computations can have certain impli-
cations.
The following are especially important to note:
Execution order Different orders of execution and state updating can
lead to radically different outcomes, even with the same initial conditions and
parameter settings (Garg et al., 2008), (Blok et al., 1999). In fact, we can see
different updating rules as an extension of the agent-based model itself, since
the set of systems generated by one set of updating rules (e.g. asynchronous)
is different to (and may not even overlap with) the set generated by another
(e.g. synchronous).
Set of systems generated The set of possible systems (distinguishable
simulations) that can be generated from an agent-based model can be ar-
bitrarily limited by the nature of the platform on which it is run. This is
particularly pertinent in cases where real (rather than integer) values are
included in the model or where stochasticity features. In the case of real val-
ues, the memory limitations mean that accuracy is limited. In other words,
the set of possible simulations only includes systems in which we are able
to measure a variable to n decimal places. While this might at first seem
trivial, the implication is theoretically significant, since it means that the
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
15
set of systems we are able to study computationally (if we were to simulate
every possible system) is only a subset of the possible systems that could
theoretically be generated by our agent-based model.
More generally, if we see each distinguishable simulation 1 as a computa-
tional representation of a system that the agent-based model can generate,
it is clear that however many simulations we run, the set of systems that
we can study is finite, even if the agent-based model is theoretically able to
generate an infinite set of systems. (We will formalise this later in terms of
complex event types.) 2
In the remainder of this section we will probe more deeply into the impli-
cations of this for three important aspects of simulation: (i) model concreti-
sation for validating predicted behaviour; (ii) sampling to determine 'typical'
behaviour; (iii) probing to evaluate parameter sensitivity.
3.1 Simulation as model concretization
In the practice of agent-based modelling, the most basic function of simula-
tion is to establish whether or not the model defined at the agent level is able
to generate some phenomenon at a higher systemic level. This is typically
represented by one or more state variables that aggregate individual agents'
state variable values. In many cases, models are also parametised so as to
capture some features of the system being modelled, so that the higher level
phenomenon is hypothesised to occur within some defined value range(s).
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
16
Simulation is therefore treated as a means of determining what happens
when the statically represented agent-based model (expressed in terms of
agent state transition rules) is concretised and dynamically executed under
particular conditions (represented by parameters and initial conditions).
Returning to the fact that the set of distinguishable simulations is finite,
the implication is that even if we were to run every possible simulation, we
never observe the desired systemic phenomenon even though the agent-based
model is theoretically able to generate it. In other words, we are only able
to concretise part of the agent-based model (this is equivalent to saying we
can only sample a subset of the possible systems the model can generate; see
below).
This is especially problematic when the phenomenon we are trying to
understand itself a one-off or rare event. In this case, we have no informa-
tion about how probable the phenomenon is under the conditions we have
represented in the concretised model. Hence, even if the concretised model
(simulation) does emulate the phenomenon, we are not really entitled to
draw any strong conclusions (unless we have extremely detailed information
about the initial conditions and the phenomenon is only reproduced in simu-
lations where these initial conditions are realised; this is the rationale behind
'history-friendly' validation (Werker and Brenner, 2004)).
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
17
3.2 Simulation as sampling
Another widely adopted approach to simulation is to treat it as sampling
(see Figure 6).
In terms of data about the system being modelled, this
requires us to have information about the distribution or probability with
which the desired phenomenon occurs. When simulating therefore, it is not
sufficient simply to reproduce the phenomenon, but to reproduce it to the
correct degree. For example, if our real world data tell us that phenomenon
X occurs in 50% of the cases, only around 50% of our simulations should
exhibit the phenomenon (assuming that we have represented in our agent-
based model everything we know about the system and that the fact that X
is only observed in 50% of the empircal cases is due to the incompleteness of
our knowledge of the conditions necessary for it to occur).
The issue with sampling from only a subset of systems implied by the
agent-based model is that neither our knowledge nor our ignorance is com-
pletely represented. Hence the resulting distribution of simulations sampled
is not strictly speaking a reflection of the information (or lack of information)
we have included in the agent-based model.
3.3 Simulation as probing
Yet another approach to agent-based simulation is to use it as a means of
understanding the fundamental nature of the phenomenon being studied.
This is strongly linked to other complex systems modelling techniques, such
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
18
as equations or iterative maps. The type of model features that we are
interested in within this approach include for example, whether or not a
phenomenon is sensitive to scale (scale invariance) or how the degree to
which it occurs alters under different conditions (parameter sensitivity). In
other words, simulation is used as a means to better understand the model
and its set of systems.
The issue that arises here generalises that which arises when simulation
is used as a means of sampling. If we are using simulation as a means of
understanding the shape of the space of systems defined by our model, the
fact that we may only able to include a subset of the possible systems means
that only a region of the possible locations in the space of systems will be
accessible to us, leading to a mis-representation of the shape of this space.
More concretely, our response to the result that out of 1000 simulations, all
expect one show sufficient agreement with our empirical data might be very
different depending on the type of study. We could conclude that we have
captured the essential mechanisms underlying the phenomenon described by
our empirical data and that our agent-based model has been validated. On
the other hand, we might wish to further investigate the differences between
the anomalous simulation and the others by identifying the key differences
(for example, different initial conditions, subsystem behaviours or global sub-
trajectories). Empirical data associated with these distinguishing attributes
could then be sought to provide further support for the model (in the best
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
19
case, the differences in the anomalous simulation would map directly onto an
anomalous case in the real world with the same distinguishing attributes).
On the other hand, even if the distinguishing attributes in the anomalous
simulation are implausible (for example, they refute what we believe should
be possible in human interactions), we might still accept the model as having
sufficient explanatory and predictive validity since the vast majority of sim-
ulations manage to reproduce what has been observed in the real world (of
course, different domains will have different tolerances to such discrepancies).
From a theoretical perspective, an agent-based model can be seen as both
a generator and a classifier of systems. The totality of the set of systems that
can possibly be generated computationally is determined by (i) the agent-
based model; (ii) the updating rules (which can be seen as an extension of the
model)the updating rules (which can be seen as an extension of the model);
(iii) the set of parameter value combinations that can be represented, includ-
ing the initial conditions and the set of possible values for random generator
seeds for stochastic models (e.g. x1 = [0.00000000000, 0.9999999999] × x2 =
[0.00000000000, 0.9999999999] × x3 = [0.00000000000, 0.9999999999]).
Correspondingly, the abstractly defined unparametised agent-based model
can be seen as defining a set of systems, with subsets defined by specific com-
binations of (i), (ii) and (iii). Even more generally, any feature that can be
represented computationally in terms of the model, either as simulation in-
put (as in the case of (i), (ii) and (iii)) or as some property or behaviour
'observed' in the simulation (see Section 4 below), can be seen to define a
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
20
subset of distinguishable systems and hence be used to classify simulations
(see Figure 6).
4
'Levels' and 'observations' within simula-
tions
Although agent-based models were initially motivated by the desire to un-
derstand how phenomena observed at one level can give rise to phenomena
observed at another level. surprisingly little work has focused on formally
defining levels or observations in agent-based simulations. This section ad-
dresses this issue by showing how to formally represent observations at dif-
ferent levels in agent-based modelling terms.
In order to do this, we begin by first defining what we mean in general
by observing a system at different levels, and what it means to say that a
property exists at a particular level. An important point to note is that the
notion of level is by its very nature a relative one; it only makes sense to
to say that some property exists at a higher level than some other property.
Essentially there are two types of relation that link lower level properties to
higher level ones:
1. Composition, where lower level properties are the constituents of the
higher level property in some structured relation (e.g. Na + Cl -¿
NaCl)3;
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
21
2. Set membership, where lower level properties belong to a set defined
by the higher level property (e.g. dog -¿ mammal). (See Figure 7.)
In many cases, these two types of relations are combined. For example, in
the case of 'marriage', not only does the property require the participation
of two individuals in some structured relation, but it is also blind to which
particular individuals participate in this structured relation. This can be
formally represented as a hypernetwork (Johnson, 2006), (Johnson, 2007)
or 'heterarchy' (Gunji and Kamiura, 2004). Furthermore, when speaking
of levels, it is impossible to separate a property's existence at a particular
level from the observation or description of the property at this level. The
resolution or precision of observation is equivalent to set membership (since a
lower resolution implies more members belonging to the set), while the scope
of observation is related to composition (since a greater scope implies more
constituents) (Ryan, 2007), (?).
4.1 Static and dynamic properties in simulations
Properties in agent-based simulations can be either static or dynamic.
In
terms of computational representation, static properties are subsystem states,
which are represented by the values of a subset of the variables (which might
also cut across agent boundaries, as in the example of group states, which take
an aggregate of only a subset of the variable values within each agent mem-
ber). Dynamic properties (or behaviours) are represented computationally
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
22
by (possibly temporally extended) structures of state transition rule execu-
tions and state transitions. Indeed, every distinguishable system generated
by an agent-based model can be described formally as a unique structure of
ST R executions and their state transitions.
4.1.1 Static properties as variable values and their configurations
At any given point in time during the simulation, we can formally describe
the current state of the system as a structured set of variable values. Fur-
thermore, we can give descriptions of this structured set at different levels.
For example, from a single-agent level, the current state is described simply
as the set of state variable values encapsulated in the agent. On the other
hand, we can give descriptions that cut across agent boundaries, for example
taking only a subset of different agents' variable values (returning to the ex-
ample of a marriage, we do not necessarily need to know the colour of agents'
hair to obtain the number of married couples in the system at a given time,
only the marital status).
To capture the observations or description of properties, we introduce the
notion of types. A type is a specification for a class of objects such that objects
satisfying the specification belong to the set defined by the class. To formalise
the observation of properties in simulation using the two notions of hierarchy
(compositional and subset, as defined above), we define a subsystem state
type (SST) using a hypergraph representation where the hyperedges can be
either compositional or set relations (as defined by above). A hypergraph
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
23
is a generalisation of a graph, where instead of the edges being limited to
binary relations between two nodes, they can be n-ary between any number
of nodes. An SST is then recursively defined by the hypergraph:
SST :: ({SST},{R})(V AR, [RG]),
(2)
where:
• R is a compositional or subset relation connecting n SSTs
• V AR is a variable;
• [RG] is the range of values that the variable must fall within (to rep-
resent the property).
• ( stands for OR)
So for example, to observe marriage, we might define the SST:
sstM arriage = ({(sstM1), sstM2, SSTM3, sstM4},{(sstM1∧sstM2∧sstM3∧sstM4)}),
where
• sstM1 = (husbID, N otN ull) (an agent has a husband);
• sstM2 = (wif eID, N otN ull) (an agent has a wife);
• sstM3 = (agentID, husbID) (identifies which agent the husband is);
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
24
• sstM4 = (agentID, wif eID) (identifies which agent the wife is);
• wedge stands for AND and is a compositional relationship.
4.1.2 Behaviours as events and structured event executions
Given that an important motivation for agent-based modelling is often to
better understand the relationship between micro-level mechanisms (repre-
sented by ST Rs) and higher level phenomena, we further distinguish between
behaviours arising from the execution of a single ST R and those arising from
an execution structure of ST Rs. In general, a structure of ST R executions
and their state transitions is called a complex event. When a state transition
results from only a single ST R execution, we call it a simple event (a simple
event is also a complex event, albeit one which results from only one ST R
execution). Each simulation is therefore a complex event.
As with states, observation of behaviour is formally represented using
event types, where an event type is a specification defining a set of events
(state transitions). To respect the distinction between events arising from
the execution of a single ST R and those arising from more than one ST R
execution, simple event types (SETs) are those event classes where the re-
quirement for class membership is determined at least in part by which ST R
is executed. However, for a given ST R execution, different observations
(descriptions) are possible. For example, an stri that results in the state
transition (var1, var2) → (var10, var20) can be described with three distinct
SETs (or observed at three different 'levels'):
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
25
1. {stri : [(var1, var2) → (var10, var20)]};
2. {stri : [var1 → var10]};
3. {stri : [var2 → var20]};
Furthermore, executions of different ST Rs might give rise to different
state transitions, but should be defined by distinct SETs (i.e. stri : [var1 →
var10] 6= ST Rj : [var1 → var10]).
Formally therefore, an SET is defined both by a set of two-tuple:
SET :: (ST R, ST),
(3)
where
• ST R is a state transition rule, and
• ST :: SST → SST 0 is a constraint that the description (or observation)
of the resulting state transition SST → SST 0 must satisfy. 4
: [var1 → var10], ST Rj
So, for example, the SET {ST Ri
: [var2 →
var20], ST Rk : [var3 → var30]} would be the set of events resulting from
either ST Ri, ST Rj or ST Rk observed at the one variable level which satisfy
the constraints satisfied (e.g. var1 > x, var10 < y...).
Complex event types (CETs) are event classes defined by a structure or
set of structures of state transitions resulting from a set of structured ST R
executions (this would include SETs, since SETs are simply classes of events
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
26
where the structure of ST R execution is a single execution). As with SSTs,
this can be defined as a hypergraph of CETs, where each hyperedge can be
either a compositional (structural) or subtype (set membership) relation. As
in the case of SSTs, we are thus able to integrate the two types of hierarchy
(compositional and set) introduced above within a common event type. The
formal recursive definition can be given as:
CET :: ({CET},{R})SET,
(4)
where:
• R is a compositional or subset relation connecting n CETs
• ( stands for OR)
This definition is mainly for formal purposes. While it is possible to
specify a CET explicitly by defining the relationships between its constituent
or subtypes, this is not always possible in practice since these relationships
are not always known or, if they are, it would be extremely cumbersome to
specify them in the representation above. Indeed, the goal of simulation may
be to discover such relationships. In practice therefore, it is more feasible
to specify CETs implicitly using aggregated state variables; for example,
we might specify a CET that includes all those structured events where a
change in systemic variable X (e.g. mean population crime rate) exceeds a
given threshold a. One could then discover the execution structures after
simulation by examining the simulations where X exceeds a.
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
27
Table 1 outlines the empirical equivalents of the SST /CET constructs
defined above and gives examples of empirical data to which they can be
mapped.
5
Inter- and multi-level validation of agent-
based models with empirical data
Having defined how we can 'observe' the dynamic instantiation properties and
behaviours in simulation, we can also use these to classify the set of systems
generated by an agent-based model (just as we can use input parameter
configurations to classify systems). The repertoire of models that we can
study has therefore been extended from hypotheses about how agent-level
rules generate systemic properties, to hypotheses about how agent-level rules
generate relationships between systemic properties.
5.1
Inter-level models and validation
Graph-based representations such as structural equation models and Bayesian
networks have been used in the social sciences to describe structures of re-
lated phenomena (usually represented as variables) and the nature of the
relationships (e.g. their strength, positivity). We call these structural mod-
els. Combined with the SST/CET framework defined above, we have a
means to represent structured, defined relationships between phenomena at
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
28
different levels in terms of the agent-based model itself, and not only as ad-hoc
system-level state variables. We call these inter-level models.
To give a concrete example, as illustrated in Figure 8, if variables x1, x2,
and x3 respectively (i) overall crime rate, (ii) clan marriage rate, and (iii) clan
size, we can ask whether the agent-based model is able to generate an inter-
level model such that x2 is positively associated with x1, and x1 increases
x3 (Value ranges for x1, x2, and x3 are also implicit specifications for three
different CETs). Assuming that the agent-based model was developed and
parametised in an empirically-driven fashion, we would require multiple data
sets with data corresponding to x1, x2 and x3 to validate the inter-level model.
If the associations specified by the model are found in these empirical data,
the inter-level model is said to be valid, in the sense that it has not been
shown to be wrong. 5.
Similarly, if we have data corresponding to variations in parameter values
(e.g. different policies at the individual level, which could be translated into
agent propensities for action), we can hypothesise about the effects of inter-
ventions at the agent level on the structural or inter-level model. Or, if we
have very little information about what might be going on at the individual
level, we can classify simulations into those which generate these inter-level
relationships and those which do not (or do so with a far weaker degree), and
then conduct further analyses to determine what the 'unsuccessful' simula-
tions have in common. This might involve specifying and identifying further
CETs or, more simply, evaluating SET frequencies (and hence agent level
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
29
ST R execution frequencies).
If, say, we find that a given SET is associ-
ated with an inter-level model, it would be worth probing further on the
effects of the particular ST R associated with this SET. In real world terms,
this might, for example, correspond to identifying a particular law as being
associated with a self-perpetuating web of social problems.
5.2 Multi-level models and parameter spaces
Given that an agent-based model aims to represent the essential individual-
level mechanisms underlying systemic phenomena, a deeper understanding
of these mechanisms can only be attained through probing the model's be-
haviour under different conditions. In practice, this is done through systemti-
cally varying the model's parameters, which (either individually or together)
can be used to represent different real-world scenarios. A characterisation of
the parameter space can therefore be seen as a statement of how our modelled
mechanisms interact under different conditions.
The multi-level statistical framework has proved to be extremely promis-
ing in the analysis of data in the social sciences. In multi-level modelling
(also known as hierarchical linear models), effects can vary depending on the
level of analysis. For example, a model relating two variables q and s, repre-
senting say, the salary per year of an individual and an individual's level of
education, and a parameter p, representing age, we might find that different
levels (precisions) of p grouping expose different relationships or relationship
strengths. If we choose a precision of 1 year to group individuals (i.e. 1, 2,
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
30
3....), there may be little difference between groups, while a precision of 10
years (i.e. 1-10, 11-20, 21-30...) might yield a stronger relationship between
q and s for some groups than for others.
This same framework can be applied to the parametisation of agent-based
models. If, say, an agent-based model has two parameters p1 and p2, we can
probe the model by simulating with different p1×p2 configurations, giving an
n1 × n2 matrix of CETs, with each matrix cell corresponding to simulation
under the particular p1 × p2 configuration (n1 is the set of values for p1 we
simulate with, and n2 is the set of values for p2).
If some region of this matrix contains CETs differing greatly from the rest
of the matrix (but similar to each other), we separate it from the remainder
of the matrix using the p1 and p2 values. For example, we could discover
a multi-level model in which M1 holds between ranges p1 = [a1, a2] and
p2 = [b1, b2]; M2 holds between ranges p1 = [a1, a2] and p2 = [b3, b4]; and
M3 holds between ranges p1 = [a3, a4] and p2 = [b1, b4], where M1, M2 and
M3 could be any specified relationship, from simple linear correlation to an
inter-level network model. (In terms of CETs we can also say that the CET
associated with M1 and the CET associated with M2 are both subtypes
of a third CET defined by the parameter range p1 = [a1, a2].) Figure 7
illustrates this. As in the case of inter-level models, the multi-level model
itself implicitly specifies a CET, as do its sub-models.
Regions in which parameters (either on their own or in combination) are
particularly sensitive are regions in which the resolution defining groups has
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
31
to be higher to observe the differences. Complexity comes in when the levels
are defined irregularly (i.e. the resolution for defining groups varies; this can
be within or between dimensions). To validate these regions, we need to also
split the empirical data into the appropriate groupings, possibly requiring
relatively high resolution data for some ranges.
In the above example, we would need two empirical datasets correspond-
ing to the two interval p2 = [b1, b2] and p2 = [b3, b4] within p1 = [a1, a2].
These two datasets correspond to the two groups ('levels'): (p1 = [a1, a2] ×
p2 = [b1, b2]) and (p1 = [a1, a2] × p2 = [b3, b4]). A third dataset is required
for the group (p1 = [a3, a4] × p2 = [b1, b4]). If, in these data groupings, the
relationships defined by M1, M2 and M3 hold, the multi-level model gener-
ated through simulations can be said to have been validated by the empirical
data. 6
This multi-level approach to describing the state space of an agent-based
model maps more naturally to data obtained from empirical studies than
the equation-based descriptions of phase transitions typically used to char-
acterise complex systems by physicists while still being formally related to
this description.
6 Summary and conclusions
In this article, we have introduced subsystem types (SSTs) and complex
event types (CETs), which allow us to formally describe or 'observe' at any
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
32
level of abstraction the states and behaviours generated by an agent-based
model. Therefore, we can characterise an agent-based model as a function
that generates a set of SSTs and CETs with given probability distributions.7
SSTs and CETs can be used as the building blocks for defining sophisti-
cated inter-level and multi-level models (formally speaking, inter-level models
and multi-level models are also CETs). Structural and inter-level models al-
low us to define a structure of statistically related CETs and/or SSTs, and
the types of statistical relationships that need to hold between them. The
multi-level modelling framework allows us to define different classes of system
for which different models hold (models might be structural, inter-level, or
simple linear models). This can also be linked to the sensitivity of parameters
and the characterisation of the model's parameter phase space.
From a more practical perspective, the ability to specify structured sta-
tistical relationships between phenomena at different abstraction levels in
ABM terms allows us to formally define the isomorphism between models
and empirical observations and data. Networks and hierarchies of statis-
tical associations then give us more stringent sets of criteria for empirically
validating these types of models. Rather than simply requiring that an agent-
based model can generate phenomenon X for example, we can stipulate that
it should be able to generate associations with particular strengths between
phenomena X, Y and Z in scenario A, and a different set of strengths in
scenario B. By identifying emergent structures of behaviour, we are able to
formally relate the agent-based model to empirical observables. This repre-
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
33
sents a significant step towards true integration of empirical and model-driven
research in the social sciences.
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
34
Notes
1Two simulation instances with the same sequence and structure of agent
rule executions and resulting state changes are indistinguishable.
2It is important to note that in many cases, the agent-based model itself
implies a finite set of systems e.g. a closed system with boolean values
deterministically governing rule execution.
3Note that structure here is meant in the most general sense here and
does not necessarily imply spatial structure
4In the above example, we can express (var1, var2) → (var10, var20) in
SST terms as sstA → sstB, where sstA = ({(var1, rg1), (var2, rg2)},{AN D})
and sstB = ({(var1, rg10), (var2, rg20)},{AN D}) (rg1 and rg10 represent dif-
ferent value ranges for var1; rg2 and rg20 represent different value ranges for
var2)
5The precise type of association relationship e.g. correlation, mechanistic
causation, phenomenal causation, depends on the statistical constraints that
need to be satisfied; these would depend on the goals of the modelling project.
6Of course, when we wish to establish stricter, more specific relationships
between models and parameters (e.g. causal relationships), validation be-
comes more problematic, since it is then necessary not only to show the
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
35
same irregular regions show up in empirical data as in simulation-generated
data, but also that they do so for the correct reasons. For example, should we
say that p1 must lie within [a1, a2] for M1 and M2 to hold for p2 = [b1, b2]
and p2 = [b3, b4], or is it that in the value range [a1, a2], p1 has no effect
when p2 lies between b1 and b4? The difficulty of validating such relations
is a general one however, and the challenge comes mainly from finding the
appropriate 'treated' and untreated' cases. This can be particularly chal-
lenging in the social sciences, since assumptions often have to be made about
the commonalities between two cases since active treatment (the methodol-
ogy of the experimental sciences) is not usually appropriate (one could even
argue that it is inconsistent with the very point of the social sciences). Data
that would allow us to distinguish, for example, necessary conditions from
irrelevant background conditions, are therefore extremely difficult to obtain.
7However, if an agent-based model contains real values or stochasticity,
the computational representation of the model will only be an approximation,
and the set of computationally generated CETs (simulations) generated may
be a biased sample from the true set of systems that could be generated by
the model.
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
36
References
Axtell, R., Axelrod, R., Epstein, J. M., and Cohen, M. D. (1996), "Align-
ing simulation models: A case study and results," Computational &
Mathematical Organization Theory, 1, 123 -- 141 -- 141.
Barab´asi, A.-L. (2002), Linked: The New Science of Networks, Basic Books,
1st ed.
Blok, H. J., Bergersen, B., and Revtex, T. U. (1999), "Synchronous versus
asynchronous updating in the "game of Life"," Rev. E, 59.
Bonabeau, E. (2002), "Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for
simulating human systems," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci-
ences of the United States of America, 99, 7280 -- 7287.
Bonabeau, E. and Dessalles, J. L. (1997), "Detection and emergence," Intel-
lectica, 2, 85 -- 94.
Brenner, T. and Werker, C. (2007), "A Taxonomy of Inference in Simulation
Models," Computational Economics, 30, 227 -- 244.
Crutchfield, J. P. (1994), "The calculi of emergence: Computation, Dynam-
ics, and Induction," Physica D, 75, 11 -- 54.
Crutchfield, J. P. and Feldman, D. P. (2003), "Regularities unseen, random-
ness observed: Levels of entropy convergence," Chaos, 13, 25 -- 54.
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
37
Darley, V. (1994), "Emergent phenomena and complexity," Arificial Life, 4,
411 -- 416.
Deguet, J., Demazeau, Y., and Magnin, L. (2006), "Elements about the
Emergence Issue - A Survey of Emergence Definitions," ComPlexUs, 3,
24 -- 31.
Dorogovtsev, S. N. and Mendes, J. F. F. (2003), Evolution of Networks: From
Biological Nets to the Internet and WWW (Physics), Oxford University
Press, USA.
Ellis, G. F. R. (2005), "Physics, complexity and causality," Nature, 435.
Fagiolo, G. (2003), "Exploitation, exploration and innovation in a model of
endogenous growth with locally interacting agents," Structural Change and
Economic Dynamics, 14, 237 -- 273.
Feldman, D. P. and Crutchfield, J. P. (2003), "Structural information in two-
dimensional patterns: Entropy convergence and excess entropy," Physical
Review E, 67, 051104+.
Focus, E. (2010), "Agents of change," The Economist.
Garg, A., Di Cara, A., Xenarios, I., Mendoza, L., and De Micheli, G. (2008),
"Synchronous versus asynchronous modeling of gene regulatory networks."
Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 24, 1917 -- 1925.
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
38
Gelman, A. (2006), "Multilevel (Hierarchical) Modeling: What it can and
cannot do," Technometrics, 48, 432 -- 436.
Gelman, A. and Hill, J. (2006), Data analysis using regression and multi-
level/hierarchical models, Cambridge University Press.
Gilbert, N. and Trioitzsch, K. G. (2005), Simulation for the social scientist,
Open University Press.
Gunji, Y.-P. and Kamiura, M. (2004), "Observational heterarchy enhancing
active coupling," Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 198, 74 -- 105.
Hartwell, L. H., Hopfield, J. J., Leibler, S., and Murray, A. W. (1999), "From
molecular to modular cell biology." Nature, 402, C47 -- C52.
institutional
Henrickson, L. and McKelvey, B. (2002), "Foundations of "new" social
science:
legitimacy from philosophy, complexity science,
postmodernism, and agent-based modeling." Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 99 Suppl 3, 7288 --
7295.
Holland, J. (2000), Emergence - from chaos to order, Oxford University Press.
Johnson, J. (2006), "Hypernetworks for reconstructing the dynamics of mul-
tilevel systems," in Proceedings of European Conference on Complex Sys-
tems.
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
39
-- (2007), Multidimensional Events in Multilevel Systems, Physica-Verlag
HD, pp. 311 -- 334.
Kauffman, S. (1993), The Origins of Order: Self-Organisation and Selection
in Evolution, Oxford University Press.
Kleijnen, J. (1995), "Verification and validation of simulation models," Eu-
ropean Journal of Operational Research, 82, 145 -- 162.
Kleijnen, J. P. C. and Kleijnen, J. P. C. (2001), "Experimental Designs for
Sensitivity Analysis of Simulation Models," in Proceedings of EUROSIM
2001.
Krull, J. L. and MacKinnon, D. P. (2001), "Multilevel Modeling of Individual
and Group Level Mediated Effects," Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36,
249 -- 277.
Kubik, A. (2003), "Toward a formalization of emergence," Artificial Life, 9,
41 -- 66.
Marks, R. (2007), "Validating Simulation Models: A General Framework and
Four Applied Examples," Computational Economics, 30, 265 -- 290 -- 290.
McCauley, J. L. (2006), "Response to Worrying Trends in Econophysics,"
Physica A, 2, 601 -- 609.
Moss, S. (2008), "Alternative approaches to the empirical validation of agent-
based models," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation.
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
40
Pearl, J. (1998), "Graphs, Causality and STructural Equation Models," So-
ciological methods and research, 27, 226 -- 284.
Prokopenko, M., Boschetti, F., and Ryan, A. J. (2009), "An information-
theoretic primer on complexity, self-organization, and emergence," Com-
plexity, 15, 11 -- 28.
Ryan, A. (2007), "Emergence is coupled to scope, not level," Nonlinear Sci-
ences.
Sasai, K. and Gunji, Y.-P. (2008), "Heterarchy in biological systems: A
logic-based dynamical model of abstract biological network derived from
time-state-scale re-entrant form," Biosystems, 92, 182 -- 188.
Sawyer, R. K. (2001), "Simulating emergence and downward causation in
small groups," in Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on
Multi-Agent Based Simulation, eds. Moss, S. and Davidsson, P., Berlin:
Springer-Verlag, pp. 49 -- 67.
Seth, A. (2008), "Measuring emergence via nonlinear Granger causality," in
Artificial Life XI: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on
the Simulation and Synthesis of Living Systems, eds. Bullock, S., Noble, J.,
Watson, R., and Bedau, M. A., MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 545 -- 552.
Tononi, G., Sporns, O., and Edelman, G. M. (1994), "A measure for brain
complexity: Relating functional seggregation and integration in the ner-
vous system." PNAS, 91, 5033 -- 5037.
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
41
Troitzsch, K. (2004), "Validating simulation models," in Proceedings of the
18th European Simulation Multiconference, pp. 98 -- 106.
Varela, F. (1979), Principles of Biological Autonomy, North-Holland.
Werker, C. and Brenner, T. (2004), "Empirical Calibration of Simulation
Models," Tech. rep., Max Planck Institute of Economics, Evolutionary
Economics Group.
Windrum, P., Fagiolo, G., and Moneta, A. (2007), "Empirical Validation of
Agent-based models," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation,
10.
Yam, B. Y. (2003), Dynamics of Complex Systems, Westview Press Inc.
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
42
7 Figures and tables
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
43
Figure 1: Graphical representation of hypothesis that mechanisms and/or
interactions a, b and c at the micro-level give rise to phenomenon X at the
systemic macro-level.
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
44
Figure 2: Graphical representation of hypothesis that under condition A,
mechanisms and/or interactions a, b and c at the micro-level give rise to
phenomenon X at the systemic macro-level, but under condition B, a, b and
c give rise to phenomenon Y .
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
45
Figure 3: Graphical representation of hypothesis that mechanisms and/or
interactions a, b and c at the micro-level need to be related by specific as-
sociations, represented by i, j and k, to give rise to phenomenon X at the
systemic macro-level.
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
46
Figure 4: Graphical representation of hypothesis that under condition A,
mechanisms and/or interactions a, b and c at the micro-level need to be
related by specific associations, represented by i1, j1 and k1, to give rise
to phenomenon X at the systemic macro-level, but under condition B, they
need different relations i2, j2, and k2. This is a multi-level model, where each
of the sub-models is distinguished only by the strengths of the relationships
(and not the structure).
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
47
Figure 5: Graphical representation of hypothesis that (i) mechanisms and/or
interactions a, b and c at the micro-level need to be related by specific as-
sociations, represented by i, j and k, to give rise to phenomenon X at the
systemic macro-level; (ii) mechanisms and/or interactions d, e and f at the
micro-level need to be related by specific associations, n, o, p, to give rise
to phenomenon Y ; and (iii) Y is associated with X by relation q. X and Y
could also represent phenomena at different abstraction levels
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
48
Figure 6: An agent-based model (abm) generates a set of possible system
trajectories, of which a simulation is an instantiation. The occurrence rate of
simulations with a particular set of attributes (X and Y) reflects the proba-
bility or frequency with which this type of system is expected to occur given
the agent-based model. Attributes X and Y could include any combination
of within-simulation observations and measures discussed above in Section 4,
such as the the emergence of a particular global phenomenon or end state.
ABMSimulation 3Simulation 2Simulation 1Simulation nSatisfies XSatisfies Y ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
49
Figure 7: Two categories of hierarchy.
(a) Compositional hierarchy/α-
aggregation: P2, P3 and P4 are constituents of P1. We can also say that P1
has a greater scope than its constituents. (b) Set membership hierarchy/β-
aggregation: P6, P7 and P8 fall in the set defined by P5. We can also say
that P5 has a lower resolution than its members P6, P7 and P8.
ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
50
Figure 8: Left: Example of an inter-level model where the nodes in the
graph, x1, x2 and x3 can represent phenomena at different levels. The edges
between the nodes represent statistical associations between x1, x2 and x3.
These can be heterogeneous in terms of their nature (correlation, modular,
causal), direction, and strength. Right: Formally, the inter-level model is
an implicit specification for a CET since the statistical associations between
phenomena at different levels define the relative value ranges that must hold
for x1, x2 and x3 (which in turn specify further CETs).
x1x2x3++CETx1++CETx2CETx1CETx1,x2,x3 ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
51
Figure 9: Top: Matrix representing different models (system behaviours)
for different parameter ranges of p1 and p2. M1, M2 and M3 might be
radically different models (e.g. M1 might represent a simple linear relation
while M2 could be an inter-level network relation, or they could simply be
different strengths of of the same model structure. Bottom: Multiple multi-
level models represented in a single hierarchy ('heterarchy'), where each node
also represents a distinct CET. Within the range p1 = [a1, a2, M1 and M2
can be treated as submodels defined by two different p2 value ranges: [b1, b2]
and [b3, b4]. Within the range p2 = [b1, b2], there are also two submodels, M1
and M3. Hence, M1 can be multiple classified as a submodel of both p1 =
[a1, a2 and p2 = [b1, b2]. All three models, M1, M2, and M3 can be treated
as submodels of the multi-level model defined by the range p1 = [a1, a4] and
p2 = [b1, b4].
p1a1a2a3a4p2b1M1M1M3M3b2M1M1M3M3b3M2M2M3M3b4M2M2M3M3 p1=[a1, a4]p2=[b1, b4]M1M2p1=[a1, a2]p1=[a3, a4]M3p2=[b1, b2]p2=[b3, b4] ABM framework for multi-level studies of complex social systems
52
SST
ST R
SET
Empirical equivalent
Validation data
Observed situation in a system at
a given point in time
Individual, collective, population
measures and/or statistics e.g. an
individual's current employment
status, an organisation's current
revenue, a country's GDP at time
ti
Hypothesised micro-level (which
can be individuals, organisations,
countries depending on what the
agents are modelling) responses
to environment. e.g.
if individ-
ual unable to pay bills and feels
cheated, more likely to steal;
if
tax imposed on activity A, firm
less likely to do A.
May be largely theory-based, so
data not always available.
If
available, may be from experi-
mental or case studies at micro-
level e.g. Social Psychology stud-
ies investigating the responses of
human subjects, case studies on
firms.
Micro-level behaviour in a sys-
tem that arises as a direct con-
sequence of the entity's response
to his/her/its environment e.g.
stealing when unable to pay bills.
from
so-
Data
cial/behavioural/cognitive
studies
and/or
psychology
case
(especially when
the entity is an organisation or
geographical region).
studies
(includes
CET
SETs)
Observed behaviour in a system.
As well as micro-level behaviour,
this also includes collective or sys-
temic behaviours at other levels
e.g.
increase in criminal activity
in community X.
Data from experimental studies
and/or case studies addressing
micro-level behaviour; population
statistics and changes in popula-
tion statistics over time.
Table 1: Table outlining the empirical equivalents and validation data for
different constructs in the SST /CET framework.
|
0706.0280 | 1 | 0706 | 2007-06-02T17:20:21 | Multi-Agent Modeling Using Intelligent Agents in the Game of Lerpa | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.GT"
] | Game theory has many limitations implicit in its application. By utilizing multiagent modeling, it is possible to solve a number of problems that are unsolvable using traditional game theory. In this paper reinforcement learning is applied to neural networks to create intelligent agents | cs.MA | cs | Multi-Agent Modeling Using Intelligent Agents in
the Game of Lerpa.
Evan Hurwitz and Tshilidzi Marwala
School of Electrical and Information Engineering
University of the Witwatersrand
Johannesburg, South Africa
[email protected]
Abstract – Game-theory has many limitations implicit in its application. By utilizing multi-agent
modeling, it is possible to solve a number of problems that are unsolvable using traditional game-theory.
In this paper reinforcement learning is applied to neural networks to create intelligent agents. Utilizing
intelligent agents, intelligent virtual players learn from each other and their own rewards to play the game
of Lerpa. These agents not only adapt to each other, but are even able to anticipate each other’s
reactions, and to “bluff" accordingly should the occasion arise. By pre-dealing specific hands, either to
one player or to the whole table, one may “solve” the game, finding the best play to any given situation.
Keywords: Neural Networks, Reinforcement Learning, Game Theory, Temporal
Difference, Multi Agent, Lerpa
1 Introduction
Current game analysis methods generally rely on the application of traditional game-
theory to the system of interest [6]. While successful in simple systems/games, anything
remotely complex requires the simplification of the said system to an approximation that
can be handled by game-theory, with its not unsubstantial limitations [9]. An alternative
approach is to rather analyze the game from within the Multi-agent Modeling (MAM)
paradigm. While this approach traditionally utilizes simple agents [29], far too simplistic
to handle any game of reasonable complexity, creating intelligent agents however, offers
the possibility to “solve” these complex systems. The solution then becomes plausible
without oversimplifying the system, as would be required in order to analyze them from
a traditional game-theory perspective.
This paper explores the use of intelligent agents in a multi-agent system framework, in
order to model and gain insight into a non-trivial, episodic card game with multiple
players. The requirements for a multi-agent model will be specified, as will those for
intelligent agents. Intelligent agents are then applied to the problem at hand, namely the
card game, and results are observed and interpreted by utilizing sound engineering
principles. All of this is presented with a view of evaluating the feasibility of applying
intelligent agents within a multi-agent model framework, in order to solve complex
games beyond the scope of traditional game-theory.
2 Game Theory
Game Theory is concerned with finding of the best, or dominant strategy (or strategies,
in the case of multiple, equally successful strategies) in order to maximize a player’s
winnings within the constraints of a game’s rule-set [19]. Game theory makes the
following assumptions when finding these dominant strategies [11]:
• Each player has two or more well-specified choices or sequences of choices
• Every possible combination of choices leads to a well-specified end-state that
terminates the game.
• A numerically meaningful payoff/reward is defined for each possible end-state.
• Each player has a perfect knowledge of the game and its opposition. Perfect knowledge
implies that it knows the full rules of the game, as well as the payoffs of the other
players.
• All decision-makers are rational. This implies that a player will always choose the
action that yields the greatest payoff.
With these assumptions in mind, the game can then be analyzed from any given position
by comparing the rewards of all possible strategy combinations, and then, by the last
assumption, declaring that each player will choose the strategy with its own highest
expected return [11].
2.1 Limitations of Game-Theory
As a result of the assumptions made when applying game theory, and of the methods
themselves, the techniques developed have some implicit limitations [9]. A few of the
more pressing limitations, which are not necessarily true of real-world systems, are as
follows:
Game theory methods arrive at static solutions. These methods will deduce a solution, or
equilibrium point for a given situation in a game. In many games, however, one will find
that a solution changes or evolves as players learn the particular favored strategy of a
player, and subsequently adapt to exploit the predictable behavior that results from
playing only dominant strategies, and thus ultimately defeating the player utilizing the
dominant strategy.
Real players are not always rational, as defined above. A player may display preferences,
often seemingly at odds with statistically “best-play” strategies, which can change the
odds within a game. A good strategy should account for this possibility and exploit it,
rather than ignore it. This problem is referred to in economic and game-theory circles as
the “trembling hand”.
Game theory cannot handle more than two to three players. Due to dimensionality issues,
game theory cannot be used to analyze games with a large number of players without
simplifying the game to two- or three-player games, game complexity having the final
word on the player limit.
Game theory can only be applied to relatively simple games. Once again as a result of
dimensionality issues, complex games have too many states to be effectively analyzed
using traditional game theory methods.
In order to be analyzed, many complex games are simplified by dividing the players into
grouped “camps”, effectively reducing multi-player games into two- or three-player
games. Likewise the rules are often simplified, in order to similarly reduce the
dimensionality of a game. While these simplifications may allow analysis to proceed,
they also change the fundamental nature of many games, rendering the analysis flawed
by virtue of examining an essentially dissimilar game.
These limitations within game-theory prompt the investigation of an alternative method
of analyzing more complex games. This paper investigates the option of utilizing Multi-
Agent Modeling, using intelligent agents, to analyze a complex game.
3 Multi-Agent Modelling
In its simplest form, multi-agent modeling involves breaking a system up into its
component features, and modeling those components in order to model the overall
system [10]. Central to this methodology is the notion of emergent behavior, that is, that
the simple interactions between agents produce complex results [8]. These results are
often far more complex than the agents that gave rise to them [8].
3.1 Emergent Behavior
Emergent behavior is so pivotal to the understanding and utilization of multi-agent
modeling, that a brief elaboration becomes necessary. While not, strictly speaking, an
instance of MAM, John Conway’s game of artificial life provides an excellent illustration
of emergent behavior, and the ramifications thereof [11]. In Conway’s game, an MxN
grid of squares (often infinite) each contains one binary value, being either alive or dead.
In each iteration of the game, a dead square will become alive if exactly three adjacent
squares are also alive, and an alive square will die if there are less than two adjacent
living squares, or if there are more than three adjacent living squares, as depicted in
Figure 1.
(a)
(b)
Figure 1. A single iteration of Life
In the next iteration, the two outermost living squares in Figure 1(a) will die since each
has only one living neighbor, and the two squares above and below the centre living
square will come to life, as each has exactly three living neighbors, resulting in the
situation depicted in Figure 1(b). As one can see, the rules are incredibly simple, but the
consequences of these rules, i.e. the Emergent Behavior, are far from simple. Figure 2
shows a simple-looking shape, commonly referred to as a glider [11].
Figure 2. Simple Glider
This shape continues to stably propagate itself at a forty-five degree angle within the
game. In contrast, the even simpler-looking shape in Figure 3, known as an r-pentamino,
produces an explosion of shapes and patterns that continually change and mutate, only
becoming predictable after 1103 iterations [11].
Figure 3. R-Pentamino
It is this same complex behavior, emerging from interacting components following
simple rules, that lies at the heart of MAM’s promise, and making it such a powerful tool
[8].
3.2 Advantages of Multi-Agent Modeling
An agent-based model holds many advantages over standard analytical techniques, which
are traditionally mathematical or statistical in nature [5]. Specifically, some of the
advantages offered by an agent-based model are as follows [14]:
• Agents are far simpler to model than the overall system they comprise, and hence the
system becomes easier to model.
• The emergent behavior resulting from the agent interactions implies that systems too
complex to be traditionally modeled can now be tackled, since the complexity of the
system need not be explicitly modeled.
• Large systems with heterogeneous agents can be easily handled within a multi-agent
system, while this is incredibly difficult to cater for using traditional mathematics,
which would make the often unrealistic demand that the components be homogenous.
3.3 Weaknesses/Limitations
While MAM has definite advantages, it is not without weaknesses. Since the emergent
behavior is arrived at empirically, and is not deterministic, it is difficult to state with any
degree of certainty as to why a certain outcome has been arrived at [26]. Similarly, since
emergent behavior is often unexpected [8], it can be difficult to ascertain whether the
multi-agent system (MAS) is incorrectly modeling the system in question. Thus,
validation of the model becomes an important aspect of any MAS.
3.4 MAM Applications
Multi-agent modeling lends itself to a number of applications. The following are some of
the more common applications of multi-agent modeling:
3.4.1 Swarm Theory
Multi-agent modeling is utilized for the development of Swarm Theory based systems
[4]. These systems utilize many simple agents, and attempt to design simple individual
rules that will allow the agents to work together to achieve a larger, common goal, much
in the same manner that a swarm of ants will work together to collect food for the colony.
These systems depend on the engineer’s ability to predict the (often unexpected)
emergent behavior of the system for given agent behavior.
3.4.2 Complexity Modelling
Multi-agent modeling is well-suited to the task of complexity modeling [25]. Complexity
modeling refers to modeling complex systems that are often too complex to be explicitly
modeled [25]. The usage of representative agents allows for the emergent behavior of the
MAM to model the complexity within the system, rather than the said complexity being
explicitly modeled by the engineer [25]. Essentially, the complexity is contained by the
interactions between the agents, and between the agents and the system, rather than the
traditional, and often insufficient, mathematical models previously used [25].
3.4.3 Economics
Fundamentally an application of complexity modeling, multi-agent modeling can be
applied to economic systems [7]. This discipline, known as Applied Computational
Economics (ACE), applies a bottom-up approach to modeling an economic system,
rather than the traditional top-down approach, which requires full system specification
and then component decomposition [7]. In order to verify ACE system veracity, the ACE
model is required to reproduce known results empirically. Once this has been
accomplished, the same system can then be used to predict the results of unknown
situations, allowing for better forecasting and policy decision-making.
3.4.4 Social Sciences
Many attempts have been made to model social phenomena, with varying degrees of
success [15]. Since social systems, by definition, involve the interaction of autonomous
entities [27], multi-agent modeling offers an ideal methodology for modeling such
systems [15]. The foundations of such applications have already been laid, with the
groundwork being solutions to such problems as the standing ovation problem [15].
3.5 Making a Multi-agent Model
In order to create a multi-agent model, the smaller components that comprise the system
must be specified [24]. These smaller components need to be fully modeled, so as to
become the agents that are at the heart of the modeling technique [24]. Each agent must
be capable of making decisions (often dictated by a rule-set), and these decisions may
involve incomplete knowledge of its environment [24]. The agents also need to be able to
receive information from their environments, and depending on the type of system being
modeled, sometimes communicate with other agents [24]. The environment itself needs
to be able to adjudicate the interactions between agents, but at no stage needs to be able
to determine the overall ramifications of these interactions. Instead, the overall result will
become apparent empirically, taking advantage of the emergent behavior of the multi-
agent system to handle the complexity modeling [24].
4 Intelligent Agents
Artificial intelligence (A.I.) can only truly be considered worthy of the name when the
system in question is capable of learning on its own, without having an expert teacher
available to point out correct behavior. This leads directly into the paradigm of
reinforcement learning [23]. Most reinforcement learning techniques explored utilize
lookup-table system representations, or linear function approximators, which severely
hinder the scope of learning available to the artificial intelligence system. One notable
exception is the work on TD-Gammon, in which he successfully applied the TD(λ)
reinforcement learning algorithm to train a neural network, with staggeringly successful
results [11]. Following attempts to emulate this work have, however, been met with
failure due to the extreme difficulties of combining back-propagation with TD(λ). Some
methods for overcoming these problems have been explored, allowing for the
combination of these versatile techniques in order to create an intelligent agent.
4.1 What is Intelligence?
In order to create intelligent agents, it is necessary to first define intelligence, so that we
may critically evaluate whether the agent created meets these criteria. In order to be
considered intelligent, an entity must be capable of the following [20]:
• The entity must be able to learn.
• The entity must be able to learn from its own inferences, without being taught.
• The entity must be capable of drawing conclusions from incomplete data, based on its
own knowledge.
• The entity must be able to re-evaluate its own knowledge, and adapt if necessary.
Should an agent meet these requirements, it can then be considered intelligent. In order to
meet these requirements, the agents will learn within the reinforcement learning
paradigm.
4.2 Reinforcement Learning
Reinforcement learning involves the training of an artificial intelligence system by trial-
and-error, reflecting the same manner of learning that living beings exhibit [23].
Reinforcement learning is very well suited to episodic tasks [21], and as such is highly
appropriate in the field of game-playing, where many episodes are encountered before a
final result is reached, and an A.I. system is required to evaluate the value of each
possible move long before a final result is achieved. This methodology allows for online
learning, and also eliminates the need for expert knowledge [23].
4.2.1 Rewards and Returns
Any artificial intelligence system requires some sort of goal or target to strive towards
[28]. In the case of reinforcement learning, there are two such quantities that need to be
defined, namely rewards and returns [23]. A reward is defined to be the numerical value
attributed to an individual state, while a return is the final cumulative rewards that are
returned at the end of the sequence [23]. The return need not necessarily be simply
summed, although this is the most common method [23]. An example of this process can
be seen below in Figure 4, where an arbitrary Markov process is illustrated with rewards
given at each step, and a final return at the end. This specific example is that of a
Random walk problem.
Figure 4. Random walk rewards and returns.
An A.I. system utilizing reinforcement learning must learn to predict its expected return
at each stage, hence enabling it to make a decision that has a lower initial reward than
other options, but maximizing its future return. This can be likened to making a sacrifice
in chess, where the initial loss of material is accepted for the future gains it brings.
4.2.2 Exploitation vs Exploration
An A.I. system learning by reinforcement learning learns only through its own
experiences [23]. In order to maximize its rewards, and hence its final return, the system
needs to experiment with decisions not yet tried, even though it may perceive them to be
inferior to tried-and-tested decisions [23]. This attempting of new approaches is termed
exploration, while the utilization of gained knowledge to maximize returns is termed
exploitation [23]. A constant dilemma that must be traded off in reinforcement learning is
that of the choice between exploration and exploitation. One simple approach is the ε-
greedy approach, where the system is greedy, i.e. attempts to exploit, with probability ε.
Hence the system will explore with probability 1- ε [23].
4.2.3 TD (λ)
One common method of training a reinforcement learning system is to use the TD (λ)
(Temporal Difference) algorithm to update one’s value estimates [22][23]. This
algorithm is specifically designed for use with episodic tasks, being an adaptation of the
common Widdrow-Hoff learning rule [21]. In this algorithm, the parameters or weights w
to be altered are updated by equation (1) [21].
=∆
w
(
α
P
t
+
1
−
P
t
t
)∑
=
1
k
−
kt
λ
∇
wP
k
(1)
The prediction Pt+1 is used as a target for finding the error in prediction Pt, allowing the
update rule to be computed incrementally, rather than waiting for the end of the sequence
before any learning can take place [22]. Parameters α and λ are the learning rate and
weight-decay parameters, respectively.
The prediction P can be made in a number of different methods, ranging from a simple
lookup table to complex function approximators [21]. Owing to the nature of the task at
hand, a function approximator with a high degree of flexibility is required, since the
agents must be capable of drawing any logical links they see fit, and not be limited by
our choice of function
5 Neural Networks
It is necessary to understand the workings and advantages of neural networks to
appreciate the task of applying them in the reinforcement learning paradigm. It is
likewise important to fully grasp the implications of reinforcement learning, and the
break they represent from the more traditional supervised learning paradigm.
5.1 Neural network architecture
The fundamental building-blocks of neural networks are neurons [28]. These neurons are
simply a multiple-input, single-output mathematical function [28]. Each neuron has a
number of weights connecting it to inputs from a previous layer, which are then added
together, possibly with a bias, the result of which is then passed into the neuron’s
activation function [28]. The activation function is a function that represents the way in
which the neural network “thinks”. Different activation functions lend themselves to
different problem types, ranging from yes-or-no decisions to linear and nonlinear
mathematical relationships. Each layer of a neural network is comprised of a finite
number of neurons. A network may consist of any number of layers, and each layer may
contain any number of neurons [28]. When a neural network is run, each neuron in each
consecutive layer sums its inputs and multiplies each input by its respective weight, and
then treats the weighted sum as an input to its activation function. The output will then be
passed on as an input to the next layer, and so on until the final output layer is reached.
Hence the input data is passed through a network of neurons in order to arrive at an
output. Figure 5 illustrates an interconnected network, with 2 input neurons, three hidden
layer neurons, and two output neurons. The hidden layer and output layer neurons can all
have any of the possible activation functions. This type of neural network is referred to as
a multi-layer perceptron [28], and while not the only configuration of neural network, it
is the most widely used configuration for regression-type problems [18].
Figure 5. Sample connectionist network
5.2 Neural network properties
Neural networks have various properties that can be utilized and exploited to aid in the
solving of numerous problems. Some of the properties that are relevant to this particular
problem are detailed below.
5.2.1 Universal approximators
Multi-layer feed-forward neural networks have been proven
to be universal
approximators [28]. By this one refers to the fact that a feed-forward neural network with
nonlinear activation functions of appropriate size can approximate any function of
interest to an arbitrary degree of accuracy [28]. This is contingent upon sufficient
training data and training being supplied.
5.2.2 Neural Networks Can Generalize
By approximating a nonlinear function from its inputs, the neural network can learn to
approximate a function [28]. In doing so, it can also infer the correct output from inputs
that it has never seen, by inferring the answer from similar inputs that it has seen. This
property is known as generalization [28]. As long as the inputs received are within the
ranges of the training inputs, this property will hold [28].
5.2.3 Neural Networks Recognize Patterns
Neural networks are often required to match large input/output sets to each other, and
these sets are often ‘noisy’ or even incomplete [28]. In order to achieve this matching,
the network learns to recognize patterns in the data sets rather than fixate on the answers
themselves [28]. This enables a network to ‘see’ through the data points and respond to
the underlying pattern instead. This is an extended benefit of the generalization property.
5.3 Training
Training of neural networks is accomplished through the use of an appropriate algorithm
[16]. The two main types of training algorithms employed are back-propagation and
batch updating algorithms [16]. Many algorithms exist, all with their own unique
advantages and disadvantages. Commonly used back-propagation algorithms are
Steepest Descent and Scaled Conjugate Gradient training methods [16], while a
commonly used batch updating algorithm is the Quasi-Newton training algorithm [16].
All of these algorithms are gradient-based algorithms for multivariable optimization,
which are preferable to evolutionary methods due to their guaranteed convergence, even
though global optimality cannot be guaranteed [16]. Regardless of the variation, the
fundamental idea behind back-propagation methods is that weights are updated, via the
optimization method selected, from the last neuron layer back to the first [16], whereas
batch updating algorithms update all weights simultaneously, making for more complex
computations, although fewer required iterations [16].
5.4 Generalization
Neural networks are capable of generalizing to situations that they have not in fact been
trained on, providing that they have been trained over an encompassing range of inputs
[3]. In other words, a network trained on input values of 1; 4; 7; and 10 will be able to
present an accurate answer to an input of 8 since the network has been trained with
values both greater and smaller than 8. It will however, struggle to present a correct
answer to an input of 11 since the highest input training value was only 10. The ability to
generalize is at the heart of the over-fitting/overtraining issue [3]. It is generally accepted
that overtraining is a myth, provided that the number of hidden neurons is correct and
that the training data is complete. However, since satisfying both of these conditions is
nontrivial, the problem of overtraining remains a stark reality. Overtraining leads to the
more specific problem of over-fitting, wherein a network fits too closely to data that may
be incorrect, often fitting the function to the noise rather than the underlying pattern [3].
A visual example of over-fitting and in contrast good generalization is presented in
Figure 6.
Figure 6. Over-fitted Vs generalising Networks
5.5 Suitability of Neural Networks for an Intelligent MAM Agent
A neural network would seem to be an exceptionally good, and obvious choice for use as
a function approximator for the agent’s predictor. The fact that it is a universal
approximator means that the agent is capable of making any inference it deems fit to link
the inputs to its observed values, thus not constraining the agent to limited human/expert
knowledge, which a linear function approximator would. A comprehensive database
lookup-table could provide a similar result, but it has a number of difficulties that
prohibit such a measure. The first problem would be that of dimensionality, i.e. that there
are simply too many possible states to encode, often more in total than even modern
computer memory can handle. On the contrary, the compact nature of a neural network
allows for all of these states to be captured using minimal memory. In addition, the
training time for any sort of convergence would be extremely slow with a lookup-table
method, again due to its size. Differing methods for generalizing using eligibility traces
[18] do exist, but all would impose an artificial linking between states that may not
necessarily exist. A neural network’s generalization property, however, allows for
training of similar states without imposing any such constraints on the budding Artificial
Intelligence’s freedom.
With these advantages in mind, the next problem is observed to be the act of training the
network, since the standard algorithms are of no use in the reinforcement learning
paradigm. The standard gradient-based algorithms require input/output data sets upon
which to train [16], which for the following reasons our agent will not have access to:
• Datasets would require a known correct answer, which would prevent the agent from
finding better answers than those currently accepted.
• Datasets can grow outdated swiftly, especially in a competitive gaming situation,
where one’s opponents can form an integral part of the game’s optimum strategy.
For these reasons, the TD(λ) algorithm has been selected for use, based largely on the
success of the Tessauro TD-Gammon program.
5.6 Jumping the hurdles
In order to implement the TD(λ) algorithm for training neural networks, it is better to
first tackle a known, smaller problem. By first tackling such a problem, one can identify
and solve the prevailing issues within the application of the algorithm, without them
being clouded by issues pertaining to the more complex system. For these reasons, the
problem of tic-tac-toe has been tackled, with an agent created to play against itself,
learning to play the game as it plays. The simplicity of the game makes analysis of the
agents easy, and the finite, solved nature of the game means that one can easily
determine whether the agent has made a good or a bad decision. This last facet will not
be true of larger games, where the agent could easily become better than the standard by
which it is judged, and is thus very important to establish now, when evaluating the
methodology.
6 Tic Tac Toe
The game of Tic Tac Toe, or noughts and crosses, is played on a 3x3 grid, with players
taking alternate turns to fill an empty spot [12][13]. The first player places a ‘O’, and the
second player places a ‘X’ whenever it is that respective player’s turn [13]. If a player
manages to get three of his mark in a row, he wins the game [13]. If all 9 squares are
filled without a winner, the game is a draw [13]. The game was simulated in MATLAB,
with a simple matrix representation of the board.
6.1 Player evaluation
The A.I. system, or player, needs to be evaluated in order to compare different players,
who have each learned using a different method of learning. In order to evaluate a
player’s performance, ten different positions are set up, each with well-defined correct
moves. Using this test-bed, each player can be scored out of ten, giving a measure of the
level of play each player has achieved. Also important is the speed of convergence – i.e.
how fast does each respective player reach its own maximum level of play.
6.2 TD(λ) for backpropogation
In order to train a neural network, equation (1) needs to be adapted for use with the back-
propagation algorithm [23]. The adaptation, without derivation, is as follows [23]:
+
1
t
w
ij
=
t
w
ij
+
∑ ∈
α
OK
(
t
P
K
+
1
−
)
t
eP
K
t
ijk
where the eligabilities are:
(2)
+
1
t
e
ijk
=
λ
e
t
ijk
+
+
1
t
δ
kj
y
t
i
+
1
(3)
and δ is calculated by recursive back-propagation
t
=δ
ki
t
∂
P
k
t
∂
S
i
(4)
as such, the TD(λ) algorithm can be implemented to update the weights of a neural
network [23].
6.3 Stability issues
The TD(λ) algorithm has proven stability for linear functions [22]. A multi-layer neural
network, however, is non-linear [16], and the TD(λ) algorithm can become unstable in
some instances [23] [22]. The instability can arise in both the actual weights and in the
predictions [23] [22]. In order to prevent instability, a number of steps can be taken, the
end result of which is in most cases to limit the degree of variation in the outputs, so as to
keep the error signal small to avoid instability.
6.3.1 Input/Output Representation
The inputs to, and outputs from, a typical A.I. system are usually represented as real or
integer values. This is not optimal for TD(λ) learning, as the values have too much
variation. Far safer is to keep the representations in binary form, accepting the
dimensionality trade-off (a function of the number of inputs into the network, and hence
larger using a binary representation) as a fair price to ensure a far higher degree of
stability. Specifically in the case of the outputs, this ensures that the output error of the
system can never be more than 1 for any single output, thus keeping the mean error to
within marginally stable bounds. For the problem of the Tic Tac Toe game, the input to
the network is an 18-bit binary string, with the first 9 bits representing a possible placed
‘o’ in each square, and the second 9 bits representing a ‘1’ in each square. The output of
the network is a 3-bit string, representing an ‘o’ win, a draw and an ‘x’ win respectively.
6.3.2 Activation Functions
As shown in Section 2, there are many possible activation functions that can be used for
the neural network. While it is tempting to utilize activation functions that have a large
scope in order to maximize the versatility of the network, it proves far safer to use an
activation function that is limited to an upper bound of 1, and a lower bound of zero. A
commonly used activation function of this sort is the sigmoidal activation function,
having the form of [16]:
( )
xf
=
1
−+
xe
1
(5)
This function is nonlinear, allowing for the freedom of approximation required of a
neural network, and limiting the upper and lower bounds as recommended above. While
this activation function is commonly used as a middle-layer activation function, it is
unusual as an output layer activation function. In this manner, instability is further
discouraged.
6.3.3 Learning Rate
As the size of the error has a direct effect on the stability of the learning system,
parameters that directly effect the error signal also have an effect on the said stability.
For this reason, the size of the learning rate α needs to be kept low, with experimental
results showing that values between 0.1 and 0.3 prove safe, while higher values tend to
become unstable, and lower values simply impart too little real learning to be of any
value.
6.3.4 Hybrid Stability Measures
In order to compare relative stability, the percentage chance of becoming unstable has
been empirically noted, based upon experimental results. Regardless of each individual
technique presented, it is the combination of these techniques that allows for better
stability guarantees. While no individual method presented gives greater than a 60%
stability guarantee (that is, 60% chance to be stable given a 100-game training run), the
combination of all of the above measures results in a much better 98% probability of
being stable, with minor tweaking of the learning rate parameter solving the event of
instability occurring at unusual instances.
6.4 The Players
All of the players are trained using an ε-greedy policy, with the value of ε = 0.1. i.e. for
each possible position the player has a 10% chance of selecting a random move, while
having a 90% chance of selecting whichever move it deems to be the best move. This
selection is done by determining all of the legal moves available, and then finding the
positions that would result from each possible move. These positions are sequentially
presented to the player, who then rates each resultant position, in order to find the best
resultant position. It obviously follows that whichever move leads to the most favored
position is the apparently best move, and the choice of the player for a greedy policy. The
training of each player is accomplished via self-play, wherein the player evaluates and
chooses moves for both sides, learning from its own experiences as it discovers errors on
its own. This learning is continued until no discernable improvement occurs.
As a benchmark, randomly initialized networks were able to correctly solve between 1
and 2 of the posed problems, beyond which one can say genuine learning has indeed
taken place, and is not simply random chance.
6.5 Player #1 – Simple TD(λ)
Player #1 learned to play the game using a simple TD(λ) back-propagation learning
algorithm. This proved to be very fast, allowing for many thousands of games to be
played out in a very short period of time. The level of play achieved using this method
was however not particularly inspiring, achieving play capable of solving no more than 5
of the 10 problems posed in the rating system. The problem that is encountered by player
#1 is that the learning done after each final input, the input with the game result, gets
undone by the learning of the intermediate steps of the next game. While in concept the
learning should be swifter due to utilizing the knowledge gained, the system ends up
working at cross-purposes against itself, since it struggles to build its initial knowledge
base, due to the generalization of the neural network which is not present in more
traditional reinforcement learning arrangements.
6.6 Player #2 – Historical Database Learning
In this instance, the player learns by recording each position and its corresponding target,
and storing the pair in a database. Duplicate input data sets and their corresponding
targets are removed, based on the principle that more recent data is more accurate, since
more learning has been done when making the more recent predictions. This database is
then used to train the network in the traditional supervised learning manner. A problem
encountered early on with this method is that early predictions have zero knowledge
base, and are therefore usually incorrect. The retaining of this information in the database
therefore taints the training data, and is thus undesirable. A solution to this problem is to
limit the size of the database, replacing old data with new data once the size limit is
reached, thus keeping the database recent. This methodology trains slower than that
employed to train player #1, making long training runs less feasible than for TD(λ)
learning. The play level of this method is the lowest of those examined, able to solve
only four of the ten proposed problems. Nonetheless, the approach does show promise
for generating an initial knowledge base from which to work with more advanced
methods.
6.7 Player #3 – Fact/Opinion DB Learning
Building on the promise of Player #2, a more sophisticated database approach can be
taken. If one takes into account the manner of the training set generation, one notes that
most of the targets in the database are no more than opinions – targets generated by
estimates of the next step, as seen in equation (1) – while relatively few data points are in
fact facts – targets generated by viewing the end result of the game. In order to avoid this
problem, the database can be split into two sub-databases, with one holding facts, and the
other holding opinions. Varying the sizes, and the relative sizes, of these two sub-
databases can then allow the engineer to decide how much credence the system should
give to fact versus opinion. This method proved far more successful than Player #2,
successfully completing 6 of the 10 problems posed by the rating system. It’s speed of
convergence is comparable to that of Player #2.
6.8 Player #4 – Widdrow-Hoff based DB Learning
In this instance, a very similar approach to that of Player #2 is taken, with one important
distinction: Instead of estimating a target at each move, the game is played out to
completion with a static player. After each game finishes, the player then adds all of the
positions encountered into its database, with the final result being the target of each
position. This means that no opinions can ever enter into the training, which trades off
speed of convergence for supposedly higher accuracy. This method is not optimal, as it
loses one of the primary advantages of reinforcement learning, namely that of being able
to incorporate current learning into its own learning, hence speeding up the learning
process. Unsurprisingly, this method trains with the same speed as the other database
methods, but takes far longer to converge. It achieves a similar level of play as does
Player #1, being able to solve 5 of the posed problems.
6.9 Player #5 - Hybrid Fact/Opinion DB TD(λ) Learning
The logical extension to the previous players is to hybridise the most successful players
in order to compensate for the failings of each. Player #5 thus utilizes the Fact/Opinion
database learning in order to build an initial knowledge base from which to learn, and
then proceeds to learn from thence using the TD(λ) approach of Player #1. This proves
more successful, since the intrinsic flaw in player #1’s methodology lies in its inability to
efficiently create a knowledge base, and the database method of player #3 creates that
knowledge base from which to learn. Player #5 begins its learning with the expected
sluggishness of database methods, but then learns much faster once it begins to learn
using the TD(λ) approach. Player #5 managed to successfully solve seven of the ten
problems once trained to convergence. The problem of unlearning learned information is
still apparent in Player #5, but is largely mitigated by the generation of the initial
knowledge base.
6.10 Player Comparisons
As is illustrated in Figure 7, the hybrid method learns to play at the strongest level of all of the methods
presented. Due to the drastic differences in speed and computational power requirements, it is preferable to
stay away from database-based methods, and it is thus worth noting that only the fact/opinion database
method arrives at a stronger level of play than the simple TD(λ)-trained player #1, and that this
methodology can easily be incorporated into a TD(λ) learning system, which produces the far more
promising player #5.
Figure 7. Relative player strengths
The fact that after a short knowledge-base generation sequence the hybrid system uses
the highly efficient TD(λ) approach makes it a faster and more reliable learning system
than the other methods presented. As can be seen in Figure 7, however, there is still a
greater level of play strength that should be achievable in this simple game, and that has
been limited by the unlearning error seen in Players #1 and #5.
While no perfect result is achieved, the primary goal of learning and adapting is
successful. The agents have been shown to learn on their own, without tutoring. They can
infer from past knowledge to make estimates of unknown situations, and can adapt to
changing situations. Thus the agents have satisfied all four requirements necessary to be
considered “intelligent agents”.
7 Lerpa
The card game being modeled is the game of Lerpa. While not a well-known game, its
rules suit the purposes of this research exceptionally well, making it an ideal testbed
application for intelligent agent. The rules of the game first need to be elaborated upon,
in order to grasp the implications of the results obtained. Thus, the rules for Lerpa now
follow.
The game of Lerpa is played with a standard deck of cards, with the exception that all of
the 8s, 9s and 10s are removed from the deck. The cards are valued from greatest- to
least-valued from ace down to 2, with the exception that the 7 is valued higher than a
king, but lower than an ace, making it the second most valuable card in a suit. At the end
of dealing the hand, during which each player is dealt three cards, the dealer has the
choice of dealing himself in – which entails flipping his last card over, unseen up until
this point, which then declares which suit is the trump suit. Should he elect not to do this,
he then flips the next card in the deck to determine the trump suit. Regardless, once
trumps are determined, the players then take it in turns, going clockwise from the
dealer’s left, to elect whether or not to play the hand (to knock), or to drop out of the
hand, referred to as folding (If the Dealer has dealt himself in, as described above, he is
then automatically required to play the hand). Once all players have chosen, the players
that have elected to play then play the hand, with the player to the dealer’s left playing
the first card. Once this card has been played, players must then play in suit – in other
words, if a heart is played, they must play a heart if they have one. If they have none of
the required suit, they may play a trump, which will win the trick unless another player
plays a higher trump. The highest card played will win the trick (with all trumps valued
higher than any other card) and the winner of the trick will lead the first card in the next
trick. At any point in a hand, if a player has the Ace of trumps and can legally play it, he
is then required to do so. The true risk in the game comes from the betting, which occurs
as follows:
At the beginning of the round, the dealer pays the table 3 of whatever the basic betting
denomination is (referred to usually as ‘chips’). At the end of the hand, the chips are
divided up proportionately between the winners, i.e. if you win two tricks, you will
receive two thirds of whatever is in the pot. However, if you stayed in, but did not win
any tricks, you are said to have been Lerpa’d, and are then required to match whatever
was in the pot for the next hand, effectively costing you the pot. It is in the evaluation of
this risk that most of the true skill in Lerpa lies.
8 Lerpa MAM
As with any optimization system, very careful consideration needs to be taken with
regards to how the system is structured, since the implications of these decisions can
often result in unintentional assumptions made by the system created. With this in mind,
the Lerpa MAS has been designed to allow the maximum amount of freedom to the
system, while also allowing for generalization and swift convergence in order to allow
the intelligent agents to interact unimpeded by human assumptions, intended or
otherwise.
8.1 System Overview
The game is, for this model, going to be played by four players. Each of these players
will interact with each other indirectly, by interacting directly with the table, which is
their shared environment, as depicted in Figure 8.
Figure 8. System interactions.
Over the course of a single hand, an agent will be required to make three decisions, once
at each interactive stage of the game. These three decision-making stages are:
• Whether to play the hand, or drop (knock or fold)
• Which card to play first
• Which card to play second
Since there is no decision to be made at the final card, the hand can be said to be
effectively finished from the agent’s perspective after it has played its second card (or
indeed after the first decision should the agent fold). Following on the TD(λ) algorithm,
each agent will update its own neural network at each stage, using its own predictions as
a reward function, only receiving a true reward after its final decision has been made.
This decision making process is illustrated below, in Figure 9.
Figure 9. Agent learning scheme
With each agent implemented as described, they can now interact with each other
through their shared environment, and will continuously learn upon each interaction and
its consequent result.
Each hand played will be viewed as an independent, stochastic event, and as such only
information about the current hand will be available to the agent, who will have to draw
on its own learned knowledge base to draw deductions from rather than from previous
hands.
8.2 Agent AI Design
A number of decisions need to be made in order to implement the agent AI effectively
and efficiently. The type of learning to be implemented needs to be chosen, as well as the
neural network architecture. Special attention needs to be paid to the design of the inputs
to the neural network, as these determine what the agent can ‘see’ at any given point.
This will also determine what assumptions, if any, are implicitly made by the agent, and
hence cannot be taken lightly. Lastly, this will determine the dimensionality of the
network, which directly affects the learning rate of the network, and hence must
obviously be minimized.
8.2.1 Input Parameter Design
In order to design the input stage of the agent’s neural network, one must first determine
all that the network may need to know at any given decision-making stage. All inputs, in
order to optimize stability, are structured as binary-encoded inputs. When making its first
decision, the agent needs to know its own cards, which agents have stayed in or folded,
and which agents are still to decide. It is necessary for the agent to be able to match
specific agents to their specific actions, as this will allow for an agent to learn a particular
opponent’s characteristics, something impossible to do if it can only see a number of
players in or out. Similarly, the agent’s own cards must be specified fully, allowing the
agent to draw its own conclusions about each card’s relative value. It is also necessary to
tell the agent which suit has been designated the trumps suit, but a more elegant method
has been found to handle that information, as will be seen shortly. Figure 10 below
illustrates the initial information required by the network.
Figure 10. Basic input structure.
The agent’s hand needs to be explicitly described, and the obvious solution is to encode
the cards exactly, i.e. four suits, and ten numbers in each suit, giving forty possibilities
for each card. A quick glimpse at the number of options available shows that a raw
encoding style provides a sizeable problem of dimensionality, since an encoded hand can
be one of 403 possible hands (in actuality, only 40P3 hands could be selected, since cards
cannot be repeated, but the raw encoding scheme would in fact allow for repeated cards,
and hence 403 options would be available). The first thing to notice is that only a single
deck of cards is being used, hence no card can ever be repeated in a hand. Acting on this
principle, consistent ordering of the hand means that the base dimensionality of the hand
is greatly reduced, since it is now combinations of cards that are represented, instead of
permutations. The number of combinations now represented is 40C3. This seemingly
small change from nPr to nCr reduces the dimensionality of the representation by a factor
of r!, which in this case is a factor of 6. Furthermore, the representation of cards as
belonging to discrete suits is not optimal either, since the game places no particular value
on any suit by its own virtue, but rather by virtue of which suit is the trump suit. For this
reason, an alternate encoding scheme has been determined, rating the ‘suits’ based upon
the makeup of the agent’s hand, rather than four arbitrary suits. The suits are encoded as
belonging to one of the following groups, or new “suits”:
• Trump suit
• Suit agent has multiple cards in (not trumps)
• Suit in agent’s highest singleton
• Suit in agent’s second-highest singleton
• Suit in agent’s third-highest singleton
This allows for a much more efficient description of the agent’s hand, greatly improving
the dimensionality of the inputs, and hence the learning rate of the agents. These five
options are encoded in a binary format, for stability purposes, and hence three binary
inputs are required to represent the suits. To represent the card’s number, ten discrete
values must be represented, hence requiring four binary inputs to represent the card’s
value. Thus a card in an agent’s hand is represented by seven binary inputs, as depicted
in Figure 11.
Figure 11. Agent card input structure
Next must be considered the information required in order to make decisions two and
three. For both of these decisions, the cards that have already been played, if any, are
necessary to know in order to make an intelligent decision as to the correct next card to
play. For the second decision, it is also plausible that knowledge of who has won a trick
would be important. The most cards that can ever be played before a decision must be
made is seven, and since the table after a card is played is used to evaluate and update the
network, it is necessary to represent eight played cards. Once again, however, simply
utilizing the obvious encoding method is not necessarily the most efficient method. The
actual values of the cards played are not necessarily important, only their values relative
to the cards in the agent’s hand. As such, the values can be represented as one of the
following, with respect to the cards of the same suit in the agent’s hand:
• Higher than the card/cards in the agent’s hand
• Higher than the agent’s second-highest card
• Higher than the agent’s third-highest card
• Lower than any of the agent’s cards
• Member of a void suit (value is immaterial)
Another suit is now relevant for representation of the played cards, namely a void suit – a
suit in which the agent has no cards. Lastly, a number is necessary to handle the special
case of the Ace of trumps, since its unique rules mean that strategies are possible to
develop based on whether it has or has not been played. The now six suits available still
only require three binary inputs to represent, and the six number groupings now reduce
the value representations from four binary inputs to three binary inputs, once again
reducing the dimensionality of the input system.
With all of these inputs specified, the agent now has available all of the information
required to draw its own conclusions and create its own strategies, without human-
imposed assumptions affecting its “thought” patterns.
8.2.2
Network Architecture Design
With the inputs now specified, the hidden and output layers need to be designed. For the
output neurons, these need to represent the prediction P that the network is making. A
single hand has one of five possible outcomes, all of which need to be catered for. These
possible outcomes are:
• The agent wins all three tricks, winning 3 chips.
• The agent wins two tricks, winning 2 chips.
• The agent wins one trick, winning 1 chip.
• The agent wins zero tricks, losing 3 chips.
• The agent elects to fold, winning no tricks, but losing no chips.
This can be seen as a set of options, namely [3 2 1 0 -3]. While it may seem tempting to
output the result as one continuous output, there are two compelling reasons for breaking
these up into binary outputs. The first of these is in order to optimize stability, as
elaborated upon in Section 5. The second reason is that these are discrete events, and a
continuous representation would cover the range of [-3 0], which does not in fact exist.
The binary inputs then specified are:
• P(O = 3)
• P(O = 2)
• P(O = 1)
• P(O = -3)
With a low probability of all four catering to folding, winning and losing no chips.
Consequently, the agent’s predicted return is:
P
=
3
A
+
2
+
CB
−
3
D
(6)
where
= OPA
( =
)3
= OPB
( =
)2
(7)
(8)
= OPC
( =
)1
(9)
= OPD
(
−=
)3
(10)
The internal structure of the neural network is consistent with that upon which the
stability optimization in Section 5 was done, using equation (5) for the hidden layer
activation function. Since a high degree of freedom is required, a high number of hidden
neurons is required, and thus fifty have been used. This number is iteratively achieved,
trading off training speed versus performance. The output neurons are linear functions,
since they represent not binary effects, but rather a continuous probability of particular
binary outcomes.
8.2.3 Agent Decision-Making
With its own predictor specified, the agent is now equipped to make decisions when
playing. These decisions are made by predicting the return of the resultant situation
arising from each legal choice it can make. An ε-greedy policy is then used to determine
whether the agent will choose the most promising option, or whether it will explore the
result of the less appealing option. In this way, the agent will be able to trade off
exploration versus exploitation.
9 The Intelligent Model
With each agent implemented as described above, and interacting with each other as
specified in section eight, we can now perform the desired task, namely that of utilizing a
multi-agent model to analyze the given game, and develop strategies that may “solve” the
game given differing circumstances.
9.1 Agent Learning Verification
In order for the model to have any validity, one must establish that the agents do indeed
learn as they were designed to do. In order to verify the learning of the agents, a single
intelligent agent was created, and placed at a table with three ‘stupid’ agents. These
‘stupid’ agents always stay in the game, and choose a random choice whenever called
upon to make a decision. The results show quite conclusively that the intelligent agent
soon learns to consistently outperform its opponents, as shown in Figure 12.
Figure 12 gent performance, averaged over 40 hands
The agents named Randy, Roderick and Ronald use random decision-making, while
AIden has the TD(λ) AI system implemented. The results have been averaged over 40
hands, in order to be more viewable, and to also allow for the random nature of cards
being dealt. As can be seen, AIden is consistently performing better than its counterparts,
and continues to learn the game as it plays.
9.1.1 Cowardice
In the learning phase of the abovementioned intelligent agent, an interesting and
somewhat enlightening problem arises. When initially learning, the agent does not in fact
continue to learn. Instead, the agent quickly determines that it is losing chips, and decides
that it is better off not playing, and keeping its chips! This is illustrated in Figure 13.
Figure 13. Agent cowardice. Averaged over 5 hands
As can be seen, AIden quickly decides that the risks are too great, and does not play in
any hands initially. After forty hands, AIden decides to play a few hands, and when they
go badly, gets scared off for good. This is a result of the penalizing nature of the game,
since bad play can easily mean one loses a full three chips, and since the surplus of lost
chips is nor carried over in this simulation, a bad player loses chips regularly. While
insightful, a cowardly agent is not of any particular use, and hence the agent must be
given enough ‘courage’ to play, and hence learn the game. In order to do this, one option
is to increase the value of ε for the ε-greedy policy, but this makes the agent far too much
like a random player without any intelligence. A more successful, and sensible solution is
to force the agent to play when it knows nothing, until such a stage as it seems prepared
to play. This was done by forcing AIden to play the first 200 hands it had ever seen, and
thereafter leave AIden to his own devices.
9.2 Parameter Optimisation
A number of parameters need to be optimized, in order to optimize the learning of the
agents. These parameters are the learning-rate α, the memory parameter λ and the
exploration parameter ε. The multi-agent system provides a perfect environment for this
testing, since four different parameter combinations can be tested competitively. By
setting different agents to different combinations, and allowing them to play against each
other for an extended period of time (number of hands), one can iteratively find the
parameter combinations that achieve the best results, and are hence the optimum learning
parameters. Figure 14 shows the results of one such test, illustrating a definite ‘winner’,
whose parameters were then used for the rest of the multi-agent modeling. It is also
worth noting that as soon as the dominant agent begins to lose, it adapts its play to
remain competitive with its less effective opponents. This is evidenced at points 10 and
30 on the graph (games number 300 and 900, since the graph is averaged over 30 hands)
where one can see the dominant agent begin to lose, and then begins to perform well
once again.
Figure 14. Competitive agent parameter optimisation. Averaged over 30 hands.
Surprisingly enough, the parameters that yielded the most competitive results were α =
0.1; λ = 0.1 and ε = 0.01. while the ε value is not particularly surprising, the relatively
low α and λ values are not exactly intuitive. What they amount to is a degree of
temperance, since higher values would mean learning a large amount from any given
hand, effectively over-reacting when they may have played well, and simply have fallen
afoul of bad luck.
9.3 MAS Learning Patterns
With all of the agents learning in the same manner, it is noteworthy that the overall
rewards they obtain are far better than those obtained by the random agents, and even by
the intelligent agent that was playing against the random agents. A sample of these
results is depicted in Figure 15.
Figure 15. Comparative returns over 200 hands.
R1 to R3 are the Random agents, while AI1 is the intelligent agent playing against the
random agents. AI2 to AI5 depict intelligent agents playing against each other. As can be
seen, the agents learn far better when playing against intelligent opponents, an attribute
that is in fact mirrored in human competitive learning [1]. The agents with better
experience tend to fold bad hands, and hence lose far fewer chips than the intelligent
agent playing against unpredictable opponents.
9.4 Agent Adaptation
In order to ascertain whether the agents in fact adapt to each other or not, the agents were
given pre-dealt hands, and required to play them against each other repeatedly. The
results of one such experiment, illustrated in Figure 16, shows how an agent learns from
its own mistake, and once certain of it, changes its play, adapting in order to gain a better
return from the hand. The mistakes it sees are its low returns, returns of -3 to be precise.
At one point, the winning player obviously decides to explore, giving some false hope to
the losing agent, but then quickly continues to exploit his advantage. Eventually, at game
#25, the losing agent gives up, adapting his play to suit the losing situation in which he
finds himself. Figure 16 also illustrates the progression of the agents and the adaptation
described.
Figure 16. Adaptive agent behaviour
9.5 Strategy analysis
The agents have been shown to successfully learn to play the game, and to adapt to each
other’s play in order to maximize their own rewards. These agents form the pillars of the
multi-agent model, which can now be used to analyze, and attempt to ‘solve’ the game.
Since the game has a nontrivial degree of complexity, situations within the game are to
be solved, considering each situation a sub-game of the overall game. The first, and most
obvious type of analysis is a static analysis, in which all of the hands are pre-dealt. This
system can be said to have stabilized when the results and the playout become constant,
with all agents content to play the hand out in the same manner, each deciding that
nothing better can be achieved. This is akin to Game Theory’s “static equilibrium”.
9.6 Bluffing
A bluff is an action, usually in the context of a card game, that misrepresents one’s cards
with the intent of causing one’s opponents to drop theirs (i.e. to fold their hand). There
are two opposing schools of thought regarding bluffing [2]. One school claims that
bluffing is purely psychological, while the other maintains that a bluff is a purely
statistical act, and therefore no less sensible than any other strategy [2]. Astoundingly
enough, the intelligent agents do in fact learn to bluff! A classic example is illustrated in
Figure 17, which depicts a hand in which bluffing was evidenced.
Figure 17. Agent bluffing
In the above hand, Randy is the first caller, and diamonds have been declared trumps.
Randy’s hand is not particularly impressive, having only one low trump, and two low
supporting cards. Still, he has the lead, and a trump could become a trick, although his
risks are high for minimal reward. Nonetheless, Randy chooses to play this hand. Ronald,
having nothing to speak of, unsurprisingly folds. Roderick, on the other hand, has a very
good hand. One high trump, and an outside ace. However, with one still to call, and
Randy already representing a strong hand by playing, Roderick chooses to fold. AIden,
whose hand is very strong with two high trumps and an outside jack, plays the hand.
When the hand is played repeatedly, Randy eventually chooses not to play, since he loses
all three to AIden. Instantly, Roderick chooses to play the hand, indicating that the bluff
was successful, that it chased a player out of the hand! Depending on which of the
schools of thought regarding bluffing one follows this astonishing result leads us to one
of two possible conclusions. If, like the authors, one maintains that bluffing is simply
playing the odds, making the odds for one’s opponent unfavorable by representing a
strong hand, then this result shows that the agents learn each other’s patterns well enough
to factor their opponent’s strategies into the game evaluation, something Game Theory
does a very poor job of. Should one follow the theory that bluffing is purely
psychological, then the only conclusion that can be reached from this result is that the
agents have in fact developed their own ‘psyches’, their own personalities which can then
be exploited. Regardless of which option tickles the reader, the fact remains that agents
have been shown to learn, on their own and without external prompting, to bluff!
[12][17]
9.7 Deeper Strategy Analysis
While the strategy analysis already presented is useful, it is not truly practical, since for
many applications one may have access to no more information than a single agent has.
For such situations, one can perform a different simulation, pre-dealing only a single
agent’s hand. In this way, the agent will be testing its strategy against a dynamic
opposition, being forced to value its hand on its own merit and not based on static results.
Once the agent performs constantly with its hand, the resulting strategy will be the
dominant strategy. To be said to be constantly performing, the agent should average zero
or greater than zero returns when playing out according to its arrived at strategy, since
negative returns would indicate playing with a weak hand that should be folded. In this
way, one can determine the correct play with any given hand, effectively ‘solving’ the
game.
9.8 Personality Profiling
While Game Theory stagnates in the assumption that all players are rational, there is no
such limit strangling a multi-agent model using intelligent agents. While this may not
seem important on the surface, it does in fact extend the usefulness of the model far
beyond that of standard Game Theory. Many poker players of reasonable skill complain
bitterly about playing against beginners, bemoaning the fact that the beginners do not
play as they should, as a “rational” player would, and thus throw the better players off
their game. A good player, however, should not be limited to assuming rationality from
his opponents, but rather should identify his opponents’ characteristics and exploit their
weaknesses. In order to perform this task, one needs to create “personality” types in
agents, this while sounding somewhat daunting, is in fact a rather simple task. All that is
required is to modify the reward function for an agent (equation #6) to reflect the
personality type to be modeled. Two personality types were created, namely an
aggressive personality and a conservative personality. The aggressive agent uses the
reward function:
P
=
3
A
+
2
+
CB
−
2
D
(11)
While the conservative agent uses the reward function:
P
=
3
A
+
2
+
CB
−
4
D
(12)
Where the symbols have the following meanings: P denotes the expected outcome of the
hand; A denotes the probability of winning three tricks; B denotes the probability of
winning two tricks; C denotes the probability of winning one trick; and D denotes the
probability of winning zero tricks.
As can be seen, in this case both agents modify the coefficient of the D term in order to
skew their world view. This is certainly not the only manner in which the reward
function can be modified in order to reflect a personality, but is the most obvious, since
the D term represents the “risk” that the agent sees within a hand. Using the above
modifications, the previously detailed strategy analysis techniques can be performed on
agents with distinctive personalities. The static analysis of comes to the same results as
with rational players, due to the unchanging nature of the problem, while the dynamic
analysis yields more interesting results. Dynamic strategy analysis finds different
dominant strategies when playing against these profiled personalities. More specifically,
the aggressive player is not considered as dangerous when playing in a hand, while the
conservative player is treated with the utmost of respect, since he only plays the best of
hands.
10 Conclusions
Mutli-agent modeling using intelligent agents allows one to analyze and solve games that
traditional game theory struggles to handle. By utilizing reinforcement learning, and the
TD(λ) algorithm in particular, adaptive, intelligent agents can be created to interact
within the multi-agent system. While these agents will learn against both intelligent and
non-intelligent agents, they learn far faster against better, more intelligent agents,
achieving a higher standard of play in a shorter period of time. They also continually
adapt to each other’s play styles, finding dynamic equilibria within the game. The system
can be used to determine “best play” strategy for any given hand, in any specific
scenario. Moreover, bluffing in the game was shown to be in all likelihood a natural
strategic development, an act of “playing the odds”, rather than the traditional view of
being a psychological play. Through modifying the reward signals received by agents, it
was also shown that personality types can be modeled, allowing for hands to be “solved”
taking into account non-rational opponents, a feature sorely lacking in traditional game-
theory. Finally, input sensitivity analysis was found to be unsuccessful in analyzing the
decision-making process of the agents, by reason of the encoding scheme.
11 References
[1]
C. Ames and J. Archer, “Achievement Goals in the Classroom: Students’ Learning Strategies and
the Motivation Processes” Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 80, no.3, pp. 260-267, 1988.
[2]
R. Bellman, D. Blackwell. “Some Two-person Games Involving Bluffing”, Proceedings of the
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 35, pp. 600-605, 1949.
[3] J.J. Distefano, R. Allen, J. Ivan, Feedback and Control Systems. 2/ed. McGraw-Hill. New York.
1990.
[4] A.P. Engelbrecht, ComputationalIntelligence: An Introduction, John Wiley & Sons. 2002.
[5] L. Fahrmeir, G. Tutz, Multivariate Statistical Modelling Based on Generalised Linear Model,
Springer-Verlag, 1994.
[6] R. Gibbons, Game Theory for Applied Economists, Princeton University Press, July 1992.
[7] D.K. Gode, S. Sunder, “Allocative Efficiency of Markets with Zero Intelligence Traders: Market as
a Partial Substitute for Individual Rationality” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 101, pp 119-137, 1993
[8] M. Granovetter, “Threshold Models of Collective Behavior”, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 83,
no. 6, pp. 1420–1443, 1978.
[9] S.H. Heap, Game Theory: A Critical Introduction, Routledge, 2004.
[10] S. Herbert, The Architecture of Complexity, The Sciences of the Artificial. MIT Press. 1982
[11] E. Hurwitz, Multi-Agent Modelling Using Intelligent Agents in Competitive Games, M.Sc. Thesis,
University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa, 2007.
[12] E. Hurwitz and T. Marwala. “Optimising reinforcement learning for neural networks”, In Proceedings
of the 6th Annual European on Intelligent Games and Simulation, Leicester, UK, 2005, pp. 13-18.
[13] E. Hurwitz and T. Marwala, “Learning to bluff: A multi-agent approach“, IEEE International
Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Montreal, Canada, (accepted)
[14] R. Khosla, T. Dillon. Engineering Intelligent Hybrid Multi-Agent Systems, Kluver Academic
Publishers, 1997.
[15] M.W. Macy, R. Willer, “From Factors to Actors: Computational Sociology and Agent-Based
Modelling”, Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 28, pp 143-166. 2002.
[16] T. Marwala. Fault identification using neural networks and vibration data. Doctor of Philosophy
Thesis, University of Cambridge, 2001.
[17] Z. Merali. “Software learns when it pays to deceive“, New Scientist 30 May 2007, p. 32
[18] W.T. Miller, R.S. Sutton and P. Werbos, Neural Networks for Control. MIT Press. Cambridge,
Massachusetts. 1990
[19] P.C. Ordeshook, Game Theory and Political Theory: An Introduction, Cambridge University Press.
1986.
[20] S.J. Russel, “Rationality and Intelligence”, Fourteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial
Intelligence. 1995.
[21] R.S. Sutton, “Learning to Predict by the Methods of Temporal Differences”, Machine Learning, vol.
3, pp. 9-44, 1988.
[22] R.S. Sutton, Implementation Details of the TD(λ) Procedure for the Case of Vector Predictions and
Back-propagation, GTE Laboratories Technical Note TN87-509.1, 1989.
[23] R.S. Sutton, A.G. Barto, Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction, MIT Press, 1998.
[24] K.P., Sycara, Multiagent Systems, AI Magazine, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 79-92, 1998.
[25] V. Tamas, “Complexity: The Bigger Picture”, Nature, vol. 418, no. 6894, pp. 131, 2002.
[26] H. Van Peach, Complexity and Ecosystem Management: The Theory and Practice of Multi-Agent
Systems, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2002.
[27] E. Wenger, Communities of Practice: Learning as a Social System, Systems Thinker, June 1988.
[28] H.J. Wesley, MATLAB Supplement to Fuzzy and Neural Approaches in Engineering, John Wiley &
Sons Inc. New York. 1997.
[29] M. Wooldridge, N.R. Jennings, “Intelligent Agents: Theory and Practice”, Knowledge Engineering
Review, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 115-152, 1995.
|
1901.11000 | 2 | 1901 | 2019-08-13T20:19:52 | Determining r- and (r,s)-Robustness of Digraphs Using Mixed Integer Linear Programming | [
"cs.MA"
] | There has been an increase in the use of resilient control algorithms based on the graph theoretic properties of $r$- and $(r,s)$-robustness. These algorithms guarantee consensus of normally behaving agents in the presence of a bounded number of arbitrarily misbehaving agents if the values of the integers $r$ and $s$ are sufficiently large. However, determining an arbitrary graph's robustness is a highly nontrivial problem. This paper introduces a novel method for determining the $r$- and $(r,s)$-robustness of digraphs using mixed integer linear programming; to the best of the authors' knowledge it is the first time that mixed integer programming methods have been applied to the robustness determination problem. The approach only requires knowledge of the graph Laplacian matrix, and can be formulated with binary integer variables. Mixed integer programming algorithms such as branch-and-bound are used to iteratively tighten the lower and upper bounds on $r$ and $s$. Simulations are presented which compare the performance of this approach to prior robustness determination algorithms. | cs.MA | cs | Determining r- and (r, s)-Robustness of Digraphs Using Mixed
Integer Linear Programming (cid:63)
James Usevitch a, Dimitra Panagou a,
aDepartment of Aerospace Engineering, University of Michigan
9
1
0
2
g
u
A
3
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
2
v
0
0
0
1
1
.
1
0
9
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract
There has been an increase in the use of resilient control algorithms based on the graph theoretic properties of r- and (r, s)-
robustness. These algorithms guarantee consensus of normally behaving agents in the presence of a bounded number of
arbitrarily misbehaving agents if the values of the integers r and s are sufficiently large. However, determining an arbitrary
graph's robustness is a highly nontrivial problem. This paper introduces a novel method for determining the r- and (r, s)-
robustness of digraphs using mixed integer linear programming; to the best of the authors' knowledge it is the first time that
mixed integer programming methods have been applied to the robustness determination problem. The approach only requires
knowledge of the graph Laplacian matrix, and can be formulated with binary integer variables. Mixed integer programming
algorithms such as branch-and-bound are used to iteratively tighten the lower and upper bounds on r and s. Simulations are
presented which compare the performance of this approach to prior robustness determination algorithms.
Key words: Networks, Robustness, Graph Theory, Optimization problems, Integer programming
1 Introduction
Consensus on shared information is fundamental to the
operation of multi-agent systems. In context of mo-
bile agents, it enables formation control, rendezvous,
distributed estimation, and many more objectives. Al-
though a vast number of algorithms for consensus exist,
many are unable to tolerate the presence of misbehaving
agents subject to attacks or faults. Recent years have
seen an increase of attention on resilient algorithms
that are able to operate despite such misbehavior. Many
of these algorithms have been inspired by [9], which is
one of the seminal papers on consensus in the presence
of adversaries; [14, 15, 43], which outline discrete- and
continuous-time algorithms along with necessary and
sufficient conditions for scalar consensus in the pres-
ence of Byzantine adversaries; and [32, 34, 38, 39], which
outline algorithms for multi-agent vector consensus
of asynchronous systems in the presence of Byzantine
adversaries. Some of the most recent resilience-based
results that draw upon these papers include state es-
timation [18 -- 21], rendezvous of mobile agents [22, 23],
output synchronization [11], simultaneous arrival of in-
terceptors [17], distributed optimization [29,31], reliable
broadcast [33, 43], clock synchronization [8], random-
ized quantized consensus [5], self-triggered coordination
[26], and multi-hop communication [30].
A large number of results on network resilience are
based upon the graph theoretical properties known as
r-robustness and (r, s)-robustness [15, 43]. r-robustness
and (r, s)-robustness are key notions included in the
sufficient conditions for convergence of several resilient
consensus algorithms including the ARC-P [14], W-
MSR [15], SW-MSR [25], and DP-MSR [4] algorithms.
Given an upper bound on the global or local number of
adversaries in the network, the aforementioned resilient
algorithms guarantee convergence of normally behaving
agents' states to a value within the convex hull of initial
states if the integers r and s are sufficiently large.
(cid:63) The authors would like to acknowledge the support of
the Automotive Research Center (ARC) in accordance
with Cooperative Agreement W56HZV-14-2-0001 U.S. Army
TARDEC in Warren, MI, and the Award No W911NF-17-
1-0526.
Email addresses: [email protected] (James Usevitch),
[email protected] (Dimitra Panagou).
A key challenge in implementing these resilient algo-
rithms is that determining the r- and (r, s)-robustness
of arbitrary digraphs is an NP-hard problem in general
[13,42]. The first algorithmic analysis of determining the
values of r and s for arbitrary digraphs was given in [13].
The algorithms proposed in [13] employ an exhaustive
search to determine the maximum values of r and s for
Preprint submitted to Automatica
15 August 2019
a given digraph, and have exponential complexity w.r.t.
the number of nodes in the network. In [42] it was shown
that the decision problem of determining if an arbitrary
graph is r-robust for a given integer r is coNP-complete
in general. Subsequent work has focused on methods
to circumvent this difficulty, including graph construc-
tion methods which increase the graph size while pre-
serving given values of r and s [6, 15]; lower bounding
r with the isoperimetric constant and algebraic connec-
tivity of undirected graphs [27]; and demonstrating the
behavior of r as a function of certain graph properties
[7,24,28,35,42,44]. In particular, it has been shown that
the r-robustness of some specific classes of graphs can
be exactly determined in polynomial time from certain
graph parameters. Examples include k-circulant graphs
[35] and lattice-based formations [7, 24]. Another recent
approach has used machine learning to correlate char-
acteristics of certain graphs to the values of r and s
[40], but these correlations are inherently stochastic in
nature and do not provide explicit guarantees. Despite
the impressive results of prior literature, methods to ei-
ther approximate or determine exactly the r- and (r, s)-
robustness of arbitrary digraphs remain relatively rare.
Methods to determine the exact r- or (r, s)-robustness of
arbitrary undirected graphs are also uncommon. Find-
ing more efficient or practical ways of determining the
robustness of arbitrary graphs in general, and digraphs
in particular, remains an open problem.
In response to this open problem, this paper intro-
duces novel methods for determining the r- and (r, s)-
robustness of digraphs and undirected graphs using
mixed integer linear programming (MILP). These meth-
ods only require knowledge of the graph Laplacian
matrix and are zero-one MILPs, i.e. with all integer
variables being binary. To the best of our knowledge,
this is the first time the robustness determination prob-
lem has been formulated in this way. These results con-
nect the problem of graph robustness determination to
the extensive and well-established literature on integer
programming and linear programming.
This paper makes the following specific contributions:
(1) We present a method to determine the maximum
integer for which a nonempty, nontrivial, simple di-
graph is r-robust using mixed integer linear pro-
gramming.
(2) We present a method which determines the (r, s)-
robustness of a digraph using linear programming.
Here, the (r, s)-robustness of a digraph refers to the
maximal (r, s) integer pair according to a lexico-
graphical order for which a given digraph is (r, s)-
robust, as first described in [13]. Furthermore, we
show that our method can also determine the maxi-
mum integer F for which a digraph is (F +1, F +1)-
robust, which is not considered in [13].
(3) We present two mixed integer linear programs
whose optimal values provide lower and upper
bounds on the maximum r for which a nonempty,
nontrivial, simple digraph is r-robust. These two
formulations exhibit a lower complexity than the
method in the first contribution described above.
The contributions of this paper provide several advan-
tages. First, expressing the robustness determination
problem in MILP form allows for approximate lower
bounds on a given digraph's r-robustness to be itera-
tively tightened using algorithms such as branch-and-
bound. Lower bounds on the maximum value of s for
which a given digraph is (r, s) robust (for a given non-
negative integer r) can also be iteratively tightened us-
ing the approach in this paper. Prior algorithms are only
able to tighten the upper bound on the maximum robust-
ness for a given digraph or undirected graph. Second,
this formulation enables commercially available solvers
such as Gurobi or MATLAB's intlinprog to be used to
find the maximum robustness of any digraph. Finally,
experimental results using this new formulation suggest
a reduction in computation time as compared to the cen-
tralized algorithm proposed in [13].
Part of this paper was previously submitted as a confer-
ence paper [36]. The extensions to the conference version
include the following:
robustness is considered.
• The more general case of determining (r, s)-
• Two optimization problems with reduced-dimension
binary vector variables are given whose optimal
values provide a lower bound and an upper bound,
respectively, on the maximum value of r for which
a graph is r-robust.
This paper is organized as follows: notation is presented
in Section 2, the problem formulation is given in Section
3, determining the r-robustness of digraphs is treated
in Section 4, determining the values of s for which a
digraph is (r, s)-robust for a given r is treated in Section
5, methods to obtain upper and lower bounds on the
maximum r for which a digraph is r-robust are presented
in Section 6, a brief discussion about the advantages of
the MILP formulations is given in Section 7, simulations
demonstrating our algorithms are presented in Section
8, and a brief conclusion is given in 9.
2 Notation
The sets of real numbers and integers are denoted R and
Z, respectively. The sets of nonnegative real numbers
and integers are denoted R+ and Z+, respectively. Rn
denotes an n-dimensional vector space over the field R,
Zn represents the set of n dimensional vectors with in-
teger entries, and {0, 1}n represents a binary vector of
dimension n. Scalars are denoted in normal text (e.g.
x ∈ R) while vectors are denoted in bold (e.g. x ∈ Rn).
The notation xi denotes the ith entry of vector x.
2
The inequality symbol (cid:22) denotes a componentwise in-
equality between vectors; i.e. for x, y ∈ Rn, x (cid:22) y im-
plies xi ≤ yi ∀i ∈ {1, . . . , n}. A vector of ones is de-
noted 1, and a vector of zeros is denoted 0, where the
length of each vector will be implied by the context. The
union, intersection, and set complement operations are
denoted by ∪, ∩, and \, respectively. The cardinality
of a set S is denoted as S, and the empty set is de-
noted ∅. The infinity norm of a vector is denoted (cid:107)·(cid:107)∞.
k ) = n!/(k!(n − k)!) are both
The notations C(n, k) = ( n
used in this paper to denote the binomial coefficient with
n, k ∈ Z+. Given a set S, the power set of S is denoted
P(S) = {A : A ⊆ S}. Given a function f : D → R, the
image of a set A ⊆ D under f is denoted f (A). Similarly,
the preimage of B ⊆ R under f is denoted f−1(B). The
logical OR operator, AND operator, and NOT operator
are denoted by ∨,∧,¬, respectively. The lexicographic
cone is defined as Klex = {0} ∪ {x ∈ Rn : x1 = . . . =
xk = 0, xk+1 > 0} for some 0 ≤ k < n. The lexico-
graphic ordering on Rn is defined as x ≤lex y if and only
if y − x ∈ Klex, with x, y ∈ Rn [3, Ch. 2].
A directed graph (digraph) is denoted as D = (V,E),
where V = {1, . . . , n} is the set of indexed vertices and
E is the edge set. This paper will use the terms ver-
tices, agents, and nodes interchangeably. A directed edge
is denoted (i, j), with i, j ∈ V, meaning that agent j
can receive information from agent i. The set of in-
neighbors for an agent j is denoted Nj = {i ∈ V : (i, j) ∈
E}. The minimum in-degree of a digraph D is denoted
δin(D) = minj∈V Nj. Occasionally, G = (V,E) will be
used to denote an undirected graph, i.e. a digraph in
which (i, j) ∈ E ⇐⇒ (j, i) ∈ E. The graph Laplacian
L for a digraph (or undirected graph) is defined as fol-
lows, with Li,j denoting the entry in the ith row and jth
column:
if i = j,
if j ∈ Ni,
if j /∈ Ni.
(1)
Ni
−1
0
Li,j =
The property of r-robustness is based upon the notion
of r-reachability. The definitions of r-reachability and r-
robustness are as follows:
Definition 1 ([15]) Let r ∈ Z+ and D = (V,E) be a
digraph. A nonempty subset S ⊂ V is r-reachable if ∃i ∈
S such that Ni\S ≥ r.
Definition 2 ([15]) Let r ∈ Z+. A nonempty, nontriv-
ial digraph D = (V,E) on n nodes (n ≥ 2) is r-robust
if for every pair of nonempty, disjoint subsets of V, at
least one of the subsets is r-reachable. By convention,
the empty graph (n = 0) is 0-robust and the trivial graph
(n = 1) is 1-robust.
The property of (r, s)-robustness is based upon the
notion of (r, s)-reachability. The definitions of (r, s)-
reachability and (r, s)-robustness are as follows:
Definition 3 ([15]) Let D = (V,E) be a nonempty,
nontrivial, simple digraph on n ≥ 2 nodes. Let r, s ∈ Z+,
0 ≤ s ≤ n. Let S be a nonempty subset of V, and de-
S = {j ∈ S : Nj\S ≥ r}. We say that S
fine the set X r
is an (r, s)-reachable set if there exist s nodes in S, each
of which has at least r in-neighbors outside of S. More
explicitly, S is (r, s)-reachable if X r
Definition 4 ([15]) Let r, s ∈ Z+, 0 ≤ s ≤ n. Let D =
(V,E) be a nonempty, nontrivial, simple digraph on n ≥ 2
nodes. Define X r
S = {j ∈ S : Nj\S ≥ r}, S ⊂ V. The
digraph D is (r, s)-robust if for every pair of nonempty,
disjoint subsets S1, S2 ⊂ V, at least one of the following
conditions holds:
= S1,
A) X r
B) X r
= S2,
+ X r
C) X r
S ≥ s.
≥ s.
S1
S2
S1
S2
3 Problem Formulation
The notions of r- and (r, s)-robustness are graph theo-
retical properties used to describe the communication
topologies of multi-agent networks. Examples of such
networks include stations in a power grid, satellites
in formation, or a group of mobile robots. In these
networks, edges model the ability for one agent i to
transmit information to another agent j. Prior litera-
ture commonly considers simple digraphs, which have
no repeated edges or self edges [12, 15, 16, 37, 39]. More
specifically, simple digraphs satisfy (i, i) /∈ E ∀i ∈ V, and
if the directed edge (i, j) ∈ E, then it is the only directed
edge from i to j. Prior work also commonly considers
nonempty and nontrivial graphs, where V > 1.
Assumption 1 This paper considers nonempty, non-
trivial, simple digraphs.
The properties of r- and (r, s)-robustness are used to
quantify the ability of several resilient consensus algo-
rithms to guarantee convergence of normally behaving
agents in the presence of Byzantine and malicious ad-
versaries, collectively referred to in this paper as misbe-
having agents [4, 11, 14, 15, 25]. Larger values of r and
s generally imply the ability of networks applying these
resilient algorithms to tolerate a greater number of mis-
behaving agents in the network. For a more detailed ex-
planation of the properties of r-robustness and (r, s)-
robustness, the reader is referred to [15, 16, 42].
It should be clear from Definitions 2 and 4 that deter-
mining r and (r, s)-robustness for a digraph D = (V,E)
by using an exhaustive search method is a combinato-
rial problem, which involves checking the reachabilities
of all nonempty, disjoint subsets of V. For notational
purposes, we will denote the set of all possible pairs of
nonempty, disjoint subsets of V as T ⊂ P(V) × P(V).
3
p=2( n
S1 ∩ S2 = 0(cid:9).
Fig. 1. Depiction of all 12 possible (S1, S2) elements in T for a
complete graph D of 3 agents. Each graph represents a different
possible way of dividing D into sets S1 and S2. In each individual
graph, yellow agents are in S1, blue agents are in S2, and white
agents are in neither S1 nor S2.
More explicitly, T is defined as
T =(cid:8)(S1, S2) ∈ P(V) × P(V) : S1 > 0, S2 > 0,
It was shown in [13] that T =(cid:80)n
(2)
p )(2p − 2). 1 As
a simple example, Figure 1 depicts all elements of T for
a graph of 3 agents, i.e. all possible ways to choose two
nonempty, disjoint subsets from the graph.
When considering a particular digraph D, there may be
multiple values of r for which D is r-robust. Similarly,
there may be multiple values of r and s for which D is
(r, s)-robust. The following properties of robust graphs
demonstrate this characteristic. Note that r-robustness
is equivalent to (r, 1)-robustness; i.e. D is r-robust if and
only if it is (r, 1)-robust [13, Property 5.21] [15, Section
VII-B].
Property 1 ([10], Prop. 5.13) Let D be an arbitrary,
simple digraph on n nodes. Suppose D is (r, s)-robust with
r ∈ N and s ∈ {0, . . . , n}. Then D is also (r(cid:48), s(cid:48))-robust
∀r(cid:48) : 0 ≤ r(cid:48) ≤ r and ∀s(cid:48) : 1 ≤ s(cid:48) ≤ s.
Property 2 ([10], Prop. 5.20) Let D be an arbitrary,
simple digraph on n nodes. Suppose D is (r, s)-robust with
r ∈ N and s ∈ {1, . . . , n}. Then D is (r− 1, s + 1)-robust.
As an example, if a digraph D1 is 4-robust, it is (4, 1)-
robust, and therefore by Property 1 it is also simulta-
neously 3-robust, 2-robust, and 1-robust. In addition, if
a digraph D2 is (5, 4)-robust, then it is simultaneously
(r(cid:48), s(cid:48))-robust for all integers 0 ≤ r(cid:48) ≤ 5 and 0 ≤ s(cid:48) ≤ 4.
Moreover, by Property 2, D2 is also (4, 5)-robust, (3, 6)-
robust, (2, 7)-robust, and (1, 8)-robust. For notational
purposes, we denote the set of all values for which a di-
graph D is (r, s)-robust as Θ, where Θ ⊂ Z+ × Z+. By
Definition 4, Θ is explicitly defined as
Θ = {(r, s) ∈ Z+ × Z+ : ∀(S1, S2) ∈ T , (X r
≥ s)}.
= S2) or (X r
= S1) or
(3)
S1
(X r
S2
+ X r
S2
S1
Note that the conditions of (3) are simply an alternate
way of expressing the conditions of Definition 4.
To characterize the resilience of graphs however, prior
literature has generally been concerned with only a few
particular values of r and s for which a given digraph is
r- or (r, s)-robust. For r-robustness, the value of interest
is the maximum integer r for which the given digraph is
r-robust.
Definition 5 We denote the maximum integer r for
which a given digraph D is r-robust as rmax(D) ∈ Z+.
Several resilient algorithms guarantee convergence of the
normal agents when the adversary model is F -total or
F -local in scope, 2 and the digraph is (2F + 1)-robust.
The value of rmax(D) therefore determines the maximum
adversary model under which these algorithms can op-
erate successfully. Furthermore, all other values of r for
which a digraph D is r-robust can be determined from
rmax(D) by using Property 1.
For (r, s)-robustness, there are two (r, s) pairs of inter-
est. The authors of [13] order the elements of Θ using a
lexicographical total order, where elements are ranked
by r value first and s value second. More specifically,
(r1, s1) ≤lex (r2, s2) if and only if(cid:2) r2−r1
(cid:3) ∈ Klex, where
Klex is the lexicographic cone defined in Section 2. Their
algorithm DetermineRobustness finds the maximum el-
ement of Θ with respect to this order. For notational
clarity, we denote this maximum element as (r∗, s∗) ∈ Θ.
s2−s1
Definition 6 Let Θ be defined as in (3). The element
(r∗, s∗) is defined as the maximum element of Θ under
the lexicographical order on R2.
The other (r, s) pair of interest is (Fmax + 1, Fmax +
1), where Fmax = max({F ∈ Z+ : (F + 1, F + 1) ∈
Θ}). Several resilient algorithms guarantee convergence
of the normally behaving agents when the (malicious
[15]) adversary model is F -total in scope and the digraph
is (F + 1, F + 1)-robust. The value Fmax determines the
maximum malicious adversary model under which these
algorithms can operate successfully. The value of (Fmax+
1, Fmax + 1) does not always coincide with the (r∗, s∗)-
robustness of the digraph. A simple counterexample is
given in Figure 2, where the (r∗, s∗)-robustness of the
graph is (2, 1) but the value of (Fmax + 1, Fmax + 1) is
equal to (1, 1).
The purpose of this paper is to present methods
using mixed integer linear programming to deter-
mine rmax(D), the (r∗, s∗)-robustness of D, and the
1 Since (S1, S2) ∈ T =⇒ (S2, S1) ∈ T , the total number
of unique nonempty, disjoint subsets is (1/2)T , denoted as
R(n) in [13].
2 An F -total adversary model implies that there are at most
F ∈ Z+ misbehaving agents in the entire network. An F -
local adversary model implies that each normal agent has at
most F misbehaving agents in its in-neighbor set.
4
Fig. 2. An example of the elements of Θ for a digraph D1. Since
V = 4, the possible values of r and s for which the digraph is
(r, s)-robust fall within the range 0 ≤ r ≤ 2, 1 ≤ s ≤ 4. One
possible pair of subsets S1 and S2 is depicted, which satisfies
X 2
= 1. By Def-
inition 4, D1 therefore cannot be (2, 2)-robust, (2, 3)-robust, or
S1
(2, 4)-robust.
= 0 and X 2
S2
(cid:54)= S2, X 2
(cid:54)= S1, X 2
S2
S1
(Fmax + 1, Fmax + 1)-robustness of D for any nonempty,
nontrivial, simple digraph D.
Problem 1 Given an arbitrary nonempty, nontrivial,
simple digraph D, determine the value of rmax(D).
Problem 2 Given an arbitrary nonempty, nontrivial,
simple digraph D, determine the (r∗, s∗)-robustness of D.
Problem 3 Given an arbitrary nonempty, nontrivial,
simple digraph D, determine the (Fmax + 1, Fmax + 1)-
robustness of D.
Finally, the values of r for which a digraph can be
r-robust lie within the interval 0 ≤ r ≤ (cid:100)n/2(cid:101) [10, Prop-
erty 5.19]. Since r-robustness is equivalent to (r, 1)-
robustness, the values of r for which a graph can be
(r, s)-robust fall within the same interval. The values of
s for which a digraph can be (r, s)-robust lie within the
interval 1 ≤ s ≤ n. 3 However, we will use an abuse of
notation by denoting a graph as (r, 0)-robust for a given
r ∈ Z+ if the graph is not (r, 1)-robust.
4 Determining r-Robustness using Mixed Inte-
ger Linear Programming
In this section we will demonstrate a method for solving
Problem 1 using a mixed integer linear program (MILP)
formulation. An MILP will be presented whose optimal
value is equal to rmax(D) for any given nonempty, non-
trivial, simple digraph D.
In other words, the function R(S) returns the maximum
r for which S is r-reachable. Using this function, the
following Lemma presents an optimization formulation
which yields rmax(D):
Lemma 1 Let D = (V,E) be an arbitrary nonempty,
nontrivial, simple digraph with V = n. Let rmax(D) be
defined as in Definition 5. The following holds:
rmax(D) = min
max (R(S1),R(S2))
S1,S2∈P(V)
subject to
1 , S∗
1 ),R(S∗
1 ), R(S∗
1 ),R(S∗
1 ),R(S∗
1 ),R(S∗
1 ),R(S∗
2 )).
max(cid:0)R(S∗
2 )(cid:1) or R(S2) ≥ max (R(S∗
S1 > 0, S2 > 0, S1 ∩ S2 = 0. (5)
PROOF. Note that S1, S2 ∈ P(V) and the three con-
straints of the RHS of (5) imply that the feasible set
consists of all subsets S1, S2 such that (S1, S2) ∈ T , as
per (2). In addition, max (R(S1),R(S2)) = m implies
R(S1) = m or R(S2) = m. Let (S∗
2 ) be a minimizer
of (5). Then max (R(S∗
2 )) ≤ max (R(S1),R(S2))
∀(S1, S2) ∈ T . Therefore ∀(S1, S2) ∈ T , either R(S1) ≥
2 )).
This satisfies the definition of r-robustness as per Def-
inition 2, therefore D is at least max (R(S∗
2 ))-
robust. This implies rmax(D) ≥ max (R(S∗
We next show that rmax(D) = max (R(S∗
2 )). We
prove by contradiction. Recall from Definition 5 that
rmax(D) is the maximum integer r for which D is r-
robust, which means D is rmax(D)-robust by definition.
1 ),R(S∗
Suppose rmax(D) > max (R(S∗
2 )). This implies
R(S∗
2 ) < rmax(D). Since the
1 ) < rmax(D) and R(S∗
2 ) ∈ T satisfy R(S∗
nonempty, disjoint subsets (S∗
1 , S∗
1 ) <
2 ) < rmax(D), by the negation of Defi-
rmax(D) and R(S∗
nition 2 this implies that D is not rmax(D)-robust. How-
ever, this contradicts the definition of rmax(D) being
the largest integer for which D is r-robust (Definition
5). This provides the desired contradiction; therefore
rmax(D) = max (R(S∗
(cid:4)
Remark 1 Using the definition of T in (2), the con-
straints on the RHS of (5) can be made implicit [3, sec-
tion 4.1.3] as follows:
rmax(D) = min
(S1,S2)∈T max (R(S1),R(S2)) .
1 ),R(S∗
2 )).
(6)
First, an equivalent way of expressing the maximum ro-
bustness rmax(D) of a digraph D is derived. This equiv-
alent expression will clarify how rmax(D) can be de-
termined by means of an optimization problem. Given
an arbitrary, simple digraph D = (V,E) and a subset
S ⊂ V , the reachability function R : P(V) → Z+ is de-
fined as follows:
(cid:26)maxi∈S Ni\S,
R(S) =
0,
if S (cid:54)= {∅},
if S = {∅}.
(4)
σj(S) =
We demonstrate next that the objective function of (5)
can be expressed as a function of the network Laplacian
matrix. Recall that n = V and that {0, 1}n represents a
binary vector of dimension n. The indicator vector σ(·) :
P(V) → {0, 1}n is defined as follows: for all S ∈ P(V),
(cid:26)1
0
if j ∈ S
if j /∈ S
, j = {1, . . . , n}.
(7)
3 Footnote 8 in [15] offers an excellent explanation for re-
stricting s to this range by convention.
In other words the jth entry of σ(S) is 1 if the node with
index j is a member of the set S ∈ P(V), and zero oth-
erwise. It is straightforward to verify that σ : P(V) →
5
{0, 1}n is a bijection. Therefore given x ∈ {0, 1}n, the
set σ−1(x) ∈ P(V) is defined by σ−1(x) = {j ∈ V :
xj = 1}. Finally, observe that for any S ∈ P(V), S =
1T σ(S). The following Lemma demonstrates that for
any S ∈ P(V), the function R(S) can be determined as
an affine function of the network Laplacian matrix and
the indicator vector of S:
Lemma 2 Let D = (V,E) be an arbitrary nonempty,
nontrivial, simple digraph, let L be the Laplacian matrix
of D, and let S ∈ P(V). Then the following holds for all
j ∈ {1, . . . , n}:
(cid:26)Nj\S,
−Nj ∩ S,
if j ∈ S,
if j /∈ S,
Ljσ(S) =
where Lj is the jth row of L. Furthermore,
R(S) = max
j
Ljσ(S), j ∈ {1, . . . , n}.
which implies
(cid:18)
(cid:19)
max
j∈{1,...,n} Ljσ(S) = max
= max
j∈S
(max
j∈S
Ljσ(S)), (max
j /∈S
Ljσ(S))
Ljσ(S).
(12)
Therefore by equations (12) and (11), the maximum
reachability of S is found by the expression
R(S) = max
(Ljσ(S)), j ∈ {1, . . . , n}.
j
(13)
(8)
(9)
Lastly, if S = ∅, then by (4) we have R(S) = 0. In
addition, σ(S) = 0, implying that maxj Ljσ(S) = 0 =
R(S), j ∈ {1, . . . , n}.
(cid:4)
Using Lemma 2, it will next be shown that the objective
function of (5) can be rewritten as the maximum over a
set of affine functions:
PROOF. The term σ(S) is shortened to σ for brevity.
Recall that the entry in the jth row and ith column of
L is denoted Lj,i. The definition of L from (1) implies
Ljσ = (Lj,j)σj +
(cid:88)
= Njσj − (cid:88)
σq − (cid:88)
q∈{1,...,n}\j
(Lj,q)σq
q∈Nj∩S
q∈Nj\S
(cid:80)
Since by (7), q ∈ S implies σq = 1, the term
σq = 0, the term (cid:80)
q∈Nj∩S σq = Nj ∩ S. In addition, since q /∈ S implies
q∈Nj\S σq = 0. By this, equation
(10) simplifies to Ljσ = Njσj − Nj ∩ S.
The value of the term Njσj depends on whether j ∈ S
or j /∈ S. If j ∈ S, then σj = 1, implying Ljσ = Nj −
Nj ∩ S = (Nj ∩ S + Nj\S) − Nj ∩ S = Nj\S. If
j /∈ S, then σj = 0 implying Ljσ = −Nj ∩ S. This
proves the result for equation (8).
To prove (9), we first consider nonempty sets S ∈
P(V)\{∅}. By the results above and (4), the maximum
reachability of any S ∈ P(V)\{∅} is
Nj\S = max
j∈S
R(S) = max
j∈S
(Ljσ(S)).
(11)
By its definition, R(S) ≥ 0. Observe that if j ∈ S then
Ljσ(S) = Nj\S ≥ 0, implying maxj∈S Ljσ(S) ≥ 0.
Conversely, if an agent j is not in the set S, then the func-
tion Ljσ(S) takes the nonpositive value −Nj ∩ S. This
implies maxj /∈S Ljσ(S) ≤ 0. By these arguments, we
therefore have maxj /∈S Ljσ(S) ≤ 0 ≤ maxj∈S Ljσ(S),
6
Lemma 3 Consider an arbitrary, nonempty, nontrivial,
simple digraph D = (V,E). Let L be the Laplacian matrix
of D, and let Li be the ith row of L. Let T be defined as
in (2). Then for all (S1, S2) ∈ T the following holds:
max (R(S1),R(S2)) =
(cid:18)
(cid:19)
σq.
(10)
max
max
i∈{1,...,n} (Liσ(S1)) , max
j∈{1,...,n} (Ljσ(S2))
PROOF. By Lemma 2, R(S1) = maxi Liσ(S1) and
R(S2) = maxj Ljσ(S2) for i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}. The result
(cid:4)
follows.
min
(S1,S2)∈T max(cid:0) max
ten as max(cid:0) maxi
i
From Lemma 1, Lemma 3, and Remark 1, we can imme-
diately conclude that rmax(D) satisfies
rmax(D) =
(Ljσ(S2))(cid:1). (14)
(Liσ(S1)) , max
j
(cid:0)Lib1(cid:1) , maxj
(cid:0)Ljb2(cid:1)(cid:1). Every pair
Note that the terms σ(S1) and σ(S2) are each n-
dimensional binary vectors. Letting b1 = σ(S1) and
b2 = σ(S2), the objective function of (14) can be writ-
(S1, S2) ∈ T can be mapped into a pair of binary vec-
tors (b1, b2) by the function Σ : T → {0, 1}n × {0, 1}n,
where Σ(S1, S2) = (σ(S1), σ(S2)) = (b1, b2). By deter-
mining the image of T under Σ(·,·), the optimal value
of (14) can be found by minimizing over pairs of binary
vectors (b1, b2) ∈ Σ(T ) directly. Using binary vector
variables instead of set variables (S1, S2) will allow (14)
to be written directly in an MILP form. Towards this
end, the following Lemma defines the set Σ(T ):
Lemma 4 Let D = (V,E) be an arbitrary nonempty,
nontrivial, simple digraph, and let T be defined as in (2).
Define the function Σ : T → {0, 1}n × {0, 1}n as
Σ(S1, S2) = (σ(S1), σ(S2)), (S1, S2) ∈ T .
(15)
Define the set B ⊂ {0, 1}n × {0, 1}n as
B =
(b1, b2) ∈ {0, 1}n × {0, 1}n : 1 ≤ 1T b1 ≤ (n − 1),
1 ≤ 1T b2 ≤ (n − 1), b1 + b2 (cid:22) 1
.
(16)
(cid:27)
(cid:26)
Then both of the following statements hold:
(1) The image of T under Σ is equal to B, i.e. Σ(T ) = B
(2) The mapping Σ : T → B is a bijection.
PROOF. We prove 1) by showing first that Σ(T ) ⊆ B,
and then B ⊆ Σ(T ). Any (S1, S2) ∈ T satisfies S1 > 0,
S2 > 0, S1 ∩ S2 = 0 as per (2). Observe that
S1 > 0 =⇒ 1T σ(S1) ≥ 1,
S2 > 0 =⇒ 1T σ(S2) ≥ 1.
Because S1, S2 ⊂ V and S1 ∩ S2 = 0, then S1 < n.
Otherwise if S1 = n then either S2 = 0 or S1 ∩ S2 (cid:54)=
0, which both contradict the definition of T . Therefore
S1 < n, and by similar arguments S2 < n. Observe
that
S1 < n =⇒ 1T σ(S1) ≤ n − 1,
S2 < n =⇒ 1T σ(S2) ≤ n − 1.
Finally, S1 ∩ S2 = 0 implies that j ∈ S1 =⇒ j /∈ S2
and j ∈ S2 =⇒ j /∈ S1 ∀j ∈ {1, . . . , n}. Therefore
σj(S1) = 1 =⇒ σj(S2) = 0 and σj(S2) = 1 =⇒
σj(S1) = 0. This implies that
S1 ∩ S2 = 0 =⇒ σ(S1) + σ(S2) (cid:22) 1.
Therefore for all (S1, S2) ∈ T , (σ(S1), σ(S2)) =
Σ(S1, S2) satisfies the constraints of the set on the RHS
of (16). This implies that Σ(T ) ⊆ B.
Next, we show B ⊆ Σ(T ) by showing that for all
(b1, b2) ∈ B, there exists an (S1, S2) ∈ T such that
(b1, b2) = Σ(S1, S2). Choose any (b1, b2) ∈ B and define
sets (S1, S2) as follows:
j = 1 =⇒ j ∈ S1, j ∈ {1, . . . , n},
b1
j = 0 =⇒ j /∈ S1,
b1
j = 1 =⇒ j ∈ S2,
b2
j = 0 =⇒ j /∈ S2.
b2
(17)
7
j = 1 =⇒ b2
For the considered sets (S1, S2), 1 ≤ 1T b1 implies S1 >
0 and 1 ≤ 1T b2 implies S2 > 0. In addition since
b1 + b2 (cid:22) 1, we have b1
j = 0 and
j = 1 =⇒ b1
b2
j = 0. By our choice of S1 and S2, we
j = 1 =⇒ j ∈ S1, and from previous arguments
have b1
j = 0 =⇒ j /∈ S2. Similar reasoning can
j = 1 =⇒ b2
b1
j = 1 =⇒ j /∈ S1. These argu-
be used to show that b2
ments imply that S1 ∩ S2 = 0. Consequently, (S1, S2)
satisfies all the constraints of T and is therefore an ele-
ment of T . Clearly, by (17) we have Σ(S1, S2) = (b1, b2),
which shows that there exists an (S1, S2) ∈ T such that
(b1, b2) = Σ(S1, S2). Since this holds for all (b1, b2) ∈ B,
this implies B ⊆ Σ(T ). Therefore Σ(T ) = B.
We next prove 2). Since Σ(T ) = B, the function
Σ : T → B is surjective. To show that it is injective,
consider any Σ(S1, S2) ∈ B and Σ( ¯S1, ¯S2) ∈ B such that
Σ(S1, S2) = Σ( ¯S1, ¯S2). This implies (σ(S1), σ(S2)) =
(σ( ¯S1), σ( ¯S2)). Note that (σ(S1), σ(S2)) = (σ( ¯S1), σ( ¯S2))
if and only if σ(S1) = σ( ¯S1) and σ(S2) = σ( ¯S2). Since
the indicator function σ : P(V) → {0, 1}n is itself injec-
tive, this implies S1 = ¯S1 and S2 = ¯S2, which implies
(S1, S2) = ( ¯S1, ¯S2). Therefore Σ : T → B is injective. (cid:4)
Using Lemma 4 allows us to present the following mixed
integer program which solves Problem 1:
Theorem 1 Let D be an arbitrary nonempty, nontrivial,
simple digraph and let L be the Laplacian matrix of D.
The maximum r-robustness of D, denoted rmax(D), is
obtained by solving the following minimization problem:
(cid:18)
(cid:0)Lib1(cid:1) , max
j
(cid:0)Ljb2(cid:1)(cid:19)
rmax(D) = min
b1,b2
max
max
subject to b1 + b2 (cid:22) 1
i
1 ≤ 1T b1 ≤ (n − 1)
1 ≤ 1T b2 ≤ (n − 1)
b1, b2 ∈ {0, 1}n.
(18)
Furthermore, (18) is equivalent to the following mixed
integer linear program:
rmax(D) = min
t
t,b
subject to 0 ≤ t, t ∈ R, b ∈ Z2n
(cid:35)
1
1
(cid:34)
(cid:105)
b (cid:22) t
0 L
0 (cid:22) b (cid:22) 1
In×n In×n
(cid:35)
L 0
(cid:34)
(cid:104)
1 ≤(cid:104)
1 ≤(cid:104)
(cid:105)
(cid:105)
b (cid:22) 1
b ≤ n − 1
b ≤ n − 1
1T 0
0 1T
(19)
PROOF. From Lemmas 1 and 3 we have
rmax(D) =
(cid:18)
(cid:19)
i
min
max
(Liσ(S1)) , max
S1,S2∈P(V)
subject to
max
(Ljσ(S2))
S1 > 0, S2 > 0, S1 ∩ S2 = 0,
for i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}. As per Remark 1, the definition of
T can be used to make the constraints implicit:
j
rmax(D) =
(cid:18)
(cid:19)
min
(S1,S2)∈T max
max
i
(Liσ(S1)) , max
j
(Ljσ(S2))
,
(20)
for i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}. Since Σ : T → B is a bijection by
Lemma 4, (20) is equivalent to
(cid:18)
(cid:0)Lib1(cid:1) , max
j
(cid:0)Ljb2(cid:1)(cid:19)
i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}.
(21)
rmax(D) = min
(b1,b2)∈B max
max
i
the (r∗, s∗)-robustness of a
Using this notation,
nonempty, nontrivial simple digraph satisfies r∗ =
rmax(D) and s∗ = smax(rmax(D)). This can be verified
by recalling that r-robustness is equivalent to (r, 1)-
robustness [13, Property 5.21], and that (r∗, s∗) is the
maximum element of Θ according to the lexicographic
ordering defined in Section 2. Since a method for de-
termining rmax(D) has already been presented, this
section will introduce a method for determining smax(r)
for any given r ∈ Z+. This can then be used to find
smax(rmax(D)) after rmax(D) is determined.
Recall that ∨ indicates logical OR. An equivalent defini-
tion of smax(r) can be given using the following notation:
Definition 8 Let Θ be the set of all (r, s) values for
which a given digraph D is (r, s)-robust, as per (3). Let
r ∈ Z+, and let X r
S be defined as in Definition 4. The set
Θr ⊂ Θ is defined as follows:
Θr = {s ∈ Z+ : ∀(S1, S2) ∈ T , (cid:0)X r
(cid:0)X r
S2
= S2(cid:1) ∨(cid:0)X r
= S1(cid:1)∨
≥ s(cid:1)},
S1
+ X r
S2
S1
(23)
Making the constraints of (21) explicit yields (18).
Next, we prove that (19) is equivalent to (18). The vari-
ables b1 and b2 from (18) are combined into the variable
b ∈ Z2n in (19); i.e. b = [ (b1)T (b2)T ]T . The first and
third constraints of (19) restrict b ∈ {0, 1}2n. Next, it
can be demonstrated [3, Chapter 4] that the formulation
minx maxi(xi) is equivalent to mint,x t subject to 0 ≤ t,
x (cid:22) t1. Reformulating the objective of the RHS of (18)
in this way yields the objective and first two constraints
of (19):
min
t,b
t
subject to 0 ≤ t,
(cid:34)
L 0
(cid:35)
0 L
(cid:34)
(cid:35)
1
1
.
b (cid:22) t
(22)
The fourth, fifth, and sixth constraints of (19) restrict
(b1, b2) ∈ B and are simply a reformulation of the first
(cid:4)
three constraints in (18).
5 Determining (r, s)-Robustness using Mixed
Integer Linear Programming
In this section we address Problems 2 and 3, which in-
volve determining the (r∗, s∗)-robustness and (Fmax +
1, Fmax + 1)-robustness of a given digraph. To determine
these values, we will use the following notation:
Definition 7 For a digraph D and a given r ∈ Z+, the
maximum integer s for which D is (r, s)-robust is denoted
as smax(r) ∈ Z+. If D is not (r, s)-robust for any 1 ≤
s ≤ n, we will denote smax(r) = 0.
In words, Θr is the set of all integers s for which the
given digraph D is (r, s)-robust for a given r ∈ Z+. By
this definition, smax(r) = max Θr, i.e. smax(r) is simply
the maximum element of Θr.
As per (23), checking directly if an integer s ∈ Θr
involves testing a logical disjunction for all possible
(S1, S2) ∈ T . This quickly becomes impractical for large
n since T grows exponentially with n. This difficulty
can be circumvented, however, by defining the set
¯Θr = Z+\Θr
= {¯s ∈ Z+ : ¯s /∈ Θr}
= {¯s ∈ Z+ : ∃(S1, S2) ∈ T s.t. (cid:0)X r
(cid:0)X r
< S1(cid:1) ∧(cid:0)X r
+ X r
< S1(cid:1)∧
< ¯s(cid:1)},
S1
S1
S2
(24)
where ∧ denotes logical AND. The set ¯Θr contains all
integers ¯s for which the given digraph is not (r, ¯s)-robust
for the given value of r.
Definition 9 For a digraph D and a given r ∈ Z+, the
minimum integer ¯s for which D is not (r, ¯s)-robust is
denoted as ¯smin(r) ∈ Z+.
As a simple example, consider a digraph D of 7 nodes
where smax(3) = 2. This implies that Θ3 = {1, 2}, i.e.
the digraph is (3, 1)- and (3, 2)-robust. In this case, the
set ¯Θ3 = {3, 4, 5, . . .} since D is not (3, 3)-robust, (3, 4)-
robust, etc. Here we have ¯smin(3) = 3. In general, observe
that by definitions 7 and 9 we have
S2
smax(r) = ¯smin(r) − 1.
(25)
8
j
S)).
S) = 1 ⇐⇒ y∗
S) = 1. This implies j ∈ X r
S ) (cid:54)= 1 ⇐⇒ σj(X r
(cid:54)= 1 ⇐⇒ y∗
S) = 0 ⇐⇒ y∗
S) = 1 ⇐⇒ y∗
to demonstrating σj(X r
S ) (cid:54)= 1 ⇐⇒ y∗
j (cid:54)= 1 ∀j, which
is equivalent to demonstrating σj(X r
S ) = 0 ⇐⇒ y∗
j =
0 ∀j. This can be seen by noting σ(X r
S) ∈ {0, 1}n which
implies σj(X r
S ) = 0, and y∗ ∈ {0, 1}n
which implies y∗
j = 0. Since proving
σj(X r
j = 1 for all j ∈ {1, . . . , n} is
equivalent to proving σj(X r
j = 0 for
all j ∈ {1, . . . , n}, and both y∗ ∈ {0, 1}n and σ(X r
S) ∈
j = 1 ∀j)
{0, 1}n, we therefore have (σj(X r
if and only if (y∗ = σ(X r
Sufficiency: Consider any j ∈ {1, . . . , n} such that
σj(X r
S and therefore Nj\S ≥
r by Definition 4. By Lemma 2, Nj\S = Ljσ(S), and
therefore Ljσ(S) > (r−1). Since y∗ is an optimal point,
it is therefore a feasible point. If y∗
j = 0, the jth row of
the first constraint on the RHS of (26) is be violated
since Ljσ(S) − (n)y∗
j = Ljσ(S) (cid:2) (r − 1). Therefore
j = 1. Note that Nj\S ≤ n ∀j ∈ S for
we must have y∗
any S ⊂ V.
Necessity: We prove by contradiction. Suppose y∗
j = 1
S) = 0. This implies that Ljσ(S) = Nj\S <
and σj(X r
i ∀i (cid:54)=
r. Consider the vector y where yj = 0 and yi = y∗
j, i ∈ {1, . . . , n}. Since Ljσ(S) = Nj\S < r, then y
is therefore also a feasible point, and 1T y < 1T y∗. This
contradicts y∗ being an optimal point to (26); therefore
we must have σj(X r
(cid:4)
S) = 1.
The next Theorem presents a mixed integer linear pro-
gram which determines ¯smin(r) for any fixed r ∈ Z+.
Theorem 2 Let D = (V,E) be an arbitrary nonempty,
nontrivial, simple digraph. Let L be the Laplacian matrix
of D. Let r ∈ Z+, and let ¯smin(r) be the minimum value of
s for which D is not (r, s)-robust. Then if ¯smin(r) < n+1,
the following holds:
¯smin(r) =
min
¯s,b1,b2,y1,y2
subject to
(cid:34)
(cid:35)
(cid:34)
(cid:35)(cid:34)
¯s
1 ≤ ¯s ≤ n + 1, ¯s ∈ Z
1T y1 ≤ 1T b1 − 1
1T y2 ≤ 1T b2 − 1
1T y1 + 1T y2 ≤ (¯s − 1)
y1
L 0
y2
b1
b2
0 L
b1 + b2 (cid:22) 1
1 ≤ 1T b1 ≤ (n − 1)
1 ≤ 1T b2 ≤ (n − 1)
b1, b2, y1, y2 ∈ {0, 1}n.
− (n)
(cid:35)
(cid:22) (r − 1)
(cid:35)
(cid:34)
1
1
(28)
Furthermore, for any r > 0, ¯smin(r) = n + 1 if and only
if the integer program in (28) is infeasible.
Illustration of how the (r∗, s∗)-robustness of a graph
Fig. 3.
is found by the DetermineRobustness algorithm and the MILP
method. Consider a digraph D of n = 6 nodes which satisfies
(r∗, s∗) = (2, 3). DetermineRobustness begins with the maxi-
mum possible r and s values (r = (cid:100)n/2(cid:101) and s = n), then iterates
in a lexicographically decreasing manner. The MILP formulation
first determines rmax(D), then ¯smin(rmax(D)), then finally infers
smax(rmax(D)) (abbreviated to ¯smin(r) and smax(r) for clarity).
It is therefore sufficient to find ¯smin(r) in order to de-
termine smax(r). An illustration is given in Figure 3.
The methods in this section will solve for ¯smin(r) using
a mixed integer linear program. Note that since possi-
ble values of smax(r) are limited to 0 ≤ smax(r) ≤ n
(Definition 7), possible values of ¯smin(r) are limited to
1 ≤ ¯smin(r) ≤ n + 1. We point out that it is easier to test
if an integer ¯s ∈ ¯Θr than to test if an integer s ∈ Θr,
in the sense that only one element (S1, S2) ∈ T is re-
quired to verify that ¯s ∈ ¯Θr (as per (24)) whereas all
(S1, S2) ∈ T must be checked to verify that s ∈ Θr (as
per (23)).
S , denoted σ(X r
The following Lemma is needed for our main result. It
shows that given any r ∈ Z+ and S ⊂ V, the indi-
cator vector of the set X r
S), can be ex-
pressed using an MILP. Recall that X r
S is the set of agents
in S which have r in-neighbors outside of S, implying
σj(X r
S) = 1 if Ljσ(S) = Nj\S ≥ r.
Lemma 5 Let D = (V,E) be an arbitrary nonempty,
nontrivial, simple digraph. Let L be the Laplacian matrix
of D, and let r ∈ N. Consider any subset S ⊂ V, S >
0 and let X r
S be defined as in Definition 4. Then the
following holds:
σ(X r
S) = arg min
y
subject to
1T y
Lσ(S) − (n)y (cid:22) (r − 1)1
y ∈ {0, 1}n.
(26)
PROOF. Recall that the entries of the indicator vector
σ(X r
S) are defined as
σj(X r
S) =
if j ∈ X r
S ,
0, otherwise.
(27)
(cid:26)1,
Let y∗ be an optimal point of the RHS of (26). To prove
that y∗ = σ(X r
S), we demonstrate that ∀j ∈ {1, . . . , n},
σj(X r
j = 1. Observe that this is equivalent
S) = 1 ⇐⇒ y∗
9
PROOF. Note that the theorem statement assumes r
is a fixed integer. First, consider the case where ¯smin(r) <
(n + 1). The value of ¯smin can be found by solving the
problem ¯smin(r) = min¯s∈ ¯Θr ¯s. Making the constraints
explicit yields
¯smin(r,D) =
min
¯s,(S1,S2)∈T
subject to
¯s
X r
X r
X r
S1
S2
S1
≤ S1 − 1
≤ S2 − 1
+ X r
S2
≤ ¯s − 1. (29)
S1
, X r
To put this problem in an MILP form, we show that the
terms X r
, S1, and S2 can be represented by
functions of binary vectors. This can be done by first
observing that for any S ⊆ V, S = 1T σ(S). Therefore
the following relationships hold:
S2
sixth through ninth constraints. Therefore by Lemma 5,
σ(X r
S1
) = arg min
y1
subject to
σ(X r
S2
) = arg min
y2
subject to
1T y1
Lb1 − (n)y1 (cid:22) (r − 1)1
y1 ∈ {0, 1}n,
1T y2
Lb2 − (n)y2 (cid:22) (r − 1)1
y2 ∈ {0, 1}n.
(32)
(33)
The constraints of (32) and (33) are contained in the fifth
and last constraints of (28). Since the fourth constraint
of (28), 1T y1+1T y2 ≤ (¯s−1), simultaneously minimizes
1T y1 and 1T y2, the fourth, fifth, and last constraints
of (28) ensure that y1 = σ(X r
).
Therefore 1T y1 = X r
) and y2 = σ(X r
and 1T y2 = X r
.
S2
S1
S1
S2
S1 = 1T σ(S1),
S2 = 1T σ(S2),
X r
X r
S1
S2
= 1T σ(X r
= 1T σ(X r
S1
S2
Equation (29) can therefore be rewritten as
),
).
Now, by the above arguments, solving the RHS of (28)
yields ¯smin(r) when ¯smin(r) < (n + 1). We now prove
that for r > 0, ¯smin(r) = n + 1 if and only if the RHS
of (28) is infeasible. Note that if r = 0, then it trivially
holds by Definition 4 that smax(0) = n and therefore
¯smin(0) = n + 1.
¯smin(r,D) =
min
¯s,(S1,S2)∈T ¯s
subject to 1T σ(X r
1T σ(X r
1T σ(X r
S1
S2
S1
) ≤ 1T σ(S1) − 1
) ≤ 1T σ(S2) − 1
) + 1T σ(X r
S2
) ≤ ¯s − 1. (30)
By Lemma 4, the terms σ(S1), σ(S2) for (S1, S2) ∈ T
can be represented by vectors (b1, b2) ∈ B. This yields
¯smin(r,D) = min
¯s
¯s,b1,b2
S1
subject to 1T σ(X r
1T σ(X r
1T σ(X r
(b1, b2) ∈ B.
S1
S2
) ≤ 1T b1 − 1
) ≤ 1T b2 − 1
) + 1T σ(X r
S2
) ≤ ¯s − 1
(31)
Expanding the last constraint using the definition of B
in (16) yields the sixth, seventh, and eighth constraints
in (28) as well as the constraint that b1, b2 ∈ {0, 1}n. In
addition, the first constraint of the RHS of (28) limits
the search for feasible value of ¯s to the range of possible
values for ¯smin(r).
The vectors y1, y2 are constrained to satisfy y1 =
σ(X r
) as follows: by Lemma 4,
b1 = σ(S1) and b2 = σ(S2) for (S1, S2) ∈ T as per the
) and y2 = σ(X r
S1
S2
10
Sufficiency: ¯smin(r) = n + 1 implies that smax(r) =
n. Recall that D is (r, smax(r))-robust by Definition 7,
since smax(r) is the largest integer s for which D is
(r, s)-robust. By Definition 4, this implies that for all
(S1, S2) ∈ T , at least one of the following three condi-
+
tions holds: X r
≥ smax(r) = n. Given any (S1, S2) ∈ T , we con-
X r
sider each condition separately and show that at least
one constraint of (28) is violated if the condition holds
true:
= S2, or X r
= S1, or X r
S2
S1
S1
S2
S2
S1
S1
S1
• X r
• X r
= S1.
= S1 being true implies that the second con-
straint of (28) is violated. This can be shown using
earlier arguments from this proof. Specifically, we
= S1 = 1T b1 > 1T b1 − 1.
have 1T y1 = X r
Therefore no feasible point can be constructed from
the given set pair (S1, S2) if X r
= S2 being true implies that the third con-
straint of (28) is violated. Specifically, we have
. This implies that
1T b2 = S2 and 1T y2 = X r
1T y2 = X r
= S2 = 1T b2 > 1T b2 − 1. There-
fore no feasible point can be constructed from the
given set pair (S1, S2) if X r
• X r
≥ n being true implies that both
X r
= S2. This follows by ob-
⊆ S2, S1∩ S2 = {∅}
serving that X r
by definition of T in (2), and therefore X r
=
{∅}. Since S1, S2 ⊂ V and V = n, we have n ≤
≤ S1 + S2 ≤ V = n. We must
X r
therefore have X r
= S2, which
from prior arguments both imply that a constraint
+ X r
= S1 and X r
= S1 and X r
⊆ S1 and X r
= S2.
+ X r
∩X r
S2
S2
S2
S1
S1
S1
S2
S2
S2
S1
S2
S1
S2
S1
S2
of (28) is violated. Therefore no feasible point can
be constructed from the given set pair (S1, S2) if
X r
+ X r
≥ n
S1
S2
Since for all (S1, S2) ∈ T at least one of these three con-
ditions holds, for all (S1, S2) ∈ T at least one constraint
of (28) is violated when smax(r) = n, which is equivalent
to ¯smin(r) = n + 1. Therefore ¯smin(r) = n + 1 implies
that (28) is infeasible.
Necessity: We prove the contrapositive, i.e. we prove that
¯smin (cid:54)= n + 1 implies that there exists a feasible point to
the RHS of (28). First, no digraph on n nodes is (r, n +
1)-robust [15, Definition 13], and the contrapositive of
Property 1 implies that if a graph is not (¯r, ¯s)-robust,
then it is also not (¯r(cid:48), ¯s(cid:48))-robust for all ¯r(cid:48) ≥ ¯r, and for all
¯s(cid:48) ≥ ¯s. Therefore ¯smin (cid:54)= n + 1 implies ¯smin ≤ n. Next,
¯smin ≤ n implies n ∈ ¯Θr, which implies that there exists
≤
(S1, S2) ∈ T such that X r
S2 − 1 and X r
≤ n − 1, as per (24). Letting
¯s = n, b1 = σ(S1), b2 = σ(S2), y1 = σ(X r
), and
y2 = σ(X r
(cid:4)
≤ S1 − 1 and X r
) yields a feasible point to (28).
+ X r
S1
S1
S2
S2
S1
S2
The MILPs in Theorems 1 and 2 can be used to deter-
mine the (r∗, s∗)-robustness of any digraph satisfying
Assumption 1, thereby solving Problem 2. Recall from
the beginning of Section 5 that r∗ = rmax(D) and s∗ =
smax(rmax(D)). Theorem 1 can first be used to determine
the value of rmax(D) = r∗. Using rmax(D), Theorem 2
can then be used to find the value of smax(rmax(D)) = s∗.
More generally however, the MILP formulation in The-
orem 2 allows for smax(r) to be determined for any r ∈
Z+. Since (r, 1)-robustness is equivalent to r-robustness,
the MILP in Theorem 2 can also be used to determine
whether a digraph D is r robust for a given r ∈ Z+.
If ¯smin(r) ≥ 2, then smax(r) ≥ 1 which implies that D
is (r, 1)-robust. On the other hand, ¯smin(r) = 1 implies
that 1 ∈ ¯Θr and therefore D is not (r, 1)-robust (and not
r-robust).
Finally, to solve Problem 3 Theorem 2 can be used
to determine the (Fmax + 1, Fmax + 1)-robustness of
a nonempty, nontrivial, simple digraph. Recall that
Fmax = max({F ∈ Z+ : (F + 1, F + 1) ∈ Θ}). The value
of Fmax is determined by Algorithm 1, presented below.
In essence, Algorithm 1 finds the largest values of r(cid:48) and
s(cid:48) such that r(cid:48) = s(cid:48) and (r(cid:48), s(cid:48)) ∈ Θ. It begins by setting
r(cid:48) ← rmax(D), and finding smax(r(cid:48)) using Theorem 2.
If smax(r(cid:48)) ≥ r(cid:48), then by Proposition 1 the digraph D
is (r(cid:48), s)-robust for s = r(cid:48) and therefore (r(cid:48), r(cid:48))-robust.
This implies r(cid:48) = Fmax + 1. However, if smax(r(cid:48)) < r(cid:48)
then r(cid:48) is decremented, smax(r(cid:48)) recalculated, and the
process is repeated until the algorithm terminates with
the highest integer r(cid:48) such that D is (r(cid:48), r(cid:48))-robust,
yielding Fmax = (r(cid:48) − 1).
11
Algorithm 1
DetermineFmax
1: r(cid:48) ← rmax(D) from MILP in Theorem 1
2: while r(cid:48) > 0
3:
4:
s(cid:48) ← smax(r(cid:48)) from MILP in Theorem 2
if s(cid:48) ≥ r(cid:48) then
(cid:46) Prop. 1 implies graph is
(r(cid:48), s)-rob. ∀s ≤ s(cid:48), therefore
D is (r(cid:48), r(cid:48))-robust
Fmax ← (r(cid:48) − 1)
return Fmax
r(cid:48) ← (r(cid:48) − 1)
else
5:
6:
7:
8:
9:
end if
10: end while
11: Fmax ← 0
12: return Fmax
6 Reducing Worst-Case Performance of Deter-
mining rmax(D)
When solving a MILP with zero-one integer variables us-
ing a branch-and-bound technique, the worst-case num-
ber of subproblems to be solved is equal to 2q, where q
is the dimension of the zero-one integer vector variable.
In Section 4, the MILP in Theorem 1 which solves for
rmax(D) has a binary vector variable with dimension 2n.
In this section, we present two MILPs whose optimal
values provide upper and lower bounds on the value of
rmax(D). Each MILP has a binary vector variable with
dimension of only n, which implies a reduced worst-case
performance as compared to the MILP in Theorem 1.
6.1 A Lower Bound on Maximum r-Robustness
In [6], a technique is presented for lower bounding
rmax(D) of undirected graphs by searching for the
minimum reachability of subsets S ⊂ V such that
S ≤ (cid:98)n/2(cid:99). We extend this result to digraphs in the
next Lemma.
Lemma 6 Let D = (V,E) be an arbitrary nonempty,
nontrivial, simple digraph. Let Ψ = {S ⊂ V : 1 ≤ S ≤
(cid:98)n/2(cid:99)}. Then the following holds:
rmax(D) ≥ min
S∈Ψ
R(S).
(34)
PROOF. By Lemma 1 and Remark 1, proving (34) is
equivalent to proving
(35)
min
S∈Ψ
R(S) ≤ min
(S1,S2)∈T max (R(S1),R(S2)) .
Denote S∗ = arg minS∈Ψ R(S) and (S∗
2 ) =
arg min(S1,S2)∈T max(R(S1),R(S2)). We prove by con-
tradiction. Suppose R(S∗) > max(R(S∗
1 ),R(S∗
2 )). Since
2 ≥ 1. Since
1 ≥ 1 and S∗
S∗
1 and S∗
1 ≤ (cid:98)n/2(cid:99),
they are disjoint, we must have either S∗
1 and S∗
2 less than or
or S∗
equal to (cid:98)n/2(cid:99). Therefore either S∗
2 ∈ Ψ.
2 are nonempty, S∗
2 ≤ (cid:98)n/2(cid:99), or both S∗
1 ∈ Ψ or S∗
1 , S∗
1 ) ≥ R(S∗) (if S∗
1 ∈ Ψ)
This implies that either R(S∗
2 ∈ Ψ), since S∗ is an opti-
or R(S∗
mal point. But this contradicts the assumption that
R(S∗) > max(R(S∗
2 )). Therefore we must have
R(S) ≤ min
2 ) ≥ R(S∗) (if S∗
1 ),R(S∗
(S1,S2)∈T max (R(S1),R(S2)) = rmax(D),
min
S∈Ψ
which concludes the proof.
(36)
(cid:4)
Using this result, a lower bound on rmax(D) can be ob-
tained by the following optimization problem:
Theorem 3 Let D be an arbitrary nonempty, nontrivial,
simple digraph and let L be the Laplacian matrix of D.
A lower bound on the maximum integer for which D is
r-robust, denoted rmax(D), is found as follows:
rmax(D) ≥ min
b
subject to 1 ≤ 1T b ≤ (cid:98)n/2(cid:99)
(37)
max
(Lib)
i
b ∈ {0, 1}n.
Furthermore, (37) is equivalent to the following mixed
integer linear program:
{0, 1}n, then σ : Ψ → BΨ is also injective and therefore
a bijection. This implies that (39) is equivalent to
rmax(D) ≥ min
b∈BΨ
max
i
Lib.
(41)
Making the constraints of (41) explicit yields (37). More
specifically, since BΨ = {b ∈ {0, 1}n : 1 ≤ 1T b ≤ (cid:98)n/2(cid:99)}
by (40), equation (41) can be rewritten with explicit
constraints on b as follows:
rmax(D) ≥ min
b
subject to
i
(Lib)
max
1 ≤ 1T b ≤ (cid:98)n/2(cid:99)
b ∈ {0, 1}n.
(42)
Equation (42) is the same as (37).
We next prove that (38) is equivalent to (37). As per
the proof of Theorem 1, the objective and first two con-
straints of (38) are a reformulation of the objective of the
RHS of (37). The first and third constraint ensure b to
be in {0, 1}n, and the fourth constraint ensures b ∈ BΨ.(cid:4)
rmax(D) ≥ min
t,b
subject to
t
t ≥ 0, b ∈ Zn
Lb (cid:22) t1
0 (cid:22) b (cid:22) 1
1 ≤ 1T b ≤ (cid:98)n/2(cid:99)
6.2 An Upper Bound on Maximum r-Robustness
This section will present an MILP whose solution pro-
vides an upper bound on the value of rmax(D), and whose
binary vector variable has a dimension of n. This will
be accomplished by searching a subset T (cid:48) ⊂ T which is
defined as
(38)
PROOF. To prove the result we show that the RHS
of (37) is equivalent to the RHS of (34). By Lemma 2,
R(S) = maxi Liσ(S). Therefore (34) is equivalent to
rmax(D) ≥ min
S∈Ψ
max
i
Liσ(S).
(39)
Next, we demonstrate that the set
BΨ = {b ∈ {0, 1}n : 1 ≤ 1T b ≤ (cid:98)n/2(cid:99)}
(40)
satisfies BΨ = σ(Ψ), where σ(Ψ) is the image of Ψ under
σ : P(V) → {0, 1}n. Since 1 ≤ S ≤ (cid:98)n/2(cid:99) for all S ∈ Ψ,
then by (7) we have 1 ≤ 1T σ(S) ≤ (cid:98)n/2(cid:99) for all S ∈ Ψ.
Also, σ(S) ∈ {0, 1}n, and therefore σ(S) ∈ BΨ ∀S ∈
Ψ, implying that σ(Ψ) ⊆ B. Next, for any b ∈ BΨ,
choose the set S = σ−1(b) (recall from ?? that σ−1 :
{0, 1}n → P(V)). Then clearly σ(S) = σ(σ−1(b)) = b,
and therefore BΨ ⊆ σ(Ψ). Therefore BΨ = σ(Ψ).
The function σ : Ψ → BΨ is therefore surjective. Since
σ : P(V) → {0, 1}n is injective, Ψ ⊂ P(V), and BΨ ⊂
T (cid:48) = {(S1, S2) ∈ T : S1 ∪ S2 = V}.
(43)
In other words, T (cid:48) is the set of all possible partitionings
of V into S1 and S2. Considering only elements of T (cid:48)
yields certain properties that allow us to calculate an
upper bound on rmax(D) using an MILP with only an
n-dimensional binary vector.
Observe that T (cid:48) = 2n − 2, since neither T nor T (cid:48) in-
clude the cases where S1 = {∅} or S2 = {∅}. Simi-
lar to the methods discussed earlier, the partitioning of
V into S1 and S2 can be represented by the indicator
vectors σ(S1) and σ(S2), respectively. Note that since
S1 ∪ S2 = V for all (S1, S2) ∈ T (cid:48), it can be shown that
σ(S1) + σ(S2) = 1 ∀(S1, S2) ∈ T (cid:48). These properties al-
low the following Lemma to be proven:
Lemma 7 Let D = (V,E) be an arbitrary nonempty,
nontrivial, simple digraph. Let L be the Laplacian matrix
of D and let Lj be the jth row of L. Let T (cid:48) be defined as
12
Theorem 4 Let D = (V,E) be an arbitrary nonempty,
nontrivial, simple digraph. Let L be the Laplacian matrix
of D. The maximum integer for which D is r-robust,
denoted rmax(D), is upper bounded as follows:
(44)
rmax(D) ≤ min
b
subject to
(cid:107)Lb(cid:107)∞
1 ≤ 1T b ≤ (n − 1)
b ∈ {0, 1}n.
(50)
in (43). Then for all (S1, S2) ∈ T (cid:48), the following holds:
(cid:26)Nj\S1,
(cid:26)Nj\S2,
−Nj\S2,
−Nj\S1,
if j ∈ S1,
if j ∈ S2.
if j ∈ S2,
if j ∈ S1.
Ljσ(S1) =
Ljσ(S2) =
PROOF. Lemma 2 implies that Ljσ(S1) = Nj\S1
if j ∈ S1, and Ljσ(S2) = Nj\S2 if j ∈ S2. Since
(S1, S2) ∈ T (cid:48) =⇒ σ(S1) + σ(S2) = 1, we have
Ljσ(S1) = Lj(1 − σ(S2)) = −Ljσ(S2).
(45)
This relation holds because, by the definition of L, 1 is
always in the null space of L. Therefore for j ∈ S2 we
have Ljσ(S1) = −Ljσ(S2) = −Nj\S2, and for j ∈ S1
we have Ljσ(S2) = −Ljσ(S1) = −Nj\S1.
(cid:4)
An interesting result of Lemma 7 is that for any sub-
sets (S1, S2) ∈ T (cid:48), the maximum reachability of the two
subsets can be recovered using the infinity norm.
Lemma 8 Let D = (V,E) be an arbitrary nonempty,
nontrivial, simple digraph and let L be the Laplacian ma-
trix of D. For all (S1, S2) ∈ T (cid:48), the following holds:
(cid:107)Lσ(S1)(cid:107)∞ = (cid:107)Lσ(S2)(cid:107)∞ = max(R(S1),R(S2)).
(46)
PROOF. Denote the nodes in S1 as {i1, . . . , ip} and
the nodes in S2 as {j1, . . . , j(n−p)} with p ∈ Z, 1 ≤
p ≤ (n − 1). Note that since S1 ∪ S2 = V, we have
{i1, . . . , ip} ∪ {j1, . . . , jn−p} = {1, . . . , n}.
The right hand side of equation (46) can be expressed as
max(R(S1),R(S2)) = max(Ni1\S1, . . . ,Nip\S1,
Nj1\S2, . . . ,Nj(n−p)\S2). (47)
Similarly, using Lemma 7 yields
(cid:107)Lσ(S1)(cid:107)∞ = max(cid:0)L1σ(S1), . . . ,Lnσ(S1)(cid:1)
= max(cid:0)Ni1\S1, . . . ,Nip\S1,
Nj1\S2, . . . ,Nj(n−p)\S2(cid:1)
= max(R(S1),R(S2)).
(48)
Finally, observe that
(cid:107)Lσ(S2)(cid:107)∞ = (cid:107)L(1 − σ(S1))(cid:107)∞ = (cid:107)Lσ(S1)(cid:107)∞ , (49)
(cid:4)
which completes the proof.
A mixed integer linear program yielding an upper bound
on the value of rmax(D) is therefore given by the follow-
ing Theorem:
13
Furthermore, (50) is equivalent to the following mixed
integer linear program:
rmax(D) ≤ min
(51)
t,b
subject to
t
0 ≤ t, b ∈ Zn.
− t1 (cid:22) Lb (cid:22) 1t
0 (cid:22) b (cid:22) 1
1 ≤ 1T b ≤ (n − 1)
PROOF. Consider the optimization problem
(S1,S2)∈T (cid:48) max (R(S1),R(S2)) .
min
(52)
Since T (cid:48) ⊂ T , the optimal value of (52) is a valid upper
bound on the value of rmax(D) as per Remark 1. From
(52) and Lemma 8 we obtain
rmax(D) ≤ min
(S1,S2)∈T (cid:48) (cid:107)Lσ(S1)(cid:107)∞
(S1,S2)∈T (cid:48) (cid:107)Lσ(S2)(cid:107)∞ .
= min
(53)
Since S1, S2 are nonempty and S1 ∪ S2 = V for all
(S1, S2) ∈ T (cid:48), the set of all possible S1 subsets within
elements of T (cid:48) is (P(V)\{∅,V}). Similarly, the set of
all possible S2 subsets within elements of T (cid:48)
is also
(P(V)\{∅,V}). For brevity, denote P∅,V = P(V)\{∅,V}.
Next, we demonstrate that the set B(cid:48) = {b ∈ {0, 1}n :
1 ≤ 1T b ≤ (n − 1)} satisfies σ(P∅,V ) = B(cid:48). Since 1 ≤
S ≤ (n − 1) for all S ∈ P∅,V , then by (7) we have
1 ≤ 1T σ(S) ≤ (n − 1) for all S ∈ P∅,V . Also, σ(S) ∈
{0, 1}n, and therefore σ(S) ∈ B(cid:48) ∀S ∈ P∅,V , implying
that σ(P∅,V ) ⊆ B(cid:48). Next, for any b ∈ B(cid:48), choose the set
S = σ−1(b). Then clearly σ(S) = σ(σ−1(b)) = b, and
therefore B(cid:48) ⊆ σ(P∅,V ). Therefore B(cid:48) = σ(P∅,V ).
The function σ : P∅,V → B(cid:48) is therefore surjective. Since
σ : P(V) → {0, 1}n is injective, P∅,V ⊂ P(V), and
B(cid:48) ⊂ {0, 1}n, then σ : P∅,V → B(cid:48) is also injective. There-
fore σ : P∅,V → B(cid:48) is a bijection, implying that (53) is
equivalent to
rmax(D) ≤ min
b∈B(cid:48) (cid:107)Lb(cid:107)∞ .
(54)
Making the constraints of (54) explicit yields (50). We
next prove that (51) is equivalent to (50). It can be shown
[3, Chapter 4] that minx (cid:107)x(cid:107)∞ is equivalent to
(3.60 GHz) capable of handling 16 total threads. All
MILP problems are solved using MATLAB's intlinprog
function.
t
min
t,x
subject to − t1 (cid:22) x (cid:22) t1.
Likewise, the objective and first two constraints of the
RHS of (51) are a reformulation of the objective of the
RHS of (50). The first and third constraint restrict b ∈
{0, 1}n, and the fourth constraint restricts b to be an
element of B(cid:48). These arguments imply that the RHS of
(cid:4)
(51) is equivalent to the RHS of (50).
7 Discussion
MILP problems are N P -hard problems to solve in gen-
eral. As such, the formulations presented in this paper do
not reduce the theoretical complexity of the robustness
determination problem. However, it has been pointed
out that algorithmic advances and improvement in com-
puter hardware have led to a speedup factor of 800 bil-
lion for mixed integer optimization problems during the
last 25 years [1]. The results of this paper allow for the
robustness determination problem to benefit from ongo-
ing and future improvements in the active areas of opti-
mization and integer programming.
In addition, one crucial advantage of the MILP formu-
lations is the ability to iteratively tighten a global lower
bound on the optimal value over time by using a branch-
and-bound algorithm. The reader is referred to [41] for a
concise overview of how such a lower bound can be cal-
culated. In context of robustness determination, lower
bounds on rmax(D) and smax(r) are generally more use-
ful than upper bounds since they can be used to cal-
culate lower bounds on the maximum adversary model
that the network can tolerate. The ability to use branch-
and-bound algorithms for solving the robustness deter-
mination problem offers the flexibility of terminating
the search for rmax(D) and/or smax(r) when sufficiently
high lower bounds have been determined. In this man-
ner, approximations of these values can be found when
it is too computationally expensive to solve for them ex-
actly. The investigation of additional methods to find
approximate solutions to the MILP formulations in this
paper is left for future work.
8 Simulations
This section presents simulations which demonstrate the
performance of the MILP formulations as compared to
a robustness determination algorithm from prior liter-
ature called DetermineRobustness [13]. Computations
for these simulations are performed in MATLAB 2018b
on a desktop computer with 8 Intel core i7-7820X CPUs
Four types of random graphs are considered in the simu-
lations: Erdos-R´enyi random graphs, random digraphs,
k-out random graphs [2], and k-in random graphs. The
Erdos-R´enyi random graphs in these simulations consist
of n agents, with each possible undirected edge present
independently with probability p ∈ [0, 1] and absent
with probability 1− p. Three values of p are considered:
0.3, 0.5, and 0.8. The random digraphs considered con-
sist of n nodes with each possible directed edge present
independently with probability p and absent with prob-
ability 1−p. The values of p considered are again 0.3, 0.5,
and 0.8. The k-out random graphs consist of n nodes.
For each vertex i ∈ V, k ∈ N other nodes are chosen
with all having equal probability and all choices being
independent. For each node j of the k chosen nodes, a
directed edge (i, j) is formed. k-in random graphs are
formed in the same manner as k-out random graphs with
the exception that the direction of the directed edges
are reversed; i.e. edges (j, i) are formed. The values of k
considered are {3, 4, 5}.
Two sets of simulations are considered. The first set
compares two algorithms which determine the pair
(r∗, s∗) for a digraph: the DetermineRobustness al-
gorithm from [13] and Algorithm 3, (r, s)-Rob. MILP,
which is an MILP formulation using results from The-
orems 1 and 2. Details about the implementation of
these algorithms can be found in the Appendix, sec-
tion A. The algorithms are tested on the four types of
graphs described above with values of n ranging from
7 to 15. In addition, the MILP formulation is tested
on digraphs with values of n ranging from 17 to 25.
The DetermineRobustness algorithm is not tested on
values of n above 15 since the convergence rate trend
is clear from the existing data, and the projected con-
vergence times are prohibitive for large n. 100 graphs
per graph type and combination of n and p (or n and
k depending on the respective graph type), are ran-
domly generated, and the algorithms are run on each
graph. Overall, 10,800 total graphs are analyzed with
DetermineRobustness and 16,800 total graphs are an-
alyzed with Algorithm 3. The time for each algorithm
to determine the pair (r∗, s∗) is averaged for each com-
bination of n and p (for Erdos-R´enyi random graphs
and random digraphs), and for each combination of n
and k (for k-out and k-in random graphs). The inter-
polated circles represent the average convergence time
in seconds over 100 trials for each value of n, while the
vertical lines represent the spread between maximum
convergence time and minimum convergence time over
trials for the respective value of n. Note the logarithmic
scale of the y-axis.
To facilitate the large number of graphs being tested, a
time limit of 103 seconds (roughly 17 minutes) is imposed
14
on Algorithm 3 (the MILP formulation). However, out
of the 16,800 graphs tested by Algorithm 3, there are
only 62 instances where the algorithm did not converge
to optimality before this time limit. Instances where the
time limit was violated are given the maximum time of
103 seconds and included in the data. The graphs where
optimality was not reached by the time limit all have
between 21 and 25 nodes, are either Erdos-R´enyi random
graphs or random digraphs, and have edge formation
probabilities of p = 0.8.
Several patterns in the data warrant discussion. It
is clear that in some cases, the minimum time of
DetermineRobustness is less than that of (r, s)-Rob.
MILP. DetermineRobustness terminates if two subsets
S1 and S2 which are both 0-reachable are encountered,
since this implies that the graph is at most (0, n)-robust.
This can result in fast termination if such subsets are en-
countered early in the search. Second, there are instances
where the maximum time for the (r, s)-Rob. MILP is
much higher than that of the DetermineRobustness
algorithm (e.g. for k-out random digraphs with k = 4).
It is not immediately clear why this is the case; future
work will investigate graph characteristics which affect
the convergence time of the MILP formulations. Finally,
for small values of n (e.g. n ∈ {7, 8}) the average time
for DetermineRobustness is lower than the average
time for the (r, s)-Rob. MILP. This likely reflects that
it may be quicker to simply test all unique nonempty,
disjoint subsets in these cases (966 for n = 7, 3025 for
n = 8) than to incur computational overhead associ-
ated with solving the MILP formulations. We point out
that, with a few exceptions, the difference in this case is
small: the average convergence time for both algorithms
is generally under 10−1 seconds for n ∈ {7, 8}.
The second simulation set compares the performance
of four algorithms which determine only the value of
rmax(D) for digraphs. These include Algorithm 4, a mod-
ified version of DetermineRobustness which determines
rmax(D), the MILP formulation from Theorem 1 (de-
noted r-Rob. MILP ), the lower bound MILP formulation
from Theorem 3 (denoted r-Rob. Lower Bnd ), and the
upper bound MILP formulation from Theorem 4 (de-
noted r-Rob. Upper Bnd ). These algorithms are tested
on the four types of graphs described above with values
of n ranging from 7 to 15. Additionally, the MILP for-
mulations are tested on digraphs with values of n rang-
ing from 17 to 25. Again, 100 graphs per graph type and
combination of n and p (or n and k, depending on the
respective graph type) are randomly generated, and the
algorithms are run on each graph. Overall, 10,800 graphs
are analyzed with Algorithm 4 and 16,800 graphs are
analyzed by each of the three MILP formulations. The
time for each algorithm to determine rmax(D) is aver-
aged for each combination of n, p or k, and graph type.
The average, minimum, and maximum times per com-
bination are plotted in Figure 5. A time limit of 103 sec-
onds is again imposed on all three of the MILP formu-
15
lations, but out of the 16,800 graphs tested there are no
instances where this time limit was violated.
Some of the same patterns as in the first set of simu-
lations (with the DetermineRobustness and (r, s)-Rob.
MILP algorithms) are evident in the second set of sim-
ulations. The Mod. Det. Rob. algorithm also terminates
if a pair of subsets S1 and S2 are found which are both
0-reachable, which is likely the reason for the small min-
imum computation time of this algorithm for several of
the graphs. Mod. Det. Rob. generally has a lower aver-
age computational time for n ∈ {7, 8}, again likely due
to the speed of checking the relatively low number of
unique nonempty, disjoint subset pairs as compared to
solving the MILPs. It is not clear why the r-Rob. Upper
Bnd MILP exhibits high average and maximum com-
putational times for the k-out random digraphs. Future
work will further analyze graph characteristics which
negatively affect the convergence time of the MILP for-
mulations.
9 Conclusion
This paper presents a novel approach on determining
the r- and (r, s)-robustness of digraphs using mixed inte-
ger linear programming (MILP). The advantages of the
MILP formulations and branch-and-bound algorithms
over prior algorithms are discussed, and the performance
of the MILP methods to the DetermineRobustness al-
gorithm is compared.
Much work remains to be done in the area of robustness
determination. The results in this paper merely open the
door for the extensive literature on mixed integer pro-
gramming to be applied to the robustness determination
problem. Future work will focus on applying more ad-
vanced integer programming techniques to the formula-
tions in this paper to yield faster solution times. In par-
ticular, the Laplacian matrix exhibits a high degree of
structure and plays a central role in the MILP formula-
tions presented in this paper. Future efforts will explore
ways to exploit this structure to determine the robust-
ness of digraphs more efficiently.
References
[1] Dimitris Bertsimas and Jack Dunn. Optimal classification
trees. Machine Learning, 106(7):1039 -- 1082, 2017.
[2] B´ela Bollob´as. Models of Random Graphs, page 3459.
Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge
University Press, 2nd edition, 2001.
[3] Stephen Boyd and Lieven Vandenberghe.
optimization. Cambridge university press, 2004.
Convex
[4] Seyed Mehran Dibaji and Hideaki Ishii. Resilient consensus
of second-order agent networks: Asynchronous update rules
with delays. Automatica, 81:123 -- 132, 2017.
[5] Seyed Mehran Dibaji, Hideaki
and Roberto
Tempo. Resilient randomized quantized consensus.
IEEE
Transactions on Automatic Control, 63(8):2508 -- 2522, 2018.
Ishii,
Fig. 4. Comparison of DetermineRobustness to (r, s)-Rob. MILP (Algorithm 3). The interpolating lines and circles represents the
average computation time in seconds over 100 digraphs for each value of n, the upper and lower lines represent the maximum and
minimum computation times, respectively, over the 100 trials for each n. Note that (r, s)-Rob. MILP actually solves two MILPs
sequentially: one to find rmax(D), and one to find smax(rmax(D)).
[6] Luis Guerrero-Bonilla, Amanda Prorok, and Vijay Kumar.
Formations for Resilient Robot Teams. In IEEE Robotics and
Automation Letters, volume 2, pages 841 -- 848. IEEE, 2017.
[7] Luis Guerrero-Bonilla, David Saldana, and Vijay Kumar.
Design guarantees for resilient robot formations on lattices.
IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 4(1):89 -- 96, 2018.
wireless sensor networks. IEEE Transactions on Control of
Network Systems, 2017.
[9] Leslie Lamport, Robert Shostak, and Marshall Pease.
The byzantine generals problem. ACM Transactions on
Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), 4(3):382 --
401, 1982.
[8] Yuhei Kikuya, Seyed Mehran Dibaji, and Hideaki Ishii. Fault
tolerant clock synchronization over unreliable channels in
[10] Heath J LeBlanc. Resilient cooperative control of networked
multi-agent systems. Vanderbilt University, 2012.
16
510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104Erdos-Renyi GraphsComputation time (sec)p =0.3Det. Rob.(r,s)-Rob. MILP510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104p =0.5510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104p =0.8510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104Random DigraphsComputation time (sec)p =0.3510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104p =0.5510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104p =0.8510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104k-In Random DigraphsComputation time (sec)k =3Det. Rob.(r,s)-Rob. MILP510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104k =4510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104k =5510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104k-Out Random DigraphsComputation time (sec)k =3510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104k =4510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104k =5 Fig. 5. Comparison of the Mod. Det. Rob. algorithm (Algorithm 4) which determines rmax(D) to three MILP formulations. The first
MILP formulation labeled r-Rob. MILP is an implementation of Theorem 1 and calculates rmax(D) exactly. The MILP formulation
labeled r-Rob. Lower Bnd is an implementation of Theorem 3 and calculates a lower bound on rmax(D). The MILP formulation labeled
r-Rob. Upper Bnd is an implementation of Theorem 4 and calculates an upper bound on rmax(D). The interpolating lines and circles
represents the average computation time over 100 digraphs for each value of n, the upper and lower lines represent the maximum and
minimum computation times, respectively, over the 100 trials for each n.
[11] Heath J LeBlanc and Xenofon Koutsoukos.
Resilient
first-order consensus and weakly stable, higher order
synchronization of continuous-time networked multi-agent
systems. IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems,
2017.
[12] Heath J LeBlanc and Xenofon D Koutsoukos.
Low
complexity resilient consensus in networked multi-agent
systems with adversaries. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM
international conference on Hybrid Systems: Computation
and Control, pages 5 -- 14. ACM, 2012.
[13] Heath J LeBlanc and Xenofon D Koutsoukos. Algorithms for
determining network robustness. In Proceedings of the 2nd
17
510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104Erdos-Renyi GraphsComputation time (sec)p =0.3Mod. Det. Rob.r-Rob. MILPr-Rob. Lower Bndr-Rob. Upper Bnd510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104p =0.5510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104p =0.8510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104Random DigraphsComputation time (sec)p =0.3510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104p =0.5510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104p =0.8510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104k-In Random DigraphsComputation time (sec)k =3Mod. Det. Rob.r-Rob. MILPr-Rob. Lower Bndr-Rob. Upper Bnd510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104k =4510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104k =5510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104k-Out Random DigraphsComputation time (sec)k =3510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104k =4510152025Number of nodes10-410-2100102104k =5 ACM international conference on High confidence networked
systems, pages 57 -- 64. ACM, 2013.
[14] Heath J. LeBlanc, H Zhang, S Sundaram, and X Koutsoukos.
Resilient continuous-time consensus in fractional robust
networks. In 2013 American Control Conference, pages 1237 --
1242, 6 2013.
[15] Heath J LeBlanc, Haotian Zhang, Xenofon Koutsoukos,
and Shreyas Sundaram. Resilient asymptotic consensus
in robust networks.
IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in
Communications, 31(4):766 -- 781, 2013.
[16] Heath J LeBlanc, Haotian Zhang, Shreyas Sundaram, and
Xenofon Koutsoukos. Consensus of multi-agent networks
in the presence of adversaries using only local information.
In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on High
Confidence Networked Systems, pages 1 -- 10. ACM, 2012.
[17] Zhenhong Li and Zhengtao Ding. Robust cooperative
guidance law for simultaneous arrival. IEEE Transactions
on Control Systems Technology, (99):1 -- 8, 2018.
[18] A. Mitra and S. Sundaram.
Secure distributed state
estimation of an LTI system over time-varying networks and
analog erasure channels. In 2018 Annual American Control
Conference (ACC), pages 6578 -- 6583, June 2018.
[19] Aritra Mitra, Waseem Abbas, and Shreyas Sundaram. On
the impact of trusted nodes in resilient distributed state
estimation of LTI systems.
In 2018 IEEE Conference on
Decision and Control (CDC), pages 4547 -- 4552. IEEE, 2018.
[20] Aritra Mitra, John A Richards, Saurabh Bagchi, and Shreyas
Sundaram. Resilient distributed state estimation with mobile
agents: overcoming byzantine adversaries, communication
losses, and intermittent measurements. Autonomous Robots,
pages 1 -- 26, 2018.
[21] Aritra Mitra and Shreyas Sundaram. Secure distributed
observers for a class of linear time invariant systems in the
presence of byzantine adversaries. In Decision and Control
(CDC), 2016 IEEE 55th Conference on, pages 2709 -- 2714.
IEEE, 2016.
[22] Hyongju Park and Seth Hutchinson. An efficient algorithm
for fault-tolerant rendezvous of multi-robot systems with
controllable sensing range.
In Robotics and Automation
(ICRA), 2016 IEEE International Conference on, pages 358 --
365. IEEE, 2016.
[23] Hyongju Park and Seth A Hutchinson.
rendezvous of multirobot systems.
robotics, 33(3):565 -- 582, 2017.
Fault-tolerant
IEEE transactions on
[24] David Saldana, Luis Guerrero-Bonilla, and Vijay Kumar.
Resilient backbones in hexagonal robot formations.
In
Distributed Autonomous Robotic Systems, pages 427 -- 440.
Springer, 2019.
[25] David Saldana, Amanda Prorok, Shreyas Sundaram,
Mario FM Campos, and Vijay Kumar. Resilient consensus
for time-varying networks of dynamic agents. In American
Control Conference (ACC), 2017, pages 252 -- 258. IEEE,
2017.
[26] Danial Senejohnny, Shreyas Sundaram, Claudio De Persis,
and Pietro Tesi. Resilience against misbehaving nodes in self-
triggered coordination networks. In 2018 IEEE Conference
on Decision and Control (CDC), pages 2848 -- 2853. IEEE,
2018.
[27] Ebrahim Moradi Shahrivar, Mohammad Pirani, and Shreyas
Sundaram. Robustness and algebraic connectivity of random
interdependent networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1508.03650,
2015.
[28] Ebrahim Moradi Shahrivar, Mohammad Pirani, and Shreyas
Sundaram. Spectral and structural properties of random
interdependent networks. Automatica, 83:234 -- 242, 2017.
[29] Lili Su and Nitin H Vaidya. Fault-tolerant multi-agent
optimization: optimal iterative distributed algorithms.
In
Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Symposium on Principles of
Distributed Computing, pages 425 -- 434. ACM, 2016.
[30] Lili Su and Nitin H Vaidya. Reaching approximate byzantine
consensus with multi-hop communication. Information and
Computation, 255:352 -- 368, 2017.
[31] Shreyas Sundaram and Bahman Gharesifard. Distributed
optimization under adversarial nodes. IEEE Transactions on
Automatic Control, 2018.
[32] Lewis Tseng and Nitin Vaidya.
Iterative approximate
byzantine consensus under a generalized fault model.
In
International Conference on Distributed Computing and
Networking, pages 72 -- 86. Springer, 2013.
[33] Lewis Tseng, Nitin Vaidya, and Vartika Bhandari. Broadcast
using certified propagation algorithm in presence of byzantine
faults. Information Processing Letters, 115(4):512 -- 514, 2015.
[34] Lewis Tseng and Nitin H Vaidya. Asynchronous convex hull
consensus in the presence of crash faults.
In Proceedings
of the 2014 ACM symposium on Principles of distributed
computing, pages 396 -- 405. ACM, 2014.
[35] James Usevitch and Dimitra Panagou. r-robustness and (r,
s)-robustness of circulant graphs. In 2017 IEEE 56th Annual
Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), pages 4416 --
4421, Dec 2017.
[36] James Usevitch and Dimitra Panagou.
Determining
r-robustness
linear
programming. In 2019 Annual American Control Conference
(ACC). IEEE, 2019.
of digraphs using mixed integer
[37] Nitin H Vaidya.
Iterative byzantine vector consensus
in incomplete graphs.
In International Conference on
Distributed Computing and Networking, pages 14 -- 28.
Springer, 2014.
[38] Nitin H Vaidya and Vijay K Garg. Byzantine vector
consensus in complete graphs.
In Proceedings of the 2013
ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing,
pages 65 -- 73. ACM, 2013.
[39] Nitin H Vaidya, Lewis Tseng, and Guanfeng Liang. Iterative
in arbitrary directed
approximate byzantine consensus
graphs.
In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM symposium on
Principles of distributed computing, pages 365 -- 374. ACM,
2012.
[40] Guang Wang, Ming Xu, Yiming Wu, Ning Zheng, Jian Xu,
and Tong Qiao. Using machine learning for determining
network robustness of multi-agent systems under attacks.
In Pacific Rim International Conference on Artificial
Intelligence, pages 491 -- 498. Springer, 2018.
[41] Laurence A Wolsey. Mixed integer programming. Wiley
Encyclopedia of Computer Science and Engineering, pages
1 -- 10, 2007.
[42] Haotian Zhang, Elaheh Fata, and Shreyas Sundaram. A
notion of robustness in complex networks. IEEE Transactions
on Control of Network Systems, 2(3):310 -- 320, 2015.
[43] Haotian Zhang and Shreyas Sundaram.
Robustness
of
information diffusion algorithms to locally bounded
adversaries. In American Control Conference (ACC), 2012,
pages 5855 -- 5861. IEEE, 2012.
[44] Jun Zhao, Osman Yagan, and Virgil Gligor. On connectivity
and robustness in random intersection graphs.
IEEE
Transactions on Automatic Control, 62(5):2121 -- 2136, 2017.
18
A Description of Algorithm implementations
This section gives additional details about the im-
plementations of the algorithms tested in the Sim-
ulation. Algorithm 2 provides the details about the
implementation of the DetermineRobustness algo-
rithm implemented in the simulations. One modifica-
(cid:7)(cid:1)
2: r ← min(cid:0)max(cid:0)δin(D), 1(cid:1) ,(cid:6) n
Algorithm 2 [13]
DetermineRobustness(A(D))
1: comment: A(D) is the adjacency matrix of the graph.
3: s ← n
4: comment: δin(D) is the min. in-degree of nodes in D
5: for each k ← 2 to n
6:
7:
8:
k ) unique subsets of V
for each Pj ∈ PKi (j = 1, 2, . . . , 2k−1 − 1)
comment: PKi is set of partitions of Ki with
for each Ki ∈ Kk (i = 1, 2, . . . , ( n
comment: Kk is the set of ( n
k ))
2
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
15:
16:
17:
18:
exactly two nonempty parts
comment: Pj = {S1, S2}
isRSRobust ← Robustholds(A(D), S1, S2, r, s)
if (isRSRobust == false) and s > 0 then
s ← s − 1
end if
while isRRobust == false and (r > 0)
while isRSRobust == false and (s > 0)
isRRobust
←
Robustholds(A(D), S1, S2, r, s)
if not isRSRobust then
s ← s − 1
end if
end while
if isRSRobust == false then
r ← r − 1
s ← n
19:
20:
21:
22:
23:
24:
25:
26:
27:
28:
29:
30:
31:
32:
33: end for
34: return (r, s)
end for
end if
end while
if r == 0 then
return (r, s)
end if
end for
(cid:46) Implies rmax(D) = 0
(cid:46) Returned values are
(rmax(D), smax(rmax(D)))
tion was made to the DetermineRobustness algorithm
to ensure accuracy of results. In the first line of the
original DetermineRobustness algorithm, r is initial-
ized with min(cid:0)δin(D),(cid:100)n/2(cid:101)(cid:1). This yields incorrect
results however for directed spanning trees where the
in-degree of the root node is zero. Consider the di-
graph depicted in Figure A. Here, δin(D) = 0, since
the left agent has no in-neighbors. This implies that
the original DetermineRobustness algorithm would
initialize r ← 0 and return (0, n) as the values of
(rmax(D), smax(rmax(D))). However, Figure A shows
that for all nonempty, disjoint subsets S1 and S2, at
least one is 1-reachable. The depicted graph is therefore
19
(Left) Example of a digraph which has δin(D) = 0
Fig. A.1.
but which is 1-robust. The graph is depicted on the far left, and
all possible (S1, S2) pairs in T are depicted on the close left.
(Right) Fig A.2. A rooted out-branching, where the in-degree of
the root node (far left) is zero. All digraphs containing a rooted
outbranching are at least (1, 1)-robust [15].
(1, 1)-robust with rmax(D) = 1 and smax(rmax(D)) = 1.
In fact, initializing r ← δin(D) will always yield this
error for any directed spanning tree where the in-degree
of the root node is 0. This happens because any di-
graph is 1-robust if and only if it contains a rooted out-
branching [15, Lemma 7], yet DetermineRobustness
initializes r ← δin(D) = 0 which results in termination
at line 23. In Algorithm 2, r is instead initialized with
δin(D) = 0, since it is still possible for the digraph to be
1-robust.
(cid:7)(cid:1). This initializes r ← 1 if
min(cid:0)max(cid:0)δin(D), 1(cid:1) ,(cid:6) n
2
To compare the MILP methodologies of this pa-
per with the DetermineRobustness algorithm, Al-
gorithm 3 was used which determines the values of
(rmax(D), smax(rmax(D))). The first part of Algorithm
Algorithm 3
(r, s)-Rob. MILP
1: r ← rmax(D) from MILP in Theorem 1
2: if r == 0 then
3:
4: else
5:
s ← n
if δin(D) ≥ (cid:98)n/2(cid:99) + r − 1 then (cid:46) See Property 5.23
s ← n
¯smin(r) ← from MILP in Theorem 2
s ← ¯smin(r) − 1
in [10]
else
6:
7:
8:
9:
10:
11: end if
12: return (r, s)
end if
3 uses the formulation in Theorem 1 to determine
rmax(D). If rmax(D) = 0, then s ← n and the algorithm
returns (r, s). If rmax(D) > 0, then the algorithm deter-
mines in line 5 whether the minimum in-degree of the
graph δin(D) ≥ (cid:98)n/2(cid:99) + r − 1. By Property 5.23 in [10],
if this is satisfied then the digraph is (r, s)-robust for all
1 ≤ s ≤ n. Since for r > 0 the MILP in Theorem 2 is
infeasible if and only if s = n, this test attempts to help
the MILP solver avoid a fruitless search for a feasible
solution if s is indeed equal to n. This test works for
graphs with large minimum in-degrees (e.g. complete
graphs), but since it is a sufficient condition only it may
not always detect when smax(r) = n. Determining a
more rigorous test to determine when smax(r) = n is left
for future work. Finally, if the test in line 5 fails then
the MILP formulation in Theorem 2 is performed to
determine ¯smin. Since smax(r) = ¯smin(r) − 1, the value
of smax(r) is stored in s and the algorithm returns (r, s).
The MILP algorithms in Section 4 consider r-robustness,
which is equivalent to (r, 1)-robustness [13, Property
5.21], [15, Section VII-B]. Since they effectively do not
consider values of s greater than 1, it is unfair to com-
pare them directly with the DetermineRobustness
algorithm. Algorithm 4 is a modified version of
DetermineRobustness which only considers
(r, 1)-
robustness. This is accomplished by initializing s ← 1 in
lines 2 and 20 instead of s ← n. Algorithm 4 is labeled
Mod. Det. Rob. in the simulation legends.
(cid:7)(cid:1)
2: r ← min(cid:0)max(cid:0)δin(D), 1(cid:1) ,(cid:6) n
Algorithm 4
Modified version of DetermineRobustness
1: comment: A(D) is the adjacency matrix of the graph
3: s ← 1
(cid:46) (Different than Alg. 3.2 in [13])
4: comment: δin(D) is the min. in-degree of nodes in D
5: for each k ← 2 to n
6: comment: Kk is the set of ( n
7:
8:
k ) unique subsets of V
for each Pj ∈ PKi (j = 1, 2, . . . , 2k−1 − 1)
comment: PKi is set of partitions of Ki into S1
for each Ki ∈ Kk (i = 1, 2, . . . , ( n
k ))
2
and S2
isRSRobust ← Robustholds(A(D), S1, S2, r, s)
if (isRSRobust == false) and s > 0 then
s ← s − 1
end if
while isRRobust == false and (r > 0)
isRRobust
while isRSRobust == false and (s > 0)
← Robustholds(A, S1, S2, r, s)
s ← s − 1
if not isRSRobust then
end if
end while
if isRSRobust == false then
(cid:46) (Diff. than Alg. 3.2 in [13])
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
15:
16:
17:
18:
19:
20:
21:
22:
23:
24:
25:
26:
27:
28:
29:
30:
31:
32: end for
33: return r
r ← r − 1
s ← 1
end if
end while
if r == 0 then
return r
end if
end for
end for
20
|
1910.00741 | 1 | 1910 | 2019-10-02T01:35:14 | Emergence of Writing Systems Through Multi-Agent Cooperation | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.CL",
"cs.CV",
"cs.IT",
"cs.LG",
"cs.IT"
] | Learning to communicate is considered an essential task to develop a general AI. While recent literature in language evolution has studied emergent language through discrete or continuous message symbols, there has been little work in the emergence of writing systems in artificial agents. In this paper, we present a referential game setup with two agents, where the mode of communication is a written language system that emerges during the play. We show that the agents can learn to coordinate successfully using this mode of communication. Further, we study how the game rules affect the writing system taxonomy by proposing a consistency metric. | cs.MA | cs | Emergence of Writing Systems Through Multi-Agent Cooperation
Shresth Verma, Joydip Dhar
ABV-Indian Institute of Information Technology and Management
Gwalior, MP, India 474003
E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]
9
1
0
2
t
c
O
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
1
4
7
0
0
.
0
1
9
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract
Learning to communicate is considered an essential task to
develop a general AI. While recent literature in language
evolution has studied emergent language through discrete or
continuous message symbols, there has been little work in
the emergence of writing systems in artificial agents. In this
paper, we present a referential game setup with two agents,
where the mode of communication is a written language sys-
tem that emerges during the play. We show that the agents
can learn to coordinate successfully using this mode of com-
munication. Further, we study how the game rules affect the
writing system taxonomy by proposing a consistency metric.
Introduction
Recent advances in deep learning have shown exceptional
results in language-related tasks such as machine transla-
tion, question answering, or sentiment analysis. However,
the supervised approaches that capture the underlying statis-
tical patterns in language are not sufficient in perceiving the
interactive nature of communication and how humans use it
for coordination. It is thus crucial to learn to communicate
by interaction, i.e., communication must emerge out of ne-
cessity. Such study gives further insights into how communi-
cation protocols emerge for successful coordination and the
ability of a learner to understand the emerged language.
Several recent works (Lazaridou, Peysakhovich, and Ba-
roni 2016; Havrylov and Titov 2017; Lazaridou et al. 2018;
Mordatch and Abbeel 2018), have shown that in multi-agent
cooperative setting of referential games, deep reinforcement
learning can successfully induce communication protocols.
In these games, communication success is the only super-
vision during learning, and the meaning of the emergent
messages gets grounded during the game. In (Lazaridou,
Peysakhovich, and Baroni 2016), the authors have restricted
the message to be a single symbol token picked from a fixed
vocabulary while in (Havrylov and Titov 2017), the mes-
sage is considered to be a sequence of symbols. (Lazaridou
et al. 2018) demonstrates that successful communication can
also emerge in environments which present raw pixel input.
Copyright c(cid:13) 2020, Association for the Advancement of Artificial
Intelligence (www.aaai.org). All rights reserved.
(Mordatch and Abbeel 2018) further extends the scope of
mode of communication by also studying the emergence of
non-verbal communication.
While these works have studied a wide variety of game
setups as well as variations in communication rules, none of
them have considered written language system as a mode of
communication. Historically, written language systems have
shown complex patterns in evolution over time. Moreover,
the process of writing requires sophisticated graphomotor
skills which involves both linguistic and non-linguistic fac-
tors. Thus writing systems can be considered crucial for un-
derstanding autonomous system development. We are fur-
ther motivated by the work in (Ganin et al. 2018), where the
authors demonstrate that artificial agents can produce visual
representations similar to those created by humans. This can
only be achieved by giving them access to the same tools
that we use to recreate the world around us. We extend this
idea to study emergence of writing systems.
Referential Game Framework
In our work, we have used two referential game setups
that are slight modifications to the ones used in (Lazaridou,
Peysakhovich, and Baroni 2016; Lazaridou et al. 2018).
There are two players, a sender and a receiver. From a
given set of images I = {ij}N
j=1, we sample a target image
t ∈ I and K − 1 distracting images D = {dj}K−1
j=1 , dj ∈ I
s.t. ∀j t (cid:54)= dj. Now, we define two sender types, Distractor
Agnostic (D-Agnostic): where the sender only has access to
the target image t; Distractor Aware (D-Aware): where the
sender has access to the candidate set C = t ∪ D. In both
these variations, the sender has to come up with a message
Ml = {mj}l
j=1, which is a sequence of l brushstrokes. A
black-box renderer R accepts the sequence of brushstrokes
Ml and paints them onto a canvas. This results in a written
symbol image W = R(Ml). Given the written symbol im-
age W and the candidate set C, the receiver has to identify
the target image t. Communicative success is achieved when
the target is correctly identified and a payoff of 1 is assigned
to both the players. In rest of the cases, payoff is 0.
Experimental Setup
Agents
The sender and receiver are modelled as reinforcement
learning policy networks Sθ andRφ. Specifically, the sender
is a recurrent neural network which takes as input the cur-
rent state of the canvas along with the visual input V which
can either be target image t (D-Agnostic) or candidate set C
(D-Aware). At the ith timestep, the sender outputs a brush-
stroke mi. The canvas state is the intermediate rendering
R(Mi), where Mi is the collection of brushstrokes pro-
duced upto timestep i. Thus, mi+1 is generated by sampling
from Sθ(R(Mi), hi, V ) where hi is the internal hidden state
maintained across timesteps. The sequence is terminated
when either the maximum sequence length L is reached or
a terminal flag is produced along with the brushstroke. The
internal state is maintained across timesteps using an LSTM
cell (Hochreiter and Schmidhuber 1997). The receiver agent
first extracts features from the written symbol image W . For
creating brushstrokes that are similar to written languages
used by humans, we use feature extractor from a Siamese
Neural Network (Koch, Zemel, and Salakhutdinov 2015),
pre-trained on the OMNIGLOT dataset (Lake, Salakhutdi-
nov, and Tenenbaum 2015). Given the written symbol im-
age W , a candidate set U (a random permutation of C), and
the feature extractor fs, the receiver returns an integer value
t(cid:48) = Rφ(fs(W ), U ) in the range 0 to K-1 that points to the
target.
Learning
For both the agents, we pose the learning of communication
protocols as maximization of the expected return Er[R(r)],
where R is the reward function. The payoff is 1 for both the
agents iff Rφ(fs(Sθ(R(Mi), hi, V )), U ) = t , where i is the
last timestep of the episode. In all other cases and interme-
diate timesteps, the payoff is 0. Because of the high dimen-
sional search space introduced due to brushstrokes, we use
Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) (Schulman et al. 2017)
for optimizing the weights of sender and receiver agents.
Images
We have used CIFAR-10 dataset (Krizhevsky, Hinton, and
others 2009), as a source of images. From the test set of
CIFAR-10, we randomly sample 100 images from each class
and represent them as outputs from relu7 layer of pre-
trained VGG-16 convNet (Simonyan and Zisserman 2014).
Results and Conclusion
Figure 1 shows the performance of our game setup for both
the sender variations. The agents converge to coordination
in both sender types, but D-Aware sender reaches higher
levels more quickly. Further, we quantify the consistency
of a writing system by studying the variability of the sym-
bols produced for a given entity e. Let we be the set of all
written symbol images representing e. We define heatmap
He = mean(we). For a writing system consistent for the
entity e, He would contain sharp brushstrokes while a non-
consistent writing system would give a blurred heatmap. We
thus compute Variance of Laplacian (VoL) of the heatmap to
Figure 1: Communication success as a function of training
episodes for referential games with K = 3 and L = 2
Sender Type Avg. Consis-
D-Agnostict
D-Awaret
D-Awaret&d
tency Score
0.019
0.007
0.015
Baseline Consis-
tency Score
0.0055
0.0044
0.0044
Table 1: Consistency Score for different sender types
quantify sharpness. Table 1 reports the average consistency
score given by
(cid:80)
e∈E V oL(He)
E
where E is the set of all the entities considered which can
either be targets (t) or target-distractor combinations (t&d).
We also report a baseline consistency score where heatmap
is generated by averaging across the universal set of gener-
ated symbol images.
High consistency of D-Agnostic sender indicates a one-
to-one mapping from target class to written symbols. The D-
Aware sender has low consistency over target class but high
consistency for target-distractor combinations . This means
that symbols are context dependent. From our qualitative
evaluations, we infer that D-Aware sender assigns mean-
ing to brushstrokes that represent conceptual differences
between target and distractors. Furthermore, D-Agnostic
sender uses a scheme akin to hierarchical encoding to at-
tribute high level semantics to brushstrokes. Thus, the writ-
ing system emerging from D-Aware sender is an ideographic
one representing concepts while D-Agnostic sender pro-
duces a writing system which has compositionality and
shows logographic traits.
References
[Ganin et al. 2018] Ganin, Y.; Kulkarni, T.; Babuschkin, I.;
Eslami, S.; and Vinyals, O. 2018. Synthesizing programs for
images using reinforced adversarial learning. arXiv preprint
arXiv:1804.01118.
[Havrylov and Titov 2017] Havrylov, S., and Titov, I. 2017.
Emergence of language with multi-agent games: Learning
to communicate with sequences of symbols. In Advances in
neural information processing systems, 2149 -- 2159.
S.,
[Hochreiter and Schmidhuber 1997] Hochreiter,
and
Schmidhuber, J. 1997. Long short-term memory. Neural
computation 9(8):1735 -- 1780.
[Koch, Zemel, and Salakhutdinov 2015] Koch, G.; Zemel,
R.; and Salakhutdinov, R. 2015. Siamese neural networks
In ICML deep learning
for one-shot image recognition.
workshop, volume 2.
[Krizhevsky, Hinton, and others 2009] Krizhevsky, A.; Hin-
ton, G.; et al. 2009. Learning multiple layers of features
from tiny images. Technical report, Citeseer.
[Lake, Salakhutdinov, and Tenenbaum 2015] Lake, B. M.;
Salakhutdinov, R.; and Tenenbaum, J. B. 2015. Human-
level concept learning through probabilistic program induc-
tion. Science 350(6266):1332 -- 1338.
[Lazaridou et al. 2018] Lazaridou, A.; Hermann, K. M.;
Tuyls, K.; and Clark, S. 2018. Emergence of linguistic com-
munication from referential games with symbolic and pixel
input. arXiv preprint arXiv:1804.03984.
[Lazaridou, Peysakhovich, and Baroni 2016] Lazaridou, A.;
Peysakhovich, A.; and Baroni, M. 2016. Multi-agent co-
operation and the emergence of (natural) language. arXiv
preprint arXiv:1612.07182.
[Mordatch and Abbeel 2018] Mordatch, I., and Abbeel, P.
2018. Emergence of grounded compositional language in
multi-agent populations. In Thirty-Second AAAI Conference
on Artificial Intelligence.
[Schulman et al. 2017] Schulman, J.; Wolski, F.; Dhariwal,
P.; Radford, A.; and Klimov, O. 2017. Proximal policy op-
timization algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06347.
[Simonyan and Zisserman 2014] Simonyan, K., and Zisser-
man, A. 2014. Very deep convolutional networks for large-
scale image recognition. arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.1556.
|
1907.00899 | 1 | 1907 | 2019-06-27T20:53:43 | Engineering Token Economy with System Modeling | [
"cs.MA"
] | Cryptocurrencies and blockchain networks have attracted tremendous attention from their volatile price movements and the promise of decentralization. However, most projects run on business narratives with no way to test and verify their assumptions and promises about the future. The complex nature of system dynamics within networked economies has rendered it difficult to reason about the growth and evolution of these networks. This paper drew concepts from differential games, classical control engineering, and stochastic dynamical system to come up with a framework and example to model, simulate, and engineer networked token economies. A model on a generalized token economy is proposed where miners provide service to a platform in exchange for a cryptocurrency and users consume service from the platform. Simulations of this model allow us to observe outcomes of complex dynamics and reason about the evolution of the system. Speculative price movements and engineered block rewards were then experimented to observe their impact on system dynamics and network-level goals. The model presented is necessarily limited so we conclude by exploring those limitations and outlining future research directions. | cs.MA | cs | Engineering Token Economy with System Modeling
Zixuan Zhang
Acknowledgment
This thesis will not be possible without the advice and guidance from Dr Michael
Zargham, founder of BlockScience and Penn PhD alumnus in Network Science and Dr Victor
Preciado, Raj and Neera Singh Professor in Network and Data Sciences.
Abstract
Cryptocurrencies and blockchain networks have attracted tremendous attention from their
volatile price movements and the promise of decentralization. However, most projects run on
business narratives with no way to test and verify their assumptions and promises about the
future. The complex nature of system dynamics within networked economies has rendered it
difficult to reason about the growth and evolution of these networks. This paper drew concepts
from differential games, classical control engineering, and stochastic dynamical system to come
up with a framework and example to model, simulate, and engineer networked token economies.
A model on a generalized token economy is proposed where miners provide service to a platform
in exchange for a cryptocurrency and users consume service from the platform. Simulations of
this model allow us to observe outcomes of complex dynamics and reason about the evolution of
the system. Speculative price movements and engineered block rewards were then experimented
to observe their impact on system dynamics and network-level goals. The model presented is
necessarily limited so we conclude by exploring those limitations and outlining future research
directions.
Table of Content
Introduction
A Token Economy
Differential Games and Control
Networked Economy
Beyond Cryptocurrencies
Model Setup
Model Assumptions
Model Scope
State Variables
System Dynamics
Simulation and Evaluation
Baseline Simulation
Speculative Price Influence
Engineering Block Rewards
Future Directions
Network Effect as a Positive Externality
Lyapunov Argument with Energy Field
Optimal Agent Strategy
Conclusion
Bibliography
1
1
2
3
4
5
5
6
8
9
13
13
21
23
26
26
27
27
29
30
Introduction
A Token Economy
The advent of Bitcoin ushered in a wave of blockchain projects with native currencies, distributed
architecture, and cryptographic guarantees. Many projects are built on the business narrative of a
new digital economy where one can provide service or product and get paid in cryptocurrencies
that can be sold on exchanges around the world. Given the decentralized nature of most of these
platforms, there is almost no external authority that governs the evolution of these networks.
These self-sovereign networks with emergent properties are only controlled by the rules of the
system and the human agents that interact with them. It has become increasingly important to
design the right set of microscopic incentives that can achieve the desirable system-level
behavior. With economic incentives, human decisions, and cryptographic proofs, the term
cryptoeconomics is coined to describe the design and study of incentives and mechanisms in a
blockchain network.
Many approach the design problem with theories from mechanism design and algorithmic game
theory whose analyses focus on the equilibrium [1]. However, the real world is full of random
disturbances, irrational behaviors, and deviation from the equilibrium which goes beyond the
scope of those analyses. We draw inspiration from early military pursuer-and-evader differential
games where the model is agnostic to the exact behavior of the players and derives proofs just
from permissible actions and trajectories of the system [2]. In the context of designing a
blockchain economic system, as protocol designers, we want to design a set of rules such that
irrespective of exact agent behaviors, the system-level objectives are still preserved. Compared to
other games and distributed control considered in the past [3, 4, 5], putting protocol design in the
context of a game has the property of global information where every agent is aware of the
actions and payoffs of other players.
Our Markovian dynamical system modeling approach for decision making and economics drew
inspiration from Ole Peters and Alexander Adamou's work on ergodicity economics [6] and John
Sterman's work on business dynamics [7]. In addition, a stochastic dynamical system model
enables us to understand complex relationships within a system and observe the business level
impact resulted from secondary or tertiary dynamics. Non-obvious business impacts that are
difficult to conceptualize will become clear and obvious after one has witnessed the impact as an
outcome of a dynamical system. Such an impact is often non-intuitive prior to the observation.
Differential Games and Control
Differential games bridge many concepts in control theory with game theory. Control theory is
foundational to design systems that are robust to environmental noise and system-failures [8]. In
our previous paper [9], we have described an application of state-space model to the analysis of
blockchain networks. In this thesis, we will further describe the process of using state-space
model to control and optimize for desired properties from the perspective of a protocol designer.
To fully harness the power of control theory, we first need to define the system-level objectives
for the blockchain network which are often neglected in the business narratives. In addition,
traditional control theory often deals with physical system over which designers have direct
control [10]. In designing an economic network of human agents and incentives, designers at best
have indirect control over the incentive structure with little control over the exact behavior.
Since a large part of the design depends on the system-level objective for control engineering
principles to work, we should first define the system in its state variables, transition functions,
system-level objectives and cost constraints. Common system-goals include steady appreciation
of network token, low cost of service provided on the network, steady growth of network
utilization and so on. We will then have the potential to apply Lyapunov-style arguments to
bound the reachable states of the system through the bound on its inputs [11]. However, to do a
full proof of min-max optimization with Lyapunov control over input and output requires much
more rigorous analysis and much contextual knowledge. Protocol designers will also require the
power to design a universe where they can design incentive structure and energy function such
that it requires energy for users to go against the allowable option space. Traditional control
engineering concept such as a barrier function can be applied in constraining the allowable
actions and reachable space. While this is a very interesting area, this thesis will not focus on its
proof and analysis but instead setting up a generalized token economy model that other more
complex models and system can be extended from.
Another major difference of our model from classical control system model is the presence of a
black box. We see this in price movement but also in agent behavior. Each individual follows
their own control policies, not necessarily the ones that protocol designers hope for. This is where
concepts from differential games come in. Agents follow their own policies as a function of their
own beliefs of the system state and their own payout function. The collective behaviors of
different agents result in sometimes unexpected system-level outcome. A differential game
assumes an adversarial agent with a complete opposite payout function. The role of the designer
is to design a set of rules and incentives such that the system-level goal can still be achieved
irrespective of the exact behavior of the agents. In our model, we will treat these black boxes as
random variables drawn from a reasonable distribution from which some meaning can be derived.
Figure 1. High-level control systems for agent-based networks.
As illustrated in the figure above, the exact agent beliefs and the full state of the system are much
like black boxes. Random processes will be fed into the agent policies and system mechanism
which collectively update the unobservable full system state. Agents in the system can then
observe the state and form their beliefs, signals, and objectives that impact their policies in the
next iteration. Despite the presence of these unobservable states and random processes, we can
design allowable agent policies and system mechanisms to achieve certain observable outcome.
This mix of white-box and black-box approach renders the token design process robust and
innovative.
Networked Economy
Another key aspect of a token economy is that it is a global networked economy from day one,
from the physical layer of distributed machines that power the network to the agent level network
of producers and consumers of services [9]. There are many interesting topics within the domain
of network itself that are worth considering. Quite a few papers in network formation will prove
relevant in modeling and understanding the growth of a network [12, 13]. In addition, the contact
and interaction of agents on the network are also dependent on the network topology, similar to
how epidemic spreads over different network topologies [14, 15]. Network topologies play an
important role in network efficiency, growth, and even adoption.
However, as our thesis focuses on the economics of the token economy on a population level, the
exact interaction over network topology is important but less relevant in the immediate term.
Many of the cryptoeconomic networks are still in their infancy for us to consider their topologies.
In addition, much of the impact of network topology is reflected in network latency which at best
can lead to lag in decision and processes. For example, mining nodes operating in a mining farm
share close proximity with each other and result in reduced latency and oftentimes lead to gains in
consensus power [16, 17]. In our population level analysis of a service based economy, the
impact of network topology has been absorbed and reflected in the quality of service, in terms of
up time, response time, and latency. From a population-level economy's perspective, it may
appear to be a random noise in the system and hence, we will not include network topology in our
modeling and analysis. Nonetheless, our model lays down the foundation for future work and
enhancement in this area.
Beyond Cryptocurrencies
Even though the problem that we are solving stems from designing cryptoeconomic network,
there are many parallels and similarities between designing the rules to deploy resources in a
blockchain network and allocating resources to build a network economy with venture capital.
After all, the generous block rewards subsidizing a new token economy is very similar to the
subsidies for new platform businesses provided by venture capital money, like Airbnb, Uber, and
Lime. Perhaps they know how to allocate resources and design incentives to achieve system-level
objectives for their networked economy.
From an economic research perspective, our approach has well addressed the Lucas critique in
macroeconomics. Lucas critique argues that it is naive to solely rely on past data and correlation
and neglect fundamental micro-foundations in designing economic policies and making economic
decisions [18]. It is worth noting that our approach to engineering economies address this critique
head-on. We start from agent-level incentives and policies with the system state as an input. We
will then run simulation with state updates to help further refine the agent policies and shed light
on system level decisions. This combination of microeconomic incentives and macroeconomic
outcome connected through networked system dynamics underpins the robustness of our model
and approach.
Model Setup
To facilitate proper design and engineering of a token economy, we need to first define its
internal states and transition dynamics. First of all, let us first define a token economy and how it
might be different from a traditional platform economy despite their similarities. Next, we will
highlight the assumptions that we will be using in our model. Lastly, we will define the minimal
set of internal states and their dynamics.
Traditional networked economies have been characterized by a centralized platform where users
and producers can exchange services on this platform. The value of such a platform is often
considered to be proportional to the square of the number of active users by Metcalfe's Law [19].
While Bitcoin and other dominant blockchain platforms today have been criticized for their high
energy usage and wasteful computation with its Proof of Work, there are new token economies
introducing new models where the work done by miners can be useful and dubbed Proof of
Useful Work. The work that miners have done is both useful to the users and useful in
maintaining consensus and network security. New networked economies such as incentivized
peer-to-peer file storage network and video streaming network are just two promising examples
[20, 21].
For most of these token economies, platform providers and service producers are tightly coupled
even though they have plans to allow for third-party providers on their network to provide
differentiated services. Apart from that, there are protocol designers and organizations designing
state update mechanisms and policies within the system but not actively participating in the
economy. As such, in our models below, we will combine platform providers and service
producers into miners and we will put ourselves in the shoes of protocol designers with design
freedom over state update mechanisms.
Model Assumptions
To help formulate the model for a token economy, we will first define the assumptions that we
are making. After all, the quality of a model is only as good as its assumptions.
Assumption 1:
The model considers each miner and user homogeneous with unit service capacity similar
to work in mean field games [22]. A large miner in real life will just be an aggregation of many
unit miners in the model. Similarly, a user with a lot of demand will be a combination of many
unit users. Each unit miner and unit user supply and demand one unit of service which is defined
by the users of the model. This abstracts away individual idiosyncratic demand and supply from
users and miners. Each user demands one unit of service and each miner can only provide one.
Assumption 2:
We assume a perfectly competitive market where miners are users are both price takers,
given the open nature of a token economy [23]. Users will consume inversely proportional the
unit price of service denominated in fiat currency. Similarly for miners, if mining is very
profitable, miners will provide as much service as possible to earn block rewards. Furthermore,
we assume the service that miners provide is a commodity, meaning that it does not matter who
produces the unit service. This is in alignment with the assumption of a perfectly competitive
market where products are homogeneous with no differentiation [24].
Model Scope
With these assumptions in mind, we can create a state-space representation of the system. We aim
to define the minimal set of internal states that can capture different aspects of the system. The
system can pause and restart any time if we keep track of all the state variables. We will also
define TOKEN, or TOK in short, as the native cryptocurrency to the network. There are two
subsystems within our token economy. The first is with regard to the flow of TOK and the second
is related to the service provided on the network. The two subsystems are connected with three
important signals, miner's profitability, price of service on the platform, and the price of the token
itself. We also assume a discrete time system and states are only updated after a new block is
produced. Note that it can also be extended into an event-based discrete time system.
If we first look at where TOKs are held, they can be in the hands of miners, users, and a liquid
pool. We are calling them TOK miner, TOK user, and TOK liquid. In many cases, miners are
required to pose a collateral requirement in TOK to participate in the network and block rewards
are minted directly to miners' account [25]. Miners allocate a portion of their TOK to participate
in the mining process to earn more block rewards and may sell some of them to the liquid pool
when the price is high. Similarly, users buy TOKs from the liquid pool to purchase service from
miners or they can speculate and trade in the market. Here, we can encode different user and
miner population profiles in which they have different strategies and thresholds with regard to
trading TOK [26]. The flow of TOK among different holding parties within the system can be
illustrated with Figure 2 below.
Figure 2. Flow diagram of TOK holdings.
The change in total TOK owned by miners is constantly affected by the inflow of block rewards
and transaction fee paid by the users. Depending on the price of TOK at t, miner population will
sell a fraction of its share of TOK to the liquid market. Similarly for users, rational users may
hoard TOK when the price is low and attempt to sell them when the price is high. Users who are
using the service on demand will purchase TOK when the service price is attractive and users will
have to pay for a transaction fee when service is consumed. Miners and users buy from and sell to
the liquid market which represents the total tradeable TOK available in the market.
Fundamentally, network mints TOK in exchange for the service that miners provide, even though
in an inflationary way.
Given our efficient market assumption, we have decided to leave out the modeling of TOK
holdings entirely. For one, it is one subsystem in and of itself with its own dynamics about price
movement relative to the amount of TOK in the liquid pool and trading activities. In addition,
with the efficient market assumption, we can assume that all the trading volume and liquidity has
been embedded in the price. After all, both miners and users are just price takers. Lastly, within
TOK user, there is also a group of speculative investors with a different set of dynamics. The
dynamics of speculative investors catalyzing technological innovation is a very interesting topic
but yet another subsystem that can be built as an extension to our model.
Figure 3. Feedback mechanism in a token economy.
Figure 3 presents a more complete picture of feedback mechanism in a token economy. There are
two main subsystems, one with the flow in TOK holdings and the other with the network service
provided. The efficient market assumption allows us to treat price of TOK as a signal that
encapsulates the flow in TOK holdings. Any attempts to take flows in TOK holdings into account
at this point will over-complicate the model and introduce arbitrary dynamics. Nonetheless, it is
worth considering and building a subsystem on top of that as an extension to our current model.
Hence, the scope of our model is restricted to an efficient token economy where miners and users
provide and consume commodity services on the platform as price takers.
State Variables
Given the above scope and assumptions, we will now define state variables for the token
economy system that we would like to study.
S(t): supply of unit service at time t
D(t): demand of unit service at time t
Q(t): transacted service at time t
P(t): price of a unit service at time t
R(t): miner profitability at time t
TOK(t): price of a TOK at time t
B(t): block rewards released at time t
C(t): cost of unit service at time t
There are also intermediary variables are relevant in state updates.
ΔS(t): arrival of new unit service supply at time t
ΔD(t): arrival of new unit service demand at time t
V(t): TOK earned per unit fiat invested in the system at time t
1/V(t): intrinsic value of TOK at time t
U(t): speculative value of TOK at time t
W(t): amount of TOK left in block rewards pool at time t
M(t): total amount of tokens that has been released as block rewards by time t
KPI(t): index on the network's progress to achieve its goal at time t
It is also worth noting that the price of TOK is not just dependent on the internal states of the
system as TOK is openly traded on secondary markets from day one. Price of TOK will have
significant impact on agent incentives within the network. It is also subject to influences from
secondary market dynamics, speculation, and sentiments that may or may not correlate with the
actual activity on the network itself.
System Dynamics
We will first model supply and demand as an arrival-departure stochastic dynamical system.
Miner profitability and unit service price are the two driving signals for two main feedback loops
in the systems. Miner profitability represents how much the network is going to pay for the
service that miners provide. A high miner profit will bring in more miners and supply of service.
Similarly, unit service price represents how much the network is willing to accept in exchange for
the service capacity it provides. When mining is extremely profitable, we can expect service price
to be small and supply outweighs demand. A low unit service price will bring in more users and
more service demand.
Hence, we are modeling the arrivals of new service supplied and new service demanded as two
Poisson processes.
ΔS(t) ~ Po(𝛌s(t))
ΔD(t) ~ Po(𝛌d(t))
The mean of two Poisson processes are dependent on the unit service price and miner
profitability. More concretely, 𝛌s(t) should expand when mining is very profitable and contract
when it is less so. Similarly, 𝛌d(t) will expand when the price of a unit service is low and contract
when the price of a unit service is high.
𝛌s(t) ~ 𝛌s(t-1) × (R(t) / R(t-1) )
𝛌d(t) ~ 𝛌d(t-1) × (P(t-1) / P(t))
We further define two constants as the departure rates for service supplied and demanded.
Xs: departure of unit service supply at every time step
Xd: departure of unit service demand at every time step
Having these two constants simplifies the dynamics without losing much of its meaning. In the
case where supply is increasing quickly, we can consider service departure as departing and then
immediately arriving again. This can be accounted for by a very positive ΔS(t). The same can be
said about departure in demand.
S(t) = S(t-1) + ΔS(t) - Xs
D(t) = D(t-1) + ΔD(t) - Xd
From S(t) and D(t), we can define P(t) and Q(t), which are the price of service and the amount of
service consumed and transacted in every round.
P(t) ~ D(t) / S(t)
Given our efficient market assumption, price is simply set by relative strength in demand and
supply. When demand is greater than supply, a higher price is expected and vice versa. This price
model, despite being very simple, captures much of the dynamics in the system. It can be further
expanded to include momentum, user valuation, and other factors that will affect service price.
Q(t) ~ min(D(t), S(t))
Q(t) is the amount of service transacted on the network at time t. It is at most the minimum
between net new demand and supply. After all, no transactions will take place with unmet
demand or supply. This can be made more realistic with a slippage later since not all matching
supply and demand can find each other in the market. Nonetheless, this has been taken care of by
the efficient market assumption.
We can now define the dynamics for the cost of providing a unit service, miner profitability, and
price of TOK in our system.
We will first model C(t) as a stochastic process that is noisy but it is neither diverging or
converging, similar to sampling from a normal distribution with momentum.
C(t) = 𝛼C(t-1) + (1-𝛼)N(𝝁, 𝝈)
Then, we can define a signal V(t) which is the revenue per unit spend signal for miners from all
the aforementioned state variables.
V(t) ~ (P(t) × Q(t) + B(t)) / (C(t) × Q(t))
P(t) × Q(t) is how much miners earn from providing the service in terms of TOK and B(t) is the
subsidy that the network provides in TOK at time t. This represents how much tokens are miner
earning for the service they provide. Multiplying V(t) which is in TOK/FIAT by the price of
token at time t, TOK(t), we get miner profitability in a unitless denomination. The system also
cares about the inverse of V(t), which is 1/V(t). This represents the intrinsic value of the token as
it measures the value of service provided per unit of token in FIAT/TOK.
R(t) = V(t) × TOK(t)
However, determining TOK(t) is not easy. The secondary market price is a speculative estimator
of future 1/V(t). Market decouples from current state of 1/V(t), because speculation is estimating
future 1/V(t) in an effort to create returns. Hence, it makes sense to model price of TOK as a
convex combination of its intrinsic and speculative value. This is in line with the general asset
pricing framework that the price of an asset can be attributed to its fundamental and speculative
value [27, 28, 29]. Speculative value U(t) captures momentum in price movement with a naive
projection. In the equation below, 𝛄 is treated as a constant but it can also be a randomized value
that can randomize the composition of the mixture model.
TOK(t) = 𝛄 × (1 / V(t)) + (1 - 𝛄) × U(t)
Lastly, TOK issued in block rewards is usually set by a predetermined release schedule that
follows an exponential decay rate. However, we can consider a more abstract and generalized
version of block rewards issuance by introducing the concept of a KPI(t). Most traditional
exponential decay block rewards scheme with a pre-determined release schedule is effectively
treating the block time as the KPI. However, if we define the release of block reward as a
function of the rate of change in achieving the KPI, we can then create direct incentives based on
what the network desires.
M(t) = B(i): total amount of tokens that has been released as block rewards by time t
W(t) = W(0) - B(i) = W(0) - M(t - 1): amount of TOK left in block rewards reserve
ΔKPI(t) = KPI(t) / KPI(t-1): change in KPI
B(t) ~ 𝛆 × ΔKPI(t - 1) × W(t - 1)
t−1
∑
i=0
t
∑
i=0
Subsidy can be given out as a function of the change in KPI(t) and the amount of TOK left in the
rewards pool. This set of subsidies {B(0), B(1), B(2), ..., B(t)} can be the set of control policies
that protocol designers can control to bootstrap the network to some target with some initial
capital. This KPI can be as simple as the cumulative service transacted on the network over some
period of time. Figure 4 below summarizes the system dynamics outlined above.
Figure 4. System dynamics at every round of update.
Simulation and Evaluation
We are leveraging a tool, cadCAD, which stands for Computer Aided Design of Complex
Agent-based Decision System, developed by Dr Zargham and his team at BlockScience. It is a
Python differential game engine that assists in the process of designing, testing, and validating
complex systems through simulation. We have encoded the dynamics of different agents and
subsystems in every discrete time step into the system.
To facilitate evaluation, we want to outline a few metrics that we can use to define the success of
our network. As a token-enabled platform economy, we would first want the platform to grow in
adoption and in the underlying value of the token. In other words, we want Q(t), V(t), and
TOK(t) to grow over time. We will also look at the distribution over the total aggregated growth
of Q(t) in our model. In addition, we want a relatively low volatility in the price of the service
provided P(t) × TOK(t) and hence we will look at the variance which is its mean squared error
from its mean as a volatility metric. Too volatile a unit service price may render the platform
service less attractive to potential users.
We will first come up with a baseline simulation in which the release of block rewards follows a
traditional exponential decay with a predetermined half-life on a similar normalized scale to
Bitcoin. We will then run Monte Carlo simulations for the baseline setup and plot summary
statistics of the metrics that we care about. Next, we will experiment with different block rewards
subsidy regime to show that it can engineered to improve macroeconomic outcomes.
Baseline Simulation
As a baseline simulation, we are treating timestep as the KPI of the system. The concept of a KPI
that the system is tracking can be applied to the timestep itself, demonstrating the generality of
our model. The most common policy for block rewards is a halving schedule where the block
rewards half after some period of time. Our baseline model will adopt a continuous exponential
decay as the block reward release schedule, treating timestep as the KPI. To determine what is a
good decay rate, we are looking at Bitcoin as the benchmark for our generalized token TOK. Note
that almost every cryptocurrency follows a different schedule. Even in the case of Bitcoin, its
block reward release function follows a step decay function with a halving period of 4 years,
introducing arbitrary shocks into the system [30]. Hence, the goal for this comparison is to
determine a comparable scale for the block reward schedule, rather than fitting for an estimate.
Instead of simulating on the block by block level, we chose to simulate on a weekly basis. A
week-by-week level makes it high-level enough to reason about the numbers and granular enough
to experiment with policy changes.
Currenc
y
BTC
TOK
Total Supply Initial Block Reward (weekly) Half Life (weeks)
21,000,000
50,400
10,000,000
26,624
208 (4 years)
260 (5 years)
Table 1. BTC and TOK release schedule comparison.
The decay rate can be back-calculated with the following formula derived from the sum of a
geometric series.
T
otal Supply
=
Initial Block Reward
1 − Decay Rate
1
2
Initial Block Reward
=
Initial Block Reward
× D
D
ecay Rate
Half Life = 2
1
ecay Rate
Half Life
Hence, the initial block reward is 26624.00 and the decay rate should be 0.99734. We will run
Monte Carlo simulations for 100 times for each configuration for 1040 weeks or 20 years to
evaluate the model. For the baseline simulation, here is the block rewards release chart.
Figure 5. Baseline model open-loop deterministic block rewards B(t).
Next, we would like to define the following metrics that we care about as a system.
1. Growth trajectory in 1/V(t) of unit FIAT/TOK.
2. High aggregated growth in Q(t) which measures the usage of the system and
3. Low variance on P(t) × TOK(t) as the price of the service in fiat unit.
approximates network value.
The following are the charts and statistics of a particular simulation of the baseline model over
100 Monte Carlo runs.
(a)
(b)
Figure 6. (a) Summary statistics and (b) distribution of 1/V(t)
over 100 Monte Carlo runs for baseline simulation.
(a)
(b)
Figure 7. (a) Summary statistics of TOK(t) and (b) bivariate distribution of log(TOK(t)) and
1/V(t)
over 100 Monte Carlo runs for baseline simulation.
As we can see from Figure 6(a) and Figure 7(a), 1/V(t) grows linearly and steadily whereas the
token price on secondary market has increased exponentially. The mean token prices is at about a
20-time multiple of the mean intrinsic value, suggesting that the token price is largely driven by
speculative value. This is further confirmed by the joint distribution of log(TOK(t)) and 1/V(t) in
Figure 7(b). The log of TOK(t) is highly correlated with 1/V(t), especially so when the network
has gained some intrinsic value so that speculators have something to speculate on.
However, the growth of the intrinsic value slows down rather quickly, as seen in Figure 6(a),
while the token prices continue to grow in Figure 7(a). This can be attributed to how the
secondary market prices are modeled in our system. It can also be explained by how secondary
market is not trying to track intrinsic value but trying to track how much people consider the
token to be worth in the future. This is rather common in the world of markets and finance where
one hope to estimate the distribution and evolution of strategies by all players in the market.
Figure 8. TOK movement for the first 5 Monte Carlo runs for baseline simulation.
A sanity check from Figure 8 shows that our price simulation which is primarily a Brownian
motion with drift is largely in line with movement in cryptocurrency prices, especially in Run 3.
(a)
(b)
Figure 9. (a) Aggregated growth in Q(t) (b) pairwise distribution of growth in Q(t) over different
time durations over 100 Monte Carlo runs for baseline simulation.
In Figure 9(a), we look at the aggregated growth in Q(t) which is the cumulative growth in
transaction volume of the platform and we want to shift the overall distribution towards the right
as much as possible. In Figure 9(b), we plot pairwise distribution of time averages of growth in
Q(t). We observed that the average growth rate across 10 timesteps is still highly correlated with
the average growth rate across 20 and 30 timesteps. This makes sense because, after all, they
share the same underlying data and short-term price movements tend to have higher correlation
with each other. However, this correlation falls apart as the duration window increases, indicating
that the system is not time-invariant. This is interpreted as a result of non-ergodicity because if
the system is indeed ergodic, we should expect invariance on the temporal dimension. Since it is
not observed, we infer that there is some element of non-ergodicity. Note that there is a clear
upward trend structure in Figure 9(b), this can be explained by how the simulation is set up and
Q(t) always increases with new arrivals of S(t) and D(t). We can inject more entropy into the
system by changing the initial values, arrival, and departure rates.
This is an important result to acknowledge because most economic systems and human activities
are non-ergodic in nature whereas many Markovian systems and simulations are implicitly
ergodic. Non-ergodicity means that the ensemble average across different parallel universes is
independent of the time average of a particular trajectory of an individual. This is important
because even if we can derive properties successfully from an ensemble average, there are no
guarantees that a particular network economy's trajectory will be successful [31]. It will be
interesting to further understand what contributes to the non-ergodicity in our system in future
studies.
Figure 10. Summary of P(t) over 100 Monte Carlo runs for baseline simulation in fiat currency.
Figure 10 shows the movement of service price in fiat terms with a variance of 10.43 and a mean
of 3.55. A steady and relatively low service price is desirable property that the network would
like to pursue. Nonetheless, what is a low price for unit service depends on what the unit service
itself is and it is up to the users to define.
Speculative Price Influence
The price of the token has been the bridge between the token economy and the rest of the world
economy. It is therefore interesting to look at the impact of price movement on system-level
objectives and behavior. In addition, cryptocurrencies have always been notorious for their price
volatility and speculative behaviors.
Speculative TOK prices play a dominant role in the R(t) which is the profitability level for
miners. This will in turn have an impact on the supply of the service S(t) which will further
impact service price P(t) and service transacted Q(t). As a result, the higher the TOK prices, the
greater the miner profitability, the higher the service supply, and the lower the service price. A
cheaper service price creates greater service demand D(t) that consumes the service supply S(t),
leading to greater service transacted and hence even more profits for miners, creating a positive
feedback loop as illustrated in Figure 11 below.
Figure 11. Positive feedback loop within token economy.
We now perform the following experiments with another 100 Monte Carlo simulations each at
different upward drift in terms of TOK prices. In the baseline model, there is a 55% probability
drift that TOK price will move up. We ran two separate experiments with 58% and 52%
respectively.
(a) (b)
Figure 12. (a) Summary charts of high speculative value scenario
(b) summary charts of low speculative value scenario.
As we can see from Figure 12(a), a greater upward drift results in much higher TOK prices and a
rightward shift in the distribution of aggregated growth in Q(t) with a mean of 133x. However, it also
results in a much higher unit service price in fiat denomination with a variance of 283.96 and a mean of
10.24. This is very much the case in Bitcoin when the transaction fee in fiat terms became too high as the price
of Bitcoin went above $10,000. In contrast, in Figure 12(b) where there is not much speculation going on in
TOK prices. We observe a leftward shift in the distribution of aggregated growth in Q(t) with a mean of 60x
and much lower TOK prices. Nonetheless, the unit service price is much lower in fiat currency with a smaller
variance of 0.176. Note also that the intrinsic value of the token is also much higher with higher speculation, as
speculation leads to a larger network with a higher level of activity as described in the positive feedback loop
above.
As much as people criticized cryptocurrencies for their insane volatility, our simulation shows that consistent
speculation can be a great way to seed a network. Fundamentally speaking, the existence of a token seeded the
network with a community of stakeholders whose incentives are aligned to help the network grow and the
token appreciate in value. Such an advantage is not present in most traditional ventures.
We have attempted to pull real world data from decentralized networks. However, the data quality is rather
poor with no simple ways to ingest and query. In addition, the notion of a unit service that the network
provides is not well defined. For instance, Ethereum is providing distributed computation as a service but the
unit of computation is not well defined on the network level. This is important for token economies to scale
beyond the circle of hobbyists to allow for proper business forecasting, demand projection, and large-scale
adoption. Nonetheless, the assumption of a user-defined unit service enables us to abstract away the exact
value of supply and demand and instead focuses on the system dynamics.
Engineering Block Rewards
On a high level, we want a token economy where its native token continues to appreciate in intrinsic
value, its service provided is highly demanded, and its service is transacted at a relatively stable price
even in fiat denomination. The variable B(t), the block rewards at time t, plays a very important role. A
high B(t) represents a high subsidy that the network provides to subsidize its formation. However, it is
also an inflationary force that dilutes the intrinsic value of the token. Nonetheless, B(t) is a big part of
miner profitability R(t) that will impact the service supply. Hence, we want to engineer B(t) such that it
gives out more block reward when the intrinsic value is decreasing. We now attempt to engineer a series
of block rewards that keep track of the system performance in 1/V(t) with a series of B(t) that follows the
following update equation,
B
(t)
~ V (t)
V (t−1) × B(t−1)
W (t−1) × W
(t)
In other words, B(t) as a fraction of the remaining block rewards, W(t), increases when the intrinsic value
1/V(t) decreases and hence maintaining a driving force on 1/V(t). Given our new block rewards function,
we will now perform 100 Monte Carlo runs with the same initial block rewards and speculative level as
the baseline model.
Figure 13. Block rewards over 100 Monte Carlo runs for V_inverse targeted model .
Figure 14. Summary of 1/V(t) over 100 Monte Carlo runs for V_inverse targeted simulation.
Note that in Figure 13, there is a sharp drop to zero for block rewards. That occurs when the allocated
block rewards reserve W(t) gets depleted. In Figure 14, the terminal intrinsic value did not significantly
outperform that in our baseline model. This can be attributed to two factors. One, the block rewards might
have been depleted in later stages and its impact on value has reduced. Two, as Q(t) grows, the intrinsic
value is largely dominated by C(t)/P(t). However, it is worth noting that 1/V(t) rose very sharply early in
the network. The following table shows the time taken for the token value to reach certain milestones.
V_inverse Value
Baseline Model
0.5
28 weeks
V_inverse targeted Model
9 weeks
0.75
177 weeks
125 weeks
1.00
529 weeks
504 weeks
Table 2. Time taken for network to reach V_inverse milestones.
After 100 Monte Carlo runs on each of our models, it takes about one third of the time for the intrinsic
value to hit 0.5 and one year in advance for the metric to hit 0.75. As the network progresses, block
rewards get depleted and Q(t) becomes the dominant factor and hence the advantage of a targeted model
becomes less obvious. A more accurate model of intrinsic value will have to capture the network effect
value of the system but that is beyond the scope of the thesis.
We then attempted to run experiments that target the growth of R(t) in a similar way but given the
volatility of TOK(t) as an input to R(t), block rewards get depleted quickly and fail to lead to interesting
results.
Future Directions
A reasonable, robust, and informative model of the token economy can serve as the springboard to answer
more important questions that are of interest to users, miners, investors, and protocol designers. The
mathematical constructs developed and examined in this paper pave the way for more complex system
and network analyses. In classical control engineering language, we are designing a useful model of a
plant in this paper, that is a representation of a token economy in which the network pays miners in tokens
to provide for a service of interest to consumers. We will now discuss future directions that our thesis can
lead to and outline their respective challenges.
Network Effect as a Positive Externality
Network effect can be loosely defined as the positive externality of a user to a platform economy when
the user joins the network. Given the presence of network effect, the value of a product or platform
increases with every additional user. Metcalfe's Law states that the value of a telecommunication network
is proportional to the square of the number of users in the network. With our current set up, we consider
the intrinsic value of the token as how much fiat money people are willing to put in exchange for the
token. However, we do not capture the network effect that these token economy may achieve when it
reaches a certain scale. After all, the holy grail of the most wildly successful ventures and platform
economies is no doubt network effect. We would even argue that the ultimate goal of block reward
subsidies is to bootstrap the network to a state in which strong network effect has been achieved.
Network effects in the context of traditional venture backed startups are straightforward to understand. It
is also quite similar in token economies and cryptocurrencies. Every additional person believing in the
value of Bitcoin will make Bitcoin more valuable because other users can now exchange goods and
services with this person in Bitcoin. Similarly for Ethereum as another case in point, every additional user
of decentralized applications will make Ethereum as the underlying computation platform and token more
valuable.
The general heuristic for network effect is that users create more users, consumptions create
consumptions, and capacity creates more capacity. We can potentially define an awareness vector that
captures the awareness, sentiment, and perception of the network as a hidden state of the system. Changes
in token price, user activity, media announcements, and so on will create a percentage change to this
vector and the awareness vector will result in a faster adoption of the network. However, the modeling of
network effect is another model in and of itself and hence we are not covering it in this thesis.
Lyapunov Argument with Energy Field
Lyapunov argument is often used to provide guarantee on system stability around a subspace of attraction
[32, 33]. If there is a maximum (or minimum) in an energy field and system energy is guaranteed to go up
(or down) by at least a constant at every timestep, the system is bound to converge to the maximum (or
the minimum). We have attempted to apply some of this concept into our system modeling. However, this
will involve coming up with new energy field that may lose generality and breadth of application for our
model since Lyapunov argument often only applies on a case-by-case basis.
The general stability guarantee provided by Lyapunov arguments means that in a closed-loop system, the
system converges to a low energy state. An additional layer to that is input-output stability which is more
robust in the sense that a system is only stable to the extent that a threshold amount of energy is injected
into the system. Otherwise, the system remains stable and converges to a ball in space. The only way to
move up to a higher energy level is through agents injecting energy into the system. How much energy
injection is required to move the system into a certain energy state depends on the energy function of the
system, which can be made to be a Lyapunov one. For someone to attack a cryptoeconomic system,
Lyapunov stability enables us to encode the energy of the system and compute how much resources in fiat
currency unit are required to move the system out of its stability. For instance, we can compute the
amount of capital expenditure required to increase the energy of the system by 1% and the system can be
designed to be insensitive to massive energy injection from agents. Such an argument is more robust than
the economic stability arguments that are currently made in the decentralized economy ecosystem which
often only focus on the cost to attack a system at some point in time without taking the temporal dynamics
of the system into account.
Optimal Agent Strategy
Another interesting angle to further this research is through the lens of an agent. Given the states and
dynamics of the system, we hope to understand and compute the optimal strategies for a population of
agents. We can define the following objective function for each agent i. Note that each agent i can also
represent a subpopulation of agents with a similar profile.
m
ax J
i = U i
(σ , X)
i
− L i
(S , D , X)
i
U i
is a concave personal utility function of agent i with
where
, supply side actions,
global observable system states, as inputs. Given the actions taken by the agent,
and
, demand side actions, and the global state X, a cost is incurred as determined by the cost function
L. This formulation is heavily inspired by literature in optimal control theory with infinite time horizon
, agent's private beliefs, and X, the
Di
σi
Si
[34]. As a control problem on infinite time horizon, discount on future utility has been accounted for by
the utility function. Note that if one can properly define a terminating condition, such as achieving some
definition of network effect, the above objective can be transformed to one that heavily rewards terminal
utility and penalizes for the path taken to get there. It then becomes very similar to the strategy and
optimization suggested in differential game literature [2].
Conclusion
This thesis presents a methodology to model and simulate a generalized token economy in which the
platform pays miners for a unit service provided in cryptocurrency. The market is assumed to be perfectly
competitive with miners and users transacting a unit commodity service. To simulate the evolution of the
system, we have defined a stochastic dynamical system and run Monte Carlo simulations to observe for
system level behaviors and properties. Modifications to the model has been made to understand
speculative price influence and explore the possibility of engineering block rewards for a specific
property. Contrary to popular belief, token speculation on secondary market turns out to be beneficial to
the network growth as it kicks start a positive feedback loop in adoption. Engineering block rewards to
track token value also turns out to be viable but its impact will be better understood if we can include
network value in modeling the value of the token. This thesis has been the first attempt to turn high level
business narratives in cryptocurrency into observable and controllable simulation and experiment. We
presented a framework and study on a generalized token economy that can be applied and extended easily
to other more complex systems, turning the design of token economies from an art to a science.
Bibliography
2018.
HD30. 2 S7835 2000. 2000.
2 (2001): 331-341.
1. Nisan, Noam, Tim Roughgarden, Eva Tardos, and Vijay V. Vazirani, eds. Algorithmic game
theory. Cambridge university press, 2007.
Isaacs, Rufus. Differential games: a mathematical theory with applications to warfare and
2.
pursuit, control and optimization. Courier Corporation, 1999.
3. Marden, Jason R. "State based potential games." Automatica 48, no. 12 (2012): 3075-3088.
4. Marden, Jason R., and Jeff S. Shamma. "Game theory and distributed control." In Handbook of
game theory with economic applications, vol. 4, pp. 861-899. Elsevier, 2015.
5. Gopalakrishnan, Ragavendran, Jason R. Marden, and Adam Wierman. "An architectural view of
game theoretic control." ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review 38, no. 3 (2011):
31-36.
6. Peters, Ole, and Alexander Adamou. Ergodicity Economics. London Mathematical Laboratory,
7. Sterman, John D. Business dynamics: systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. No.
8. Dockner, Engelbert J., Steffen Jorgensen, Ngo Van Long, and Gerhard Sorger. Differential games
in economics and management science. Cambridge University Press, 2000.
9. Zargham, Michael, Zixuan Zhang, and Victor Preciado. "A State-Space Modeling Framework for
Engineering Blockchain-Enabled Economic Systems." arXiv preprint arXiv:1807.00955 (2018).
10. Franklin, Gene F., J. David Powell, Abbas Emami-Naeini, and J. David Powell. Feedback control
of dynamic systems. Vol. 3. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1994.
11. Antsaklis, Panos J., and Anthony N. Michel. Linear systems. Springer Science & Business Media,
2006.
12. Watts, Alison. "A dynamic model of network formation." Games and Economic Behavior 34, no.
13. Jackson, Matthew O. "A survey of network formation models: stability and efficiency." Group
14. Nowzari, Cameron, Victor M. Preciado, and George J. Pappas. "Analysis and control of
formation in economics: Networks, clubs, and coalitions 664 (2005): 11-49.
epidemics: A survey of spreading processes on complex networks." IEEE Control Systems
Magazine 36, no. 1 (2016): 26-46.
15. Preciado, Victor M., Michael Zargham, Chinwendu Enyioha, Ali Jadbabaie, and George Pappas.
"Optimal vaccine allocation to control epidemic outbreaks in arbitrary networks." In 52nd IEEE
conference on decision and control, pp. 7486-7491. IEEE, 2013.
Communications of the ACM 61, no. 7 (2018): 95-102.
Rosenschein. "Bitcoin mining pools: A cooperative game theoretic analysis." In Proceedings of
the 2015 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 919-927.
International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 2015.
16. Eyal, Ittay, and Emin Gün Sirer. "Majority is not enough: Bitcoin mining is vulnerable."
17. Lewenberg, Yoad, Yoram Bachrach, Yonatan Sompolinsky, Aviv Zohar, and Jeffrey S.
18. Ericsson, Neil R., and John S. Irons. "The lucas critique in practice." In Macroeconometrics, pp.
19. Zhang, Xing-Zhou, Jing-Jie Liu, and Zhi-Wei Xu. "Tencent and Facebook data validate
263-324. Springer, Dordrecht, 1995.
Metcalfe's Law." Journal of Computer Science and Technology 30, no. 2 (2015): 246-251.
20. Petkanic, D., and E. Tang. "Livepeer Whitepaper: Protocol and Economic Incentives for a
Decentralized Live Video Streaming Network." (2017).
mathematics 2, no. 1 (2007): 229-260.
21. Protocol Labs. "Filecoin: A Decentralized Storage Network." (2017).
22. Lasry, Jean-Michel, and Pierre-Louis Lions. "Mean field games." Japanese journal of
23. Mankiw, N. Gregory. Principles of economics. Cengage Learning, 2014.
24. Hayek, Friedrich A. "The meaning of competition." Individualism and economic order 92 (1948):
25. Saleh, Fahad. "Blockchain without waste: Proof-of-stake." Available at SSRN 3183935 (2019).
26. Paulin, James, Anisoara Calinescu, and Michael Wooldridge. "Agent-based modeling for
98.
complex financial systems." IEEE Intelligent Systems 33, no. 2 (2018): 74-82.
& Finance 23, no. 12 (1999): 1745-1769.
Collected Writings of John Maynard Keynes 7 (1964): 1971-9.
Princeton University Press, 2011.
27. Dimson, Elroy, and Massoud Mussavian. "Three centuries of asset pricing." Journal of Banking
28. Keynes, John Maynard. "The general theory of employment, interest and money (1936)." The
29. Bachelier, Louis. Louis Bachelier's theory of speculation: the origins of modern finance.
30. Nakamoto, Satoshi. "Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system." (2008).
31. Peters, Ole. "Optimal leverage from non-ergodicity." Quantitative Finance 11, no. 11 (2011):
32. Araujo, Ricardo Azevedo, and Helmar Nunes Moreira. "Lyapunov stability in an evolutionary
1593-1602.
33. Lechevin, N., and C. A. Rabbath. "Lyapunov-based nonlinear missile guidance." Journal of
34. Bertsekas, Dimitri P., Dimitri P. Bertsekas, Dimitri P. Bertsekas, and Dimitri P. Bertsekas.
game theory model of the labour market." EconomiA 15, no. 1 (2014): 41-53.
guidance, control, and dynamics 27, no. 6 (2004): 1096-1102.
Dynamic programming and optimal control. Vol. 1, no. 2. Belmont, MA: Athena scientific, 1995.
|
1702.03466 | 1 | 1702 | 2017-02-11T22:56:22 | Safe Open-Loop Strategies for Handling Intermittent Communications in Multi-Robot Systems | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.RO"
] | In multi-robot systems where a central decision maker is specifying the movement of each individual robot, a communication failure can severely impair the performance of the system. This paper develops a motion strategy that allows robots to safely handle critical communication failures for such multi-robot architectures. For each robot, the proposed algorithm computes a time horizon over which collisions with other robots are guaranteed not to occur. These safe time horizons are included in the commands being transmitted to the individual robots. In the event of a communication failure, the robots execute the last received velocity commands for the corresponding safe time horizons leading to a provably safe open-loop motion strategy. The resulting algorithm is computationally effective and is agnostic to the task that the robots are performing. The efficacy of the strategy is verified in simulation as well as on a team of differential-drive mobile robots. | cs.MA | cs | Safe Open-Loop Strategies for Handling Intermittent Communications
in Multi-Robot Systems*
Siddharth Mayya1 and Magnus Egerstedt2
7
1
0
2
b
e
F
1
1
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
6
6
4
3
0
.
2
0
7
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract -- In multi-robot systems where a central decision
maker is specifying the movement of each individual robot, a
communication failure can severely impair the performance
of the system. This paper develops a motion strategy that
allows robots to safely handle critical communication failures
for such multi-robot architectures. For each robot, the proposed
algorithm computes a time horizon over which collisions with
other robots are guaranteed not to occur. These safe time
horizons are included in the commands being transmitted to
the individual robots. In the event of a communication failure,
the robots execute the last received velocity commands for
the corresponding safe time horizons leading to a provably
safe open-loop motion strategy. The resulting algorithm is
computationally effective and is agnostic to the task that the
robots are performing. The efficacy of the strategy is verified
in simulation as well as on a team of differential-drive mobile
robots.
I. INTRODUCTION
Multi-robot systems have reached a point of maturity
where they are beginning to be deployed in real-world
scenarios (see e.g., the special issue [10] and constituent
papers [1], [17]). Such deployments of robot teams often
require a signal exchange network, typically in the form of a
wireless communication channel. Communication is not only
essential for sharing sensor measurements and performing
diagnostics, it is often an integral part of the closed loop
control mechanism [3], [11]. In fact, in many applications
and scenarios such as extra-terrestrial exploration [21], high
precision manufacturing [5], and multi-robot testbeds [14],
the robots frequently rely on communicating with a central-
ized decision maker for their velocity or position commands.
In such situations, a failure in the communication network
can severely hinder the motion of the robots and performance
of the algorithm. This is the premise behind the work per-
formed in this paper, whereby the adverse effects caused by
intermittently failing communication networks are mitigated.
As deployment conditions for multi-robot systems become
increasingly harsh, occasional failures in wireless communi-
cation channels are both expected and inevitable [15]. This
raises the following question: What should a robot do in case
a communication failure prevents it from receiving critical
motion commands from a central decision maker?
*This research was sponsored by Grant No. 1544332 from the U.S.
National Science Foundation
1Siddharth Mayya is with the School of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA
[email protected]
2Magnus Egerstedt is a professor at the School of Electrical and Com-
puter Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332,
USA [email protected]
Many different techniques have been explored to handle
communication uncertainties in multi-robot teams [2], [13],
[20]. In many cases, the robots are assumed to have signif-
icant decision making capability, have sensors to maneuver
around obstacles, or have knowledge about the positions
of other robots. Furthermore, some developed communica-
tion recovery techniques do not provide formal collision-
avoidance guarantees in case of unforeseen communication
failures.
An existing technique used to handle communication
failures, mentioned in [20], is to stop the robot when critical
data is not received. While this behavior preserves safety, it
could cause the robot to behave erratically. For example, if
only intermittent velocity commands are received, the robot
could move in a jerky "start-stop" fashion. This problem
was observed on the Robotarium: a remote-access multi-
robot testbed being developed at Georgia Tech [14]. The
Robotarium is a multi-robot research platform, and gives
users the flexibility to test any coordination algorithm they
wish. During experiments, it was observed that failures in the
communication channels prevented robots from receiving ve-
locity or position commands which caused them to abruptly
stop moving. This lead to a disruption in the coordination
algorithm being executed, and affected the ability of the
Robotarium to faithfully reproduce the behavior specified by
the user.
Motivated by the need to alleviate such problems in
general, and resolve issues with the Robotarium in particular,
this paper proposes a strategy that allows differential-drive
robots without sensory or decision-making capabilities, to
continue moving safely for a specific amount of time even
when velocity commands from a central decision maker are
not received. For each robot, the central decision maker
computes a time horizon over which collisions with other
robots are guaranteed not to occur. This is called the safe
time horizon. During normal operations, the desired velocity
and the safe time horizon are transmitted to the robots period-
ically. If a robot stops receiving data due to a communication
failure, it executes the last received velocity command for the
duration of the last received safe time horizon. This allows
the robot to continue moving in a provably collision-free
manner despite having no updated information about the
environment. The robot can follow this open-loop trajectory
for the entire duration of the safe time horizon, beyond which
it stops moving.
In order to calculate the safe time horizon, we first
compute the set of all possible locations that can be reached
by a robot within a given time (i.e., the reachable set [6],
[18]). This is followed by computing the time horizon for
which each robot lies outside the reachable set of other
robots. But, for the differential-drive robots considered here,
performing such set-membership tests is computationally
expensive owing to the non-convexity of the reachable set.
Consequently, the reachable set is over-approximated by en-
closing it within an ellipse whose convex structure allows for
simpler set-membership tests and finite representation [12].
By minimizing the area of the ellipse enclosing the convex
hull of the reachable set, we obtain the best ellipsoidal over-
approximation of the reachable set in terms of the accuracy
and effectiveness of set-membership tests.
The outline of this paper is as follows: In Section II, the
structure of the reachable sets of differential-drive robots
is outlined. Section III derives an ellipsoidal approximation
of the reachable set. Section IV formally defines the safe
time horizon, outlines the algorithm used by the robots, and
proves the safety guarantees that it provides. In Section V,
the developed algorithm is first implemented in simulation,
following which, experimental verification is performed on a
team of differential-drive mobile robots. Finally, Section VI
concludes the paper.
II. REACHABILITY ANALYSIS
Consider a dynamical system whose state evolves accord-
ing to the following differential equation,
x = f (x, u), y = h(x), x(0) = x0, u ∈ U,
where x is the state of the system, y represents the output
of the system, u is the control input, and U is the set of
admissible control inputs. The reachable set of outputs at
time t can be defined as
R(t; x0) =
Y(t, x0, u(·)),
(cid:91)
u(·)∈U
where Y(t, x0, u(·)) represents the output of the dynamical
system at time t under control action u(·).
Since the Robotarium [14], in its current form, is populated
with differential-drive mobile robots, this paper investigates
the reachability of two-wheeled differential-drive robots with
non-holonomic dynamics.
For such systems, let z = (x, y) ∈ R2 denote the position
of the robot in the 2D plane, and let φ ∈ [−π, π] denote its
orientation with respect to the horizontal axis. As such, the
robot is described as a point (z, φ) in the configuration space
R2× S1. The motion of the robots can be captured using the
unicycle dynamics model:
x = v cos(φ),
v ≤ 1, ω ≤ 1.
y = v sin(φ),
φ = ω,
(1)
The bounds on the linear velocity v and the angular velocity
ω represent the physical limitations of the robots, and are
normalized to 1 without loss of generality.
Since collisions are ultimately defined by positions rather
than orientations, we consider the output of the system to be
z. Relative to this output, the reachable set R(t; z0, φ0) is
the set of all positions in the 2D plane that can be reached
at time t by a robot starting in the configuration (z0, φ0) at
t = 0. For z0 = (0, 0), φ0 = 0, denote the reachable set as
R(t). Since the dynamics in (1) is drift-free, the structure of
the reachable set does not depend on z0 and φ0, i.e.,
R(t; z0, φ0) = z0 + Πφ0R(t),
where Πφ0 is a rotation by φ0. Therefore, the study of
reachable sets can be restricted to the case when z0 = (0, 0)
and φ0 = 0.
In order to reach the boundary of the reachable set, a robot
must travel in a time-optimal manner [4]. If this was not true,
a point even farther away would be reachable in the same
amount of time. A closely related motion model for which
the structure of time-optimal paths has been extensively
studied is the Reeds-Shepp car [16].
The motion model of a Reeds-Shepp car is similar to (1),
except that the set of admissible inputs is v = 1,ω ≤ 1.
In [19], the authors compute a family of trajectories rich
enough to contain a time-optimal path between any two
configurations for a robot with dynamics given in (1). It
is shown that every trajectory in this family is also time-
optimal for a Reeds-Shepp car, and furthermore, this family
of trajectories is sufficient for time-optimality of a Reeds-
Shepp car. Another way to view this result is that, when
moving in a time-optimal manner, the robot behaves like a
Reeds-Shepp car. As mentioned earlier, any path reaching
the boundary of the reachable set has to be time-optimal.
Therefore, the reachable set for the Reeds-Shepp car and for
the differential-drive robot considered here are identical. By
utilizing expressions for the reachable set of a Reeds-Shepp
car given in [18], Fig. 1 portrays the reachable set for a robot
with dynamics given in (1).
Fig. 1: The reachable set R(t) of a robot with dynamics
given in (1), is depicted for varying time horizons. The robot
is represented as a circle at the center.
The complexity of performing set-membership tests with
respect to the non-convex set R(t) increases the computa-
tional burden associated with the safe time horizon algorithm.
Consequently, the next section derives an ellipsoidal approx-
imation of the reachable set.
III. APPROXIMATING THE REACHABLE SET
Given any convex set K ⊂ Rn, there exists a unique
ellipsoid of minimum volume circumscribing it [9]. This
ellipsoid is denoted as ξ(K). One way to derive an ellipsoidal
approximation of the reachable set would be to compute
the minimum area ellipse ξ(conv(R(t))), where conv(R(t))
denotes the convex hull of R(t). Additionally, the derivation
of analytical expressions for the ellipse ξ(conv(R(t))), if at
all possible, will enable its efficient and fast computation in
the safe time horizon algorithm.
The feasibility of the derivation of analytical expressions
for the ellipses, is closely linked to the symmetry properties
of the underlying set as well as the equations describing it
[7]. Consequently, in order to allow for analytical solutions,
we introduce a new set K(t) enclosing conv(R(t)), which
allows for an easier computation of ξ(K(t)). Essentially, this
enables us to swap the problem of computing ξ(conv(R(t)))
with the simpler problem of computing ξ(K(t)).
Furthermore, this approximation is justified by showing
the dissimilarity between conv(R(t)) and K(t), as
that
measured by the Jaccard distance metric [8], asymptotically
goes to zero over time. For the sets X, Y ⊂ R2, the Jaccard
distance based on the area measure is given by,
dJ (X, Y ) = 1 − A(X ∩ Y )
A(X ∪ Y )
,
where A(·) denotes the area of the set. The following
proposition formally introduces the set K(t).
Proposition 1. Let K(t) be given by,
K(t) =
∈ R2 : (cid:107)p(cid:107)2 ≤ t,
(cid:40)
(cid:20)px
(cid:21)
(cid:26)1 − cos(t),
p =
py
py ≤
if 0 < t ≤ π/2
t − π/2 + 1, if
t > π/2
(cid:41)
.
Since p(t, 0) = (t, 0), this point lies on the circular arc of
radius t. Then, the fact that ∂(cid:107)p(t,ψ)(cid:107)2
≤ 0, implies that, as
ψ increases, the curve either overlaps with the circular arc
of radius t, or gets closer to the origin. This proves that, a
part of the outer boundary of conv(R(t)), represented by the
curve C++(t), can be over-approximated by a circular arc of
radius t. (see Fig. 2). Also, the definition of py(t, ψ) gives
∂ψ
2
Fig. 2: The set conv(R(t)) is shown enclosed within K(t).
In particular, it is illustrated how the curve C++(t), which
represents the curved boundary of conv(R(t)) in the first
quadrant, can be over-approximated by a circular arc of
radius t, which forms the boundary of K(t) in the first
quadrant.
us the y-axis bounds of conv(R(t)):
1 − cos(t),
t − π/2 + 1, if t > π/2
if 0 < t ≤ π/2
ψ∈[0,min(t,π/2)]
py(t, ψ) =
(cid:40)
max
.
Then, conv(R(t)) ⊂ K(t) and
t→∞ dJ (conv(R(t)),K(t)) = 0,
lim
where dJ is the Jaccard distance.
Proof. Denote C++(t) as the curved outer boundary of
conv(R(t)) in the first quadrant (see Fig. 2). From [18],
we know that, C++(t) can be expressed as,
C++(t) =
(cid:26)px = sin ψ + γ cos ψ
p ∈ R2
py = − cos ψ + γ sin ψ + 1
(cid:40)
(cid:41)
++ :
,
By symmetry, these results hold in all the 4 quadrants and
it follows that conv(R(t)) ⊂ K(t) (see Fig. 2).
Next, it is shown that, as t grows larger, the dissimilarity
between the two sets asymptotically goes to zero. Due to
the asymptotic nature of the result, only values of time
greater than π/2 are considered. Since conv(R(t)) ⊂ K(t),
conv(R(t))∩K(t) = conv(R(t)) and conv(R(t))∪K(t) =
K(t). So, the Jaccard distance can be computed as,
(cid:0)conv(R(t)),K(t)(cid:1) = 1 − A(conv(R(t)))
.
dJ
A(K(t))
where ψ ∈ [0, min(t, π/2)], and γ = t − ψ.
In order to prove that conv(R(t)) ⊂ K(t), we first show that
all points on C++(t) are closer to the origin than points on
the outer boundary of K(t), which is a circular arc of radius
t. Let p(t, ψ) = (px(t, ψ), py(t, ψ)) denote a point on the
curve C++(t). The squared l2-norm of p(t, ψ) is given as,
(cid:107)p(t, ψ)(cid:107)2
2 = (t − ψ)2 + 2 − 2 cos(ψ) + 2(t − ψ) sin(ψ),
where ψ ∈ [0, min(t, π/2)]. The derivative of (cid:107)p(t, ψ)(cid:107)2
2
with respect to the parameter ψ, is shown to be always non-
positive:
∂(cid:107)p(t, ψ)(cid:107)2
2
∂ψ
= 2(t − ψ)(cos(ψ) − 1) ≤ 0,
Since both the sets are symmetric with respect to the x and
y axes, area is computed in the first quadrant alone. After in-
tegrating over the boundary of conv(R(t)), A(conv(R(t)))
is given by,
(12π(t2−1)+t(48−6π2)+π3). (2)
A(conv(R(t))) =
Similarly, computing the area of K(t) in the first quadrant,
1
48
A(K(t)) =
t2
2
sin−1 (1 − δ(t))+
sin(2 sin−1 (1 − δ(t)))
(3)
where δ(t) = (π/2 − 1)/t. As t → ∞, the term t2 in (2)
dominates and δ(t) → 0 in (3). So, for large values of t,
1
2
,
(cid:19)
(cid:18)
∀ ψ ∈ [0, min(t, π/2)].
A(conv(R(t))) ≈ π
4
t2, A(K(t)) ≈ π
4
t2.
(4)
Evaluating limt→∞ dJ (conv(R(t)),K(t)) using (4), the de-
sired result is obtained.
The set K(t) not only allows us to derive analytical
expressions for the minimum area ellipse enclosing it, the
asymptotic reduction in the dissimilarity between K(t) and
conv(R(t)) implies that, the impact of using ξ(K(t)) instead
of ξ(conv(R(t))) on the accuracy of set-membership tests
in the safe time horizon algorithm, is minimal.
In Rn, an ellipsoid can be represented uniquely by its
center c and a positive-definite matrix H: E(c, H) = {x ∈
(x − c)T H(x − c) ≤ 1}. According to results
Rn :
presented in [9], at any given time t, the minimum area
ellipse circumscribing K(t) can be obtained by solving the
following semi-infinite programming problem:
− log det(H)
min
c,H
s.t. (z − c)T H(z − c) ≤ 1,∀z ∈ K(t).
(5)
The rest of this section formulates an analytical solution
to this semi-infinite programming problem. In Lemma 1, we
utilize the symmetry properties of K(t) to determine the
center and orientation of the ellipse ξ(K(t)). Following this,
Lemma 2 and Lemma 3 pose the semi-infinite programming
problem as a convex optimization problem. By solving this,
we present analytical expressions for the ellipse ξ(K(t)) in
Theorem 1.
Lemma 1. The ellipse ξ(K(t)) has the form E(c, H(t)),
where c = (0, 0) and H(t) = diag(A(t), B(t)) for some
A(t), B(t) ∈ R, such that A(t) > 0, B(t) > 0,∀t > 0.
Proof. For a convex set K ⊂ Rn, denote O(K) as a set of
affine transformations which leave the set K invariant:
O(K) = {T(x) = a + P x : T(K) = K}.
This set is called the automorphism group of K. Applying
results from [7], we know that, O(K) ⊆ O(ξ(K)). Since
K(t) is symmetric about both the x and y axes, the trans-
formation T(x) = −I2x, where I2 is the identity matrix,
lies in O(K(t)), and hence in O(ξ(K(t))). Furthermore, if
T ∈ O(ξ(K(t))) then T(c) = c. Applying this result with
the transformation T(x) = −I2x, we get c = (0, 0).
We know from [7], that T ∈ O(ξ(K(t))) =⇒ P T H(t)P =
H(t). The structure of H(t) appears by applying
(cid:20)1
(cid:21)
P =
0
0 −1
,
and the fact that H(t) is always positive definite.
Applying results from [9] for the case of K(t) ⊂ R2,
1, 0 < h ≤ 5
we know that, there exist contact points {qi}h
satisfying qi ∈ ∂K(t)∩ ∂ξ(K(t)), i = 1, . . . , h. Furthermore,
these contact points cannot all lie in any closed halfspace
whose bounding hyperplane passes through the center of
ξ(K(t)). Using these facts, the following lemma can be
stated:
Lemma 2. There are 4 contact points between K(t) and
ξ(K(t)).
Proof. We seek to find the number of contact points h. Since
K(t) and ξ(K(t)) are symmetric about the x and y axes (see
Lemma 1), and 0 < h ≤ 5, h can only take values 2 or 4.
If h = 2, both contact points must lie on the x or y axes
(otherwise symmetry in all the 4 quadrants is not possible).
But, the contact points cannot lie in any closed halfspace
whose bounding hyperplane passes through the center of
ξ(K(t)). Hence h = 4.
Given the structure of H(t) from Lemma 1, and the
number of contact points from Lemma 2, the semi-infinite
programming problem (5) will now be re-formulated as a
convex optimization problem.
Lemma 3. The matrix H(t) = diag(A(t), B(t)) can be
expressed as the solution of a convex optimization problem.
At any given time t > 0, A(t) is given as,
A(t) = argmin
Xt
− log Xt − log
1 − Xt(t2 − α(t)2)
(6)
α(t)2
s.t. 0 < Xt ≤ 1
t2 .
Furthermore,
1 − A(t)(t2 − α(t)2)
(cid:40)
B(t) =
1 − cos(t),
t − π/2 + 1, if
α(t)2
if 0 < t ≤ π/2
t > π/2
.
where α(t) =
Proof. As outlined in the semi-infinite programming prob-
lem given by (5), we aim to derive expressions for A(t) and
B(t) which minimize the cost function,
− log det(H(t)) = − log(A(t)) − log(B(t)),
(7)
subject to the constraint that K(t) ⊂ E((0, 0), H(t)). This
constraint can be translated into the condition that
the
quadratic function,
g(y) = A(t)(t2 − y2) + B(t)(y2) − 1,
(8)
is non-positive for y ≤ α(t).
As outlined in Lemma 2, there are a total of four contact
points, one in each quadrant. Thus, there must be at least
two distinct points at which g(y) is zero. The roots of
the quadratic function g(y) must lie at y = ±α(t) (in no
other situation can g(y) take non-positive values in the given
interval). So g(y) can be alternatively expressed as,
g(y) = λ(y − α(t))(y + α(t)), for some λ ≥ 0.
(9)
By equating the coefficients in (8) and (9), the following
constraints emerge,
B(t) − A(t) = λ ≥ 0,
A(t)t2 − 1 + λα(t)2 = 0.
Eliminating λ from the equations, the two constraints are re-
duced to B(t) ≥ A(t) and A(t)t2−1+(B(t)−A(t))α(t)2 =
0. Expressing B(t) in terms of A(t) using the second
constraint, we get,
A(t) ≤ 1
1 − A(t)(t2 − α(t)2)
(10)
.
t2 , B(t) =
α(t)2
Substituting B(t) from equation (10) into the cost function
(7), and denoting Xt as the value taken by the function A(·)
at time t, we obtain the optimization problem given in (6),
whose point-wise minimizer in time gives the value of A(t).
The next theorem solves the convex optimization prob-
lem outlined above to obtain analytical expressions for the
minimum area ellipses enclosing K(t) (Fig. 3).
Theorem 1. The minimum area ellipse ξ(K(t)) has the form
E(c, H(t)), where c = (0, 0) and H(t) = diag(A(t), B(t)).
A(t) and B(t) are given by the following expressions:
1) If 0 < t ≤ π/2, then
1
A(t) =
2(t2 − α(t)2)
where α(t) = 1 − cos(t).
2) If π/2 < t ≤ (1 + 1√
2
1
A(t) =
2(t2 − α(t)2)
where α(t) = t − π/2 + 1.
3) If t > (1 + 1√
and B(t) =
1
2α(t)2 ,
)(π − 2), then
and B(t) =
1
2α(t)2 ,
2
)(π − 2),
1
t2 and B(t) =
A(t) =
1
t2
Proof. We seek to calculate the minimizer to the convex cost
function f (Xt) given in (6). In the interior of the constraint
set, i.e., when Xt < 1
t2 , the minimizer can be found by
setting the gradient to zero and solving for Xt:
t2 − α(t)2
+
1 − Xt(t2 − α2)
∇f (Xt) = − 1
Xt
1
Xt =
2(t2 − α(t)2)
For this expression to satisfy the constraint, the inequality
t2 > 2α(t)2 must be satisfied. This is true for all values of
t in the interval (0, π/2]. For t > π/2, this holds whenever
the function t2 + 4(1 − π/2)t + 2(1 − π/2)2 takes non-
positive values. This is true for the time interval 0 < t ≤
)(π − 2), the
(1 + 1√
2
minimum in the feasible set is achieved when Xt = 1/t2.
Evaluating A(t) from (6) and B(t) from (10), we get the
desired result.
)(π − 2). For all values of t > (1 + 1√
2
The following theorem justifies the ellipsoidal approxima-
tion by showing that the dissimilarity between conv(R(t))
and ξ(K(t)) asymptotically goes to zero as time grows larger.
Theorem 2. Let R(t) denote the reachable set of
a differential-drive robot with dynamics given in (1),
conv(R(t)) denote its convex hull, K(t) denote an approx-
imation of the convex hull as defined in Proposition 1 and
let ξ(t) be the minimum area ellipse circumscribing K(t).
Then,
t→∞ dJ (conv(R(t)), ξ(t)) = 0,
lim
= 0,
Since the Jaccard distance is a metric distance, it obeys the
triangle inequality,
Fig. 3: Minimum area ellipse enclosing K(t)
where dJ is the Jaccard distance.
Proof. We first compute dJ (K(t), ξ(t)). Since K(t) ⊆ ξ(t),
K(t) ∪ ξ(t) = ξ(t) and K(t) ∩ ξ(t) = K(t). So,
dJ (K(t), ξ(t)) = 1 − A(K(t))
.
A(ξ(t))
2
Due to the asymptotic nature of the result, only values of
)(π − 2) are considered. For these
time greater than (1 + 1√
values of time, ξ(t) is a circle of radius t (see Theorem 1).
Also, since both ξ(t) and K(t) are symmetric about the x
and y axes, it suffices to compute areas in the first quadrant.
So, A(ξ(t)) = πt2/4. From (4), we know that, for large
values of t, A(K(t)) ≈ πt2/4 which is equal to the area of
ξ(t) in the first quadrant. Thus,
t→∞ dJ (K(t), ξ(t)) = 0.
lim
(11)
dJ (conv(R(t)), ξ(t)) ≤ dJ (conv(R(t)),K(t))
+ dJ (K(t), ξ(t)).
Applying Proposition 1 and (11), the desired result is
obtained.
Fig. 4 shows the evolution of R(t), conv(R(t)),K(t)
and ξ(K(t)) for different values of time. As predicted by
the result, the dissimilarity between conv(R(t)), K(t) and
ξ(K(t)) asymptotically goes to zero.
Using the ellipsoidal approximation of the reachable set
developed in this section, Section IV outlines a safe time
horizon based open-loop motion strategy for the robots.
IV. A SAFE OPEN-LOOP MOTION STRATEGY
Let M = {1, . . . , N} be a set of N differential-drive
robots, where each robot moves according to the dynamics
specified in (1). Let (zi(t), φi(t)) denote the configuration
of robot i ∈ M at time t. At regular intervals of time tk =
kδ, k ∈ N, the central decision maker transmits the desired
velocities ui(tk) = (vi(tk), ωi(tk)) and the corresponding
safe time horizon si(tk) to each robot i ∈ M via a wireless
communication channel. 1/δ is called the update frequency.
Thus, the safe time horizon is the longest amount of time
for which the trajectory of the robot after communication
failure, does not intersect the reachable sets of its neighbors.
But, as discussed in Section III, an ellipsoidal approximation
of the reachable set can be used to simplify set-membership
tests. Thus, the definition of sij(tk) can be modified by
replacing R(µ; zj(tk), φj(tk)) with ξj(µ, tk) in (13), where
ξj(µ, tk) denotes the ellipsoidal approximation correspond-
ing to R(µ; zj(tk), φj(tk)) as derived in Section III. Next,
we discuss how the safe time horizon is incorporated into
the motion strategy of the robots.
As discussed earlier, the central decision maker transmits
ui(tk) and si(tk) to all the robots i ∈ M at regular time
intervals tk, k ∈ N. Let ci represent
the status of the
communication link of robot i:
ci(tk) =
1,
0,
if (ui(tk), si(tk)) was received
if (ui(tk), si(tk)) was not received.
(cid:40)
Algorithm 1 outlines the motion strategy that robot i em-
ploys.
Algorithm 1 Safe Time Horizon based Open-Loop Motion
Strategy
k = 1, l = 1; ui(0) = 0, si(0) = 0
while true do
if ci(tk) = 1 then
Execute ui(tk)
l = k
else if tk − tl < si(tl) then
Execute ui(tl)
else
Stop Moving
end if
k = k + 1
end while
Fig. 5 illustrates the rationale behind the safe time horizon
algorithm. As long as the robot experiencing communication
failure is outside the ellipsoidal reachable sets of its neigh-
bors, it can safely move. The end of the safe time horizon
corresponds to the time when the robot reaches the boundary
of one of the ellipses. At this point, the robot stops moving.
In order to state formal safety guarantees regarding Algo-
rithm 1, we make mild assumptions on the capability of the
control algorithm executing on the central decision maker.
We assume that,
the control algorithm ensures collision
avoidance between communicating robots as well as between
communicating robots and stationary obstacles. In particular,
if ∃i, j ∈ M such that ci(tk) = 1 and cj(tk) = 1, then ui(tk)
and uj(tk) guarantee that,
(cid:107)zi(tk) − zj(tk)(cid:107) > 0 =⇒ (cid:107)zi(tk+1) − zj(tk+1)(cid:107) > 0.
Let zO denote the position of a stationary obstacle. If
ci(tk) = 1 for any i ∈ M,
(cid:107)zi(tk) − zO(cid:107) > 0 =⇒ (cid:107)zi(tk+1) − zO(cid:107) > 0.
(14)
Fig. 4: Evolution of R(t), conv(R(t)),K(t) and ξ(K(t)) for
t = 2, 5, 12, 25. As predicted by Theorem 2, the dissimilarity
between conv(R(t) and ξ(K(t)) asymptotically goes to zero.
The scale for each figure is different.
When a robot experiences communication failure, it exe-
cutes the last received velocity command repeatedly for the
duration of the corresponding safe time horizon. This causes
the robot to follow a circular trajectory. Let Zi(µ, tk) denote
the position of robot i along this circular trajectory, where tk
is the time of the last received command and µ is the time
elapsed since the communication failure. The expressions for
Zi(µ, tk) are obtained by integrating (1) for constant velocity
inputs. If ωi(tk) (cid:54)= 0,
Zi(µ, tk) = zi(tk)+
vi(tk)
ωi(tk)
and if ωi(tk) = 0,
(cid:19)
(cid:18) sin(ωi(tk)µ + φi(tk)) − sin(φi(tk))
(cid:18)cos(φi(tk))
(cid:19)
cos(φi(tk)) − cos(ωi(tk)µ + φi(tk))
Zi(µ, tk) = zi(tk) + µvi(tk)
sin(φi(tk))
.
In order
to ensure the scalability and computational
tractability of the safe time horizon algorithm, we introduce
the notion of a neighborhood set for each robot. To do this,
the safe time horizon for each robot is upper-bounded by
a pre-specified value L. This allows us to introduce the
neighborhood set of robot i at time t as:
Ni(t) =(cid:8)j ∈ M, j (cid:54)= i : (cid:107)zi(t) − zj(t)(cid:107) < 2L(cid:9), (12)
where (cid:107).(cid:107) denotes the l2 norm. If robot i and robot j are
not neighbors, they cannot collide within the maximum safe
time horizon L.
The safe time horizon si(tk) can be defined as,
si(tk) = min
j∈Ni
sij(tk),
where sij(tk) is called the pair-wise safe time and is defined
as,
λ(cid:90)
0
sij(tk) = max
λ
1 dλ
(13)
s.t. Zi(µ, tk) /∈ R(µ; zj(tk), φj(tk)),∀µ ∈ [0, λ]
and λ ≤ L.
robot. Thus,
the original safety guarantee of the control
algorithm is extended to situations where the robot is moving
without commands from the central decision maker within
the safe time horizon.
A. Simulations
V. RESULTS
This section presents the simulation results of the safe time
horizon algorithm implemented on a team of 6 robots. Fig. 6
compares the motion of the robots during a communication
failure with and without the safe time horizon algorithm. A
communication failure is simulated lasting from t = 3.1s
to t = 8.3s. In the case where safe time horizons are
not utilized, shown by Fig. 6a and Fig. 6b,
the robots
experiencing communication failure abruptly stop moving,
thus exhibiting a jerky motion pattern. When safe time
horizons are utilized, the robots experiencing communication
failure execute their last received velocity command for the
duration of the safe time horizon (Fig. 6c and Fig. 6d).
This allows them to keep moving during the communication
failure, thereby avoiding jerky "start-stop" motion behaviors
and reducing the disruption caused to the multi-robot system.
(a) No Safe Times: t = 3.1s
(b) No Safe Times: t = 8.3s
(c) With Safe Times: t = 3.1s
(d) With Safe Times: t = 8.3s
Fig. 6: Comparison of the motion of robots with and without
safe time horizons. Two robots experience communication
failure from t = 3.1s to t = 8.3s. In the case when
safe time horizons are not used (Fig. 6a and Fig. 6b), the
robots exhibit jerky motion behavior, since they abruptly
stop during the communication failure. When safe time
horizons are used (Fig. 6c and Fig. 6d), the robots continue
moving by executing their last received velocity command
for the corresponding safe time horizon, thus demonstrating
the ability of the safe time horizon algorithm to effectively
handle communication failures.
(a) t = 0.005
(b) t = 3
(c) t = 5
(d) t = 5.96
Fig. 5: The safe time horizon represents the longest time
duration for which the robot
lies outside the ellipsoidal
reachable sets of other robots. Thus, the robot experiencing
communication failure can execute its last received velocity
command for the corresponding safe time horizon and remain
safe. Beyond this, the robot stops moving.
Utilizing these assumptions, the following theorem outlines
the safety guarantees provided by Algorithm 1.
Theorem 3. If robot i does not receive any commands from
the central decision maker after time tk, i.e., ci(tk) = 1 and
ci(tm) = 0 ∀m > k, then Algorithm 1 ensures that,
(cid:107)zi(tk) − zj(tk)(cid:107) > 0 =⇒ (cid:107)zi(tk + µ) − zj(tk + µ)(cid:107) > 0,
∀µ ∈ [0, si(tk)], ∀j ∈ M, j (cid:54)= i.
Proof. Since (cid:107)zi(tk) − zj(tk)(cid:107) > 0 ∀j ∈ M, si(tk) > 0.
As seen in (12), if j /∈ Ni, then a collision is not possible
between robot i and j within the safe time horizon. Next,
we consider the case when j ∈ Ni. From the definition of
si(tk), we know that, zi(tk+µ) /∈ ξj(µ, tk), ∀µ ∈ [0, si(tk)].
Furthermore, from the definition of reachable sets, zj(tk +
µ) ∈ ξj(µ, tk), ∀µ ∈ [0, si(tk)]. From the previous two
statements, it is clear that zi(tk + µ) (cid:54)= zj(tk + µ), ∀µ ∈
[0, si(tk)]. Hence,
(cid:107)zi(tk +µ)−zj(tk +µ)(cid:107) > 0, ∀µ ∈ [0, si(tk)], ∀j ∈ Ni.
This completes the proof.
Beyond the safe time horizon, the robot stops moving,
and (14) ensures that no collisions occur with the stationary
*Position of robot when the communication failure occured Current position of the robot Safe Open-Loop trajectory followed by robot Ellipsoidal reachable sets of neighboring robots Robot under normal operation Current Position of robot experiencing communication failureSafe Open-Loop trajectory followed by robot *Position of robot when the communication failure occured B. Experimental Results
The safe time horizon algorithm is implemented on a
multi-robot testbed with 4 Khepera III robots and an Op-
titrack motion capture system, which is connected to a
desktop computer serving as the central decision maker. In
the first scenario (Fig. 7a and Fig. 7b), the robot experiencing
communication failure executes its last received velocity
command for the duration of the safe time horizon, after
which it becomes stationary. In the second scenario, (Fig.
7c and Fig. 7d),
the robot experiences a short duration
communication failure and keeps moving safely through it.
In particular, the safe time horizon algorithm successfully
combats issues pertaining to intermittent communications
on the Robotarium, and enables the seamless execution of
coordination algorithms in the face of such failures.
(a) Robots at t = 9s
(b) Robots at t = 14s
(c) Robots at t = 28s
(d) Robots at t = 32s
Fig. 7: Four Khepera III robots are shown patrolling a
U-shaped corridor. At t = 9s, a robot experiences com-
munication failure and executes its last received velocity
command until t = 14s. Similarly, a robot
loses com-
munication at t = 28s (Fig. 7c) and keeps moving in
a safe manner. Before the safe time horizon of the robot
elapses, communication is restored (Fig. 7d). Thus, the safe
time horizon algorithm prevents jerky "start-stop" motion
patterns of the robot during the intermittent communica-
tion failure. This experiment demonstrates how the safe
time horizon algorithm can prevent disruptions in robot
motion caused due to intermittent communications on the
Robotarium. A video of this experiment can be found at
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gyz861xwaHY
VI. CONCLUSIONS
The safe time horizon algorithm not only provides a
technique for multi-robot systems to safely handle intermit-
tent communication failures, it demonstrates the feasibility
of reachability analysis as a powerful tool for multi-robot
algorithms. The minimum area ellipse derived in Section
III provides a compact and efficient way to represent the
reachable set of a differential-drive robot and can be used in
other robotics algorithms as an abstraction of the reachable
set itself.
REFERENCES
[1] Gianluca Antonelli, Filippo Arrichiello, and Stefano Chiaverini. The
null-space-based behavioral control for autonomous robotic systems.
Intelligent Service Robotics, 1(1):27 -- 39, 2008.
[2] R C Arkin and J Diaz. Line-of-sight constrained exploration for
reactive multiagent robotic teams. In Advanced Motion Control, 2002.
7th International Workshop on, pages 455 -- 461. IEEE, 2002.
[3] Tucker Balch and Ronald C Arkin. Communication in reactive
multiagent robotic systems. Autonomous Robots, 1(1):27 -- 52, 1994.
[4] Jean-Daniel Boissonnat and Xuan-Nam Bui. Accessibility region for
a car that only moves forwards along optimal paths. INRIA France,
1994.
[5] M Dogar, R A Knepper, A Spielberg, C Choi, H I Christensen, and
D Rus. Multi-scale assembly with robot teams. The International
Journal of Robotics Research, 34(13):1645 -- 1659, 2015.
[6] A Fedotov, V Patsko, and V Turova. Reachable Sets for Simple Models
of Car Motion. INTECH Open Access Publisher, 2011.
[7] O Guler and F Gurtuna. Symmetry of convex sets and its applications
to the extremal ellipsoids of convex bodies. Optimization Methods
and Software, 27(4-5):735 -- 759, 2012.
[8] Paul Jaccard. Distribution de la Flore Alpine: dans le Bassin des
dranses et dans quelques r´egions voisines. Rouge, 1901.
[9] F John. Extremum problems with inequalities as subsidiary conditions.
In Traces and Emergence of Nonlinear Programming, pages 197 -- 215.
Springer, 2014.
[10] Christopher A Kitts and Magnus B Egerstedt. Design, control, and
applications of real-world multi-robot systems. 2008.
[11] E Klavins. Communication complexity of multi-robot systems.
In
Algorithmic Foundations of Robotics V, pages 275 -- 291. Springer,
2004.
[12] Oded Maler. Computing reachable sets: An introduction. Technical
report, 2008.
[13] H Nguyen, N Pezeshkian, M Raymond, A Gupta, and J Spector.
Autonomous communication relays for tactical robots. Technical
report, DTIC Document, 2003.
[14] D Pickem, L Wang, P Glotfelter, Y Diaz-Mercado, M Mote, A Ames,
E Feron, and M Egerstedt.
Safe, remote-access swarm robotics
research on the robotarium. arXiv preprint arXiv:1604.00640, 2016.
[15] R Ramanathan and J Redi. A brief overview of ad hoc networks:
challenges and directions. IEEE communications Magazine, 40(5):20 --
22, 2002.
[16] J Reeds and L Shepp. Optimal paths for a car that goes both forwards
and backwards. Pacific journal of mathematics, 145(2):367 -- 393, 1990.
[17] S Sariel, T Balch, and N Erdogan. Naval mine countermeasure
missions. IEEE robotics & automation magazine, 15(1):45 -- 52, 2008.
[18] P Sou`eres, J Y Fourquet, and J Pl Laumond. Set of reachable positions
for a car. Automatic Control, IEEE Transactions on, 39(8):1626 -- 1630,
1994.
[19] H J Sussmann and G Tang. Shortest paths for the reeds-shepp car: a
worked out example of the use of geometric techniques in nonlinear
optimal control. Rutgers Center for Systems and Control Technical
Report, 10:1 -- 71, 1991.
[20] Patrick Ulam and Ronald C Arkin. When good communication go
bad: communications recovery for multi-robot teams. In Robotics and
Automation, 2004. Proceedings. ICRA'04. 2004 IEEE International
Conference on, volume 4, pages 3727 -- 3734. IEEE, 2004.
[21] Logan Yliniemi, Adrian K Agogino, and Kagan Tumer. Multirobot
coordination for space exploration. AI Magazine, 35(4):61 -- 74, 2014.
Position of robot when communication failure occuredRobot currently experiencing communication failure Safe Open-Loop trajectory followed by robot XXX |
1909.01711 | 1 | 1909 | 2019-09-04T11:53:40 | Simulation and computational analysis of multiscale graph agent-based tumor model | [
"cs.MA",
"q-bio.TO"
] | This paper deals with the cellular biological network analysis of the tumor-growth model, consisting of multiple spaces and time scales. In this paper, we present a model in graph simulation using ABM for tumor growth. In particular, we propose a graph agent-based modeling and simulation system in the format of tumor growth scenario for evolving analysis. To manage cellular biological network analysis, we developed a workflow that allows us to estimate the tumor model and the complexity of the evolving behavior in a principled manner. By developing the model using Python, which has enabled us to run the model multiple times (more than what is possible by conventional means) to generate a large amount of data, we have succeeded in getting deep in to the micro-environment of the tumor, employing network analysis. Combining agent-based modeling with graph-based modeling to simulate the structure, dynamics, and functions of complex networks is exclusively important for biological systems with a large number of open parameters, e.g., epidemic models of disease spreading or cancer. Extracting data from evolutionary directed graphs and a set of centrality algorithms helps us to tackle the problems of pathway analysis and to develop the ability to predict, control, and design the function of metabolisms. Reproducing and performing complex parametric simulations a known phenomenon at a sufficient level of detail for computational biology could be an impressive achievement for fast analysis purposes in clinics, both on the predictive diagnostic and therapeutic side. | cs.MA | cs |
Simulation and computational analysis of multiscale
graph agent-based tumor model
Department Computer Architecture & Operating Systems
Department Computer Architecture & Operating Systems
Ghazal Tashakor
Remo Suppi
Universitat Autnoma de Barcelona
Barcelona, Spain
[email protected]
Universitat Autnoma de Barcelona
Barcelona, Spain
[email protected]
Abstract -- This paper deals with the cellular biological network
analysis of the tumor-growth model, consisting of multiple spaces
and time scales. In this paper, we present a model in graph
simulation using ABM for tumor growth. In particular, we
propose a graph agent-based modeling and simulation system
in the format of tumor growth scenario for evolving analysis.
To manage cellular biological network analysis, we developed a
workflow that allows us to estimate the tumor model and the
complexity of the evolving behavior in a principled manner. By
developing the model using Python, which has enabled us to
run the model multiple times (more than what is possible by
conventional means) to generate a large amount of data, we
have succeeded in getting deep in to the micro-environment of
the tumor, employing network analysis.
Combining agent-based modeling with graph-based modeling
to simulate the structure, dynamics, and functions of complex
networks is exclusively important for biological systems with
a large number of open parameters, e.g., epidemic models of
disease spreading or cancer. Extracting data from evolutionary
directed graphs and a set of centrality algorithms helps us to
tackle the problems of pathway analysis and to develop the
ability to predict, control, and design the function of metabolisms.
Reproducing and performing complex parametric simulations
a known phenomenon at a sufficient level of detail for com-
putational biology could be an impressive achievement for fast
analysis purposes in clinics, both on the predictive diagnostic and
therapeutic side.
Index Terms -- multi scale modeling, agent based modeling
(ABM), graph-based modeling, tumor agent-based model.
I. INTRODUCTION
Scientific agent-based modeling and simulation requires
specific techniques to manage parametric executions and the
computational cost of the evolution analysis. It gets more
complicated when it is defined as Systems Biology (SB) based
on a multiscale nature. There is a large set of references in SB
which reviewed and compared different agent-based modeling
tool-kits. From the scientific community point of view this
field still lacks an accepted generic methodology to address
Research supported under contract TIN2017-84875-P, funded by the Agen-
cia Estatal de Investigaci´on, Spain and the FEDER-UE and partially funded by
a research collaboration agreement with the Fundaci´on Escuelas Universitarias
Gimbernat.
multiscale computation. Specifically to optimize the transport
of data between sub-models in high-performance computing
(HPC) environments which means exchanging large volumes
of data. In this case, dedicated data pattern software and
high-performance multiscale computing applications would be
needed.
This paper presents our work in graph simulation and
modeling of an agent-based tumor growth. The most novel
changes in this paper on the ground of the other scenarios
are obtaining a probabilistic state machine in Python using
Mesa [4], a graph-based representation using NetworkX [21]
and consideration of multiscale simulation to perform cellular
and molecular population dynamics. Unlike many other tools,
NetworkX [21] data analysis features are designed to handle
data on a scale relevant to complex problems, and most of the
core algorithms rely on extremely fast legacy code for flexible
graph representations which a node and edge can be anything.
On the other hand, implementing our tumor agent-based
in Python using Mesa [4] is indeed a prospective
model
approach since it is becoming the language for scientific com-
puting and facilitating the web crawling for direct visualization
of every model step. Mesa allows large-scale modeling to
create agent-based models using built-in core components such
as agent schedulers and spatial grids in parallel computation.
II. BACKGROUND
A primary tumor model just addressing the vascular growth
state depends on differential equations, but In silico [6] refers
to computational models of biology and it has many applica-
tions. There are three approaches of In silico to build a cancer
model: continuum, discrete and hybrid. Each approach has
the characteristics that make it suitable for analyzing specific
properties of tumors and tumor cells [8]. However, an adaptive
hybrid model which integrates both continuous and discrete
based models is the most challenging for simulating a complex
system. A minimal coupling of a vascular tumor dynamics to
tumor angiogenic factors through agent-based modeling has
pushed the progress of experimental studies during recent
years1. It is a big challenge to simulate total process of a
complex system such as tumor growth, metastasis, and tu-
mor response treatments mathematically because mathematical
modeling is still a simplification of the systems biology and
the results require validation [7]. As we can see in some
papers such as [8][9], it is apparent that building a bulky
model over a range of matrix densities which covers numerous
factors in this way for large domain sizes or 3D simulations
are restricted by computational and application costs. In [8]
they have presented a series of ABMs that are intended to in-
troduce a multiscale architecture2 for representing biomedical
knowledge in NetLogo [1] and in conclusion they mentioned
that a full-scale ABM implementation is not possible at this
time. They have pointed out that there is a need to develop
and communicate the potential framework that is conceptually
robust and allows the evolution of knowledge represented
in a computable form. Authors of [10][11] also suggested
focusing on modified methods for analyzing and modeling
which scales more with network size using information about
edge betweenness to detect community peripheries3. This
suggestion allows scientists to go through a broader inves-
tigation of tumor information extraction and tumor-growth
dynamics. Also, it seems using dynamic networks based on
a large number of interactive agents make it possible for
researchers to carry out more detailed research on inter-cellular
network interactions and metastasis in a multiscale model
[12]. One of the latest papers is [22] which addresses recent
progress and open questions in multiscale modeling. From
their point of view, a well-established methodology is building
and maintaining a computer code and proposing a framework
which includes theoretical concepts, a multiscale modeling
language and an execution environment to solve the interdisci-
plinary multiscale problems such as spatial scale. On the other
hand, cell populations can be very heterogeneous, so nested
effects modeling for single-cell data to simultaneously identify
different cellular sub-populations to explain the heterogeneity
in a cell population will be necessary. It helps entering the
mechanisms of gene regulation and the reconstruction of cell
signaling networks [23].
Building a general framework at this time which could
model the static and dynamic aspects of the tumor behavior
and provide the computational resources is an open application
area challenge with many technical barriers overcome in recent
years [23]. Perhaps a hybrid graph agent-based simulation
and modeling could be an outset to metabolic engineering for
applications which have expanded to address problems such
as evolution.
It
is noteworthy that graphs,
in
such integrative analysis of data from different sources which
in general, are useful
1ABM model that allows rule definition with great detail and different levels
of activation to model the angiogenesis phenomenon.
2Multilevel structure of information exchange through which it is defined
that how the agents interact in the model.
3Methods proposed by [10-12] are based on the exchange of information
between agents that allows extracting a greater quantity of tumor information
and understanding its dynamics
Fig. 1.
Stem cells evolution and metastasis visualization with grow-
factor=1.75, apoptosis=low and replication-factor=high (near 200,000 cells
in steady state).
naturally required an in-depth integrity and dependency.
A. Modeling and Simulation in NetLogo
Our initial ABM NetLogo model [2] was designed as a
self-organized model that illustrates the growth of a tumor
and how it resists chemical treatment. This model in NetLogo
which is based on Wilensky's tumor model [1] permits us to
change the parameters that affect tumor progression, immune
system response, and vascularization. Figure 1 shows the
steady state of a tumor metastasis visualization with six stem
cells and the grow-factor=1.75, replication-factor=high, and
apoptosis=low. As it could be seen, the growth of metastasis
is more aggressive and through reducing apoptosis, there is a
higher number of cells that do not die, amounting near 200,000
cells (agents) [2]. NetLogo [1] includes the Behavior Space
tool that allows the exploration of the model data space using
parametric executions in varying settings of the model and for
recording the results of each model run. The main problem
of these executions is that the Behavioral Space only supports
multithreading, so its performance is limited to the number of
cores/threads at the local infrastructure. To solve the problem,
we have executed the parametric simulations using our HPC
cluster in order to reduce the necessary time to explore a
determinate model data space. It has pointed out that this
implementation using NetLogo caused the limitations of the
execution environment (Java memory limitations) and loss of
performance with a high number of metastasis cells. Also, it
shows this model did not allow capturing in detail interactions
between the different parameters the microenvironment level.
B. Static preliminary model in Python
Taking into account
the limitations of Netlogo and the
different research tendencies to introduce multiscale simula-
tions to represent biomedical knowledge, our research was
data. Graph visualization makes large amounts of data more
accessible and easier to read as we can see in Fig. 2. The
interactive visualization in Mesa helps us to identify insights
and generate value from connected data. The visualization of
the model is a network of nodes that shows the distribution
of agents and their links. A scheduler (time module) activates
agents and stores their locations and updates the network. The
total operation time is directly related to the number of steps
necessary to deploy all the agents.
III. A NEW MULTISCALE GRAPH AGENT-BASED MODEL OF
TUMOR-GROWTH
Large multiscale experimental modeling and simulation
causes an accumulation of data which reflect the possible
infinite divers of interactions in cellular biological networks.
Accordingly, there is a great need for computational methods
and computer tools to manage, query and analysis of these
experiments. In the most abstract level, cellular biological
networks represent as mathematical graphs because metabolic
networks generally require complex representations which
have made it possible to investigate the topology and func-
tions of these kinds of networks. By using graph-theoretical
concepts, predicting the dynamical properties of deep layers
may suggest new biological hypotheses. Functional modules
across different data sources will be essential in understanding
the behavior of the system on a large scale. Since agent-
based modeling became an alternative and potentially a more
appropriate form of mathematics to define for a computational
system, ABM researchers use model analyzing sample distri-
butions to record real-world network outcomes and summarize
the theoretical concepts. In the end,
the results of these
analyses also can be beneficial on the biological goals of
the study. The development and clinical implementation for
tumor growth behaviors have become a priority these days,
and it requires the analysis of large multiscale data from
cell populations to identify features and parameters which
predict tumor behavior. Our static preliminary model in Python
still was a limited scale model because of using the Erds-
Rnyi graph. To advance the initial idea, we have developed
a computational workflow for simulating a multiscale tumor
model. The graph-based methodology nested in agent-based
modeling aids us to exploit evolving analysis more accurate.
Mapping agents to the nodes in the graph-structure model
coordinates the assignments of values to their variables in such
a way that maximizes their aggregation. Agents work as states,
locations or even sometimes as controls of all the variables that
map to the nodes.
A. A workflow for simulating tumor model and evolving
analysis
This section aims to illustrate an evolving analysis of tumor
growth in different patients. Let's assume that an oncologist
needs growing analysis of cellular interplay for a patient with
newly diagnosed cancer disease. Therefore the basic level of
the tumor must be characterized for future prediction of the
possible growth behaviors. In principle, we need intervention
Fig. 2. Graph visualization for a tumor in three states (normal, dead and
inflamed) which has shown in three colors(green, grey and red).
oriented towards this type of ABM simulations. For this,
the environment and modeling were changed to represent all
the interactions in a multiscale ABM model. In this sense,
Python + Mesa were chosen as a development environment
and a graph-based model was selected to represent all the
complexity and interactions of the tumor model. Fig. 2 shows
the visual form of our second approach [5] for tumor agent-
based modeling which tumor cells changed color while they go
through state transition. We have implemented a preliminary
tumor agent-based model in graph architecture considering
that in life science data analysis such as tumor almost ev-
erything is about connections and dependencies. As well a
large amount of data makes it difficult for researchers to
identify insights or controlling dynamical networks and here
the role of graph architecture in displaying complex patterns
of interactions between components is significant. Each agent
nested in a single-node and changes in three states under the
influence of the neighbor nodes. The process goes on until
the tumor agent's volume appears as metastasis. To simulate a
graph network for this model, we selected a random graph to
construct the cell interactions and stromal cells behavior within
a tumor microenvironment. Due to the time-dependency of the
connections, we developed our graph agent-based model on
Erds-Rnyi [24] topology. Erds-Rnyi model takes a number of
vertices N and connecting nodes by selecting edges from the
(N (N-1)/2) possible edges randomly. As the same scenario
as our NetLogo tumor model,
to study and analyze the
behavior of Python tumor model under different conditions,
we needed to explore the relevant data of the model using
parametric executions. For this purpose, we found Mesa [4]
which supports multi-agent and multiscale simulations. It is a
framework that allows us to make changes to existing ABMs.
Also monitoring the data management issues when processing
actions happen in parallel seems facile in Mesa since each
module runs on the server and turns a model state into JSON
by agent-based modeling to set the initial experimental con-
ditions. Fig. 3 introduces the workflow of our computational
simulation system for modeling a scenario of tumor growth
and preparing data from different scales and stages of its
evolving behavior. As can be seen at the part (ii) in Fig. 3, we
have defined three steps for the scenario of the workflow. The
first step is simulating an initial tumor by setting up initial
features to create an initial graph model. Collecting data at
the end of each step helps the oncologist to reuse the data
whenever he needs again.
The second step is forwarding the initial graph to the
growing module with redirection possibilities in tumor growth.
The third step is feeding the growing tumor by changing subset
features of angiogenic switch.
The last two steps of the scenario are implemented as a
growing network with redirection (GNR) [21] nested in an
ABM model. The subset features of the angiogenic switch
define as a state transition based on probabilistic state machine
(explained in next section). We considered that the transient
states probability adopted in the subset features are necessarily
valued between 0 and 1. Finally, in the Back-end computa-
tional part of the workflow, we designed a data visualization
tool for the oncologists.
biological parameters which are known as cancer driver: the
number of divisions (d), the number of stem cells (N), the
number of critical rate-limiting pathway driver mutations (k),
and the mutation rate (u).
p = 1 − (1 − (1 − (1 − u)d)k)N
(1)
Subset features get in the computational simulation system
through agents as state transition probabilities to change the
state of the cells in the growing network. These parameters
could be selected by the oncologist or any other user of the
system through the interactive visualization form.
At the agent-based model, tumor cells are affected, inflamed
and turn quiescent. Based on these key factors we have
simulated the tumor growth behavior and measurements such
as the tumor volume, density and also we calculate a number
of dead, inflamed and tumor-derived cells.
B. The probabilistic state machine of tumor growth
Using probabilistic automaton (PA) in computational biol-
ogy can be a useful aspect of tracking a natural problem.
Fig. 3. Graph-based modeling and simulation system in the format of tumor
growth scenario
We have deployed two complementary graph-driven meth-
ods for analyzing and estimating probable growing network
patterns. The selected methods are presented in the context
of network analysis in Python using Mesa [4] and NetworkX
[21] packages. The amount of data which is extracted from
the methods address some problems in cell biology.
We chose a fast binomial graph generator on Erds-Rnyi
topology for initialization, so we used our static preliminary
model as an initial input. To simulate our growing network
nested in the agent-based model, we used a growing network
with redirection (GNR) graph with probability (p) for adding
nodes one at a time with a link to the initial nodes. In this
graph, a target node is a node where a new link attached. Target
nodes are selected randomly following a uniform distribution.
We set the redirection probability (p) which is shown by the
equation in (1) like that gives us a new pattern of tumor growth
every time.
Based on [13], we used the following equation in (1) to
calculate the probability (p) of tumor growth. It contains five
Fig. 4. Flowchart representation of our tumor behavior in a PFA model
Probabilistic finite-state automaton (PFA) during the past
years was applied to the model and generate distributions over
sets of possible infinite terms and trees. Typically, PFA is
represented as directed labeled graphs[15][16].
The fundamental biological aspect of
the probabilistic
model of our tumor growth comes from the acute inflammation
based upon the key factors involved such as an angiogenic
switch. Tumor angiogenesis is critical for tumor growth and
maintenance [14][20].
Fig. 4 shows the metabolic flowchart of this aspect and how
we have created our PFA model based on the flowchart. The
strategy begins with initial identification of a minor population
of cells with the characteristics of tumor-initiating cancer stem
cells and they will be assumed inflamed or dead under the
influence of angiogenic switch factors.
The threshold of angioprevention K is compared with
the assessment values of transition probability PA which is
selected by oncologist interactively. The result of the com-
parison works as a trigger to change the state of the cells
from their current state S0 to the proliferation state S1 or
the inflammation state S3. Afterward, under the influence of
changing angiogenic switch values Ω, the inflammation state
S1 may turn to the progression state S2 and metastasis can
happen.
(cid:88)
s∈SA
IA(S) = 1
(2)
PA(s, b.s(cid:48)) = 1 where ∀ Ps > Ki (3)
(cid:88)
s(cid:48)∈SA,b∈Ω
FA(s) +
From the probabilistic point of view in equation 2 and 3, a
finite generic states SA is transitioned under the influence
of angiogenic probabilities defined by alphabets Ω. K is
a threshold drawn from a uniform [0,1] distribution. If the
transition probability PA is greater than K, the current state
assumed to be extended with PA(s, b.s(cid:48)). In the End, initial-
state probability IA, final state probability FA and transition
probabilities PA are considered as total and PFA definition
will be a tuple of below functions.
C. Results of Parametric Execution
Human-tumor-derived cell lines contain common and dif-
ferent transforming genomic profiles which is essential for
a comprehensive understanding of tumorigenesis, and for
identifying the earliest events in tumor evolution [17].
We assumed four different parametric baseline executions
for monitoring tumor-growth model in four different patients
as it can be seen in Fig. 5. For each baseline, it is considered
three repetitions as growth patterns to be able to extract data
from the growing network in different redirection patterns. The
goal is simulating the dynamic behavior of tumor-growth.
Fig. 5. Initial tumor graph to set up four baselines (Symbol of four patients)
The first baseline set to an initial state of 200 stem cells and
increase to 400 under the influence of 50 cancer stem cells.
The second baseline set to an initial state of 400 stem cells
and increase to 800 under the influence of 200 cancer stem
cells. The third baseline set to an initial state of 600 stem
cells and increase to 1200 under the influence of 400 cancer
stem cells. Moreover, the forth baseline set to an initial state
of 1200 stem cells and increase to 2400 under the influence
of 650 cancer stem cells.
The configuration management of these four baselines is es-
tablished for analyzing tumor density variations, tumor-derived
cells into cancer redirection and identifying genomic profiles
of those essential cells. Significant revision regarding graph
patterns configuration is extracted from neighborhood analysis
and graph centrality methods such as centrality closeness or
betweenness [19] which quantify the number of times a node
acts as a bridge along the shortest path between two other
nodes. These methods were introduced as a measure for quan-
tifying the control of a human on the communication between
other humans in a social network by Linton Freeman. In this
conception, vertices which have a high probability to occur
on a randomly chosen shortest path between two randomly
chosen vertices have a high betweenness [21]. We used this
concept to reconstruct the tumor-derived cell lines and produce
their profiles by extracting data from our experiments and
comparing the results of the baselines in Table I to Table IV.
As it could be seen, the most aggressive growth pattern be-
longs to the Table III about patient3 for as-much as the average
value of the essential genomic profile of tumor patterns and
the number of tumor-derived cells are higher than the other
tumors.
TUMOR-DERIVED CELL ID AND GENOMIC PROFILE FOR PATIENT 1
TABLE I
Initial tumor(Patient1)
tumor-derived cell ID
Essential Genomic Profile
GP1
10
2.19E-03
GP2
4
4.70E-03
GP3
18
3.34E-03
TUMOR-DERIVED CELL ID AND GENOMIC PROFILE FOR PATIENT 2
TABLE II
Initial tumor(Patient2)
tumor-derived cell ID
Essential Genomic Profile
GP1
6
1.34E-03
GP2
12
8.94E-04
GP3
6
1.50E-03
TUMOR-DERIVED CELLS ID AND GENOMIC PROFILE FOR PATIENT 3
TABLE III
Initial tumor(Patient3)
tumor-derived cell ID
Essential Genomic Profile
GP1
1
3.96E-04
GP2
17 and 10
7.07E-04
GP3
5
6.85E-04
TUMOR-DERIVED CELLS ID AND GENOMIC PROFILE FOR PATIENT 4
TABLE IV
Initial tumor(Patient4)
tumor-derived cell ID
Essential Genomic Profile
GP1
1
2.70E-04
GP2
6
3.70E-04
GP3
1
2.13E-04
Fig. 6 is a visual representation of genome profile variation
of tumor-derived cells distribution in tumor number three.
We selected this tumor because it behaved more aggressive
than the others especially because it grows very radical in
its growth patterns number two and three. Cell lines serve
as models to study cancer biology and to connect genomic
variation to angiogenic responses. This modeling can aid in
understanding different tumor behavior. The tumor-derived cell
distribution results are significant for molecular and cell lines
study. Molecular sub-typing could be done based on gene
expression patterns and it helps for tumor-derived cell classi-
fication [24]. Accordingly, the assortment of classes in tumor-
derived cell distribution is our future work. By computing
the ratio of the dead cells to the inflamed cells, we have
also been able to demonstrate different tumor growth behavior
upon the effective laboratory condition from the angiogenic
switch. Fig. 7 illustrates the change scale of inflammatory in
tumor3 based on different angiogenic key factors determinate
in Table V. There is evidence in the chart that angiogenesis
and inflammation are mutually dependent.
ANGIOGENIC SWITCH KEY FACTORS AS TRANSITION PROBABILITIES
TABLE V
AngioPrevention
Angiogenesis
PA Values
Quiescent
ASW1
0.4
0.6
0.2
ASW2
0.6
0.4
0.2
ASW3
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fig. 6. Genome profile variation of tumor-derived cells distribution in tumor
number three
Also, stem cell quiescence is a way to control the inflam-
mation in the tumor microenvironment. Increasing angiogenic
value in angiogenic switch 1 causes inflammatory reactions
and raise the number of inflamed cells. Targeting inflammation
by using angioprevention and stop cancer cells from prolifer-
ating helps to decrease the number of inflamed cells as it is
shown in angiogenic switch 2 and 3 of the chart.
D. Conclusions and Future work
In this paper, we simulated and developed a multiscale
graph agent-based model. The model uses for extracting and
analyzing data from the cellular network of a tumor while
growing. The extracted information from the hybrid simulation
with transient probabilities and variable angiogenesis key
factors to target emulating the dynamic behavior of tumor-
growth seems interesting to oncologists and scientist since
they can study the probable predictive power of pathways in
the cellular network of the tumor. Migrating from NetLogo to
Python using Mesa and NetworkX was a successful strategy
since the Python framework permits us to develop faster and
deeper into the details in multistage and multiscale modeling.
Presenting the mathematical and biological form of the tumor-
growth model in the format of graph agent-based model using
a probabilistic state machine and the identification based on
genomic profiling idea could be validated in the future. Also,
this idea will allow us to integrate our model to an alternative
approach in discovering similarly or densely connected sub-
graphs of nodes[18]. This approach is an imitation of the
metastasis complication.
Fig. 7. The result of the change scale of inflamed and dead cells of tumor
number 3
REFERENCES
[1] U. Wilensky, "NetLogo tumor model. Center for Connected Learning
and Computer-Based Modeling Northwestern University, Evanston, IL,"
http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/models/tumor, 1998.
[2] G. Tashakor,E. Luque,R. Suppi,"High Performance Computing for tumor
Propagation Agent-based Model," in Proceedings of the XXIII Computer
Science Conference (CACIC) (Argentina, La Plata, 2017.
[3] D. Drau, D. Stanimirov,T. Carmichael,M. Hadzikadic, "An agent-based
model of solid tumor progression," Bioinformatics and Computational
Biology, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009, pp. 187-198.
[4] D. Masad,J. Kazil, "MESA : an agent-based modeling framework," in
Proceedings of the 14th Python in Science Conference (SCIPY), 2015,
pp. 53-60.
[5] G. Tashakor, R. Suppi, "Agent-based model for tumor-analysis using
Python+Mesa,"in Proceedings European Modeling and Simulation Sym-
posium (EMSS), 2018, pp. 248-253.
[6] LB. Edelman, JA. Eddy, ND. Price, "In silico models of cancer," Systems
Biology and Medicine, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews, vol. 2(4), 2010,
pp. 438-459.
[7] S. Soleimani, M.Shamsi, MA. Ghazani,HP. Modarres,KP. Valente, M.
Saghafian, MM. Ashani, M. Akbari, A. Sanati-Nezhad, "Translational
models of tumor angiogenesis: A nexus of in silico and in vitro models,"
Biotechnology Advances, 2018.
[8] G. An, "Introduction of an agent-based multi-scale modular architecture
for dynamic knowledge representation of acute inflammation," Theoret-
ical Biology and Medical Modelling, vol. 5(1), 2008.
[9] AM. Bailey,BC. Thorne,SM. Peirce, "Multi-cell agent-based simulation
of the microvasculature to study the dynamics of circulating inflamma-
tory cell trafficking," in Annals of biomedical engineering, vol. 5(6),
2007, pp. 916-936.
[10] M. Girvan, ME. Newman, "Community structure in social and biological
networks," in Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, vol.
99(12), 2002, pp. 7821-7826.
[11] ME. Newman, "Detecting community structure in networks," The Eu-
ropean Physical Journal B., vol. 38(2), 2004, pp. 321-330.
[12] V. Grimm ,E. Revilla, U. Berger, F. Jeltsch, WM. Mooij, SF. Railsback,
HH. Thulke, J. Weiner, T. Wiegand, DL. DeAngelis, "Pattern-oriented
modeling of agent-based complex systems:
lessons from ecology,"
Science, vol. 310(5750), 2002, pp. 987-991.
[13] P. Calabrese, D. Shibata, "A simple algebraic cancer equation: calculat-
ing how cancers may arise with normal mutation rates," BMC Cancer,
vol. 10(1), 2010.
[14] RS. Kerbel, "Tumor Angiogenesis," New England Journal of Medicine,
vol. 358(19), 2008, pp. 2039-2049.
[15] E. Vidal, F.Thollard, C. De La Higuera, F.Casacuberta, RC. Carrasco,
"Probabilistic finite-state machines-part I," IEEE transactions on pattern
analysis and machine intelligence, vol. 27(7), 2005, pp. 1013-1025.
[16] E. Vidal, F.Thollard, C. De La Higuera, F.Casacuberta, RC. Carrasco,
"Probabilistic finite-state machines-part II," IEEE Transactions on Pat-
tern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 27(7), 2005, pp. 1026-1039.
[17] C. Jolly, P. Van Loo, "Timing somatic events in the evolution of cancer,"
Genome biology, vol. 19(1), 2018.
[18] A. Bulu, H. Meyerhenke, I. Safro, P. Sanders, C. Schulz, "Recent
Advances in Graph Partitioning," Algorithm Engineering, Springer,
Cham, 2016, pp. 117-158.
[19] Lc. Freeman, "A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness,"
Sociometry, vol. 1, 1977, pp. 35-41.
[20] DF. Quail, JA. Joyce, "Microenvironmental regulation of tumor progres-
sion and metastasis," Nature medicine, vol. 19(11), 2013.
[21] Aric A. Hagberg, Daniel A. Schult and Pieter J. Swart, "Exploring net-
work structure, dynamics, and function using NetworkX," in Proceedings
of the 7th Python in Science Conference (SciPy), 2008, pp. 1115.
[22] P. Knzli, JL. Falcone, E. Rossi, P. Albuquerque, Chopard B., "HPC Mul-
tiscale Simulation of Transport and Aggregation of Volcanic Particles,"
in 17th International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Computing
(ISPDC), 2018, pp. 25-32.
[23] O. ys, J. Stelling, "Genome-scale metabolic networks in time and space,"
Current Opinion in Systems Biology, vol. 1(8), 2018, pp. 51-58.
[24] A. Goodspeed, LM. Heiser, JW. Gray, JC.Costello, "Tumor-derived cell
lines as molecular models of cancer pharmacogenomics," Molecular
Cancer Research, vol. 14(1), 2016, pp. 3-13.
[25] S. Wuchty, E. Ravasz, AL. Barabsi, "The architecture of biological
networks," Complex systems science in biomedicine, Springer, Boston,
MA, 2006, pp. 165-181.
|
1602.06731 | 1 | 1602 | 2016-02-22T11:23:26 | Decentralised Norm Monitoring in Open Multi-Agent Systems | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.GT"
] | We consider the problem of detecting norm violations in open multi-agent systems (MAS). We show how, using ideas from scrip systems, we can design mechanisms where the agents comprising the MAS are incentivised to monitor the actions of other agents for norm violations. The cost of providing the incentives is not borne by the MAS and does not come from fines charged for norm violations (fines may be impossible to levy in a system where agents are free to leave and rejoin again under a different identity). Instead, monitoring incentives come from (scrip) fees for accessing the services provided by the MAS. In some cases, perfect monitoring (and hence enforcement) can be achieved: no norms will be violated in equilibrium. In other cases, we show that, while it is impossible to achieve perfect enforcement, we can get arbitrarily close; we can make the probability of a norm violation in equilibrium arbitrarily small. We show using simulations that our theoretical results hold for multi-agent systems with as few as 1000 agents---the system rapidly converges to the steady-state distribution of scrip tokens necessary to ensure monitoring and then remains close to the steady state. | cs.MA | cs |
Decentralised Norm Monitoring in Open
Multi-Agent Systems
Natasha Alechina
University of Nottingham
[email protected]
Joseph Y. Halpern∗
Cornell University
[email protected]
Ian A. Kash
Microsoft Research
[email protected]
Brian Logan
University of Nottingham
[email protected]
Abstract
We consider the problem of detecting norm violations in open multi-agent sys-
tems (MAS). We show how, using ideas from scrip systems, we can design mech-
anisms where the agents comprising the MAS are incentivised to monitor the ac-
tions of other agents for norm violations. The cost of providing the incentives is
not borne by the MAS and does not come from fines charged for norm violations
(fines may be impossible to levy in a system where agents are free to leave and
rejoin again under a different identity). Instead, monitoring incentives come from
(scrip) fees for accessing the services provided by the MAS. In some cases, perfect
monitoring (and hence enforcement) can be achieved: no norms will be violated in
equilibrium. In other cases, we show that, while it is impossible to achieve perfect
enforcement, we can get arbitrarily close; we can make the probability of a norm
violation in equilibrium arbitrarily small. We show using simulations that our
theoretical results hold for multi-agent systems with as few as 1000 agents -- the
system rapidly converges to the steady-state distribution of scrip tokens necessary
to ensure monitoring and then remains close to the steady state.
1
Introduction
Norms have been widely proposed as a means of coordinating and controlling the be-
haviour of agents in a multi-agent system (MAS). Norms specify the behaviours that
agents should follow to achieve the objectives of the MAS. For example, the designer
of a system to allow agents to post content (invitations to tender for work, prices of
goods or services, etc.) may wish to ensure that the content posted is relevant, accurate
and up to date.
∗Supported in part by NSF grants IIS-0534064, IIS-0812045, IIS-0911036, and CCF-1214844, and by
AFOSR grants FA9550-08-1-0438, FA9550-09-1-0266, and FA9550-12-1-0040, and ARO grant W911NF-
09-1-0281.
1
In a MAS where norms must be enforced, the responsibility for enforcing norms
lies with a system component termed the normative organisation [Dastani et al., 2009],
which continuously monitors the actions of the agents (and perhaps carries out other
tasks on behalf of the MAS). If an action (or the state resulting from an action) would
violate or violates a norm, the action is either prevented, or the agent that performed
the action is penalised (incurs a sanction). The effective monitoring of agent actions
is therefore key to enforcing norms in a MAS. However, in large systems with many
agents, maintaining a separate component to monitor the actions of the agents may
involve significant overhead for the MAS.
In this paper, we propose an approach to norm monitoring in open multi-agents
systems in which the monitoring of agent actions is performed by the agents comprising
the MAS. We term this decentralised monitoring. We focus on norms which prohibit
certain actions (or the resulting state), for example, posting irrelevant or inaccurate
content may be prohibited. The novelty of our approach is that the MAS does not
need to bear the cost of paying for monitoring; at the same time we do not need to
assume that fines can be levied on the agents who violate the norms and used to pay
for monitoring, as done by Fagundes et al. [2014]. The latter assumption does not hold
for many open systems where the agents can always leave the system and, if needed,
rejoin it later under a different identity. Hence, a key issue for our approach is how
to incentivise the agents to monitor the actions of other agents. We show how, using
ideas from scrip systems [Friedman et al., 2006], we can design incentive-compatible
mechanisms where the agents do the monitoring themselves. We can think of scrip
as "virtual money" or "tokens". Performing an action costs a token, and detecting
violations is rewarded with tokens. The main difference between our setting and that of
[Friedman et al., 2006] is that the agents are not always rewarded after they monitor, but
only if they discover a violation. This requires a non-trivial adaptation of the techniques
developed in [Friedman et al., 2006].
We consider two settings. In the first, the inadvertent setting, actions that violate a
norm are assumed to be inadvertent or unintentional: violating a norm does not increase
an agent's utility. In the second, the strategic setting, actions that violate the norm
are intentional: violating the norm increases the agent's utility, and an agent chooses
whether to try to violate the norm. We describe a mechanism that achieves perfect
enforcement in the inadvertent setting; in equilibrium, all actions are monitored and
hence there are no violations of the norm. In the strategic setting, we prove that there
can be no equilibrium with perfect enforcement. However, the probability of violations
can be made arbitrarily small: for all > 0, we can design a mechanism where, in
equilibrium, the probability of violations is . We show how all the key steps in our
mechanisms can be decentralised, and how our ideas can be extended to open systems,
where agents may enter and leave the system at any time. We also consider robustness,
and show that the mechanisms we propose are m-resilient: no coalition of up to m
agents can increase their utility through collusion. Finally, we show using simulations
that our theoretical results hold for multi-agent systems with as few as 1000 agents. In
particular, we show that the system rapidly converges to the steady-state distribution of
scrip tokens necessary to ensure monitoring and then remains close to the steady state.
2
2
Incentivising Monitoring
In this section we outline the simple scenario that we use as a running example through-
out the remainder of the paper.
We consider a MAS where agents want to post content on the web. There are
norms regarding what may be posted; for example, copyrighted images should not be
posted, and comments should not be abusive or defamatory. We assume that agents
may occasionally submit posts that violate the norm. If such content appears on the
web, the MAS loses significant utility (e.g., it can be fined or sued). Note that here
we are viewing the MAS as a whole as an entity that can be fined or sued for norm
violations, and which may incur the computational costs associated with monitoring
for violations (and hence can gain and lose utility).
It is therefore in the MAS's interest that submitted posts are checked for compliance
with the norm before they appear on the web. We assume that it is possible to check
objectively if a particular item of content violates the norm. (For simplicity, we assume
that if a post that violates the norm is checked, the violation will be detected. We
can easily modify our approach to handle the case where there is some probability ρ
of the violation being caught.) Checking whether a post is 'bad' (violates the norm)
requires some work, and incurs a small utility cost. Although checking requires some
resources, we assume that if a violation is found, evidence of the violation can be
provided that can be checked in negligible time (so we do not need to deal with disputes
about whether content violates the norm). If the content does violate the norm, the post
is discarded and no violation occurs. We assume a basic infrastructure that ensures that
content posted by an agent is signed, and that the digital signatures can be trusted. The
signature identifies the agent id, and is interpreted as a statement by the agent that the
content posted conforms to the norm. Note however, that the infrastructure does not
itself enforce the norm; it serves only to ensure auditability. We believe that such a
separation of concerns is good design: the same basic infrastructure may be used by
different systems with different norms.
There is a system-level objective that content conform to the norm, but since the
cost to the MAS to check all posts may be prohibitive, we would like to distribute
the monitoring of posts among the agents that use the system. Just as for the MAS,
monitoring incurs a small negative utility for an agent. This means that agents must be
appropriately incentivised to monitor. It should be clear that the ideas exemplified by
this scenario are applicable far more broadly.
We formalise the posting and monitoring of content for norm violations as a non-
cooperative game. This scenario (and the resulting game) is similar to the scenario
considered by Friedman et al. [2006], but differs in several key respects. Friedman et
al. assume that some agent requests a service (e.g., downloading a file), and the problem
is to incentivise provision of the service; if the service is not provided, the requesting
agent will not be satisfied. Here, it is not necessary that each post be monitored for the
posting agent to be satisfied. We assume that, if no agent monitors, it is possible for
the posting agent to post and benefit from it; however, a norm violation may be missed.
This difference turns out to be not so significant. A more significant difference is that,
in our setting, a post may violate the norm. This has no analogue in the setting of
Friedman et al., and does complicate matters, as we shall see. Despite this, many of the
3
ideas used by Friedman et al. [2006] can be used in our setting. In particular, we adopt
the idea of using tokens as payment for posting and as a reward for monitoring. In
order to post, an agent must pay one token; finding a bad post is rewarded by receiving
one or more tokens as payment. This encourages agents to volunteer to monitor posts.
The exact mechanisms and amounts are discussed below.
We consider two scenarios, one in which bad posts are unintentional, and one in
which they are strategic. These correspond to different games. We formalise these two
scenarios and our approach for dealing with them in the next two subsections.
2.1 Unintentional Violation
In this scenario, bad posts happen with a constant probability b, but agents are unaware
that they are violating the norm when they post something inappropriate. For technical
reasons, we assume that b is a rational number (our results hold as long as we use
a sufficiently good approximation to the true probability, so this assumption is really
without loss of generality). The game in the inadvertent scenario is described by the
following parameters:
• a finite set of n agents 1, . . . , n;
• the time between rounds is 1/n;1
• at each round t an agent is picked at random to submit a post (we implicitly
assume that agents always have something that they want to post);
• probability of a post being bad: b;
• utility of posting (to the agent doing the posting): 1 (independent of whether
what is posted violates the norm);
• disutility of monitoring (to the agent doing the monitoring): −α (where 0 < α <
1);
• discount rate: δ ∈ (0, 1).
The game runs forever. As is standard in the literature, we assume that agents discount
future payoffs. This captures the intuition that a util now is worth more than a util
tomorrow, and allows us to compute the total utility derived by an agent in the infinite
game. We have assumed for simplicity that the system is homogeneous: all agents
get the same utility for posting (1), the same disutility for monitoring (−α), have the
same probability of being chosen to post something (1/n), and have the same discount
factor (δ). Using ideas from [Kash et al., 2012], we can extend the approach discussed
here to deal with different types of agents, characterised by different parameters. Some
agents may want to post more often; other agents may be less patient (so have a smaller
discount rate); etc.
We need some additional notation to describe what happens:
• pt ∈ {1, . . . , n} is the agent chosen to submit a post in round t;
1The assumption that the time between rounds is 1/n, which also made by Friedman et al.
[2006],
makes the analysis easier. It guarantees that, on average, each agent wants to post one message per time unit,
independent of the total number of agents.
4
• vt ∈ {0, . . . , n} \ {pt}; vt = j if agent j (cid:54)= pt is chosen to monitor in round t,
and vt = 0 if no one is chosen to monitor at round t;
• f t ∈ {0, 1}; f t = 0 if the content posted in round t is good, f t = 1 if it is bad.
Given that good and bad posts have the same utility (1), the utility of an agent i in
1
ut
i =
−α if vt = i;
otherwise.
0
round t is:
if i = pt and either vt = 0 or f t = 0;
Thus, an agent gets utility 1 at round t if it is chosen to submit a post (pt = i), and
either the post is not monitored (vt = 0) or it does not violate the norm (f t = 0). Given
the discount factor δ, the total utility Ui for agent i is Σ∞
So now the question is how to incentivise monitoring. The key idea is to use tokens
as payment for posting and as a reward for monitoring. Note that the number of tokens
that an agent has does not affect the agent's utility. However, if an agent requires a
token to post something, the number of tokens that an agent has does have an indirect
impact on utility; if the agent has no tokens, then it will not be able to post anything,
and thus will forego the opportunity to get utility 1.
i.
t=0δt/n ut
Agents are rewarded with tokens only if they detect a bad post. We argue below
that in order for the system to function successfully (agents being able to post, and
some agents always available for monitoring), the 'right' amount to pay for finding a
bad posting is 1/b.2 This means, in expectation, an agent gets one token for finding a
bad posting. Thus, the price of a posting is equal to the expected cost of checking a
posting.
Paying agents 1/b for finding a bad posting makes the situation similar to that
in [Friedman et al., 2006], where the agent wanting work done pays one token, and
the agent doing the work gets one token. However, the fact that in the current setting
payment is made only if a problem is found complicates matters. An expected payment
of 1 token is not equivalent to an actual payment of 1 token! To understand the issue
here, note that the most obvious way to deal with the payment of tokens is to have the
agent who wants to post pay one token to the normative organisation, and then have
the normative organisation pay 1/b tokens to the monitor if a violation is detected. But
there are problems with this approach. If monitors have a long run of "bad luck" and
do not find postings that violate the norm, there will be very few tokens left in the
system; on the other hand, if monitors get lucky, and find quite a few postings that
violate the norm, the normative organisation will end up pumping quite a few tokens
into the system. As pointed out by Friedman et al. [2006], having both too few or too
many tokens in the system will cause problems. Intuitively, with too many tokens in
the system, (almost) everyone will have plenty of tokens, so no one will volunteer to
monitor; with too few tokens in the system, it will often be the case that the agent who
wants to post will not have a token to pay for it.3 This problem does not occur in the
2We are implicitly assuming that tokens are divisible into units such that it is possible to transfer 1/b
tokens.
3The situation would be even worse if the payment for detecting a violation were different from 1/b; then
after some time there would certainly be too few or too many tokens in the system.
5
setting of Friedman et al. [2006], because there, the payment of person doing the work
always matched exactly the payment received by the person doing the work.
We deal with this problem by having the agents rather than the normative organi-
sation perform the role of the "bank". When agent i wants to post, it pays a randomly
chosen agent who has fewer than the maximum number of tokens allowed (see below)
1 token; if an agent j monitors and finds a violation, a randomly chosen agent with at
least 1/b tokens gives j 1/b tokens. This ensures that the number of tokens in 'circu-
lation' remains constant. (Note also that a randomly chosen agent pays the monitoring
agent 1/b tokens if there is a violation; this allows agents to post as long as they have a
single token.)
We assume that all agents follow a threshold strategy when deciding whether to
monitor. There is a fixed threshold k such that agents volunteer iff they have fewer
than k tokens.
It is easy to see that there is an equilibrium in threshold strategies
if everyone uses a threshold of 0. In that case, no one ever volunteers to monitor a
posting, so everyone gets to post, without monitoring. Of course, no agent has any
incentive to deviate from this strategy. On the other hand, this equilibrium is rather bad
from the point of view of the MAS. We are thus interested in nontrivial equilibria in
threshold strategies, where everyone uses a threshold k > 0.
Friedman et al. [2006] show that, in their setting, there is a nontrivial equilibrium in
threshold strategies; more precisely, for all > 0, there exists a δ sufficiently close to
1 and a threshold k such that as long as the discount factor is at least δ, all agents using
a threshold of k is an -Nash equilibrium: no agent can gain more than by deviating.
We can get a similar result in our setting, using the banking idea above, where the
maximum number of tokens any agent may have is k + 1/b. To summarise, if an agent
i has at least one token and is chosen to submit a post (i = pt), pt gives a randomly
chosen agent with fewer than k + 1/b tokens one more. The posting agent pt than asks
for volunteers to act as monitor. All agents with fewer than k tokens volunteer. If at
least one agent volunteers, one, vt, is chosen at random to act as monitor. If vt confirms
the post conforms to the norm, it is posted. If vt detects a violation of the norm, then
the post is discarded, and a randomly chosen agent with at least 1/b tokens gives vt
1/b tokens.
Theorem 1: For all > 0, there exist a δ sufficiently close to 1 and an n sufficiently
large such that if all n agents have a discount factor δ(cid:48) ≥ δ, then there exists a k
such that the mechanism above with all agents using a threshold of k is an -Nash
equilibrium.
The proof of Theorem 1 is similar in spirit to that of Friedman et al. [2006]. A
proof sketch can be found in Section 6.
Note that in the equilibrium the existence of which is stated in Theorem 1, we get
perfect enforcement; all bad posts will be detected. Although the theorem applies only
if δ is "sufficiently close to 1" and n is "sufficiently large", simulations (reported in
Section 3) show that, in practice, the distribution of tokens is reasonably stable with n
as small as 1000.4 These simulations also show that, rather than having one randomly
4In fact, simulations show that even with 100 -- 1000 agents, performance is in a range that seems quite
tolerable in practice.
6
chosen agent pay 1/b tokens if a violation is discovered, we can have (cid:100)1/b(cid:101) randomly
chosen agents pay 1 token each. The latter approach may be more acceptable in some
systems.
2.2 Strategic Violation
We now consider the scenario of strategic violation. In this scenario, we assume when
an agent is chosen to submit a post, it can either submit something good (i.e., that does
not violate the norm) or something bad. The parameters of the game are the same as
in Section 2.1, except that there is no longer a probability b of a posting being bad (the
quality of a posting now becomes a strategic decision), and the utility of a bad posting
is no longer 1, but κ > 1. (We must assume κ > 1 here, otherwise no agent would ever
post anything bad: the utility of doing so is no higher than that of posting something
good, and the violation may be detected.)
As before, monitoring agents get paid only if they find a bad post. With these
assumptions, it is not hard to show that there does not exist an equilibrium with perfect
enforcement.
Theorem 2:
perfect enforcement.
In the setting of strategic violations, there can be no equilibrium with
Proof: Suppose, by way of contradiction, that there is an equilibrium with perfect
enforcement. In this equilibrium, all attempts to make a bad posting are caught. Thus,
no agent will use a strategy that gives a positive probability to making a bad posting,
for that agent would get higher utility by posting something good instead of something
bad. But then no agent would monitor. Even if an agent volunteers to monitor, the
agent would just claim that no violations were found without actually monitoring (since
monitoring costs −α in utility, and there would be no violations to catch). But if there
is no actual monitoring, then agents should deviate and make bad postings, since they
will not be caught.
Although we cannot achieve perfect enforcement in the strategic setting, we can
achieve the next best thing: we can make the probability of a bad posting as low as
we want. More precisely, for all , (cid:48) > 0, there is an -Nash equilibrium such that the
probability of a bad post is (cid:48).
The idea now is that, with some probability, a submitted post will not be checked;
there will be no attempt to get volunteers to monitor that posting. Let ct = 0 if there
is no monitoring in round t; ct = 1 otherwise. The decision regarding whether to
monitor is made after the poster submits their post (otherwise, the agent chosen to post
will always post something bad in round t if ct = 0). If ct = 0, then whatever the
poster submits is posted in that round, whether it is good or bad. As before, if an agent
submits a bad post and there is monitoring, we assume that the bad post definitely will
be detected and discarded, so the posting agent gets utility 0 in that round. The utility
7
of agent i in round t now becomes
if i = pt and f t = 0;
if i = pt, f t = 1, and either ct = 0
or ct = 1 and vt = 0;
1
κ
−α if i = vt;
otherwise.
0
ut
i =
Suppose that the normative organisation decides that postings will be monitored
with probability 1 − 1/κ. Further suppose that an agent uses a randomised algorithm:
with probability β it submits a good posting, and with probability 1 − β it submits a
bad posting. Note that the agent's expected payoff is then β + (1 − β)(1/κ)κ = 1,
independent of β. Thus, we get an equilibrium in the single-shot game if monitoring
occurs with probability 1− 1/κ and agents submit bad postings with probability β, for
all choices of β, provided that there is always guaranteed to be a monitor available. We
will show that again there is an equilibrium in threshold policies. As long as there are
not too many tokens in the system, there are bound to be some agents with fewer than
the threshold number of tokens, so there will be a volunteer.
We assume the designer of the MAS specifies a value β∗ (which, intuitively, should
be a small 'tolerable' probability of a violation occurring).
If a monitor that finds
a problem is paid 1/β∗ tokens, then essentially the same type of mechanism as that
proposed for the case of unintentional violations will work, provided that we get bad
postings with probability exactly β∗. So, perversely, in this setup, while all strategies
are equally good for the poster, the MAS actually wants to encourage agents to post
something bad with probability β∗, so that monitors again get an expected payment
of 1 token. The way to do this is for the normative organisation to announce that it
will track the number of bad postings, and if the fraction of postings that have been
bad up to round t is β, checks will happen with probability 1 − β∗/(βκ). Thus, if
β = β∗, then checks happen with probability 1 − 1/κ, and we have an equilibrium.
Moreover, the payment (1/β tokens) is exactly what is needed to ensure that, in equi-
librium, monitoring occurs with probability β∗. For if β < β∗, then the check will
happen with probability less than 1 − 1/κ, which means that agents will want to make
more bad posts. On the other hand, if β > β∗, then monitoring will happen with prob-
ability greater than 1 − 1/κ, and agents will want to make fewer bad posts. Thus, in
equilibrium, we get bad posts with probability exactly β∗.
To summarise, we have the following mechanism, given a threshold k. If an agent
is chosen to post, it submits bad content with probability β∗ and good content with
probability 1 − β∗. After the agent has decided what to post and made the posting
available, the normative organisation decides whether the posting will be monitored.
For an initial period (say 1,000 rounds), a posting is monitored with probability 1 −
1/κ; afterwards, if the fraction of postings that have been discovered to be bad due
to monitoring is β and β is more than (say) two standard deviations from β∗, then
monitoring occurs with probability 1 − β∗/(βκ). If the decision has been made to
monitor, and the posting agent has at least one token (so that a post can be made), the
posting agent asks for volunteers and all agents with fewer than k tokens volunteer to
monitor and one is chosen to be the monitor. As in the case of unintentional violations,
if at least one agent volunteers, then the posting agent gives a randomly chosen agent
8
with less than k + 1/β∗ tokens one more. If the monitor approves the posting, it is
posted. If the monitor finds a problem with the posting, then a randomly chosen agent
with at least 1/β∗ tokens gives the monitor 1/β∗ tokens.
Theorem 3: For all > 0, there exist a δ sufficiently close to 1 and an n sufficiently
large such that if all n agents use a discount factor δ(cid:48) ≥ δ, then there exists a k such that
the mechanism above with all agents using a threshold of k is an -Nash equilibrium.
A proof sketch can be found in Section 6.
of a bad posting is β∗, as desired.
Note that, in the equilibrium whose existence is stated in Theorem 3, the probability
2.3 Optimising Social Welfare
In this section, we expand our analysis to include the utility of the MAS, and show how
social welfare can be maximised by controlling the number of tokens in the system.
Suppose that the MAS gets utility −C (where C > 0) for each norm violation. In
the setting where bad posts are inadvertent, if there is no monitoring, the MAS suffers
an expected loss of utility of bC in each round and the remaining players get 1 unit
of utility in each round (because a post is never discarded), so all the agents in the
system get an expected utility of 1 − bC per round. With monitoring, if we assume for
simplicity that an agent always has a token when it wants to post something and there
is always a volunteer to monitor, players get a total expected utility of 1 − b − α per
round. Thus, as long as C > (b + α)/b, we maximise social welfare by monitoring.
This analysis doesn't change if occasionally an agent does not have a token to pay for
a posting.
In the strategic setting, without monitoring, players will always post inappropriate
material, so the total utility will be κ − C per round.5 With monitoring, assuming
agents post something bad with probability β∗, as we have seen, the expected utility
of an agent who makes a posting is 1 (independent of β∗, so the total expected utility
in each round is 1 − (1 − 1/κ)α. So monitoring increases social welfare if C >
κ − 1 + (1 − 1/κ)α.
Although we have taken the MAS to be a separate entity with its own utility, in
some cases the utility of the MAS is best thought of as shared among the individual
agents posting content (e.g., in the case of a community or collaboratively maintained
website). In this case, we can assume that the players collectively bear the costs of a
bad posting. It is then certainly reasonable to assume that monitoring increases social
welfare; otherwise the players would simply not bother. But even if the MAS is really
an independent entity, whether or not monitoring increases social welfare, the MAS
can ensure the monitoring equilibrium is the one that occurs by simply posting this
equilibrium and asking agents to play it. As long as sufficiently many agents play it
(where "sufficiently many" means that there are enough to ensure that there will always
be a monitor), then no agent gains by deviating. Posting the equilibrium is also useful
if new agents join the system (see Section 2.5). Note that the MAS can always threaten
to shut down if there is no monitoring (which would be in its best interests). Given
5Of course, the utility of an inappropriate post may decrease if everyone is posting such material.
9
that, in the remainder of the discussion, we assume that agents play an equilibrium
with monitoring.
Social welfare is then maximised if, every time an agent is chosen to submit a post,
it has a token to pay for posting and there is an agent who is willing to volunteer to act
as a monitor. Friedman et al. [2006] show that, in their setting, social welfare depends
completely on the average number of tokens per agent. Social welfare increases mono-
tonically as the average number of tokens per agent increases, until it reaches a critical
point. The key point is that the threshold used in equilibrium decreases as the average
number of tokens per agent increases. The critical point is the one where the average
number of tokens per agent is equal to the threshold. At this point, no one is willing to
volunteer, so social welfare drops immediately to 0.
Essentially the same arguments apply in our setting, although we need to be a
In the setting of Friedman et al., after an initial period, no agent has
little careful.
more than the threshold number of tokens (since once they hit the threshold, they stop
volunteering). In our setting, since an agent can receive 1/b tokens (or 1/β∗ in the case
of strategic violations) in one round by discovering a violation, the maximum number
of tokens than an agent can have is not k, but k + 1/b (or k + 1/β∗), where k is the
threshold. As long as the average number of tokens per agent is less than k−(k−1)/n,
then there is always guaranteed to be a volunteer. Thus, social welfare is maximized if
the average number of tokens per agent, a, is as large as possible, while still being less
than k − (k − 1)/n, where k is the equilibrium threshold corresponding to a, since a
higher average increases the likelihood that an agent who is chosen to post can make a
posting.
2.4 Minimising the Role of the Normative Organisation
Although, using our mechanisms, the normative organisation no longer has to monitor
postings, it still has a role to play. The normative organisation:
• keeps track of the agents in the system (this is needed to ensure that all agents
are aware of a call for volunteers);
• chooses an agent at random with fewer than k + 1/b (or k + 1/β∗) tokens to
receive a token from the agent posting;
• choses an agent at random with at least 1/b (or 1/β∗) tokens to pay the monitor
if the monitor detects a bad posting;
• keeps track of the number of bad postings and decides whether checking should
be carried out in a given round in the mechanism for strategic violations.
There is actually no need for the normative organisation to do any of these things;
we can distribute its role among the agents in the system. It is easy for the agents
to maintain a list of the agents in the system (think of this as a large email list). Of
course, it will have to be updated whenever an agent enters or leaves the system (see
also Section 2.5).
Choosing an agent at random from among a group of agents to receive a token from
a posting agent, to monitor, or pay for finding a bad post can be done in an incentive-
compatible way (i.e., in a way that no agent has any incentive to deviate) using the
10
leader-election algorithm of Abraham et al. [2013]. Choosing a leader among a set of
players is equivalent to choosing one monitor among a set of volunteers. In equilibrium,
the algorithm of [Abraham et al., 2013] results in each player having an equal chance
of being chosen.
To handle the banking process, we can assume that each agent keeps track of how
many tokens each agent has. All the transactions can be announced publicly (i.e., who
is chosen at random to make a posting, who is chosen at random to get one token, etc.),
so everyone can update the amounts appropriately. (We can minimise the communica-
tion required by having only a small subset of agents keep track of how many tokens
each agent has, or by distributing the role of the bank, so that each agent keeps track
of the amounts held by only a few other agents [Vishnumurthy et al., 2003], but the
overhead seems low in any case.)
The leader-election algorithm of Abraham et al. can also be used to decide whether
checking should be carried out in a given round in the second mechanism. To see
how this works, first suppose that κ is an integer that is at most n. Choose a subset
of κ agents, including agent 1. There is monitoring if the leader chosen among the
κ players is not agent 1. This guarantees that checking is done with probability 1 −
1/κ. We can easily modify this algorithm to compute any rational probability. If the
detection of a bad post is announced publicly, agents can also keep track of the number
of bad postings in the mechanism for strategic violation case, so that the probability of
checking can be modified if needed.
2.5 Open Systems
We assume that our system is open; agents can enter and leave at any time. Dealing
with agents leaving is straightforward: they are just deleted from the list of players.
Noticing that an agent has left is also straightforward: an agent who does not attempt
to make a posting when it is chosen to submit a post, or does not pay tokens to a monitor
that detects a bad post when it is chosen to, will be assumed to have left. In the latter
case, a new agent can be chosen to make a payment by rerunning the leader election
algorithm.
Dealing with agents entering is almost as straightforward. We assume that there
is a url where agents can post a message saying that they wish to join. They are then
automatically added (by all agents) to the list of members. As in Friedman et al. [2006],
we assume that a new agent starts out with no tokens, so new entrants to the system
cannot post anything. This prevents an agent from joining the system, not doing any
monitoring until it runs out of tokens, then leaving the system and rejoining under a
different identity. New entrants can acquire tokens by monitoring, or by receiving one
token at random from an agent making a post.
There is one other issue that needs to be dealt with: if the number of agents changes
significantly, the average number of tokens per agent will change. As noted in Sec-
tion 2.3, this can have an effect on social welfare. To deal with this, we apply an idea
suggested by Friedman et al.: we choose a factor F , and multiply the number of tokens
that each agent has by F . The factor F is chosen so as to make the average number
11
of tokens close to the threshold again.6 As long as all the agents are keeping track of
the number of agents in the system (or can consult a public url where this information
is available) and we are using public banking, then the agents can detect if the average
number of tokens has deviated significantly from the target range, and apply the factor
F in a distributed way.
2.6 Robustness
In a Nash equilibrium, no single agent can do better by deviating. However, a coalition
may be able to do better by deviating in a coordinated way. In large systems, it seems
quite likely that coalitions may form.
Abraham et al. [2006] define a strategy profile to be m-resilient if no group of up to
m agents can increase their utility by deviating. A Nash equilibrium is just a 1-resilient
profile. It is not hard to show that our basic protocol, combined with "public banking",
where all agents keep track of how many tokens are held by each agent, is m-resilient
for all m. We assume that agents all keep track of of the number of tokens that each
agent has, and compare notes at each step. (If the number of messages exchanged is
a concern, it should suffice to compare notes far less often.) If there is disagreement
between any pair of agents, then the system simply stops. Clearly, no group of agents
gains any advantage by misrepresenting the status of the bank.
We suggested that the leader-election algorithm of Abraham et al. [2013] could be
used to distribute the process of choosing a volunteer at random. This algorithm is m-
resilient for all m < n in a completely-connected network (which we have implicitly
assumed -- every agent can communicate with every other agent). Thus, we can put all
the pieces together and still get m-resilience for reasonable-sized m.
However, this resilience claim relies on the assumption that the actions and agents
are exactly those in our model. In the remainder of this section we discuss some al-
ternatives and our intuitions for how they would affect our results, but we leave a full
analysis to future work.
As pointed out by Friedman et al. [2006], if it is possible to transfer funds between
agents, yet another type of collusion is possible: coalitions can use a lower threshold
because they can "insure" each other (i.e., if one agent runs out of tokens to pay for
a posting, another agent in the coalition can loan it a token); this allows agents in the
coalition to deviate by monitoring less frequently. However, this possibility does not
arise in our setting with public banking: there is no procedure for one agent to loan a
token to another agent.
If b is relatively small (so that 1/b is large) and an agent i could somehow arrange
that another j would always be the one to check i's post (and vice versa), then i might
be tempted to deliberately make a bad posting, so that j could find it and collect 1/b.
This is not a problem for Nash equilibrium, since it requires collusion on the part
6If the desired average number of tokens is t, an obvious alternative might be to have each agent entering
the system start with t tokens. But, as pointed out by Friedman et al., this leaves the system open to a sybil
attack: a new player enters the system, makes posts, but never monitors. Once the agent runs out of tokens, it
drops out of the system and re-enters the system using a different id. This approach may be less problematic
in our setting if agents like to have their identity associated with a post, so there is some loss of utility in
leaving the system and re-entering with a new id.
12
of two agents, but it is an issue if we want to prove 2-resilience. However, as our
analysis shows, in equilibrium, there will be many volunteers, so as long as the choice
among volunteers and the choice of agent required to pay if a violation is found are
both made at random, it is not hard to show that type of deviation will not result in a
gain, no matter how large the coalition is, since probability of gaining 1/b tokens by
deliberately deviating is equal to the probability of having to pay 1/b tokens.
Another potential source of actions outside our model is asynchrony. This would
complicate our Nash equilibrium analysis, but we would not expect this to have a
significant effect on single-agent deviations. With coalitions however, more care is
needed. In particular, using the leader-election algorithm of Abraham et al. [2013] is
only m resilient when m < n/2 with asynchronous communication.
In practice, as pointed out by Abraham et al. [2006], we may want even more. We
may want to allow for a certain number of "irrational" or "malicious" players, who do
not to seem to be acting according to their self-interests. This may be simply because
we do not understand what motivates them; that is, we do not know their true utility
functions. It may also be because of computer or system problems, or unfamiliarity
with the system; these are agents that would act rationally if they could, but something
is preventing them from doing so. Note that our proposal for dealing with the bank-
ing system, while sufficient to guarantee m-resilience, is not even what Abraham et
al. [2006] call 1-immune: one agent who wants to bring down the system can easily do
so by lying about the status of the bank. We can deal with such "malicious" agents by
using techniqes of Byzantine agreement [Fischer, 1983] to get agreement on the bank
status, as long as fewer than one-third of the agents are malicious. Indeed, if there is
a public-key infrastruture, so that cryptography is available, we can actually use tech-
niques of Byzantine agreement to handle an arbitrary number of malicious agents.
While we think that other aspects of our system are quite robust, and will degrade
gracefully in the presence of such irrational or malicious behaviour, we do not have
a formal proof. This is a topic that we believe deserves further exploration, since
robustness is an important property in practice.
3 Simulations
In this section, we use simulations to quantitatively evaluate the reasonableness of our
theoretical results. In particular, we show that the system is well behaved with as few
as 1000 agents, converging to the steady-state distribution of tokens quickly and then
staying close to it. We also examine an alternative version of our system where we take
the payment of 1/b tokens from 1/b random agents rather than all from a single agent.
We report here results of simulations where there are twice as many tokens as agents
(so the average number of tokens per agent -- shown to be a key parameter in [Friedman
et al., 2006] -- is two), agents used a threshold of k = 5, and, in the inadvertent setting,
the probability of a bad posting is b = 0.2. (These choices are arbitrary; similar results
hold for other settings of the parameters.) Results below refer to the notion of closeness
of distributions of tokens. We represent each distribution as a vector that indicates the
fraction of agents with each amount of tokens and then calculate the Euclidean distance
between those vectors. We elected to use Euclidean distance to be consistent with prior
13
work [Friedman et al., 2006]. The claims below remain true for a variety of reasonable
notions of closeness of distributions.
Figure 1 shows the results of starting the system near the steady-state distribution
of tokens predicted by the theory and then running the system for 1 million rounds.
It shows that the system stays quite close to the steady-state distribution with as few
as 1000 agents. For larger numbers, the system is even closer. With larger numbers
of agents, this simulation results in fewer rounds per agent, but an alternate version
where we ran it for 1000 rounds per agent (omitted) produced visually indistinguishable
results.
For 100 agents (omitted), the maximal distance is 10 times larger than in Figure 1
(below 0.05 rather than below 0.005), which may still be tolerable in practice.
Figure 1: The system stays close to the steady-state distribution of tokens.
In practice, it may be more natural to start the system with some more convenient
distribution, such as every agent having the same number of tokens, rather than the
maximum-entropy distribution predicted by the theory. (See Section 6).
We simulated starting with the most extreme distribution possible (every agent has
either 0 or k + 1/b − 1 tokens) to determine how long it took to get close to the
steady-state distribution. Figure 2 shows that even in this unrealistic and extreme case,
convergence takes only a small constant number of rounds per agent.
(With these
parameters, 5 rounds per agent suffice.) Figure 3, which fixes the number of agents at
1000, shows that the required time does not rise significantly even if we ask for very
small distances.
Our model has the somewhat undesirable feature that, when a payment must be
made, all 1/b tokens are taken from a single agent. It seems more palatable to take a
single token from 1/b agents instead. However, this invalidates the technique used to
calculate the steady-state distribution of wealth. While other work has shown that it is
possible to find other ways of calculating the steady-state distribution in other settings
where the analogous assumption is not made [Humbert et al., 2011], this requires sig-
nificant effort. Our intuition strongly suggested that charging 1/b agents one token each
should have no effect on the results, although we could not find a formal proof. There-
fore, we decided to empirically validate the existence of a steady-state distribution of
tokens. To do so, we ran this alternate mechanism for 100 million steps, sampling the
14
5000100001500020000250000.0000.0010.0020.0030.004NumberofAgentsMaximumDistance Figure 2: Convergence time to the near the steady-state distribution is a constant num-
ber of rounds per agent.
Figure 3: Convergence is fast even for very close distances.
distribution every 20000 steps, and took the sample mean as our estimate of the true
steady-state distribution. This change affected the final steady-state distribution more
than we expected. The results are shown in Figures 4 -- 7.
The blue dots in Figure 4 show the new steady-state distribution; the original dis-
tribution is described by the orange dots. The distance between these distributions is
0.152, which is two orders of magnitude larger than the variation around the steady-
state distribution that we saw Figure 1.
We verified that this is in fact the steady-state distribution by rerunning all three
simulations and calculating distances from it. The results, shown in Figures 5 -- 7, are
essentially the same. The results of this change seem positive overall: agents do not
face sudden large drops in their supply of tokens and convergence is, if anything, mod-
estly faster. There are more agents without tokens, but this could be mitigated by using
a larger number of tokens.
15
0500010000150002000025000020000400006000080000100000NumberofAgentsTimetoDistance.0010.0000.0020.0040.0060.0080.0102000300040005000EuclideanDistanceNumberofSteps Figure 4: Original and Alternate distribution of tokens.
Figure 5: The system stays close to the steady-state distribution of tokens.
4 Related Work
Our analysis of the behaviour and incentives of the token economy draws heavily on
prior work on scrip systems by Kash et al. [2006; 2012]. We adopt many of their
techniques, but extend their analysis to a variant model that applies to our setting.
Other work has shown that changing the random volunteer procedure can improve
welfare [Johnson et al., 2014] and that this approach still works if more than one agent
must be hired to perform work [Humbert et al., 2011]. Work from the systems com-
munity has looked at practical details such as the efficient implementation of a token
bank [Vishnumurthy et al., 2003].
Another strand of related work is on game-theoretic models of norm emergence.
Axelrod [1986] showed by means of simulations how norms could emerge given sim-
ple game rules where players punish each other for violations (and punish players who
don't punish violations), and a number of norm enforcement mechanisms with good
incentive properties have been analysed [Kandori, 1992; Ellison, 1994]. Axelrod's
work has been extended by Mahmoud et al. [2013] to general scenarios and to incor-
16
1from1/b1/bfrom1024680.00.10.20.30.4NumberofTokensFractionofAgents5000100001500020000250000.0000.0010.0020.0030.004NumberofAgentsMaximumDistance Figure 6: Convergence time to the near the steady-state distribution is a constant num-
ber of rounds per agent.
Figure 7: Convergence is fast even for very close distances.
porate learning. Da Pinnick et al. [2010] proposed a distributed norm enforcement
mechanism that uses ostracism as punishment, and showed both analytically and ex-
perimentally that it provides an upper bound on the number of norm violations.
There is a significant amount of work in the MAS literature on infrastructures for
implementing normative organisations, monitoring for norm violations, and compen-
sating violations through sanctions. One common approach involves the use of addi-
tional components or agents to implement the normative organisation. For example,
Boella and van der Torre [2003] propose 'defender agents' which detect and punish
norm violations. Esteva et al. [2004] propose the use of 'governors' to monitor and
regiment message exchanges between agents; each agent is associated with a governor,
and all interactions with other agents are filtered by the governor to ensure compliance
with norms. Grizard et al. [2007], propose an approach in which a separate system of
'controller agents' monitor norm violations and apply reputational sanctions to 'appli-
cation agents' in a MAS; application agents avoid interactions with other application
agents that have low reputation, hence eventually excluding bad agents from the sys-
17
0500010000150002000025000020000400006000080000NumberofAgentsTimetoDistance.0010.0000.0020.0040.0060.0080.01020002500300035004000EuclideanDistanceNumberofSteps tem. Modgil et al. [2009] propose a two-layer approach, in which 'trusted observers'
relay observations of states of interest referenced by norms to 'monitor agents' re-
sponsible for determining whether a norm has been violated (a similar approach is
described by Criado et al. [Criado et al., 2012]). Hubner et al. [2010] describe an ap-
proach in which 'organizational agents' monitor interactions between agents mediated
by 'organizational artifacts'. Balke et al. [2013] have used simulation to investigate the
effectiveness and costs of paying 'enforcement agents' to monitor norm violations in
a wireless mobile grid scenario; the mechanism they propose for rewarding enforce-
ment agents results in a cost to the MAS (in their setting, the telecommunications
company), and they assume sanction-based enforcement (agents who violate the norm
are punished by the telecommunications company). Testerink et al. [2014] consider
the problem of monitoring and enforcement by a network of normative organisations
in which each normative organisation has only partial information about the actions of
the agents and is capable of only local enforcement (by sanctioning).
These approaches are distributed, but the responsibility for monitoring still lies
with the normative organisation, and the cost of monitoring is borne by the MAS,
either in the cost of running additional system components which monitor and regulate
interactions (e.g., [Boella and van der Torre, 2003; Esteva et al., 2004]) or by paying
some agents to monitor the rest (e.g., [Balke et al., 2013]). Fagundes et al. [2014] have
explored the tradeoff between the efficiency and cost of norm enforcement in stochastic
environments, to identify scenarios in which monitoring can be funded by sanctions
levied on violating agents while at the same time keeping the number of violations
within a tolerable level. However, in an open multi-agent system, approaches in which
norm enforcement is based on sanctioning (e.g., [Grizard et al., 2007; Testerink et
al., 2014]) may be susceptible to sybil attacks; sanctioned agents may simply leave
the system and rejoin under a different id. In contrast, in our approach, the cost of
monitoring is borne by the agents using the MAS. Moreover, agents cannot benefit by
dropping out and rejoining the system, and monitoring is m-resilient against collusion
by monitoring agents.
5 Conclusion
We propose an approach to norm monitoring and show that, for sufficiently large MAS,
perfect monitoring (and hence enforcement) can be achieved when violations are in-
advertent. When violations are strategic, the probability of a norm violation can be
made arbitrarily small. This is achieved at no cost to the MAS and without assuming
that fines can be used to pay for monitoring. Instead, we achieve perfect or near per-
fect enforcement using techniques adapted from scrip systems [Friedman et al., 2006].
Our approach is limited to monitoring norms which forbid single actions (or result-
ing states). In contrast, approaches such as [Esteva et al., 2004; Modgil et al., 2009;
Hubner et al., 2010] are capable of monitoring conditional norms which specify com-
plex behaviours, such as multi-step protocols. We leave extending our approach to such
conditional norms to future work.
18
6 Appendix: Sketch of Proof of Theorems 1 and 3
In the setting of Friedman et al. [2006] (denoted FHK in this section), there is someone
who wants work done and an agent who is willing to do it. The agent who wants work
done gives a token to the agent willing to do it (chosen among volunteers, just as in our
setting). In our setting, there is an agent who wants to post something; it plays the same
role as the agent who wants work done in the FHK system. But now the posting agent
gives a token to a random agent, and the agent performing work (monitoring) gets paid
only if he detects a problem. Moreover, it is not paid by the agent doing the posting,
but by a random agent; and it is not paid one token, but 1/b (or 1/β∗) tokens. While
these seem to be significant differences, the argument used by FHK to prove that there
exists an equilibrium in threshold strategies goes through almost without change.
We briefly sketch the key features of the FHK argument here, and the differences in
our setting. Suppose that all players are following a threshold strategy with threshold
k. What is the best response for a given agent? In particular, when should the agent
volunteer?
Clearly, the one thing that the agent is concerned about is that it will run out of
tokens before it is next chosen to monitor, and thus not be able to post when it has the
opportunity to do so. The likelihood of this happening depends on how many other
volunteers there are each time the agent volunteers. To take an extreme case, if the
agent can be sure that it will be the only volunteer, then it is safe waiting until it has
one token left. It is unlikely that it will get a chance to make a posting twice before it
is able to earn a token. On the other hand, if there will be lots of competition each time
it volunteers, then it would be better to use a higher threshold.
So the first step in the proof is to get an accurate estimate of how many volunteers
there will be at each step. To do this, we view the system as a Markov chain, where the
state of the system is characterised by how many tokens each agent has. For simplicity,
we take the Markov chain to consist of all states reachable from some fixed initial state,
assuming that all players follow a fixed threshold-k strategy and all players have an
integral number of tokens, bounded by k. In each state, it is straightforward to compute
the probability of a transition to another state: each agent will be chosen to make a
posting with probability 1/n; we know whether that agent has a token (and thus can
post something); we know exactly who will volunteer to monitor (all agents with less
than k tokens); and, since a volunteer is chosen at random among the volunteers, we
also know the likelihood that an agent will be chosen to monitor. The key observation is
that, in the FHK setting, this Markov chain is reversible: the probability of a transition
from a state s to a state s(cid:48) (cid:54)= s is the same as the probability of the reverse transition
from s(cid:48) to s.
In the FHK setting, reversibility is easy to check: the only such transition that can
occur is from a state where an agent i performs work for an agent j. Then in state s(cid:48),
j has one fewer token than in state s, and i has one more. This transition occurs with
probability 1/nm, where m is the number of agents in state s other than j who have
fewer than k tokens: i is chosen in state s with probability 1/m, and j is chosen with
independent probability 1/n. The transition from s(cid:48) to s also has probability 1/nm.
Agent i is chosen in s(cid:48) with probability 1/n (and i is guaranteed to have at least one
token in s(cid:48), since it received the token from j) and there are again m volunteers: all the
19
ones that volunteered in state s other than i together with agent j (who must have less
than k tokens in state s(cid:48), since j gave a token to i).
In the inadvertent setting, we again take the Markov chain to consist of all states
reachable with positive probability from some fixed starting state, with everyone fol-
lowing the threshold strategy. Reversibility still holds, but we have to work a little
harder to show it. For simplicity, we assume that the act of the person wanting to do
monitoring paying one token to a random agent with less the maximum number of
tokens is distinct from the act where an agent who discovers a violation is paid 1/b
tokens by a random agent with at least 1/b tokens. In the first transition, the agent
i who makes a post ends up with one less token and the random agent j who gets it
has one more token. This transition happens with probability 1/nm, where m is the
number of agents other than i who have less than k + 1/b tokens. The reverse transition
happens with the same probability: j is chosen to post something with probability 1/n,
j can make a posting since it received a token from i, and the agents who have less
than k + 1/b tokens other than j is still m: all the agents who had less than k + 1/b
tokens in state s, together with i (who must have less than k + 1/b tokens, since it gave
a token to j).
Now consider the transition from s to s(cid:48) where i gives j 1/b tokens because j
discovered a violation. This transition occurs with probability b/mm(cid:48), where m is the
number of agents other than i with less than k tokens in s (these are the volunteers)
and m(cid:48) is the number of agents with at least 1/b tokens. Again the reverse transition
happens with the same probability: now j must have at least 1/b tokens and i must
have less than k tokens, so i is a potential volunteer and j is an agent who can pay i.
The rest of the argument now continues as in [Friedman et al., 2006], so we just
sketch the details. Clearly the Markov chain is finite, given our assumption that b is
rational: we can easily bound the number of possible states, since b is rational and
players have at most k + 1/b tokens.7 It immediately follows from reversibility and
our assumptions that the states in the Markov chain consist of all states reachable from
some initial starting state that Markov chain is irreducible: every state is reachable
from every other state. Finally, the same arguments as in FHK show that the Markov
chain is aperiodic: for every state s, there exist to cycles from s to itself such that the
gcd of their lengths is 1.
It is well known [Resnick, 1992] that every finite, reversible, aperiodic, and irre-
ducible Markov chain has a limit distribution π (where π(s) is the fraction of the time
that the Markov chain is in state s) and in this limit distribution, all states are equally
likely. However, we are not so interested in the probability of a given state; we are
interested in the probability of the distribution of tokens; in particular we are interested
in the fraction of agents that have less than the threshold number of tokens, because this
will tell us how many volunteers there will be. To understand the difference, consider
a system with two tokens. There are n states where agent has both the tokens, and(cid:0)n
2
states where two agents have one token each. So although all states are equally likely,
the distribution where 2/n of the agents have one token and the rest have none is far
more likely than the distribution where 1/n of the agents have two tokens, and the rest
have none.
(cid:1)
7Here is where we need the technical assumption that b is rational.
20
Using standard techniques, it can be shown that the distribution that maximises
entropy is overwhelmingly more likely than the rest. So, as long as n is sufficiently
large, the number of agents with less than the threshold k of tokens is, with extremely
high probability, γn, where γ is the probability of having less than k tokens according
to the maximum entropy distribution. Once the agent knows how much competition
she will face, it is easy to compute a best response, and to show that there is a best
response in threshold strategies.
Let BR(k) denote the agent's best-response threshold strategy if all other agents are
using threshold k. FHK show that BR(k) is monotonically increasing in k; moreover,
for δ sufficiently close to 1, there exists k such that BR(k) > k.
It follows using
standard arguments that BR has a fixed point that is greater than k. That fixed-point is
an -Nash equilibrium, for if BR(k) = k and all agents are playing a threshold strategy,
then playing a threshold of k is an -best response. (The accounts for the fact that the
the distribution of money is not exactly described by the maximum entropy distribution,
and even with the maximum entropy distribution, there is a very small chance that
playing k is not a best response.) This completes the proof sketch of Theorem 1.
The argument in the case of Theorem 3 is quite similar. Here the setting appears
more complicated, because agents have two strategic choices: deciding whether or not
to post bad material, and deciding whether or not to volunteer. However, as shown
earlier, our choice of parameters guarantees that an agent's payoff is independent of
its strategy regarding whether or not to post bad material. Indeed, if we fix agent i's
strategy for deciding whether or not to volunteer, and fix the strategies of all other
agents, all choices of strategy for deciding whether or not to post bad material, even
ones that are history-dependent and correlated the agent i's threshold and the strategies
of all other agents, give i the same utility. So, we can assume without loss of generality
that in equilibrium, agent i makes a bad posting with probability β∗.
Now essentially the same argument as that used in the proof of Theorem 1 shows
that there is an equilibrium where agents' make their choices regarding volunteering ac-
cording to some threshold strategy. In particular, the reversibility argument still holds;
the probability just need to be multiplied by 1 − 1/κ.
21
References
[Abraham et al., 2006] I. Abraham, D. Dolev, R. Gonen, and J. Y. Halpern. Distributed
computing meets game theory: robust mechanisms for rational secret sharing and
multiparty computation. In Proc. 25th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed
Computing, pages 53 -- 62, 2006.
[Abraham et al., 2013] Ittai Abraham, Danny Dolev, and Joseph Y. Halpern. Dis-
tributed protocols for leader election: A game-theoretic perspective.
In Yehuda
Afek, editor, Distributed Computing - 27th International Symposium, DISC 2013,
Jerusalem, Israel, October 14-18, 2013. Proceedings, volume 8205 of Lecture Notes
in Computer Science, pages 61 -- 75. Springer, 2013.
[Axelrod, 1986] Robert Axelrod. An evolutionary approach to norms. The American
Political Science Review, 80(4):1095 -- 1111, 1986.
[Balke et al., 2013] Tina Balke, Marina De Vos, and Julian Padget. Evaluating the
cost of enforcement by agent-based simulation: A wireless mobile grid example.
In Guido Boella, Edith Elkind, Bastin Tony Roy Savarimuthu, Frank Dignum, and
Martin K. Purvis, editors, PRIMA 2013: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent
Systems, volume 8291 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 21 -- 36. Springer
Berlin Heidelberg, 2013.
[Boella and van der Torre, 2003] Guido Boella and Leendert W. N. van der Torre.
Norm governed multiagent systems: The delegation of control to autonomous
In 2003 IEEE/WIC International Conference on Intelligent Agent Tech-
agents.
nology (IAT 2003), pages 329 -- 335. IEEE Computer Society, 2003.
[Criado et al., 2012] Natalia Criado, Estefania Argente, Pablo Noriega, and Vicente J.
Botti. A distributed architecture for enforcing norms in open MAS. In Francien
Dechesne, Hiromitsu Hattori, Adriaan ter Mors, Jose M. Such, Danny Weyns, and
Frank Dignum, editors, Advanced Agent Technology - AAMAS 2011 Workshops,
AMPLE, AOSE, ARMS, DOCM3AS, ITMAS, Taipei, Taiwan, May 2-6, 2011. Revised
Selected Papers, volume 7068 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 457 --
471. Springer, 2012.
[Dastani et al., 2009] Mehdi Dastani, Davide Grossi, John-Jules Ch. Meyer, and Nick
Tinnemeier. Normative multi-agent programs and their logics. In John-Jules Ch.
Meyer and Jan Broersen, editors, Knowledge Representation for Agents and Multi-
Agent Systems, volume 5605 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 16 -- 31.
Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009.
[de Pinninck et al., 2010] Adrian Perreau de Pinninck, Carles Sierra, and W. Marco
Schorlemmer. A multiagent network for peer norm enforcement. Autonomous
Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 21(3):397 -- 424, 2010.
[Ellison, 1994] Glenn Ellison. Cooperation in the prisoner's dilemma with anonymous
random matching. Review of Economic Studies, 61:567 -- 588, 1994.
22
[Esteva et al., 2004] Marc Esteva, Bruno Rosell, Juan A. Rodr´ıguez-Aguilar, and
Josep Llu´ıs Arcos. AMELI: An agent-based middleware for electronic institutions.
In 3rd International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Sys-
tems (AAMAS 2004), 19-23 August 2004, New York, NY, USA, pages 236 -- 243. IEEE
Computer Society, 2004.
[Fagundes et al., 2014] Moser Silva Fagundes, Sascha Ossowski,
and Felipe
Meneguzzi. Analyzing the tradeoff between efficiency and cost of norm enforce-
ment in stochastic environments. In 21st European Conference on Artificial Intelli-
gence (ECAI 2014), pages 1003 -- 1004. IOS Press, 2014.
[Fischer, 1983] M. J. Fischer. The consensus problem in unreliable distributed sys-
tems. In M. Karpinski, editor, Foundations of Computation Theory, Lecture Notes in
Computer Science, Volume 185, pages 127 -- 140. Springer, Berlin/New York, 1983.
[Friedman et al., 2006] Eric J. Friedman, Joseph Y. Halpern, and Ian A. Kash. Effi-
ciency and nash equilibria in a scrip system for P2P networks. In Proceedings 7th
ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC-2006), pages 140 -- 149. ACM, 2006.
[Grizard et al., 2007] Amandine Grizard, Laurent Vercouter, Tiberiu Stratulat, and
Guillaume Muller. A peer-to-peer normative system to achieve social order. In Pablo
Noriega, Javier Vzquez-Salceda, Guido Boella, Olivier Boissier, Virginia Dignum,
Nicoletta Fornara, and Eric Matson, editors, Coordination, Organizations, Institu-
tions, and Norms in Agent Systems II, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages
274 -- 289. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2007.
[Hubner et al., 2010] JomiF. Hubner, Olivier Boissier, Rosine Kitio, and Alessandro
Instrumenting multi-agent organisations with organisational artifacts and
Ricci.
agents. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 20:369 -- 400, 2010.
[Humbert et al., 2011] M. Humbert, H. Manshaei, and J.-P. Hubaux. One-to-n scrip
systems for cooperative privacy-enhancing technologies. In Communication, Con-
trol, and Computing (Allerton), 2011 49th Annual Allerton Conference on, pages
682 -- 692, 2011.
[Johnson et al., 2014] Kris Johnson, David Simchi-Levi, and Peng Sun. Analyzing
scrip systems. Operations Research, 62(3):524 -- 534, 2014.
[Kandori, 1992] Michihiro Kandori. Social norms and community enforcement. Re-
view of Economic Studies, 59:63 -- 80, 1992.
[Kash et al., 2012] Ian A. Kash, Eric J. Friedman, and Joseph Y. Halpern. Optimizing
scrip systems: crashes, altruists, hoarders, sybils and collusion. Distributed Com-
puting, 25(5):335 -- 357, 2012.
[Mahmoud et al., 2013] Samhar Mahmoud, Nathan Griffiths, Jeroen Keppens, and
Michael Luck. Norm emergence through dynamic policy adaptation in scale free
networks. In Huib Aldewereld and Jaime Simao Sichman, editors, Coordination,
Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Agent Systems VIII - 14th International
23
Workshop, COIN 2012, Revised Selected Papers, volume 7756 of Lecture Notes in
Computer Science, pages 123 -- 140. Springer, 2013.
[Modgil et al., 2009] Sanjay Modgil, Noura Faci, Felipe Rech Meneguzzi, Nir Oren,
Simon Miles, and Michael Luck. A framework for monitoring agent-based nor-
mative systems.
In Carles Sierra, Cristiano Castelfranchi, Keith S. Decker, and
Jaime Simao Sichman, editors, 8th International Joint Conference on Autonomous
Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2009), pages 153 -- 160, Budapest, Hungary,
2009. IFAAMAS.
[Resnick, 1992] S. I. Resnick. Adventures in Stochastic Processes. Birkhauser, 1992.
[Testerink et al., 2014] Bas Testerink, Mehdi Dastani, and John-Jules Meyer. Norms
in distributed organizations. In Tina Balke, Frank Dignum, M. Birna van Riemsdijk,
and Amit K. Chopra, editors, Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms
in Agent Systems IX, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 120 -- 135. Springer
International Publishing, 2014.
[Vishnumurthy et al., 2003] V. Vishnumurthy, S. Chandrakumar, and E. G. Sirer.
KARMA: a secure economic framework for peer-to-peer resource sharing. In First
Workshop on Economics of Peer-to-Peer Systems (P2PECON), 2003.
24
|
1907.09112 | 1 | 1907 | 2019-07-22T03:18:05 | Causality and Epistemic Reasoning in Byzantine Multi-Agent Systems | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.DC",
"cs.LO"
] | Causality is an important concept both for proving impossibility results and for synthesizing efficient protocols in distributed computing. For asynchronous agents communicating over unreliable channels, causality is well studied and understood. This understanding, however, relies heavily on the assumption that agents themselves are correct and reliable. We provide the first epistemic analysis of causality in the presence of byzantine agents, i.e., agents that can deviate from their protocol and, thus, cannot be relied upon. Using our new framework for epistemic reasoning in fault-tolerant multi-agent systems, we determine the byzantine analog of the causal cone and describe a communication structure, which we call a multipede, necessary for verifying preconditions for actions in this setting. | cs.MA | cs | Causality and Epistemic Reasoning
in Byzantine Multi-Agent Systems
Roman Kuznets*
Embedded Computing Systems
TU Wien
Vienna, Austria
[email protected]
Laurent Prosperi
ENS Paris-Saclay
Cachan, France
[email protected]
Krisztina Fruzsa†
Embedded Computing Systems
TU Wien
Vienna, Austria
[email protected]
Ulrich Schmid
Embedded Computing Systems
TU Wien
Vienna, Austria
[email protected]
Causality is an important concept both for proving impossibility results and for synthesizing efficient
protocols in distributed computing. For asynchronous agents communicating over unreliable chan-
nels, causality is well studied and understood. This understanding, however, relies heavily on the
assumption that agents themselves are correct and reliable. We provide the first epistemic analysis
of causality in the presence of byzantine agents, i.e., agents that can deviate from their protocol and,
thus, cannot be relied upon. Using our new framework for epistemic reasoning in fault-tolerant multi-
agent systems, we determine the byzantine analog of the causal cone and describe a communication
structure, which we call a multipede, necessary for verifying preconditions for actions in this setting.
1
Introduction
Reasoning about knowledge has been a valuable tool for analyzing distributed systems for decades [5, 9],
and has provided a number of fundamental insights. As crisply formulated by Moses [17] in the form of
the Knowledge of Preconditions Principle, a precondition for action must be known in order to be action-
able. In a distributed environment, where agents only communicate by exchanging messages, an agent
can only learn about events happening to other agents via messages (or sometimes the lack thereof [8]).
In asynchronous systems, where the absence of communication is indistinguishable from delayed
communication, agents can only rely on messages they receive. Lamport's seminal definition of the
happened-before relation [14] establishes the causal structure for asynchronous agents in the agent -- time
graph describing a run of a system. This structure is often referred to as a causal cone, whereby causal
links are either time transitions from past to future for one agent or messages from one agent to another.
As demonstrated by Chandy and Misra [2], the behavior of an asynchronous agent can only be affected
by events from within its causal cone.
The standard way of showing that an agent does not know of an event is to modify a given run by
removing the event in question in such a way that the agent cannot detect the change. By Hintikka's
definition of knowledge [11], the agent thinks it possible that the event has not occurred and, hence, does
not know of the event to have occurred. Chandy and Misra's result shows that in order for agent i to learn
of an event happening to another agent j, there must exist a chain of successfully delivered messages
*Supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) projects RiSE/SHiNE (S11405) and ADynNet (P28182).
†PhD student in the FWF doctoral program LogiCS (W1255).
L.S. Moss (Ed.): TARK 2019
EPTCS 297, 2019, pp. 293 -- 312, doi:10.4204/EPTCS.297.19
© R. Kuznets, L. Prosperi, U. Schmid & K. Fruzsa
This work is licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution License.
294
Causality and Epistemic Reasoning in Byzantine Multi-Agent Systems
leading from the moment of agent j observing the event to some past or present state of agent i. This ob-
servation remains valid in asynchronous distributed systems where messages could be lost and/or where
agents may stop operating (i.e., crash) [4, 10, 19].
In synchronous systems, if message delays are upper-bounded, agents can also learn from the absence
of communication (communication-by-time). As shown in [1], Lamport's happened-before relation must
then be augmented by causal links indicating no communication within the message delay upper bound
to also capture causality induced via communication-by-time, leading to the so-called syncausality rela-
tion. Its utility has been demonstrated using the ordered response problem, where agents must perform
a sequence of actions in a given order: both the necessary and sufficient knowledge and a necessary and
sufficient communication structure (called a centipede) have been determined in [1]. It is important to
note, however, that syncausality works only in fault-free distributed systems with reliable communica-
tion. Although it has recently been shown in [8] that silent choirs are a way to extend it to distributed
systems where agents may crash, the idea does not generalize to less benign faults.
Unfortunately, all the above ways of capturing causality and the resulting simplicity of determining
the causal cone completely break down if agents may be byzantine faulty [15]. Byzantine faulty agents
may behave arbitrarily, in particular, need not adhere to their protocol and may, hence, send arbitrary
messages. It is common to limit the maximum number of agents that ever act byzantine in a distributed
system by some number f , which is typically much smaller than the total number n of agents. Prompted
by the ever growing number of faulty hardware and software having real-world negative, sometimes
life-critical, consequences, capturing causality and providing ways for determining the causal cone in
byzantine fault-tolerant distributed systems is both an important and scientifically challenging task. To
the best of our knowledge, this challenge has not been addressed in the literature before.1
In a nutshell, for f > 0, the problem of capturing causality becomes complicated by the fact that
a simple causal chain of messages is no longer sufficient: a single byzantine agent in the chain could
manufacture "evidence" for anything, both false negatives and false positives. And indeed, obvious
generalizations of message chains do not work. For example, it is a folklore result that, in the case
of direct communication, at least f + 1 confirmations are necessary because f of them could be false.
When information is transmitted along arbitrary, possibly branching and intersecting chains of messages,
the situation is even more complex and defies simplistic direct analysis. In particular, as shown by the
counterexample in [16, Fig. 1], one cannot rely on Menger's Theorem [3] for separating nodes in the
two-dimensional agent -- time graph.
Major contributions: In this paper, we generalize the causality structure of asynchronous distributed
systems described above to multi-agent systems involving byzantine faulty agents. Relying on our novel
byzantine runs-and-systems framework [12] (described in full detail in [13]), we utilize some generic
epistemic analysis results for determining the shape of the byzantine analog of Lamport's causal cone.
Since knowledge of an event is too strong a precondition in the presence of byzantine agents, it has to be
relaxed to something more akin to belief relative to correctness [18], for which we coined the term hope.
We show that hope can only be achieved via a causal message chain that passes solely through correct
agents (more precisely, through agents still correct while sending the respective messages). While the
result looks natural enough, its formal proof is quite involved technically and paints an instructive pic-
ture of how byzantine agents can affect the information flow. We also establish a necessary condition for
detecting an event, and a corresponding communication structure (called a multipede), which is severely
complicated by the fact that the reliable causal cones of indistinguishable runs may be different.
Paper organization: In Sect. 2, we succinctly introduce the features of our byzantine runs-and-
1Despite having "Byzantine" in the title, [4, 10] only address benign faults (crashes, send/receive omissions of messages).
R. Kuznets, L. Prosperi, U. Schmid & K. Fruzsa
295
systems framework [13] and state some generic theorems and lemmas needed for proving the results
of the paper. In Sect. 3, we describe the mechanism of run modifications, which are used to remove
events an agent should not know about from a run, without the agent noticing. Our characterization of
the byzantine causal cone is provided in Sect. 4, the necessary conditions for establishing hope for an
occurrence of an event and the underlying multipede structure can be found in Sect. 5. Some conclusions
in Sect. 6 round-off the paper.
2 Runs-and-Systems Framework for Byzantine Agents
First, we describe the modifications of the runs-and-systems framework [5] necessary to account for
byzantine behavior. To prevent wasting space on multiple definition environments, we give the following
series of formal definitions as ordinary text marking defined objects by italics; consult [13] for the same
definitions in fully spelled-out format. As a further space-saving measure, instead of repeating every
time "actions and/or events," we use haps2 as a general term referring to either actions or events.
The goal of all these definitions is to formally describe a system where asynchronous agents 1, . . . , n
perform actions according to their protocols, observe events, and exchange messages within an envi-
ronment represented as a special agent ε. Unlike the environment, agents only have limited local in-
formation, in particular, being asynchronous, do not have access to the global clock. No assumptions
apart from liveness are made about the communication. Messages can be lost, arbitrarily delayed, and/or
delivered in the wrong order. This part of the system is a fairly standard asynchronous system with un-
reliable communication. The novelty is that the environment may additionally cause at most f agents
to become faulty in arbitrary ways. A faulty agent can perform any of its actions irrespective of its
protocol and observe events that did not happen, e.g., receive unsent or corrupted messages. It can also
have false memories about actions it has performed. At the same time, much like the global clock, such
malfunctions are not directly visible to an agent, especially when it mistakenly thinks it acted correctly.
We fix a finite set A = {1, . . . , n} of agents. Agent i ∈ A can perform actions a ∈ Actionsi,
e.g., send messages, and witness events e ∈ Eventsi such as message delivery. We denote Hapsi :=
Actionsi ⊔ Eventsi. The action of sending a copy numbered k of a message µ ∈ Msgs to an agent j ∈ A
is denoted send( j,µk), whereas a receipt of such a message from i ∈ A is recorded locally as recv(i,µ).3
Agent i records actions from Actionsi and observes events from Eventsi without dividing them into
correct and faulty. The environment ε, on the contrary, always knows if the agent acted correctly or
was forced into byzantine behavior. Hence, the syntactic representations of each hap for agents (local
view) and for the environment (global view) must differ, with the latter containing more information.
In particular, the global view syntactically distinguishes correct haps from their byzantine counterparts.
While there is no way for an agent to distinguish a real event from its byzantine duplicate, it can analyze
its recorded actions and compare them with its protocol. Sometimes, this information might be sufficient
for the agent to detect its own malfunctions.
All of Actions :=Si∈A Actionsi, Events :=Si∈A Eventsi, and Haps := Actions ⊔ Events represent the
local view of haps. All haps taking place after a timestamp t ∈ T := N and no later than t + 1 are grouped
into a round denoted t + ½ and are treated as happening simultaneously. To model asynchronous agents,
we exclude these system timestamps from the local format of Haps. At the same time, the environment ε
incorporates the current timestamp t into the global format of every correct action a ∈ Actionsi, as initi-
2Cf. "Till I know 'tis done, Howe'er my haps, my joys were ne'er begun." W. Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act IV, Scene 3.
3Thus, it is possible to send several copies of the same message in the same round. If one or more of such copies are received
in the same round, however, the recipient does not know which copy it has received, nor that there have been multiple copies.
296
Causality and Epistemic Reasoning in Byzantine Multi-Agent Systems
ated by agent i in the local format, via a one-to-one function global (i,t, a). Timestamps are especially
crucial for proper message processing with global (i,t, send( j,µk)) := gsend(i, j,µ, id(i, j,µ, k,t)) for
some one-to-one function id : A × A × Msgs × N × T → N that assigns each sent message a unique
global message identifier (GMI). We chose not to model agent-to-agent channels explicitly. With all
messages effectively sent through one system-wide channel, these GMIs are needed to ensure the causal-
ity of message delivery, i.e., that only sent messages can be delivered correctly. The sets GActionsi :=
{global (i,t, a) t ∈ T, a ∈ Actionsi} of all possible correct actions for each agent in global format are
Unlike correct actions, correct events witnessed by agents are generated by the environment ε and,
hence, can be assumed to be produced already in the global format GEventsi. We define GEvents :=
pairwise disjoint due to the injectivity of global. We set GActions :=Fi∈A GActionsi.
Fi∈A GEventsi assuming them to be pairwise disjoint, and GHaps = GEvents ⊔ GActions. We do not
consider the possibility of the environment violating its protocol, which is meant to model the fundamen-
tal physical laws of the system. Thus, all events that can happen are considered correct. A byzantine event
is, thus, a subjective notion. It is an event that was perceived by an agent despite not taking place. In other
words, each correct event E ∈ GEventsi has a faulty counterpart fake (i, E), and agent i cannot distinguish
the two. An important type of correct global events of agent j is the delivery grecv( j, i,µ, id) ∈ GEvents j
of message µ with GMI id ∈ N sent by agent i. Note that the GMI, which is used in by the global
format to ensure causality, must be removed before the delivery is recorded by the agent in the local
format because GMIs contain the time of sending, which should not be accessible to agents. To strip
this information before updating local histories, we employ a function local : GHaps → Haps converting
correct haps from the global into the local format in such a way that for actions local reverses global,
i.e., local(cid:0)global (i,t, a)(cid:1) := a. For message deliveries, local(cid:0)grecv( j, i,µ, id)(cid:1) := recv(i,µ), i.e., agent j
only knows that it received message µ from agent i. It is, thus, possible for two distinct correct global
events, e.g., grecv( j, i,µ, id) and grecv( j, i,µ, id′), representing the delivery of different copies of the
same message µ, possibly sent by i at different times, to be recorded by j the same way, as recv(i,µ).
Therefore, correct actions are initiated by agents in the local format and translated into the global
format by the environment. Correct and byzantine events are initiated by the environment in the global
format and translated into the local format before being recorded by agents.4 We will now turn our
attention to byzantine actions.
While a faulty event is purely an error of perception, actions can be faulty in another way: they can
violate the protocol. The crucial question is: who should be responsible for such violations? With agents'
actions governed by their protocols while everything else is up to the environment, it seems that errors,
especially unintended errors, should be the environment's responsibility. A malfunctioning agent tries
to follow its protocol but fails for reasons outside of its control, i.e., due to environment interference. A
malicious agent tries to hide its true intentions from other agents by pretending to follow its expected
protocol and, thus, can also be modeled via environment interference. Thus, we model faulty actions as
byzantine events of the form fake (i, A 7→ A′) where A, A′ ∈ GActionsi ⊔ {noop} for a special non-action
noop in global format. Here A is the action (or, in case of noop, inaction) performed, while A′ rep-
resents the action (inaction) perceived instead by the agent. More precisely, the agent either records
a′ = local(A′) ∈ Eventsi if A′ ∈ GEventsi or has no record of this byzantine action if A′ = noop. The
byzantine inaction fail (i) := fake (i, noop 7→ noop) is used to make agent i faulty without performing
any actions and without leaving a record in i's local history. The set of all i's byzantine events, corre-
sponding to both faulty events and faulty actions, is denoted BEventsi, with BEvents :=Fi∈A BEventsi.
To prevent our asynchronous agents from inferring the global clock by counting rounds, we make
4This has already been described for correct events. A byzantine event is recorded the same way as its correct counterpart.
R. Kuznets, L. Prosperi, U. Schmid & K. Fruzsa
297
waking up for a round contingent on the environment issuing a special system event go(i) for the agent in
question. Agent i's local view of the system immediately after round t + ½, referred to as (process-time or
agent-time) node (i,t + 1), is recorded in i's local state ri(t + 1), also called i's local history. Nodes (i, 0)
correspond to initial local states ri(0) ∈ Σi, with G (0) := ∏i∈A Σi. If a round contains neither go(i) nor
any event to be recorded in i's local history, then the said history ri(t + 1) = ri(t) remains unchanged,
denying the agent the knowledge of the round just passed. Otherwise, ri(t + 1) = X : ri(t), for X ⊆ Hapsi,
the set of all actions and events perceived by i in round t + ½, where : stands for concatenation. The ex-
act definition will be given via the updatei function, to be described shortly. Thus, the local history ri(t)
is a list of all haps as perceived by i in rounds it was active in. The set of all local states of i is L
i.
While not necessary for asynchronous agents, for future backwards compatibility, we add more sys-
tem events for each agent, to serve as faulty counterparts to go(i). Commands sleep (i) and hibernate (i)
signify a failure to activate the agent's protocol and differ in that the former enforces waking up the agent
(and thus recording time) notwithstanding. These commands will be used, e.g., for synchronous systems.
None of the system events SysEventsi := {go(i), sleep (i), hibernate (i)} is directly detectable by agents.
To summarize, GEventsi := GEventsi ⊔ BEventsi ⊔ SysEventsi with GEvents :=Fi∈A GEventsi and
GHaps := GEvents ⊔ GActions. Throughout the paper, horizontal bars signify phenomena that are cor-
rect. Note that the absence of this bar means the absence of a claim of correctness. It does not necessarily
imply a fault. Later, this would also apply to formulas, e.g., occurredi(e) demands a correct occurrence
of an event e whereas occurredi(e) is satisfied by either correct or faulty occurrence.
We now turn to the description of runs and protocols for our byzantine-prone asynchronous agents.
A run r is a sequence of global states r(t) = (rε(t), r1(t), . . . , rn(t)) of the whole system consisting of the
state rε(t) of the environment and local states ri(t) of every agent. We already discussed the composition
of local histories. Similarly, the environment's history rε(t) is a list of all haps that happened, this time
faithfully recorded in the global format. Accordingly, rε(t + 1) = X : rε(t) for the set X ⊆ GHaps of all
haps from round t + ½. The set of all global states is denoted G .
What happens in each round is determined by protocols Pi of agents, protocol Pε of the environ-
ment, and chance, the latter implemented as the adversary part of the environment. Agent i's protocol
i → ℘(℘(Actionsi)) \ {∅} provides a range Pi (ri(t)) of sets of actions based on i's current local
Pi : L
state ri(t), with the view of achieving some collective goal. Recall that the global timestamp t is not
part of ri(t). The control of all events -- correct, byzantine, and system -- lies with the environment ε
via its protocol Pε : T →℘(℘(GEvents)) \ {∅}, which can depend on a timestamp t ∈ T but not on the
current state. The environment's protocol is thus kept impartial by denying it an agenda based on the
global history so far. Other parts of the environment must, however, have access to the global history, in
particular, to ensure causality. Thus, the environment's protocol provides a range Pε(t) of sets of events.
Protocols Pi and Pε are non-deterministic and always provide at least one option. The choice among the
options (if more than one) is arbitrarily made by the already mentioned adversary part of the environ-
ment. It is also required that all events from Pε(t) be mutually compatible at time t. These t-coherency
conditions are: (a) no more than one system event go(i), sleep (i), and hibernate (i) per agent i at a time;
(b) a correct event perceived as e by agent i is never accompanied by a byzantine event that i would also
perceive as e, i.e., an agent cannot be mistaken about witnessing an event that did happen; (c) the GMI
of a byzantine sent message is the same as if a copy of the same message were sent correctly in the same
round. Note that the prohibition (b) does not extend to correct actions.
Both the global run r : T → G and its local parts ri : T → L
i provide a sequence of snapshots of
the system and local states respectively. Given the joint protocol P := (P1, . . . , Pn) and the environment's
protocol Pε, we focus on τf ,Pε,P-transitional runs r that result from following these protocols and are built
according to a transition relation τf ,Pε,P ⊆ G × G for asynchronous agents at most f ≥ 0 of which may
298
Causality and Epistemic Reasoning in Byzantine Multi-Agent Systems
Pn (rn (t))
adversary
Pn
. . .
Xn
. . .
r (t)
P1
P1 (r1 (t))
adversary
X1
global
Pε
Pε (t)
adversary
Xε
global
αt
n (r)
αt
n (r)
f iltern
βt
n (r)
updaten
rn (t + 1)
. . .
αt
1 (r)
Xε =
αt
ε (r)
. . .
. . .
. . .
αt
1 (r)
f ilter1
βt
1 (r)
βt
εn (r)
update1
βt
ε1 (r)
r1 (t + 1)
r (t + 1)
f ilterε
βt
ε (r)
βt
ε (r)
updateε
rε (t + 1)
Protocol phase
Adversary phase
Labeling phase
Filtering phase
Updating phase
t
t + 1
Figure 1: Details of round t + ½ of a τf ,Pε,P-transitional run r.
become faulty in a given run. In this paper, we only deal with generic f , Pε, and P. Hence, whenever safe,
we write τ in place of τf ,Pε,P. Each transitional run begins in some initial global state r(0) ∈ G (0) and
progresses by ensuring that r (t) τ r (t + 1), i.e., (r (t) , r (t + 1)) ∈ τ, for each timestamp t ∈ T. Given f ,
Pε, and P, the transition relation τf ,Pε,P consisting of five consecutive phases is graphically represented
in Figure 1 and described in detail below:
1. Protocol phase. A range Pε (t) ⊆ ℘(GEvents) of t-coherent sets of events is determined by the en-
vironment's protocol Pε; for each i ∈ A , a range Pi (ri (t)) ⊆ ℘(Actionsi) of sets of i's actions is
determined by the agents' joint protocol P.
2. Adversary phase. The adversary non-deterministically picks a t-coherent set Xε ∈ Pε (t) and a set
Xi ∈ Pi (ri (t)) for each i ∈ A .
3. Labeling phase. Locally represented actions in Xi's are translated into the global format: αt
{global (i,t, a) a ∈ Xi} ⊆ GActionsi. In particular, correct sends are supplied with GMIs.
i (r) :=
4. Filtering phase. Functions f ilterε and f ilteri for each i ∈ A remove all causally impossible at-
i (r).
ε (r) := Xε and actions from αt
tempted events from αt
4.1. First, f ilterε filters out causally impossible events based (a) on the current global state r(t),
which could not have been accounted for by the protocol Pε, (b) on αt
i (r), not
accessible for Pε either. Specifically, two kinds of events are causally impossible for asynchronous
agents with at most f byzantine failures and are removed by f ilterε in two stages as follows (for-
mal definitions can be found in the appendix, Definitions A.16 -- A.17; cf. also [13] for details):
(1) in the 1st stage, all byzantine events are removed by f ilter≤ f
ε
if they would have resulted in
ε (r), and (c) on all αt
more than f faulty agents in total;
(2) in the 2nd stage, correct receives without matching sends (either in the history r(t) or in the
current round) are removed by f ilterB
ε .
The resulting set of events to actually occur in round t + ½ is denoted
βt
ε (r) := f ilterε(cid:0)r (t) , αt
ε (r), αt
1 (r),
. . . , αt
n (r)(cid:1) .
4.2. After events are filtered, f ilteri for each agent i removes all i's actions iff go(i) /∈ βt
resulting sets of actions to be actually performed by agents in round t + ½ are
ε (r). The
We have βt
i (r) ⊆ αt
βt
i (r) := f ilteri(cid:0)αt
i (r) ⊆ GActionsi and βt
1 (r),
. . . , αt
n (r), βt
ε (r) ⊆ αt
ε (r) ⊆ GEvents.
ε (r)(cid:1) .
R. Kuznets, L. Prosperi, U. Schmid & K. Fruzsa
299
5. Updating phase. The resulting mutually causally consistent sets of events βt
ε (r) and of actions βt
i (r)
are appended to the global history r(t); for each i ∈ A , all non-system events from
βt
εi (r) := βt
ε (r) ∩ GEventsi
as perceived by the agent and all correct actions βt
i (r) are appended in the local form to the local
history ri(t), which may remain unchanged if no action or event triggers an update or be appended
with the empty set if an update is triggered only by a system event go(i) or sleep (i):
rε (t + 1) :=updateε(cid:0)rε (t) , βt
ri (t + 1) :=updatei(cid:0)ri (t) , βt
ε (r), βt
i (r), βt
. . . , βt
n (r)(cid:1) ;
(1)
(2)
1 (r),
ε (r)(cid:1) .
Formal definitions of updateε and updatei are given in Def. A.19 in the appendix.
The protocols P and Pε only affect phase 1, so we group the operations in the remaining phases 2 -- 5
into a transition template τf that computes a transition relation τf ,Pε,P for any given P and Pε. This transi-
tion template, primarily via the filtering functions, represents asynchronous agents with at most f faults.
The template can be modified independently from the protocols to capture other distributed scenarios.
Liveness and similar properties that cannot be ensured on a round-by-round basis are enforced by
restricting the allowable runs by admissibility conditions Ψ, which formally are subsets of the set R of all
transitional runs. For example, since no goal can be achieved without allowing agents to act from time to
time, it is standard to impose the Fair Schedule (FS) admissibility condition, which for byzantine agents
states that an agent can only be delayed indefinitely through persistent faults:
FS := {r ∈ R (∀i ∈ A ) (∀t ∈ T) (∃t′ ≥ t)βt′
ε (r) ∩ SysEventsi 6= ∅}.
In scheduling terms, FS ensures that each agent be considered for using CPU time infinitely often. Deny-
ing any of these requests constitutes a failure, represented by a sleep (i) or hibernate (i) system event.
We now combine all these parts in the notions of context and agent-context:
Definition 1. A context γ = (Pε, G (0),τf , Ψ) consists of an environment's protocol Pε, a set of global
initial states G (0), a transition template τf for f ≥ 0, and an admissibility condition Ψ. For a joint proto-
col P, we call χ = (γ, P) an agent-context. A run r : T → G is called weakly χ-consistent if r(0) ∈ G (0)
and the run is τf ,Pε,P-transitional. A weakly χ-consistent run r is called (strongly) χ-consistent if r ∈ Ψ.
The set of all χ-consistent runs is denoted Rχ ⊆ R. Agent-context χ is called non-excluding if any finite
prefix of a weakly χ-consistent run can be extended to a χ-consistent run.
We are also interested in narrower types of faults. Let FEventsi := BEventsi ⊔{sleep (i), hibernate (i)}.
Definition 2. Environment's protocol Pε makes an agent i ∈ A :
1. correctable if X ∈ Pε (t) implies that X \ FEventsi ∈ Pε (t);
2. delayable if X ∈ Pε (t) implies X \ GEventsi ∈ Pε (t);
3. error-prone if X ∈ Pε (t) implies that, for any Y ⊆ FEventsi, the set Y ⊔ (X \ FEventsi) ∈ Pε (t)
whenever it is t-coherent;
4. gullible if X ∈ Pε (t) implies that, for any Y ⊆ FEventsi, the set Y ⊔(X \GEventsi) ∈ Pε (t) whenever
it is t-coherent;
5. fully byzantine if agent i is both error-prone and gullible.
In other words, correctable agents can always be made correct for the round by removing all their
byzantine events; delayable agents can always be forced to skip a round completely (which does not
300
Causality and Epistemic Reasoning in Byzantine Multi-Agent Systems
make them faulty); error-prone (gullible) agents can exhibit any faults in addition to (in place of) correct
events, thus, implying correctability (delayability); fully byzantine agents' faults are unrestricted. Com-
mon types of faults, e.g., crash or omission failures, can be obtained by restricting allowable sets Y in
the definition of gullible agents.
Now that our byzantine version of the runs-and-systems framework is laid out, we define interpreted
systems in this framework in the usual way, i.e., as special kinds of Kripke models for multi-agent dis-
tributed environments [5]. For an agent-context χ, we consider pairs (r,t′) ∈ Rχ × T of a χ-consistent
run r and timestamp t′. A valuation function π: Prop → ℘(Rχ × T) determines whether an atomic
proposition from Prop is true in run r at time t′. The determination is arbitrary except for a small set
of designated atomic propositions whose truth value at (r,t′) is fully determined. More specifically, for
i ∈ A , o ∈ Hapsi, and t ∈ T such that t ≤ t′,
correct(i,t) is true at (r,t′), or node (i,t) is correct in run r, iff no faulty event happened to i by
timestamp t, i.e., no event from FEventsi appears in the rε(t) prefix of the rε(t′) part of r(t′);
correcti is true at (r,t′) iff correct(i,t′ ) is;
fake(i,t) (o) is true at (r,t′) iff i has a faulty reason to believe that o ∈ Hapsi occurred in round t − ½,
i.e., o ∈ ri(t) because (at least in part) of some O ∈ BEventsi ∩ βt−1
(r);
ε
occurred(i,t)(o) is true at (r,t′) iff i has a correct reason to believe o ∈ Hapsi occurred in round t − ½,
i.e., o ∈ ri(t) because (at least in part) of O ∈ (GEventsi ∩ βt−1
ε
(r)) ⊔ βt−1
(r);
i
occurredi(o) is true at (r,t′) iff at least one of occurred(i,m)(o) for 1 ≤ m ≤ t′ is;
occurred (o) is true at (r,t′) iff at least one of occurredi(o) for i ∈ A is;
occurredi(o) is true at (r,t′) iff either occurredi(o) is or at least one of fake(i,m) (o) for 1 ≤ m ≤ t′ is.
An interpreted system is a pair I = (Rχ,π). The epistemic language ϕ ::= p ¬ϕ (ϕ ∧ ϕ) Kiϕ
where p ∈ Prop and i ∈ A and derived Boolean connectives are defined in the usual way. Truth for these
(epistemic) formulas is defined in the standard way, in particular, for a run r ∈ Rχ, timestamp t ∈ T,
atomic proposition p ∈ Prop, agent i ∈ A , and formula ϕ we have (I , r,t) = p iff (r,t) ∈ π(p) and
(I , r,t) = Kiϕ iff (I , r′,t′) = ϕ for any r′ ∈ Rχ and t′ ∈ T such that ri(t) = r′
i(t′). A formula ϕ is valid
in I , written I = ϕ, iff (I , r,t) = ϕ for all r ∈ Rχ and t ∈ T.
Due to the t-coherency of all allowed protocols Pε, an agent cannot be both right and wrong about any
local event e ∈ Eventsi, i.e., I = ¬(occurred(i,t)(e) ∧ fake(i,t) (e)). Note that for actions this can happen.
Following the concept from [6] of global events that are local for an agent, we define conditions
under which formulas can be treated as such local events. A formula ϕ is called localized for i within
i(t′) implies (I , r,t) = ϕ ⇐⇒ (I , r′,t′) = ϕ for any I = (Rχ,π), runs
an agent-context χ iff ri(t) = r′
r, r′ ∈ Rχ, and timestamps t,t′ ∈ T. By these definitions, we immediately obtain:
Lemma 3. The following statements are valid for any formula ϕ localized for an agent i ∈ A within an
agent-context χ and any interpreted system I = (Rχ,π): I = ϕ ↔ Kiϕ and I = ¬ϕ ↔ Ki¬ϕ.
The knowledge of preconditions principle [17] postulates that in order to act on a precondition an
agent must be able to infer it from its local state. Thus, Lemma 3 shows that formulas localized for i can
always be used as preconditions. Our first observation is that the agent's perceptions of a run are one
example of such epistemically acceptable (though not necessarily reliable) preconditions:
Lemma 4. For any agent-context χ, agent i ∈ A , and local hap o ∈ Hapsi, the formula occurredi(o) is
localized for i within χ.
It can be shown that correctness of these perceptions is not localized for i and, hence, cannot be the
basis for actions. In fact, Theorem 12 will reveal that no agent can establish its own correctness.
R. Kuznets, L. Prosperi, U. Schmid & K. Fruzsa
301
3 Run modifications
We will now introduce the pivotal technique of run modifications, which are used to show an agent does
not know ϕ by creating an indistinguishable run where ϕ is false.
Definition 5. A function ρ: Rχ →℘(GActionsi) ×℘(GEventsi) is called an i-intervention for an agent-
context χ and agent i ∈ A . A joint intervention B = (ρ1, . . . ,ρn) consists of i-interventions ρi for each
agent i ∈ A . An adjustment [Bt ; . . . ; B0] is a sequence of joint interventions B0 . . . , Bt to be performed at
rounds from ½ to t + ½.
εi (r′) = βt
i (r′) = X and βt
We consider an i-intervention ρ(r) = (X , Xε) applied to a round t + ½ of a given run r to be a
meta-action by the system designer, intended to modify the results of this round for i in such a way
ε (r′) ∩ GEventsi = Xε in the artificially constructed new run r′. For
that βt
ρ(r) = (X , Xε), we denote aρ(r) := X and eρ(r) := Xε. Accordingly, a joint intervention (ρ1, . . . ,ρn) pre-
scribes actions βt
Thus, an adjustment [Bt ; . . . ; B0] fully determines actions and events in the initial t + 1 rounds of run r′:
Definition 6. Let adj = [Bt ; . . . ; B0] be an adjustment where Bm = (ρm
n ) for each 0 ≤ m ≤ t and
is an i-intervention for an agent-context χ = ((Pε, G (0),τf , Ψ), P). A run r′ is obtained from
each ρm
i
r ∈ Rχ by adjustment adj iff for all t′ ≤ t, all T ′ > t, and all i ∈ A ,
(a) r′ (0) := r (0),
ε (r′) =Fi∈A eρi(r) for the round in question.
i (r′) = aρi(r) for each agent i and events βt
1 , . . . ,ρm
(b) r′
(c) r′
i (t′ + 1) := updatei(cid:16)r′
ε (t′ + 1) := updateε(cid:16)r′
i (t′) , aρt′
i (r), Fi∈A eρt′
i (r)(cid:17),
ε (t′) , Fi∈A eρt′
(d) r′(T ′) τf ,Pε,P r′(T ′ + 1).
R (τf ,Pε,P, r, adj) is the set of all runs obtained from r by adj.
i (r), aρt′
1 (r), . . . , aρt′
n (r)(cid:17),
Note that adjusted runs need not be a priori transitional, i.e., obey (d), for t′ ≤ t. Of course, we intend
to use adjustments in such a way that r′ is a transitional run. But it requires a separate proof. In order to
improve the readability of these proofs, we allow ourselves (and already used) a small abuse of notation.
i (r′) were initially defined only for transitional runs as the result of filtering.
The β-sets βt
But they also represent the sets of events and i's actions respectively happening in round t + ½. This
alternative definition is equivalent for transitional runs and, in addition, can be used for adjusted runs r′.
This is what we mean whenever we write β-sets for runs obtained by adjustments.
ε (r′) and βt
In order to minimize an agent's knowledge in accordance with the structure of its (soon to be defined)
reliable (or byzantine) causal cone, we will use several types of i-interventions that copy round t + ½ of
the original run to various degrees: (a) CFreeze denies i all actions and events, (b) FakeEchot
i reproduces
all messages sent by i but in byzantine form, (c) X -Focust
i (for an appropriately chosen set X ⊆ A × T)
faithfully reproduces all actions and as many events as causally possible.
Definition 7. For an agent-context χ, i ∈ A , and r ∈ Rχ, we define the following i-interventions:
CFreeze (r) := (∅, ∅).
{fail (i)} ⊔ (cid:8) fake (i, gsend(i, j,µ, id) 7→ noop)
i (r) ∨ (∃A) fake (i, gsend(i, j,µ, id) 7→ A) ∈ βt
gsend(i, j,µ, id) ∈ βt
(cid:12)(cid:12)
(3)
(4)
(5)
ε (r)(cid:9)(cid:17).
( j, m) /∈ X , k ∈ N(cid:9)(cid:17).
FakeEchot
X -Focust
i (r) :=(cid:16)∅,
i (r) := (cid:16)βt
i (r),
βt
εi (r) \(cid:8)grecv(i, j,µ, id( j, i,µ, k, m))
(cid:12)(cid:12)
302
Causality and Epistemic Reasoning in Byzantine Multi-Agent Systems
4 The Reliable Causal Cone
Before giving formal definitions and proofs, we first explain the intuition behind our byzantine analog of
Lamport's causal cone, and the particular adjustments used for constructing runs with identical reliable
causal cones in the main Lemma 10 of this section.
In the absence of faults [2], the only way information, say, about an event e that happens to an agent j
can reach another agent i, or more precisely, its node (i,t), is via a causal chain (time progression and
delivered messages) originating from j after e happened and reaching i no later than timestamp t. The
set of beginnings of causal chains, together with all causal links, is called the causal cone of (i,t). The
standard way of demonstrating the necessity of such a chain for i to learn about e, when expressed in
our terminology, is by using an adjustment that removes all events and actions outside the causal cone.
Once an adjusted run with no haps outside the causal cone is shown to be transitional and the local state
of i at timestamp t is shown to be the same as in the given run, it follows that i considers it possible that
e did not happen and, hence, does not know that e happened. This well known proof is carried out in our
framework in [12] (see also [13] for an extended version).
However, one subtle aspect of our formalization is also relevant for the byzantine case. We illus-
trate it using a minimal example. Suppose, in the given run, js sent exactly one message to jr during
round m + ½ and it was correctly received by jr in round l + ½. At the same round, jr itself sent its last
ever message, and sent it to i. If this message to i arrived before t, then ( jr, l) is a node within the causal
cone of (i,t). On the other hand, neither ( jr, l + 1) nor ( js, m) are within the causal cone. Thus, the run
adjustment discussed in the previous paragraph removes the action of sending the message from js to jr,
which happened outside the causal cone, and, hence, makes it causally impossible for jr to receive it de-
spite the fact that the receipt happened within, or more precisely, on the boundary of the causal cone. On
the other hand, the message sent by jr in the same round cannot be suppressed without i noticing. Thus,
suppressing all haps on the boundary of the causal cone is not an option. These considerations necessitate
the use of X -Focusl
j to remove such "ghosts" of messages instead of the exact copy of round l + ½ of the
given run. To obtain Chandy -- Misra's result, one needs to set X to be the entire causal cone.5
We now explain the complications created by the presence of byzantine faults. Because byzantine
agents can lie, the existence of a causal chain is no more sufficient for reliable delivery of information.
Causal chains can now be reliable, i.e., involve only correct agents, or unreliable, whereby a byzantine
agent can corrupt the transmitted information or even initiate the whole communication while pretending
to be part of a longer chain. If several causal chains link a node ( j, m) witnessing an event with (i,t),
where the decision based on this event is to be made, then, intuitively, the information about the event can
only be relied upon if at least one of these causal chains is reliable. In effect, all correct nodes, i.e., nodes
( j, m) such that (I , r,t) = correct( j,m), are divided into three categories: those without any causal chains
to (i,t), i.e., nodes outside Lamport's causal cone, those with causal chains but only unreliable ones, and
those with at least one reliable causal chain. There is, of course, the fourth category consisting of byzan-
tine nodes, i.e., nodes ( j, m) such that (I , r,t) 6= correct( j,m). Since there is no way for nodes without
reliable causal chains to make themselves heard, we call these nodes silent masses and apply to them the
CFreeze intervention: since they cannot have an impact, they need not act. The nodes with at least one
reliable causal chain to (i,t), which must be correct themselves, form the reliable causal cone and treated
the same way as Lamport's causal cone in the fault-free case, except that the removal of "ghost" messages
is more involved in this case. Finally, the remaining nodes are byzantine and form a fault buffer on the
5This treatment of the cone's boundary could be perceived as overly pedantic. But in our view this is preferable to being
insufficiently precise.
R. Kuznets, L. Prosperi, U. Schmid & K. Fruzsa
303
way of reliable information. Their role is to pretend the run is the same independently of what the silent
masses do. We will show that FakeEchom
j suffices since only messages sent from the fault buffer matter.
Before stating our main Lemma 10, which constructs an adjusted run that leaves agent i at t in the
same position while removing as many haps as possible, it should be noted that our analysis relies on
knowing which agents are byzantine in the given run, which may easily change without affecting local
histories. This assumption will be dropped in the following section.
First we define simple causal links among nodes as binary relations on A × T in infix notation:
i (r) or fake (i, gsend(i, j,µ, id) 7→ A) ∈ βm
c( j, l) iff there are µ ∈ Msgs and id ∈ N such that grecv( j, i,µ, id) ∈ βl−1
Definition 8. For all i ∈ A and t ∈ T, we have (i,t) →l (i,t + 1). Additionally, for a run r, we
have (i, m)→r
(r) and either
gsend(i, j,µ, id) ∈ βm
ε (r) for some A ∈ {noop} ⊔ GActionsi.
Causal r-links →r :=→l ∪→r
c are either local or communication related. A causal r-path for a run r is
a sequence ξ = hθ0,θ1, . . . ,θki, k ≥ 0, of nodes connected by causal r-links, i.e., such that θl→rθl+1 for
each 0 ≤ l < k. This causal r-path is called reliable iff node ( jl,tl + 1) is correct in r for each θl = ( jl,tl)
with 0 ≤ l < k and, additionally, node θk = ( jk,tk) is correct in r. We also write θ0 r
ξ θk to denote the
fact that path ξ connects node θ0 to θk in run r, or simply θ0 r θk to state that such a causal r-path exists.
Note that neither receives nor sends of messages forming a reliable causal r-path can be byzantine.
ε
The latter is guaranteed by the immediate future of nodes on the path being correct.
Definition 9. The reliable causal cone ◮r
that ζ r
nodes ( j, m) with m < t such that ( j, m) r θ and ( j, m + 1) is not correct. Abbreviating ii◮r
the silent masses of node θ in run r are all the remaining nodes ·ir
θ of node θ in run r consists of all nodes ζ ∈ A × T such
θ of node θ in run r consists of all
θ ⊔iir
θ,
ξ θ for some reliable causal r-path ξ. The fault buffer iir
θ :=◮r
θ := (A × T) \ ii◮r
θ.
Here the filling of the cone ◮ signifies reliable communication, ii represents a barrier for correct
information, whereas ·i depicts correct information isolated from its destination. We can now state the
main result of this section:
Lemma 10 (Cone-equivalent run construction). For f ∈ N, for a non-excluding agent-context χ =
(cid:0)(Pε, G (0),τf , Ψ), P(cid:1) such that all agents are gullible, correctable, and delayable, for any τf ,Pε,P-tran-
sitional run r, for a node θ = (i,t) ∈ A × T correct in r, let adjustment adj = [Bt−1; . . . ; B0] where
Bm = (ρm
n ) for each 0 ≤ m ≤ t − 1 such that
1 , . . . ,ρm
θ-Focusm
ii◮r
FakeEchom
j
j
CFreeze
if ( j, m) ∈◮r
θ ,
if ( j, m) ∈ iir
θ,
if ( j, m) ∈ ·ir
θ.
(6)
ρm
j
:=
Then each r′ ∈ R (τf ,Pε,P, r, adj) satisfies the following properties:
(A) (∀( j, m) ∈◮r
θ)
r′
(B) (∀m ≤ t)
i(m) = ri(m);
(C) for any m ≤ t, we have that βm−1
r′
j (m) = r j (m);
ε
(r′) ∩ FEvents j 6= ∅ iff both ( j, m − 1) r θ and ( j, m) is not
correct in r;
(D) for any m ≤ t, any node ( j, m) correct in r is also correct in r′;
(E) the number of agents byzantine by any m ≤ t in run r′ is not greater than that in run r and is ≤ f ;
(F) r′ is τf ,Pε,P-transitional.
Proof sketch. The following properties follow from the definitions:
◮
θ = ∅,
r
θ ∩iir
( j, m) ∈◮
r
θ & (k, m′)→r( j, m)
θ ∈◮
r
θ,
=⇒
(k, m′) ∈ ii◮r
θ.
(7)
(8)
304
Causality and Epistemic Reasoning in Byzantine Multi-Agent Systems
Note that for βk = ( jk, mk) with k = 1, 2, we have β1→rβ2 implies m1 < m2 and β1 r β2 implies
m1 ≤ m2. Thus, all parts of the lemma except for Statement (F) only concern m ≤ t, and even this last
statement for m > t is a trivial corollary of Def. 6(d). Thus, we focus on m ≤ t.
Statement (A) can be proved by induction on m using the following auxiliary lemma for the given
transitional run r and the adjusted run r′, which is also constructed using the standard update functions.
Lemma 11. If r j(m) = r′
j(m), and βm
j (r) = aρm
j (r), and βm
εj (r) = eρm
j (r), then r j(m + 1) = r′
j(m + 1).
Proof. This statement follows from (2) for the transitional run r, Def. 6(b) for the adjusted run r′, and the
fact that update j only depends on events of agent j, in particular, on the presence of go( j) or sleep ( j)
(see Def. A.19 in the appendix for details).
The third condition of Lemma 11 is satisfied for ρm
if ( j, m) ∈◮r
Statement (B) follows from Statement (A) we have already proved.
θ, then so are all ( j, m′) with m′ ≤ m.
j (r) = ii◮r
In particular, (i, m′) ∈◮r
θ-Focusm
j within ◮r
θ by (8). Further,
θ for any m′ ≤ t. Thus,
Statement (C) is due to the fact that (a) ii◮r
εj (r), which contains none for ( j, m) ∈◮r
j does not produce any new byzantine events
θ, (b) CFreeze never produces byzantine events,
j always contains at least fail ( j) ∈ BEvents j. Statements (D) and (E) are direct
θ-Focusm
relative to βm
whereas (c) FakeEchom
corollaries of Statement (C).
The bulk of the proof concerns Statement (F), or, more precisely the transitionality up to times-
j (r′) = {global ( j, m, a) a ∈ X j} for some
j (r) for all j ∈ A ,
tamp t. For each m < t, we need sets αm
X j ∈ Pj(r′
j(m)) for each j ∈ A such that for βm
ε (r′) ∈ Pε (m) and αm
j (r′) = aρm
j (r) and βm
βm
βm
ε (cid:0)r′(cid:1) = f ilterε(cid:0)r′(m),αm
j (cid:0)r′(cid:1) = f ilter j(cid:0)αm
ε (r′) =F j∈A eρm
ε (cid:0)r′(cid:1),αm
1 (cid:0)r′(cid:1), . . . ,αm
1 (cid:0)r′(cid:1), . . . ,αm
n (cid:0)r′(cid:1)(cid:1) ,
n (cid:0)r′(cid:1),βm
ε (cid:0)r′(cid:1)(cid:1) .
(9)
(10)
(11)
The construction of such α-sets and the proof of (9) -- (10) for them is by induction on m. Note that
r′
ε(0) = rε(0) and r′
j(0) = r j(0) for all j ∈ A by Def. 6(a). We will show that it suffices to choose
j (r)
αm
j (cid:0)r′(cid:1) :=(αm
{global ( j, m, a) a ∈ X j} for some X j ∈ Pj(r′
j(m)) otherwise,
if ( j, m) ∈◮r
θ,
with the choice in the latter case possible by Pj(r′
j(m)) 6= ∅, and
αm
ε (cid:0)r′(cid:1) :=(cid:16) f ilter≤ f
ε (r),αm
1 (r), . . . ,αm
ε (cid:0)r(m),αm
nfake (l, gsend(l, j,µ, id) 7→ noop)
n (r)(cid:1) \ G(l,m)∈·ir
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
(cid:16)gsend(l, j,µ, id) ∈ βm
GEventsl(cid:17) ⊔ {fail (l) (l, m) ∈ iir
θ}⊔
θ ⊔iir
θ
(l, m) ∈ iir
θ &
l (r) ∨ (∃A) fake (l, gsend(l, j,µ, id) 7→ A) ∈ βm
(12)
ε (r)(cid:17)o.
Informally, according to (11), in r′, we just repeat the choices made in r within the reliable causal
cone and make arbitrary choices elsewhere. According to (12), events are chosen in a more complex
way. First, mimicking the 1st-stage filtering in the given run r, the originally chosen αm
ε (r) ∈ Pε (m)
is preventively purged of all byzantine events whenever they would have caused more than f agents to
become faulty in r. Note that, in our transitional simulation of the adjusted run r′, this is done prior to
filtering (9) by exploiting the correctability of all agents. Secondly, for all agents l outside the reliable
causal cone at the current timestamp m, i.e., with (l, m) ∈ ·ir
θ, all events are removed, to comply with
θ ⊔ iir
R. Kuznets, L. Prosperi, U. Schmid & K. Fruzsa
305
the total freeze among the silent masses ·ir
θ and to make room for byzantine communication in the fault
buffer iir
θ. The resulting set complies with Pε because all agents are delayable. For the silent masses, this
is the desired result. For the fault buffer, on the other hand, byzantine sends are added for every correct
or byzantine send in r, thus, ensuring that the incoming information in the reliable causal cone in r′ is the
same as in r. For the case when a faulty buffer node (l, m) sent no messages in the original run, fail (l) is
added to make the immediate future (l, m + 1) byzantine despite its silence, which is crucial for fulfilling
Statement (C) and simplifying bookkeeping for byzantine agents.
The proof of (9) -- (10) is by induction on m = 0, . . . ,t − 1. To avoid overlong formulas, we ab-
j for
ε (r′) defined in (11) and (12) respectively. Thus, it only remains to show that
ε ∩ GEvents j, that
breviate the right-hand side of (9) by ϒm
the specific αm
ε (r′) = ϒm
βm
ε and the right-hand sides of (10) for each j ∈ A by Ξm
j , or equivalently, further abbreviating ϒm
ε and (∀ j ∈ A )βm
j (r′) and αm
j (r′) = Ξm
j := ϒm
for all j ∈ A , by simultaneous induction on m.
βm
εj(cid:0)r′(cid:1) = ϒm
j
and
βm
j (cid:0)r′(cid:1) = Ξm
j
Induction step for the silent masses ( j, m) ∈ ·ir
j = ∅ = βm
tering it yields ϒm
j (r′), whatever it is, yields Ξm
that filtering αm
applied within ·ir
θ.
εj (r′) as prescribed by CFreeze. In particular, go( j) /∈ βm
θ. By (12), αm
εj (r′) := αm
ε (r′) ∩ GEvents j = ∅, and fil-
εj (r′), thus, ensuring
j (r′), once again in compliance with CFreeze
j = ∅ = βm
Before proceeding with the induction step for the remaining nodes, observe that events in αm
ε (r′),
if added to r′(m), do not cross the byzantine-agent threshold f , meaning that the 1st-stage filtering does
not affect αm
ε (r′):
f ilter≤ f
ε (cid:0)r′(m),αm
ε (cid:0)r′(cid:1),αm
1 (cid:0)r′(cid:1), . . . ,αm
n (cid:0)r′(cid:1)(cid:1) = αm
ε (cid:0)r′(cid:1).
ε (r′): byzantine events from αm
in (12) and those pertaining to nodes in the fault buffer iir
ε (r) in the original run because the 2nd-stage filter f ilterB
Indeed there are two sources of byzantine events in αm
ε (r) that survived
f ilter≤ f
θ. The former were also present
ε
in βm
ε only removes correct (receive) events.
At the same time, for any (l, m) ∈ iir
θ, the immediate future (l, m + 1) was a faulty node in r by the def-
ε (r′) was also faulty by timestamp m + 1
inition of iir
in r. Additionally, any agent already faulty in r′(m) was also faulty in r(m) by Statement (D). Since the
ε (r′)
number of agents faulty by m + 1 in the original transitional run r could not exceed f , adding αm
to r′(m) does not exceed this threshold either. It follows from (13) that
θ. In either case, any agent faulty in r′ based on αm
(13)
Induction step for the fault buffer ( j, m) ∈ iir
ϒm
j = filterB
ε(r′(m),αm
ε (cid:0)r′(cid:1),αm
1 (cid:0)r′(cid:1), . . . ,αm
n (cid:0)r′(cid:1)) ∩ GEvents j.
θ. For these nodes, the αm
εj (r′) part of αm
ε (r′) contains
(14)
no correct events, hence, f ilterB
ε , which only removes correct receives, has no effect. In other words,
ϒm
j = αm
ε (cid:0)r′(cid:1) ∩ GEvents j = {fail ( j)} ⊔ nfake ( j, gsend( j, h,µ, id) 7→ noop)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
ε (r)o = βm
j (r) ∨ (∃A) fake ( j, gsend( j, h,µ, id) 7→ A) ∈ βm
gsend( j, h,µ, id) ∈ βm
j . As in the case of the silent masses, go( j) /∈ βm
ε (r′) guarantees that the
εj(cid:0)r′(cid:1)
as prescribed by FakeEchom
Ξm
j = ∅ = βm
j (r′) requirement is fulfilled within iir
θ.
Induction step for the reliable causal cone ( j, m) ∈◮r
θ. The case of the nodes with a reliable causal
path to θ, whose immediate future remains correct in r, is the final and also most complex induction step.
θ by Statement (A) r′(m) = r(m).
Recall that αm
j (r) ∈ Pj(r(m)) = Pj(r′(m)) because within ◮r
j (r′) = αm
306
Causality and Epistemic Reasoning in Byzantine Multi-Agent Systems
εj (r) := αm
ε (r) ∩ GEvents j part of αm
j (r′) in (11) is in compliance with transitionality. Since ( j, m + 1) is correct,
Thus, our choice of αm
the αm
ε (r) contained no byzantine events and, hence, is unchanged
by (12). For the same reason it is not affected by 1st-stage filtering in either run. Thus, the same set of
j's events undergoes the 2nd-stage filtering in both the original run r and in our transitional simulation
of the adjusted run r′. Let us call this set of j's events Ω j.
Since both f ilterB
εj (r′) ⊆ βm
βm
ensuring that Ξm
εj (r) and ϒm
j = αm
j (r).
ε and ii◮r
θ-Focusm
j can only remove receive events, it immediately follows that
j agree on all non-receive events. Importantly, this includes go( j) events, thus
A receive event U = grecv( j, k,µ, id) ∈ Ω j is retained in either run iff it is causally grounded by a
matching send, correct or byzantine. Due to the uniqueness of GMI id, as ensured by the injectivity of
both id and global functions, as well as Condition (c) of the t-coherency of sets produced by Pε, there is at
most one agent k's node where such a matching send can originate from. If id is not well-formed and no
ε (r′). The rea-
such send can exist, U is filtered out from both βm
soning in the case such a node η = (k, z) exists depends on where timestamp z is relative to m and where
η falls in our partition of nodes. Generally, to retain U in βm
j , one must find either a correct
send V := gsend(k, j,µ, id) or a faulty send WA := fake (k,V 7→ A) for some A ∈ GActionsk ⊔ {noop}.
ε (r′).
εj (r′)
because the message's origin is outside the focus area. At the same time, no actions or events are
scheduled at η in r′ (for z = m it follows from the already proven induction step for silent masses).
Without either V or WA, event U is filtered out from ϒm
ε .
θ, then, independently of filtering in r, hap U /∈ e(cid:0)ii◮r
• If z > m is in the future of m, then U is filtered out from both βm
• If z ≤ m and η ∈ ·ir
ε , hence, U /∈ βm
θ-Focusm
ε , the former ensuring U /∈ βm
j (r)(cid:1) = βm
εj (r) and ϒm
ε (r) and ϒm
ε (r) and ϒm
• If z < m and η ∈◮r
• If z = m and η ∈ iir
εk (r′) iff either V ∈ βz
θ, again only Wnoop can save U in ϒm
ε (r′) 6∋ go(k). Here Wnoop ∈ αm
αm
tering U yields the same result in both runs, and ii◮r
j , this time by construction (12) of
εk (r) for some A. Thus, fil-
j does not affect U because η ∈ ii◮r
θ.
θ, then (k, z + 1) is still correct in both r and r′, hence, no byzantine events
such as WA are present in either r(m) or r′(m). Accordingly, only V can save U in this case. Since
βz
k (r) = βz
k, filtering U yields the same result in both runs,
and ii◮r
k (r′) by construction (5) of ii◮r
j does not affect U because η ∈ ii◮r
θ.
k (r) or WA ∈ βz
θ-Focusm
θ-Focusm
θ-Focusz
• If z = m and η ∈◮r
θ, again (k, m + 1) is correct in r meaning this time that no WA are present in Ωk.
k (r′) by construction (11) and the sets
Again, only V can save U from filtering. Since αm
of events being filtered agree on go(k) ∈ Ωk, here too filtering U yields the same result in both
runs, and ii◮r
j does not affect U because η ∈ ii◮r
θ.
k (r) = αm
θ-Focusm
This case analysis completes the induction step for the reliable causal cone, the induction proof, proof of
Statement (F), and the proof of the whole Lemma 10.
5 Preconditions for Actions: Multipedes
Arguably the most important application of Lemma 10, and, hence, of causal cones, is to derive precon-
ditions for agents' actions, cp. [1]. While relatively simple in traditional settings, where events can be
preconditions according to the knowledge of preconditions principle [17] and where Lamport's causal
cone suffices, this is no longer true in byzantine settings. As Theorem 12 reveals, if f > 0, an asyn-
• If z < m and η ∈ iir
θ, then, by (4) in the definiton of FakeEchoz
Wnoop ∈ βz
result in both runs, and ii◮r
εk (r′) iff either V ∈ βz
k (r) or WA ∈ βz
θ-Focusm
j does not affect U because η ∈ ii◮r
θ.
j and
εk (r) for some A. Thus, filtering U yields the same
k, only Wnoop can save U in ϒm
R. Kuznets, L. Prosperi, U. Schmid & K. Fruzsa
307
chronous agent can learn neither that it is (still) correct nor that a particular event6 really occurred.
Theorem 12 ([12]). If f ≥ 1, then for any o ∈ Eventsi, for any interpreted system I = (Rχ,π) with any
non-excluding agent-context χ = ((Pε, G (0),τf , Ψ), P) where i is gullible and every j 6= i is delayable,
I = ¬Kioccurred(o)
and
I = ¬Kicorrecti.
(15)
These validities can be shown by modeling the infamous brain in a vat scenario (see [12] for details).
Theorem 12 obviously implies that knowledge of simple preconditions, e.g., events, is never achiev-
able if byzantine agents are present. Settling for the next best thing, one could investigate whether
i knows o has happened relative to its own correctness, i.e., whether Ki(correcti → occurred (o)) holds
(cf. [18]), a kind of non-factive belief in o. This means that i can be mistaken about o due to its own
faults (in which case it cannot rely on any information anyway), not due to being misinformed by other
agents. It is, however, sometimes overly restrictive to assume that Ki(correcti → occurred(o)) holds in
situations when i is, in fact, faulty: typical specifications, e.g., for distributed agreement [15], do not
restrict the behavior of faulty agents, and agents might sometimes learn that they are faulty. We therefore
introduced the hope modality
Hiϕ := correcti → Ki(correcti → ϕ),
which was shown in [7] to be axiomatized by adding to K45 the axioms correcti → (Hiϕ → ϕ), and
¬correcti → Hiϕ, and Hicorrecti.
The following Theorem 13 shows that hope is also closely connected to reliable causal cones, in the
sense that events an agent can hope for must lie within the reliable causal cone.
Theorem 13. For a non-excluding agent-context χ = ((Pε, G (0),τf , Ψ), P) such that all agents are
gullible, correctable, and delayable, for a correct node θ = (i,t), and for an event o ∈ Events, if all
occurrences of O ∈ GEvents such that local(O) = o happen outside the reliable causal cone ◮r
θ of a run
r ∈ Rχ, i.e., if O ∈ βm
ε (r) ∩ GEvents j & local(O) = o implies ( j, m) /∈◮r
θ, then for any I = (Rχ,π),
(I , r,t) 6= Hioccurred(o).
Proof. Constructing the first t rounds according to the adjustment from Lemma 10 and extending this
prefix to an infinite run r′ ∈ Rχ using the non-exclusiveness of χ, we obtain a run with no correct events
recorded as o. Indeed, in r′, there are no events originating from ·ir
θ, and all
events originating from ◮r
θ, though correct, were also present in r and, hence, do not produce o in local
i(t) by Lemma 10(B), making (I , r′,t) indistinguishable for i, and
histories. At the same time, ri(t) = r′
(I , r′,t) = correcti by Lemma 10(D).
θ, no correct events from iir
It is interesting to compare the results and proofs of Theorems 12 and 13. Essentially, in the run r′
modeling the brain in a vat in the former, i is a faulty agent that perceives events while none really happen.
Therefore, Kioccurred (o) can never be attained. In the run r′ constructed by Lemma 10 in Theorem 13,
on the other hand, i remains correct. The reason that Hioccurred (o) fails here is that o does not occur
within the reliable causal cone.
Theorem 13 shows that, in order to act based on the hope that an event occurred, it is necessary that
the event originates from the reliable causal cone. Unfortunately, this is not sufficient. Consider the
case of a run r where no agent exhibits a fault: every causal message chain is reliable and the ordinary
6Actually, the reasoning in this section also extends to actions, i.e., arbitrary haps.
308
Causality and Epistemic Reasoning in Byzantine Multi-Agent Systems
and reliable causal cones coincide. However, since up to f agents could be byzantine, it is trivial to
modify r by seeding fail ( j) events in round ½ for several agents j in a way that is indistinguishable for
agent i trying to hope for the occurrence of o. This would enlarge the fault buffer and shrink the reliable
causal cone in the so-constructed adjusted run r. Obviously, by making different sets of agents byzantine
(without violating f , of course), one can fabricate multiple adjusted runs where ri(t) = ri(t) is exactly
the same but fault buffers and reliable causal cones vary in size and shape. Any single one of those r
satisfying the conditions of Theorem 13, in the sense that all occurrences of o happen outside its reliable
causal cone, dash the hope of i for o in r.
Thus, in order for i to have hope at (i,t) in run r that o really occurred, it is necessary that some
correct global version O of o (not necessarily the same one) is present somewhere (not necessarily at
the same node) in the reliable causal cone of every run r that ensures ri(t) = ri(t). This gives rise to the
definition of a multipede, which ensures (I , r,t) = Hioccurred(o) according to Theorem 13:
Definition 14 (Multipede). We say that a run r in a non-excluding agent context χ = ((Pε, G (0),τf , Ψ), P)
θ for event o ∈ Events at some node θ = (i,t) iff, for all runs r ∈ Rχ with ri(t) = ri(t),
contains a multipedeo
it holds that o happens inside its reliable causal cone, i.e., that
(∃( j, m) ∈◮
r
θ) (∃O ∈ GEvents j)(cid:0)O ∈ βm
ε (r) & local(O) = o(cid:1).
We obtain the following necessary condition for the existence of a multipede:
Theorem 15 (Necessary condition for a multipede). Given an arbitrary non-excluding agent-context
χ =(cid:0)(Pε, G (0),τf , Ψ), P(cid:1) such that all agents are gullible, correctable, and delayable and for any run
r ∈ Rχ in any interpreted system I = (Rχ,π), if (I , r,t) = Hioccurred(o) for a correct node θ = (i,t),
i.e., if there is a multipedeo
θ}.
For any S ⊆ A \({i}⊔ Byzr
θ, there must exist a witness wS ∈ A of some correct
event OS ∈ βmS
θ
that does not involve agents from S ⊔ Byzr
θ.
ε (r)∩ GEventswS such that local(OS) = o and such that there is causal path (wS, mS) r
ξS
θ in r, then the following must hold: Let Byzr
θ) such that S = f −Byzr
θ := { j ∈ A (∃m)( j, m) ∈ iir
ε (rS) := β0
ε (r′) ⊔ {fail ( j) j ∈ S ⊔ Byzr
θ, i.e., pertain to agents from Byzr
Proof. Since, by Lemma 10, the adjusted run r′ ∈ Rχ and since the only faults up to t occur in r′ in
the fault buffer iir
θ, for any S described above, one can construct first
θ} and keeping the rest of r′ intact. These first
t rounds by setting β0
t rounds can be extended to complete infinite runs rS ∈ Rχ indistinguishable for i at θ from either r′ or r
because the addition of fail ( j) is imperceptible for agents and does not affect protocols. The only poten-
tially affected element could have been f ilterε in the part ensuring byzantine agents do not exceed f in
number, but it also behaves the same way as in r′ because S + Byzr
i (t),
we have (I , rS,t) = Hioccurred (o). Node θ remains correct in these runs because i /∈ S. Thus, by
Theorem 13, each run rS must have a requisite correct event OS ∈ βmS
θ . It remains to note
εwS
that any such correct event from rS must be present in r′ and in r and any causal path in rS exists already
in r′ and r, according to the construction from Lemma 10. Thus, there must exist a causal path ξ in r from
(wS, mS) to θ such that ξ is reliable in rS. Finally, since all f byzantine agents in rS, namely S ⊔ Byzr
θ,
are made faulty from round ½, path ξS being reliable in rS means not involving these agents.
θ = f . Since ri(t) = r′
(rS)∩ ◮rS
i(t) = rS
From the perspective of protocol design, arguably, of more interest are sufficient conditions for
the existence of a multipede in a given run. Whereas a sufficient condition could be obtained directly
from Def. 14, of course, identifying all the transitional runs r with ri(t) = ri(t) is far from being com-
putable in general. Actually, we conjecture that sufficient conditions cannot be formulated in a protocol-
independent way at all. Unfortunately, however, protocol-dependence cannot be expected to be simple
R. Kuznets, L. Prosperi, U. Schmid & K. Fruzsa
309
either. For instance, even just varying the number and location of faults in r for suppressing occurred (o)
in a modified run r could be non-trivial. If k agents are already faulty in run r, at least f − k ones can
freely be used for this purpose. However, some of the k byzantine faults in r may also be re-located in r,
as agents that only become faulty after timestamp t cannot be part of any fault buffer. Rather than making
them faulty, it would suffice to just freeze them.
For instance, for the following communication structure with f = 2 and agents 1 and 2 being byzan-
tine (we omit the time dimension for simplicity's sake),
1
2
3
4
they would both participate in the fault buffer, whereas, already 2 alone would suffice because even were
1 correct, the observed communication does not give it a chance to pass by 2. Depending on 1's protocol,
it might be possible to reassign 1 to the silent masses, thereby allowing to consider 4 as the second faulty
agent and, thus, showing the impossibility for 3 to act in this situation. An opposite outcome is possible
in the following scenario:
A1.1
A2.1
I1
A1.2
C
A2.2
I2
A1.3
A2.3
Let f = 2 and the faulty agents be A2.1 and A1.1. While the sufficient condition forces C to consider
the case of both I1 and I2 being compromised and information originating from them unreliable, our
necessary condition does not rule out C's ability to make a decision.
Indeed, suppose I1 and I2 are
investigators sending in their reports via three aides each. Having received 4 identical reports that are
correct from A1.2, A1.3, A2.2, and A2.3 and only 2 fake reports from A1.1 and A2.1, agent C would have
been able to choose the correct version if the possibility of both investigators being compromised were
off the table. Our method of adjusting the run does not allow us to move the faulty agent from A1.1 to I1
because it is not clear how A1.1 would have behaved were it correct and had it received a fake report
from I1. By designing a protocol in such a way that A1.1's correct behavior in such a hypothetical situ-
ation is different, we can eliminate the possibility of investigators being compromised and, thus, resolve
the situation for C.
6 Conclusions
The main contribution of this paper is the characterization of the analog of Lamport's causal cone in
asynchronous multi-agent systems with byzantine faulty agents. Relying on our novel byzantine runs-
and-systems framework, we provided an accurate epistemic characterization of causality and the induced
reliable causal cone in the presence of asynchronous byzantine agents. Despite the quite natural final
shape of a reliable causal cone, it does not lead to simple conditions for ascertaining preconditions:
the detection of what we called a multipede is considerably more complex than the verification of the
existence of one causal path in the fault-free case. Since the agents' actions depend on the shape of
multiple alternative reliable causal cones in byzantine fault-tolerant protocols like [20], however, there is
no alternative but to detect multipedes.
310
Causality and Epistemic Reasoning in Byzantine Multi-Agent Systems
Developing practical sufficient conditions for the existence of a multipede poses exciting challenges,
which are currently being addressed in the context of the epistemic analysis of some real byzantine
fault-tolerant protocols. This context-dependency is unavoidable, since the agent that tries to detect a
multipede in a run lacks global information such as the actual members of the fault buffer. On the other
hand, the gap between the necessary and sufficient conditions can potentially be minimized by designing
protocols based on the insights into the causality structure we have uncovered. For instance, while we
treated all error-creating nodes as part of the fault buffer in our necessary conditions for a multipede,
it is sometimes possible to relegate redundant parts of it into the silent masses. As this would allow to
re-locate byzantine faults for intercepting more causal paths, one may design protocols in a way that does
not allow this.
A larger and more long-term goal is to extend our study to syncausality and the reliable syncausal
cone in the context of synchronous byzantine fault-tolerant multi-agent systems, and to possibly incor-
porate protocols explicitly into the logic.
Acknowledgments. We are grateful to Yoram Moses, Hans van Ditmarsch, and Moshe Vardi for
fruitful discussions and valuable suggestions that have helped shape the final version of this paper. We
also thank the anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions.
References
[1] Ido Ben-Zvi & Yoram Moses (2014): Beyond Lamport's Happened-before: On Time Bounds and the Order-
ing of Events in Distributed Systems. Journalof the ACM 61(2:13), doi:10.1145/2542181.
[2] K. M. Chandy & Jayadev Misra (1986): How processes learn. Distributed Computing 1(1), pp. 40 -- 52,
doi:10.1007/BF01843569.
[3] Reinhard Diestel (2017): Graph Theory, Fifth edition. Springer, doi:10.1007/978-3-662-53622-3.
[4] Cynthia Dwork & Yoram Moses (1990): Knowledge and Common Knowledge in a Byzantine Environment:
Crash Failures. InformationandComputation 88(2), pp. 156 -- 186, doi:10.1016/0890-5401(90)90014-9.
[5] Ronald Fagin, Joseph Y. Halpern, Yoram Moses & Moshe Y. Vardi (1995): Reasoning About Knowledge.
MIT Press.
[6] Ronald Fagin, Joseph Y. Halpern, Yoram Moses & Moshe Y. Vardi (1999): Common knowledge revisited.
Annalsof Pure andApplied Logic 96(1 -- 3), pp. 89 -- 105, doi:10.1016/S0168-0072(98)00033-5.
[7] Krisztina Fruzsa (2019): Hope for Epistemic Reasoning with Faulty Agents!
In: Proceedings of ESSLLI
2019StudentSession. (To appear).
[8] Guy Goren & Yoram Moses (2018): Silence. In: PODC '18, Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Symposium on
Principlesof DistributedComputing, ACM, pp. 285 -- 294, doi:10.1145/3212734.3212768.
[9] Joseph Y. Halpern & Yoram Moses (1990): Knowledge and Common Knowledge in a Distributed Environ-
ment. Journalof the ACM 37(3), pp. 549 -- 587, doi:10.1145/79147.79161.
[10] Joseph Y. Halpern, Yoram Moses & Orli Waarts (2001): A characterization of eventual Byzantine agreement.
SIAM Journalon Computing 31(3), pp. 838 -- 865, doi:10.1137/S0097539798340217.
[11] Jaakko Hintikka (1962): Knowledge and Belief: An Introduction to the Logic of the Two Notions. Cornell
University Press.
[12] Roman Kuznets, Laurent Prosperi, Ulrich Schmid & Krisztina Fruzsa (2019): Epistemic Reasoning with
Byzantine-Faulty Agents. In: Proceedingsof FroCoS2019. (To appear).
[13] Roman Kuznets, Laurent Prosperi, Ulrich Schmid, Krisztina Fruzsa & Lucas Gr´eaux (2019): Knowledge in
Byzantine Message-Passing Systems I: Framework and the Causal Cone. Technical Report TUW-260549,
TU Wien. Available at https://publik.tuwien.ac.at/files/publik_260549.pdf.
R. Kuznets, L. Prosperi, U. Schmid & K. Fruzsa
311
[14] Leslie Lamport (1978): Time, Clocks, and the Ordering of Events in a Distributed System. Communications
of the ACM 21(7), pp. 558 -- 565, doi:10.1145/359545.359563.
[15] Leslie Lamport, Robert Shostak & Marshall Pease (1982): The Byzantine Generals Problem. ACMTransac-
tionson ProgrammingLanguagesandSystems 4(3), pp. 382 -- 401, doi:10.1145/357172.357176.
[16] Alexandre Maurer, S´ebastien Tixeuil & Xavier Defago (2015): Reliable Communication in a Dynamic Net-
work in the Presence of Byzantine Faults. eprint 1402.0121, arXiv. Available at https://arxiv.org/abs/
1402.0121.
[17] Yoram Moses (2015): Relating Knowledge and Coordinated Action: The Knowledge of Preconditions Prin-
ciple. In R. Ramanujam, editor: Proceedingsof TARK 2015, pp. 231 -- 245, doi:10.4204/EPTCS.215.17.
[18] Yoram Moses & Yoav Shoham (1993): Belief as defeasible knowledge. Artificial Intelligence 64(2), pp.
299 -- 321, doi:10.1016/0004-3702(93)90107-M.
[19] Yoram Moses & Mark R. Tuttle (1988): Programming Simultaneous Actions Using Common Knowledge.
Algorithmica 3, pp. 121 -- 169, doi:10.1007/BF01762112.
[20] T. K. Srikanth & Sam Toueg (1987): Optimal Clock Synchronization. JournaloftheACM34(3), pp. 626 -- 645,
doi:10.1145/28869.28876.
Appendix
Filter functions
Definition A.16. The filtering function f ilterε for asynchronous agents with at most f ≥ 0 byzantine
faults is defined as follows.
First, we define a subfilter f ilterB
ε : G ×℘(GEvents) × ∏n
i=1℘(GActionsi) → ℘(GEvents) that re-
moves impossible receives: for a global state h ∈ G , set Xε ⊆ GEvents, and sets Xi ⊆ GActionsi,
f ilterB
ε (h, Xε, X1, . . . , Xn) := Xε \ngrecv( j, i,µ, id)
gsend(i, j,µ, id) /∈ hε ∧
(∀A ∈ {noop} ⊔ GActionsi) fake (i, gsend(i, j,µ, id) 7→ A) /∈ hε ∧ (gsend(i, j,µ, id) /∈ Xi ∨ go(i) /∈ Xε)∧
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
(∀A ∈ {noop} ⊔ GActionsi) fake (i, gsend(i, j,µ, id) 7→ A) /∈ Xεo,
where hε is the environment's record of all haps in the global state h and O ∈ hε (O /∈ hε) states that the
hap O ∈ GHaps is (isn't) present in this record of all past rounds, Xε represents all events attempted by
the environment and Xi's represent all actions attempted by agents i in the current round.
Second, using X B
εi
:= Xε ∩(cid:0)BEventsi ⊔ {sleep (i), hibernate (i)}(cid:1) and defining A (Failed (h)) to be
the set of agents who have already exhibited faulty behavior in the global state h, we define a subfilter
f ilter≤ f
i=1℘(GActionsi) →℘(GEvents) that removes all byzantine events in the
situation when having them would have exceeded the f threshold:
ε : G ×℘(GEvents)× ∏n
f ilter≤ f
Xε
ε (h, Xε, X1, . . . , Xn) :=
Xε \ Fi∈A
A (Failed (h)) ∪(cid:8)i X B
otherwise.
εi
if(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
≤ f ,
6= ∅(cid:9)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)
X B
εi
The filter f ilterε : G ×℘(GEvents) × ∏n
i=1℘(GActionsi) →℘(GEvents) is obtained by composing
these two subfilters, with the ≤ f subfilter applied first:
f ilterε (h, Xε, X1, . . . , Xn) := f ilterB
ε(cid:16)h, f ilter
≤ f
ε (h, Xε, X1, . . . , Xn) , X1, . . . , Xn(cid:17) .
312
Causality and Epistemic Reasoning in Byzantine Multi-Agent Systems
The composition in the opposite order could violate causality if a message receipt is preserved by
ε based on a byzantine send in the same round, which is later removed by f ilter≤ f
ε .
f ilterB
Definition A.17. The filters f ilteri : ∏n
j=1℘(GActions j) ×℘(GEvents) →℘(GActionsi) for agents' ac-
tions are defined as follows: for Xε representing all environment's events and Xi representing all actions
attempted by agent i in the current round,
f ilteri (X1, . . . , Xn, Xε) :=(Xi
if go(i) ∈ Xε,
∅ otherwise.
Update functions
Before defining the update functions, we need several auxiliary functions:
Definition A.18. We use a function local : GHaps → Haps converting correct haps from the global
format into the local formats for the respective agents in such a way that, for any i, j ∈ A , any t ∈ T, any
a ∈ Actionsi, any µ ∈ Msgs, and any M ∈ N:
1.
2.
local(GActionsi) = Actionsi;
local(GEventsi) = Eventsi;
3.
4.
local(cid:0)global (i,t, a)(cid:1) = a;
local(cid:0)grecv(i, j,µ, M)(cid:1) = recv( j,µ).
For all other haps, the localization cannot be done on a hap-by-hap basis because system events and
byzantine events fake (i, A 7→ noop) do not create a local record. Accordingly, we define a localization
function σ : ℘(GHaps) →℘(Haps) as follows: for each X ⊆ GHaps,
σ(cid:0)X(cid:1) := local(cid:16)(X ∩ GHaps) ∪
Definition A.19. We abbreviate Xεi := Xε ∩ GEventsi for performed events Xε ⊆ GEvents and actions
{E ∈ GEvents (∃i) fake (i, E) ∈ X } ∪ {A′ ∈ GActions (∃i)(∃A) fake(cid:0)i, A 7→ A′(cid:1) ∈ X }(cid:17).
Xi ⊆ GActionsi for each i ∈ A . Given a global state r (t) =(cid:0)rε (t) , r1 (t) , . . . , rn (t)(cid:1) ∈ G , we define
i ×℘(GActionsi) ×℘(GEvents) → L
i that outputs a new local state from L
i based
agent i's updatei : L
on i's actions Xi and events Xε:
updatei (ri (t) , Xi, Xε) :=(ri (t)
(cid:2)σ(cid:0)Xεi ⊔ Xi(cid:1)(cid:3) : ri (t)
if σ(Xεi) = ∅ and Xεi ∩ {go(i), sleep(i)} = ∅,
otherwise
(note that in transitional runs, updatei is always used after the action f ilteri, thus, in the absence of go(i),
it is always the case that Xi = ∅).
Similarly, the environment's state updateε : L
ε ×℘(GEvents) × ∏n
i=1℘(GActionsi) → L
ε outputs
a new state of the environment based on events Xε and all actions Xi:
updateε (rε (t) , Xε, X1, . . . , Xn) := (Xε ⊔ X1 ⊔ · · · ⊔ Xn) : rε (t) .
Accordingly, the global update function update : G ×℘(GEvents) × ∏n
the global state as follows:
i=1℘(GActions j) → G modifies
update (r (t) , Xε, X1, . . . , Xn) :=(cid:16)updateε (rε (t) , Xε, X1, . . . , Xn) ,
update1 (r1 (t) , X1, Xε) , . . . , updaten (rn (t) , Xn, Xε)(cid:17).
|
1512.07038 | 1 | 1512 | 2015-12-22T11:46:44 | Conflict Solution According to "Aggressiveness" of Agents in Floor-Field-Based Model | [
"cs.MA"
] | This contribution introduces an element of "aggressiveness" into the Floor-Field based model with adaptive time-span. The aggressiveness is understood as an ability to win conflicts and push through the crowd. From experiments it is observed that this ability is not directly correlated with the desired velocity in the free flow regime. The influence of the aggressiveness is studied by means of the dependence of the travel time on the occupancy of a room. A simulation study shows that the conflict solution based on the aggressiveness parameter can mimic the observations from the experiment. | cs.MA | cs | Conflict Solution According to "Aggressiveness"
of Agents in Floor-Field-Based Model
Pavel Hrab´ak1,(cid:63) and Marek Buk´acek2
1 Institute of Information Theory and Automation
Czech Academy of Sciences
Pod Vodarenskou vezi 4, 182 08 Prague, Czech Republic
2 Faculty of Nuclear Sciences and Physical Engineering
[email protected]
Czech Technical University in Prague
Trojanova 13, 120 00 Prague, Czech Republic
[email protected]
June 16, 2021
Abstract. This contribution introduces an element of "aggressiveness"
into the Floor-Field based model with adaptive time-span. The aggres-
siveness is understood as an ability to win conflicts and push through the
crowd. From experiments it is observed that this ability is not directly
correlated with the desired velocity in the free flow regime. The influence
of the aggressiveness is studied by means of the dependence of the travel
time on the occupancy of a room. A simulation study shows that the
conflict solution based on the aggressiveness parameter can mimic the
observations from the experiment.
Keywords: Floor-Field model, conflict solution, aggressiveness.
1
Introduction
This article focuses on a microscopic study of a simulation tool for pedestrian
flow. The object of the study is a simulation of one rather small room with
one exit and one multiple entrance, which may be considered as one segment
of a large network. The behaviour of pedestrians in such environment has been
studied by our group by means of variety experiments [4,6] from the view of the
boundary induced phase transition (this has been studied theoretically for Floor-
Field model in [9]). Observing data from these experiments we have found out
that each participant has different ability to push through the crowd. Therefore,
this article is motivated by the aim to mimic such behaviour by simple cellu-
lar model, which may be applied in simulations of apparently heterogeneous
scenarios as [13,16].
The original model is based on the Floor-Field Model [7,12,14] with adap-
tive time-span [5] and principle of bonds [10]. The adaptive time span enables
(cid:63) Corresponding author
5
1
0
2
c
e
D
2
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
8
3
0
7
0
.
2
1
5
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
2
P. Hrab´ak M. Buk´acek
to model heterogeneous stepping velocity of pedestrians; the principle of bonds
helps to mimic collective behaviour of pedestrians in lines. It is worth noting
that there is a variety of modifications of the Floor-Field model capturing dif-
ferent aspects of pedestrian flow and evacuation dynamics. Quite comprehensive
summary can be found in [15].
In this article we focus on the solution of conflicts, which accompany all cellu-
lar models with parallel update, i.e., when more agents decide to enter the same
site/cell. In such case, one of the agents can be chosen at random to win the
conflict, the randomness can be executed proportionally to the hopping proba-
bility of conflicting agents [7]. The unresolved conflicts play an important role
in models of pedestrian evacuation. The aim to attempt the same cell may lead
to the blocking of the motion. This is captured by the friction parameter µ de-
noting the probability that none of the agent wins the conflict. An improvement
is given by the friction function [17], which raises the friction according to the
number of conflicting agents.
In our approach we introduce an additional property determining the agent's
ability to win conflicts, which may be understood as agent's aggressiveness. This
characteristics has been inspired by the analyses of repeated passings of pedestri-
ans through a room under various conditions from free flow to high congestion.
As will be shown below, this characteristics significantly affects the time spent by
individual agents in the room, which is referred to as the travel time. Similar het-
erogeneity in agents behaviour has been used in [11], where the "aggressiveness"
has been represented by the willingness to overtake.
2 Experiment
The introduction of the aggressiveness as an additional model parameter is moti-
vated by the microscopic analyses of the experimental data from the experiment
"passing-through" introduced in [6]. The set-up of the experiment is shown in
Figure 1. Participants of the experiment were entering a rectangle room in order
to pass through and leave the room via the exit placed at the opposite wall to
the entrance.
The inflow rate of pedestrians has been controlled in order to study the
dependence of the phase (free flow or congested regime) on the inflow rate α. In
order to keep stable flow through the room, pedestrians were passing the room
repeatedly during all runs of the experiment.
Each participant has been equipped by a hat with unique binary code. The
automatic image recognition enables us not only to restore the pedestrians tra-
jectories but more over to assign all trajectories to individual participants. This
enables the study of individual properties of the pedestrians under a bride scale
of conditions, since for each participant there are 20 to 40 records of their pass-
ings.
One of the investigated quantities is the travel-time T T = Tout−Tin denoting
the length of the interval a pedestrian spent in the room between the entrance at
Tin and the egress at Tout. To capture the pedestrians behaviour under variety
"Aggressiveness" in Floor-Field Model
3
Fig. 1. Taken from [6]. Left: Experimental setting the experiment, a = 7.2 m, b =
4.4 m. After the passage through the exit, participant returned to the area Y waiting for
another entry. Right: sketch of pedestrian's hat used for automatic image recognition.
of conditions, the travel time is investigated with respect to the average number
of pedestrians in the room Nmean defined as
(cid:90) Tout
Tout − Tin
Tin
Nmean =
1
N (t)dt ,
(1)
where N (t) stands for the number of pedestrians in the room at time t. Fig-
ure 2 shows the scatter plot of all pairs (Nmean, T T ) gathered over all runs of
experiment and all participants.
The reaction of participants on the occupancy of the room significantly dif-
fers. There are two basic characteristics of that can be extracted: the mean travel
time in the free-flow regime (0 - 7 pedestrians) and the slope of the travel-time
dependence on the number of pedestrians in the congested regime (10 - 45 pedes-
trians). The former is given by the desired velocity, the latter reflects the ability
to push through the crowd, referred to as the aggressiveness. This observation
corresponds to the piece-wise linear model for each pedestrian
T T =
S
v0(i)
+ 1{N >7}(N − 7) · slope(i) + noise
(2)
where S = 7.2 m, v0(i) is the free-flow velocity of the pedestrian i, slope(i) is the
unique coefficient of the linear model for pedestrian i. The breakpoint N = 7
depends from the room geometry. The weighted mean of the R2 value of the
model (2) is 0.688.
Detailed description of the experiment and its analyses has been presented
at the conference TGF 15 and will be published in the proceedings [3]. Videos
capturing the exhibition of the aggressive behaviour are available at http://
gams.fjfi.cvut.cz/peds.
3 Model Definition
The model adapts the principle of the known Floor-Field cellular model. The
playground of the model is represented by the rectangular two-dimensional lat-
tice L ⊂ Z2 consisting of cells x = (x1, x2). Every cell may be either occupied by
26252423222120control bitbinary codecentre of massrecognitionmark 4
P. Hrab´ak M. Buk´acek
Fig. 2. Scatter plot of the travel time T T with respect to the occupancy Nmean ex-
tracted from the experiment. Three participants are highlighted. Their travel time is
approximated by the piecewise linear model. We can see that Ped. 2 has lower desired
velocity in free regime but higher ability to push through the crowd in comparison to
Ped. 4.
one agent or empty. Agents are moving along the lattice by hopping from their
current cell x ∈ L to a neighbouring cell y ∈ N (x) ⊂ L, where the neighbourhood
N (x) is Moore neighbourhood, i.e., N (x) = {y ∈ L; maxj=1,2 xj − yj ≤ 1} .
3.1 Choice of the New Target Cell
(cid:112)
Agents choose their target cells y from N (x) stochastically according to proba-
bilistic distribution P (y x; state of N (x)), which reflects the "attractiveness"
of the cell y to the agent. The "attractiveness" is expressed by means of the
static field S storing the distances of the cells to the exit cell E = (0, 0), which
is the common target for all agents. For the purposes of this article, the eu-
y12 + y22. Then it is considered
clidean distance has been used, i.e., S(y) =
P (y x) ∝ exp{−kSS(y)}, for y ∈ N (x). Here kS ∈ [0, +∞) denotes the param-
eter of sensitivity to the field S.
The probabilistic choice of the target cell is further influenced by the occu-
pancy of neighbouring cells and by the diagonality of the motion. An occupied
cell is considered to be less attractive, nevertheless, it is meaningful to allow the
choice of an occupied cell while the principle of bonds is present (explanation of
the principle of bonds follows below). Furthermore, the movement in diagonal
direction is penalized in order to suppress the zig-zag motion in free flow regime
and support the symmetry of the motion with respect to the lattice orientation.
0510152025303540455001020304050N_mean [peds]TT [s] Ped. 17 dataPed. 17 modelPed. 4 dataPed. 4 modelPed. 2 dataPed. 2 model "Aggressiveness" in Floor-Field Model
5
Technically this is implemented as follows. Let Ox(y) be the identifier of
agents occupying the cell y from the point of view of the agent sitting in cell
x, i.e. Ox(x) = 0 and for y (cid:54)= x Ox(y) = 1 if y is occupied and Ox(y) = 0
if y is empty. Then P (y x) ∝ (1 − kOOx(y)), where kO ∈ [0, 1] is again the
parameter of sensitivity to the occupancy (kO = 1 means that occupied cell
will never be chosen). Similarly can be treated the diagonal motion defining
the diagonal movement identifier as Dx(y) = 1 if (x1 − y1) · (x2 − y2) (cid:54)= 0 and
Dx(y) = 0 otherwise. Sensitivity parameter to the diagonal movement is denoted
by kD ∈ [0, 1] (kD = 1 implies that diagonal direction is never chosen).
final form
The probabilistic choice of the new target cell can be than written in the
exp(cid:8)
z∈N (x) exp(cid:8)
(cid:80)
− kSS(y)(cid:9)(cid:0)1 − kOOx(y)(cid:1)(cid:0)1 − kDDx(y)(cid:1)
− kSS(z)(cid:9)(cid:0)1 − kOOx(z)(cid:1)(cid:0)1 − kDDx(z)(cid:1) .
P (y x) =
(3)
It is worth noting that the site x belongs to the neighbourhood N (x), therefore
the equation (3) applies to P (x x) as well.
3.2 Updating Scheme
The used updating scheme combines the advantages of fully-parallel update ap-
proach, which leads to necessary conflicts, and the asynchronous clocked scheme [8]
enabling the agents to move at different rates.
Each agent carries as his property the own period denoted as τ , which repre-
sents his desired duration between two steps, i.e., the agent desires to be updated
agents, but undesirably suppresses the number of conflicts between agents with
different τ . To prevent this, we suggest to divide the time-line into isochronous
at times t = kτ , k ∈ Z. Such principle enables to model different velocities of
(cid:2)kh, (k + 1)h(cid:1). A wise choice of the interval length h in dependence on the dis-
intervals of the length h > 0. During each algorithm step k ∈ Z such agents
are updated, whose desired time of the next actualization lies in the interval
tribution of τ leads to the restoration of conflicts in the model. It worth noting
that we use the concept of adaptive time-span, i.e., the time of the desired actu-
alization is recalculated after each update of the agent, since it can be influenced
by the essence of the motion, e.g., diagonal motion leads to a time-penalization,
since it is √2 times longer. For more detail see e.g. [5]. This is an advantage over
the probabilistic approach introduced in [1].
3.3 Principle of Bonds
The principle of bonds is closely related to the possibility of choosing an occupied
cell. An agent who chooses an occupied cell builds a bond to the agent sitting in
the chosen cell. This bond lasts until the motion of the blocking agent or until
the next activation of the bonded agent. The idea is that the bonded agents
attempt to enter their chosen cell immediately after it becomes empty.
6
P. Hrab´ak M. Buk´acek
3.4 Aggressiveness and Solution of Conflicts
The partially synchronous updating scheme of agents leads to the kind of con-
flicts that two ore more agents are trying to enter the same cell. This occurs when
more agents choose as their target cell the same cell, or when more agents are
bonded to the same cell, which becomes empty. The mechanism of the conflict
solution is the same in both cases. Each agent carries an information about his
ability to "win" conflicts which is here referred to as aggressiveness and denoted
by letter γ ∈ [0, 1]. The conflict is always won by agents with highest γ.
If there are two or more agents with the highest γ, the friction parameter µ
plays a role. In this article we assume that the higher is the aggressiveness γ, the
less should be the probability that none of the agents wins the conflict. Therefore,
the conflict is not solved with probability µ(1 − γ) (none of the agents move).
With complement probability 1 − µ(1 − γ) the conflict resolves to the motion
of one of the agents. This agent is chosen randomly with equal probability from
all agents with involved in the conflict having the highest γ. The mechanism of
the friction can be easily modified. An example of conflict solution is depicted
in Figure 3.
Fig. 3. Conflict solution for γ1 < γ2. Left: More aggressive wins the conflict over two
less aggressive. Right: The conflict of two more aggressive can resolve by the blocking
of the movement.
4
Impact of the Aggressiveness Element
The effect of the aggressiveness has been studied by means of the simulation.
Results stressed in this article come from the simulations with parameters given
by Table 1. The values of τ and γ are distributed among agents uniformly and
independently on each other.
The simulation set-up has been designed according to the experiment, i.e.,
the room of the size 7.2 m × 4.4 m has been modelled by the rectangular lat-
tice 18 sites long and 11 sites wide. The size of one cell therefore corresponds
to 0.4 m × 0.4 m. The exit is placed in the middle of the shorter wall, the
6P.Hrab´akM.Buk´acekIftherearetwoormoreagentswiththehighestγ,thefrictionparameterµplaysarole.Inthisarticleweassumethatthehigheristheaggressivenessγ,thelessshouldbetheprobabilitythatnoneoftheagentswinstheconflict.Therefore,theconflictisnotsolvedwithprobabilityµ(1−γ)(noneoftheagentsmove).Withcomplementprobability1−µ(1−γ)theconflictresolvestothemotionofoneoftheagentswithhighestγ.Thisagentischosenatrandom.Themechanismofthefrictioncanbeeasilymodified.AnexampleofconflictsolutionisdepictedinFigure3.γ2γ1γ1γ2γ1γ1γ1γ2γ2µ(1−γ2)γ1γ2γ21−µ(1−γ2)2γ1γ2γ21−µ(1−γ2)2γ1γ2γ2Fig.3.Conflictsolutionforγ1<γ2.Left:Moreaggressivewinstheconflictovertwolessaggressive.Right:Theconflictoftwomoreaggressivecanresolvebytheblockingofthemovement.4ImpactoftheAggressivenessElementTheeffectoftheaggressivenesshasbeenstudiedbymeansofthesimulation.ResultsstressedinthisarticlecomefromthesimulationswithparametersgivenbyTable1.Thevaluesofτandγaredistributedamongagentsuniformlyandindependentlyoneachother.Table1.Valuesofparametersusedforsimulation.kSkOkDhµτγ3.510.70.1s0.5{.25,.4}{0,1}Thesimulationset-uphasbeendesignedaccordingtotheexperiment,i.e.,theroomofthesize7.2m×4.4mhasbeenmodelledbytherectangularlat-tice18siteslongand11siteswide.Thesizeofonecellthereforecorrespondsto0.4m×0.4m.Theexitisplacedinthemiddleoftheshorterwall,theopenboundaryismodelledbyamultipleentranceontheoppositewall.Newagentsareenteringthelatticestochasticallywiththemeaninflowrateα[pedes- "Aggressiveness" in Floor-Field Model
7
Table 1. Values of parameters used for simulation.
kS
3.5
kO
1
kD
0.7
h
0.1 s
µ
0.5
τ
{.25, .4}
γ
{0, 1}
open boundary is modelled by a multiple entrance on the opposite wall. New
agents are entering the lattice stochastically with the mean inflow rate α [pedes-
trians/second]. The inflow rate is a controlled parameter. For more detailed
description of the simulation we refer the reader to [2].
It has been shown that such system evinces the boundary induced phase
transition from the free flow (low number of agents in the lattice) to the conges-
tion regime (high number of pedestrians in the lattice) via the transient phase
(number of pedestrians fluctuating between the low and high value). Therefore,
wise choice of different inflow rates α covering the all three phases, enables us to
study the dependence of the travel time T T on the average number of agents in
the lattice Nmean. When simulating with parameters from Table 1, the correct
choice of inflow rate is α ∈ [1, 3].
Figure 4 shows the dependence of the travel time T T = Tout−Tin on the aver-
age number of agents in the lattice Nmean calculated according to (1). Measured
data consisting of pairs (Nmean, T T ) are aggregated over simulations for inflow
rate values α ∈ {1, 1.5, 1.8, 2.0, 2.3, 2.7, 3.0}; for each inflow α twenty runs of the
simulation have been performed. Each run simulates 1000 s of the introduced
scenario starting with empty room. Agents were distributed into four groups
according their own period τ and aggressiveness γ, namely "fast aggressive"
(τ = 0.25, γ = 1), "fast calm" (τ = 0.25, γ = 0), "slow aggressive" (τ = 0.4,
γ = 1), and "slow calm" (τ = 0.4, γ = 0).
In the graph of the Figure 4 we can see the average travel time for each group
calculated with respect to the occupancy of the room. It is evident that for low
occupancy up to 10 agents in the room the mean travel time for each group levels
at a value corresponding to the free flow velocity given by the own updating
period. For the occupancy above 20 agents in the lattice, the linear growth of
the mean travel time with respect to Nmean is obvious. Furthermore, the average
travel time for fast-calm corresponds to the travel time of slow aggressive. The
Figure 4 shows two auxiliary graphs presenting the dependence of T T on Nmean
for systems with homogeneity in γ (left) or in τ (right). From the graphs we
can conclude that the heterogeneity in aggressiveness γ reproduces the desired
variance in the slope of the graph without the non-realistic high variance in free
flow generated by the heterogeneity of own updating frequency.
The influence is even more evident from the graph in Figure 5 representing a
plot of all travel time entries with respect to the time of the exiting Tout. Right
graph shows the box-plots of the travel time for four groups measured after 500 s
from the initiation, i.e., in the steady phase of the system. We can see that in
this view, the aggressiveness plays more important role that the desired velocity
of agents.
8
P. Hrab´ak M. Buk´acek
Fig. 4. Dependence of the mean travel time T T on the average occupancy Nmean for
each group of agents. Gray lines represent the quantiles of the travel time regardless
to the groups. Top: heterogeneity in both, γ and τ . Bottom left: heterogeneity in τ .
Bottom right: heterogeneity in γ.
5 Conclusions and Future Work
The article introduced a parameter of aggressiveness as an additional character-
istics of agents in the Floor-Field model with adaptive time. This parameter is
understood as an ability to win conflicts. Therefore the heterogeneity of agents
is given by their desired velocity (determined by the own period τ ) and their
ability to win conflicts referred to as the aggressiveness.
The simulation study shows that the aggressiveness has significant influence
in the regime with high occupation of the room, i.e., in the dense crowd, and on
the other hand has no effect in the free flow, as desired. The linear dependence of
the travel time on the number of pedestrians in the agents neighbourhood seems
to be a good tool how to measure the ability of agents/pedestrians to push
through the crowd. The independence of this ability on the desired velocity of
agents is very important to mimic the aspect that some "fast" pedestrians can
be significantly slowed down by the crowd while some "slow" pedestrians can
push through the crowd more effectively.
TitTitTitPavelHrab´ak2,?andMarekBuk´acek11FacultyofNuclearSciencesandPhysicalEngineeringCzechTechnicalUniversityinPragueTrojanova13,12000Prague,CzechRepublicbukacma2@fjfi.cvut.cz2InstituteofInformationTheoryandAutomationAcademyofSciencesoftheCzechRepublicPodVodarenskouvezi4,18208Prague,[email protected],2015020406080100120140160180200050100150qv = 0qv = 0.1qv = 0.5qv = 0.9N_meanmean(TT) γ=0, τ=0.25γ=0, τ=0.4γ=1, τ=0.25γ=1, τ=0.4010203005101520 050100150200050100150N_meanmean(TT) γ=0, τ=0.25γ=0, τ=0.4010203001020 050100150200050100150N_meanmean(TT) γ=0, τ=0.3γ=1, τ=0.3010203001020 ?Correspondingauthor "Aggressiveness" in Floor-Field Model
9
Fig. 5. Left: Development of travel time T T in time for one run of the simulation. The
value T T is plotted against the time of the exit Tout to ensure that values corresponding
to the same time stem from similar conditions near the exit. Inflow rate α = 3 ped/s.
The agent group is indicated by the color. Right: Box-plots of the travel time for entries
with Tin > 500 s (i.e. in the steady state).
We believe that such feature can be very useful in the simulation of the
evacuation or egress of large complexes as e.g. football stadiums, where the less
aggressive pedestrians (parents with children, fragile women) can be slowed down
and leave the facility significantly later than the average. The model reproduces
this aspect even in the case of the homogeneity in own period τ .
In the future we plan to study this aspect in more detail. Mainly we would like
to focus on the joint distribution of the desired velocity τ and the aggressiveness
γ among the population and study its impact by means of the proposed model.
Acknowledgements.
This work was supported by the Czech Science Foundation under grants GA13-
13502S (P. Hrab´ak) and GA15-15049S (M. Buk´acek). Further support wa pro-
vided by the CTU grant SGS15/214/OHK4/3T/14.
References
1. Bandini, S., Crociani, L., Vizzari, G.: Heterogeneous pedestrian walking speed
in discrete simulation models. In: Chraibi, M., Boltes, M., Schadschneider, A.,
Seyfried, A. (eds.) Traffic and Granular Flow '13, pp. 273 -- 279. Springer Interna-
tional Publishing (2015)
2. Buk´acek, M., Hrab´ak, P.: Case study of phase transition in cellular models of
pedestrian flow. In: Was, J., Sirakoulis, G., Bandini, S. (eds.) Cellular Automata,
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8751, pp. 508 -- 517. Springer International
Publishing AG (2014)
020040060080010000100200300400T_out [s]TT [s] 010020030040000110.250.40.250.4γ = 1, τ = 0.4γ = 1, τ = 0.25γ = 0, τ = 0.4γ = 0, τ = 0.25 10
P. Hrab´ak M. Buk´acek
3. Buk´acek, M., Hrab´ak, P., Krb´alek, M.: Individual microscopic results of bottleneck
experiments. In: Traffic and Granular Flow '15. Springer International Publishing,
to be published.
4. Buk´acek, M., Hrab´ak, P., Krb´alek, M.: Experimental analysis of two-dimensional
pedestrian flow in front of the bottleneck. In: Chraibi, M., Boltes, M., Schadschnei-
der, A., Seyfried, A. (eds.) Traffic and Granular Flow '13, pp. 93 -- 101. Springer
International Publishing (2015)
5. Buk´acek, M., Hrab´ak, P., Krb´alek, M.: Cellular model of pedestrian dynamics with
adaptive time span. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8385, pp. 669 -- 678.
Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2014)
6. Buk´acek, M., Hrab´ak, P., Krb´alek, M.: Experimental study of phase transition in
pedestrian flow. In: Daamen, W., Duives, D.C., Hoogendoorn, S.P. (eds.) Pedes-
trian and Evacuation Dynamics 2014, Transportation Research Procedia, vol. 2,
pp. 105 -- 113. Elsevier Science B.V. (2014)
7. Burstedde, C., Klauck, K., Schadschneider, A., Zittartz, J.: Simulation of pedes-
trian dynamics using a two-dimensional cellular automaton. Physica A: Statistical
Mechanics and its Applications 295(3-4), 507 -- 525 (2001)
8. Cornforth, D., Green, D.G., Newth, D.: Ordered asynchronous processes in multi-
agent systems. Physica D 204(1-2), 70 -- 82 (2005)
9. Ezaki, T., Yanagisawa, D., Nishinari, K.: Analysis on a single segment of evacuation
network. Journal of Cellular Automata 8(5-6), 347 -- 359 (2013)
10. Hrab´ak, P., Buk´acek, M., Krb´alek, M.: Cellular model of room evacuation based
on occupancy and movement prediction: Comparison with experimental study.
Journal of Cellular Automata 8(5-6), 383 -- 393 (2013)
11. Ji, X., Zhou, X., Ran, B.: A cell-based study on pedestrian acceleration and over-
taking in a transfer station corridor. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Ap-
plications 392(8), 1828 -- 1839 (2013)
12. Kirchner, A., Schadschneider, A.: Simulation of evacuation processes using a
bionics-inspired cellular automaton model for pedestrian dynamics. Physica A:
Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 312(12), 260 -- 276 (2002)
13. Kleczek, P., Was, J.: Simmulation of pedestrian behavior in shopping mall. In:
Was, J., Sirakoulis, G., Bandini, S. (eds.) Cellular Automata, Lecture Notes in
Computer Science, vol. 8751, pp. 650 -- 659. Springer International Publishing AG
(2014)
14. Kretz, T.: Pedestrian Traffic, Simulation and Experiments. Ph.D. thesis, Univer-
sitat Duisburg-Essen, Germany (2007)
15. Schadschneider, A., Chowdhury, D., Nishinari, K.: Stochastic Transport in Com-
plex Systems: From Molecules to Vehicles. Elsevier Science B. V., Amsterdam
(2010)
16. Spartalis, E., Georgoudas, I., Sirakulis, G.: Ca crowd modeling for a retirement
house evacuation with guidance. In: Was, J., Sirakoulis, G., Bandini, S. (eds.)
Cellular Automata, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8751, pp. 481 -- 491.
Springer International Publishing AG (2014)
17. Yanagisawa, D., Kimura, A., Tomoeda, A., Nishi, R., Suma, Y., Ohtsuka, K.,
Nishinari, K.: Introduction of frictional and turning function for pedestrian outflow
with an obstacle. Phys. Rev. E 80, 036110 (2009)
|
1912.11495 | 1 | 1912 | 2019-12-24T19:12:21 | A Bi-Level Cooperative Driving Strategy Allowing Lane Changes | [
"cs.MA",
"math.OC"
] | This paper studies the cooperative driving of connected and automated vehicles (CAVs) at conflict areas (e.g., non-signalized intersections and ramping regions). Due to safety concerns, most existing studies prohibit lane change since this may cause lateral collisions when coordination is not appropriately performed. However, in many traffic scenarios (e.g., work zones), vehicles must change lanes. To solve this problem, we categorize the potential collision into two kinds and thus establish a bi-level planning problem. The right-of-way of vehicles for the critical conflict zone is considered in the upper-level, and the right-of-way of vehicles during lane changes is then resolved in the lower-level. The solutions of the upper-level problem are represented in tree space, and a near-optimal solution is searched for by combining Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) with some heuristic rules within a very short planning time. The proposed strategy is suitable for not only the shortest delay objective but also other objectives (e.g., energy-saving and passenger comfort). Numerical examples show that the proposed strategy leads to good traffic performance in real-time. | cs.MA | cs | A Bi-Level Cooperative Driving Strategy Allowing Lane
Changes
Huile Xu 1, 2, Yi Zhang 1, 3, Christos G. Cassandras 2, Li Li 1, , Shuo Feng 4
1. Department of Automation, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China 100084
2. Division of Systems Engineering and Center for Information and Systems Engineering, Boston University, Boston,
MA, USA 02215
3. Tsinghua-Berkeley Shenzhen Institute (TBSI), Shenzhen, China 518055
4. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA 48109
Abstract: This paper studies the cooperative driving of connected and automated vehicles (CAVs)
at conflict areas (e.g., non-signalized intersections and ramping regions). Due to safety concerns,
most existing studies prohibit lane change since this may cause lateral collisions when
coordination is not appropriately performed. However, in many traffic scenarios (e.g., work zones),
vehicles must change lanes. To solve this problem, we categorize the potential collision into two
kinds and thus establish a bi-level planning problem. The right-of-way of vehicles for the critical
conflict zone is considered in the upper-level, and the right-of-way of vehicles during lane changes
is then resolved in the lower-level. The solutions of the upper-level problem are represented in tree
space, and a near-optimal solution is searched for by combining Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS)
with some heuristic rules within a very short planning time. The proposed strategy is suitable for
not only the shortest delay objective but also other objectives (e.g., energy-saving and passenger
comfort). Numerical examples show that the proposed strategy leads to good traffic performance
in real-time.
Keywords: connected and automated vehicles (CAVs), cooperative driving, lane change, Monte
Carlo Tree Search (MCTS)
1. Introduction
Increasing traffic congestion and accidents have caused huge losses to society and generated
Manuscript received Dec. 2nd, 2019.
Corresponding author. Mail address: #806, Central Main Building, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China 100084
Tel.: + 86 (10) 62782071; E-mail address: [email protected]
-1-
wide concern in recent years (Rios-Torres et al., 2016). The emergence of Connected and
Automated Vehicles (CAVs) and CAV-based traffic control is believed to be a promising way of
improving safety and
traffic efficiency. With
the aid of vehicle-to-everything (V2X)
communication, CAVs can share their driving states (position, velocity, acceleration, etc.) and
intentions with adjacent vehicles and road infrastructure to better coordinate their motions (Li et
al., 2014; Sukuvaara et al., 2009).
The existing studies for CAV-based traffic control can be categorized into six types of
approaches (Guo et al., 2019), that is, driver guidance (Ubiergo and Jin, 2016), actuated (adaptive)
signal control (Yun and Park, 2012), platoon-based signal control (Lioris et al., 2017),
planning-based signal control (Goodall et al., 2013), signal-vehicle coupled control (Yu et al.,
2018), and multi-vehicle cooperative driving without traffic signals (Chen and Englund, 2016).
Different from the other five types of approaches, most studies about multi-vehicle cooperative
driving requires a 100% CAV environment but does not rely on the traffic signal control system
like traffic lights and stop signs. In recent years, there also have been some studies to investigate
the performance of cooperative driving under different penetration rates, revealing that multiple
benefits still can be offered by CAVs even there are some human-driving vehicles in the
environment (Zhang and Cassandras, 2019). Thus, with the rapid development of CAVs, it is
regarded as the most promising and efficient intelligent transportation system (ITS) in the future.
The main task of cooperative driving is to cooperatively control CAVs passing through the
conflict areas safely and efficiently without any traffic signaling. The concept of cooperative
driving first appeared in the early 1990s. The Association of Electronic Technology for
Automobile Traffic and Driving presented it for flexible platooning of automated vehicles with a
short inter-vehicle distance (Tsugawa, 2002). Since then, cooperative driving has been
continuously studied by many researchers and examined by various projects, e.g., the Demo 2000
Cooperative Driving System in Japan (Kato et al., 2002) and the Grand Cooperative Driving
Challenge in Netherlands (Englund et al., 2016). Researchers found that one of the key points for
cooperative driving was to determine the right-of-way of vehicles for conflicting areas (Li et al.,
2006; Guler et al., 2014). An assignment of the right-of-way of vehicles for the critical conflict
zone generates a possible passing order for vehicles.
As summarized in (Meng et al., 2017), there are two primary kinds of cooperative driving
strategies, ad hoc negotiation-based and planning-based, for determining the passing order.
Ad hoc negotiation-based strategies aim to assign right-of-way using some heuristic rules
within a very short time (Xu et al., 2019a). Dresner and Stone (2008) proposed a
reservation-based intersection management strategy which divided the intersection into grids
(resources) and assigned these grids to CAVs in a First-In-First-Out (FIFO) manner. Choi et al.
(2018) extended the idea of reservation-based cooperative traffic management to an intersection of
multi-lane roads. They considered moving directions of vehicles when passing through the
-2-
intersection and found that the vehicles turning left greatly contribute to the overall average delay.
Malikopoulos et al. (2018) proposed a decentralized energy-optimal control framework for CAVs
at signal-free intersections in which the right-of-way (desired arrival times to the intersection) was
determined according to the FIFO manner and the trajectories (velocity and acceleration profiles)
of vehicles were derived through a decentralized optimal control problem. To realize a fast
implementation, they presented a complete analytical solution for the decentralized optimal
control problem. For simplicity, the considered scenario in the work was an isolated single-lane
intersection with no lane changes and no turns allowed. Then, Zhang et al. (2018) further extended
the decentralized energy-optimal control framework by including left and right turns and proposed
a dynamic resequencing method for relaxing the FIFO constraints and exploring some other
possible right-of-way. Besides the intersection scenarios, the FIFO-based passing order can be
easily extended to resolve the conflicts in other traffic scenarios such as highway ramps and work
zones. Other conflict resolutions for assigning the right-of-way like conflict graph (Liu et al., 2018)
and virtual vehicles (Uno et al., 1999; Xu et al., 2018) also have been attempted to be applied in
this field. However, as shown in (Meng et al., 2017), the passing order found by ad hoc
negotiation-based strategies roughly followed the FIFO rule and were not good enough in many
situations.
Planning-based strategies aim to enumerate all possible passing orders to find a globally
optimal solution (Xu et al., 2019a). Most state-of-the-art studies formulate the problem as an
optimization problem whose objective is usually set to minimize the total delay or passing time of
all CAVs (Meng et al., 2017; Li et al., 2017). Li et al. (2017) formulated the intersection
automation policy within a 100% CAV environment as a mixed-integer linear programming
(MILP) problem whose decision variables were desired arrival
times and used
the
branch-and-bound search approach to find the exact optimal solution. Hult et al. (2016)
formulated an optimal coordination problem for vehicles and the decision variables were states
and control signals for each vehicle. They used model predictive control to solve the problem and
took a simple intersection scenario with six vehicles as an example. Apart from the above, the
objective of some studies is to minimize the overlap of vehicle trajectories inside the intersection
zone. For example, Kamal et al. (2014) proposed a vehicle-intersection coordination scheme for
preventing each pair of conflicting vehicles from approaching their cross-collision point at the
same time. A risk function was designed to indicate the risk of a collision of a pair of vehicles, and
then the model predictive control was used to solve the resulting constrained nonlinear
optimization problem. The tree search method is an equivalent formulation to the optimization
method. Li et al. (2006) showed that we can also view the cooperative driving problem as a tree
search problem. Each tree node indicates a special passing order and the equivalent objective was
to find the node corresponds to the minimum objective value. However, all these studies ignore
the lane change for the sake of safety concerns and simplicity. Moreover, the computation time of
all planning-based strategies increases sharply as the number of vehicles increases (Lawler et al.,
-3-
1966; Morrison et al., 2016). This hinders their applications in practice.
In recent years, some state-of-the-art studies have started taking lane changing into
consideration mainly because a) no feasible solution exists for collision avoidance in some driving
scenarios without considering a lane change; and b) the latest development of CAV technology is
beginning to meet the requirement of control and positioning accuracy for lane changes. Lu et al.
(2019) considered lane changing and formulated the traffic management of vehicle trajectories as
a mixed-integer nonlinear programming (MINLP) problem and developed a specialized algorithm
based on the rolling horizon approach to improve the computational efficiency. They aimed to
optimize both longitudinal and lateral trajectories for all vehicles, subject to vehicle kinematics
and collision avoidance. For simplicity, they assumed that a lane change maneuver can always be
completed within a given time interval. Hu et al. (2019) showed that when the passing order of
vehicles in the cooperative lane change region was determined, the trajectories of vehicles could
be efficiently optimized by a linear programming model. The FIFO-based passing order was used,
and the lane change maneuvers of all vehicles were assumed to be completed within the same time
interval. Nevertheless, the assumption is practically impossible, and the lane change trajectory
used is not mentioned. Smooth lane change trajectories approximated by the sixth order
polynomials were considered in (Li et al., 2005). They showed that the lane change trajectories of
vehicles can be considered and optimized through a constructed tree search problem. Then, this
idea was further extended from intersections to lane closures (Li et al., 2007). Thus, the lane
change can be carried out in a more practical way. However, it is difficult to find a good solution
when the number of vehicles is large. Although the lane change was not considered, Xu et al.
(2019b) showed that Monte Carlo tree search with heuristic rules can help us to search a good
solution even when the search space is huge. As seen from the above, the studies of cooperative
driving allowing lane changing is limited or oversimplified.
In summary, there are two problems to conquer in this research direction. First, it is difficult
to handle lane changing in local conflict areas and deal with the high nonlinearity caused by
considering the lane change trajectories. Second, the following vehicle may pass through the
conflict zones earlier than the preceding vehicle because of the lane change, which results in the
sharp increase of the size of the search space for possible passing orders. The increasing number
of the passing orders makes it difficult to find a good enough passing order within limited
computation time. To realize a fast implementation, many studies use FIFO-based rule or other
heuristic rules to assign right-of-way to vehicles. However, the performance of the solution cannot
be guaranteed.
To address these two major limitations, we propose a bi-level-based cooperative driving
strategy allowing lane changes. According to the two types of potential collisions, we establish a
bi-level planning problem in which the optimization problem for the cooperative driving is broken
down into two sub-problems. For the first problem of finding the optimal passing order, we
-4-
creatively build a tree representation of the solution space for passing orders. After that, we
combine the Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) with some heuristic rules to find a more promising
passing order than the FIFO-based passing order. For the second problem of deriving the objective
value and the corresponding trajectories of vehicles, we design a passing-order-to-trajectory
interpretation algorithm to quickly derive a feasible solution for the optimization problem on
condition that the passing order is given. For each lane change vehicle, a suitable lane change
trajectory constrained by vehicle dynamics is chosen from a pre-designed trajectory set according
to the velocity of the vehicle. Thus, the right-of-way of vehicles for the critical conflict zone is
considered in the upper-level, and the right-of-way of vehicles during lane changes is then
resolved in the lower-level. Testing results show that the proposed strategy can effectively
improve traffic efficiency with a short enough computation time.
The main contributions of the paper include: (a) we explicitly consider the lane change
trajectories constrained by vehicle dynamics and make the solution framework more practical than
most of the existing studies; (b) we formulate a bi-level planning which greatly reduces the
complexity of the problem and makes it more efficiently solved than the conventional MIP
problem; (c) we use the MCTS-based tree search to realize the trade-off between the
computational efficiency and coordination performance.
To give a better presentation of our finding, the rest of this paper is arranged as follows.
Section 2 introduces the problem and formulates it into an optimization problem. Section 3 briefly
reviews the existing strategies and presents our new strategy. Section 4 shows the testing results of
this new strategy. Finally, Section 5 gives conclusions.
2. Problem Presentation
2.1 Conflict Zone Classification
We can classify all conflict zones into two kinds, critical conflict zones and local conflict
zones, according to the impact of the conflict on the driving scenario.
Critical conflict zones are the relatively fixed areas where a lot of potential collisions may
occur if vehicles do not appropriately adjust their motion. They are usually the bottleneck area of
traffic flow and are caused by two main reasons: 1) changes in road geometry and 2) unreasonable
occupancy of road resources. For the former, lane crossing and lane merging are the most common
causes of road geometry changes. The resulting increase in collision risk and the reduction of the
maximum traffic capacity require good coordination of the motions of the vehicles. For the latter,
the unreasonable occupancy of road resources often leads to the reduction of the number of lanes
and blocks the traffic flow in several lanes. For example, a part of the road in a lane is disabled
because of a work zone, an accident vehicle, or other obstacles. All vehicles in the same lane
-5-
where a part of the road is disabled must change their lanes in advance to avoid a collision with
them. The classic critical conflict zones include intersections, highways with a work zone, etc.
In contrast, local conflict zones are the areas where conflicts are caused by the maneuvers of
vehicles. These local conflicts influence the motions of several adjacent vehicles for a small period
of time. For instance, the local conflict zone may appear due to a lane change maneuver of one
vehicle and quickly disappear when the maneuver is completed.
Most of the complicated driving scenarios are made up of several basic driving scenarios,
like intersection, on-ramp, off-ramp, roundabout, road segment, etc. For example, a simple urban
traffic network can be divided into several intersection scenarios and road segment scenarios
based on the geometry of the road. As shown in Fig. 1, most basic driving scenarios include only
one critical conflict zone which lies in the downstream of local conflict zones. Thus, if we can
handle the conflicts in all basic driving scenarios well, then it can be extended to deal with all
complicated driving scenarios like traffic networks by dividing the conflicts into each basic
driving scenarios. The main goal of the paper is to propose an effective way to solve the conflicts
in basic driving scenarios.
Since the critical conflict zones have significant impact on the traffic efficiency of the driving
scenario, the primary task for cooperative driving is to optimize the assignment of right-of-way in
the critical conflict zone. We can first plan the motions of vehicles that are approaching to the
critical conflict zone and then backwardly plan their motions in the local conflict zone.
Yang et al. (2016) pointed out that all kinds of conflicts arise from the unclear assignment of
the right-of-way. For the critical conflict zone, we define a passing order to be a possible result of
assigning right-of-way and represents the priority of vehicles. For simplicity, we can use a string
to denote a passing order (Li et al., 2006). For example, string BAC means vehicle B, vehicle A,
and vehicle C enter into the critical conflict zone sequentially. The vehicle with the leftmost
position in the string has the highest priority. If there is a potential collision between two vehicles,
no matter in either the critical or local conflict zone, the vehicle with higher priority in the passing
order can pass through the conflict zone first.
-6-
Fig. 1. Typical driving scenarios with conflict zones. The red dashed boxes represent critical
conflict zones, and the blue dashed boxes represent local conflict zones. (a) Vehicle B changes
lanes to avoid a collision with the work zone; (b) The left-turning vehicle A changes its lane to the
left lane because of driving rules.
2.2 The Trajectory Planning Problem
If we take the locations of vehicles as decision variables, we can formulate the cooperative
driving problem as a trajectory planning problem. The constraints include vehicle dynamics,
collision avoidance, and physical constraints. The trajectory planning problem can be formulated
as
(1a)
(1b)
(1c)
(1d)
(1e)
(1f)
-7-
Work Zone(a)(b)Critical Conflict ZonesLocal Conflict ZonesIntersectionCell123456ABCDELane 1Lane 2Lane 3AB(),()1min((),())niiixtutiJxtut=..()((),(),)iiiistxtfxtutt=,((),(),)0ijijgxtxtb=,min,max()iiivvtv,min,max()iiiuutu,{0,1}ijb where
and
represent the state and control input for each vehicle at time
. The state
is a vector that consists of the vehicle's position and velocity. The function
is an
objective function which could be very general including traffic efficiency, energy consumption,
etc. Since we are more concerned about the traffic efficiency, we limit ourselves to an objective
which is the delay. Therefore, the objective function in (1a) is the total delay. Of course, by
dividing by the number of vehicles n, we get the average vehicle delay. It is worth noting that the
number of vehicles in the control zone varies with time, and we solve the above trajectory
planning problem in a time-driven manner like every few seconds. Every time we formulate the
problem, n is the number of vehicles in the control zone at that time. The function
in (1b)
is the vehicle dynamics constraint for vehicle
, the function
in (1c) is the collision
avoidance constraints, and (1d) and (1e) is the physical constraints for velocity and control input.
The binary variable
is introduced to denote the right-of-way priority between vehicle
and
vehicle
. For example, if
equals 0, the vehicle
has higher right-of-way than vehicle
;
otherwise, the vehicle
has higher right-of-way.
The optimization problem (1) is a continuous-time optimal control problem. For practical
implementation, we can discretize the control horizon and use the locations of vehicles at each
sampling time as decision variables, which results in a similar discrete-time optimal control
problem. When the sampling time is small enough, the resulting trajectories are still smooth and
continuous (Li and Li, 2019).
Clearly, the formulated optimization problem is a MINLP that is hard to solve. Although
there are many algorithms for collision avoidance constraints (1c) (Mukhtar et al., 2015; Ji et al.,
2017), it is still time-consuming to do collision avoidance for vehicles especially when the lane
change is considered.
To solve the problem, some studies use the cell-based modeling method and discretize the
road space into several cells as shown in Fig. 1 (Dresner and Stone, 2004; Dresner and Stone,
2008). The length of the cells can be determined according to the length of the vehicles. For
simplicity, we assume that all vehicles are homogeneous passenger cars, and the lengths of all
cells are the same. The lane change vehicles are assumed to simultaneously occupy the cells in
both the origin and destination lane of the maneuver. Then the safety in the critical conflict zone
and local critical zones can both be guaranteed by requiring that every cell is occupied by no more
than one vehicle at any time. It can be easily realized through optimizing the arrival times to all
cells for all vehicles.
The decision variables in this method are the arrival times of vehicles instead of the locations
of vehicles. Compared with the original formulation, the collision avoidance constraints of the
cooperative driving problem can be further discretized and simplified as
,
,
(2a)
(2b)
-8-
()xt()utt()xt()iJ()ifi()ig,ijbij,ijbijj,()(),,ijijtztzMbtijz−+,()()(1),,jiijttttMbtijz−+− where
is the arrival time of the vehicle
to the
th cell,
is a sufficiently large
number and
is the safety headway. Clearly, when
equals 0, the constraint (2a) is
reduced to
,
(3)
and the constraint (2b) is not active because of the large
. So, vehicle
must arrive at the
th cell later than vehicle
, that is to say, vehicle
has higher right-of-way than vehicle
.
Otherwise, when
equals 1, vehicle
has higher right-of-way. Thus, the vector consisting of
all binary variables
is an equivalent expression to the passing
order and represents the right-of-way priority for all vehicles.
If the temporal and spatial duration of the lane change trajectory is not considered, the
constraint (1b) under cell discretization can be written as
,
(4)
where
is the function that describes the time constraint between any two adjacent cells.
For example, if we only consider the longitudinal movement of a vehicle and assume that the
acceleration of a vehicle in a cell remains the same, we have
(5)
where
is the length of a cell.
However, to be more realistic, we consider the lane change trajectory instead of assuming the
lane change can be completed immediately or within the distance of one cell. The lane change
trajectory satisfies vehicle dynamics and can be designed in advance using fifth-order polynomial
curve functions or other functions that can guarantee a continuous third derivative and smooth
curvature (Li et al., 2005; Papadimitriou and Tomizuka, 2003; Wang et al., 2014; Luo et al.,
2016).
For vehicles during the lane change process, the constraints (4) should be modified since the
lane change trajectory is determined in advance and the input
is given correspondingly. For
example, as shown in Fig. 1, the lane change maneuver of vehicle B begins at the start-edge of cell
1 and ends at the end-edge of cell 6. Based on the given lane change trajectory, suppose that the
vehicle B spends 2s, 1s, and 1.5s passing through cell 1, cell 2, and cell 3 respectively. Then, we
have
, (6)
. (7)
As aforementioned, lane change vehicles simultaneously occupy the cells in two lanes, that is,
-9-
()itzizMt,ijb()(),,ijtztztijz−Mizjji,ijbi1,21,3,1,[,,,]ijnnbbbb−=b1(1)((),(),(),)iiiiitzftzuzvzz+=1()if22(())((1)())0.5(())((1)())(())2(())(())(1)(())iiiiiiiiiiivtztztzutztztzpvtzutzpvtztzutz+−++−=+−+=p()ut(2)(1)2BBtt=+(3)(2)1BBtt=+ . (8)
Thus, during the lane change process, the arrival times to cells can be directly determined
according to the given lane change trajectory
, which can be expressed as
,
(9)
where
is the function that indicates the arrival time gap between two adjacent cells on
condition that the lane change trajectory
is given.
Thus, the trajectory planning problem under cell discretization can be expressed as
(10a)
(10b)
(10c)
(10d)
(10e)
After the lane change trajectory is considered, more binary variables need to be introduced to
indicate the states (changing lane or going straight) of vehicles in cell
. Meanwhile, the possible
trajectories of vehicles become more complicated, which makes the problem (10) difficult to be
handled.
3. The Bi-level Planning Framework
To solve above MIP problems, researchers have proposed various methods and most of them
are planning-based methods. The planning-based methods can be regarded as single level planning
methods that aim at solving the formulated MIP model directly. However, the computation time is
too large since the collision avoidance is complicated. Some ad hoc negotiation-based methods
proposed that we can determine the passing order of vehicles first according to some heuristic
rules, and then schedule the trajectories of all vehicles according to the given passing order.
However, the performance of the given FIFO-based passing order cannot be guaranteed. Thus, it is
necessary to propose a new strategy that can deal with different kinds of conflicts and at the same
time has the ability of balancing the coordination performance and computation time.
Based on the above observation of conflict zone classification, it is natural for us to put
forward a bi-level planning framework that maximizes a specific objective such as traffic
efficiency in the upper-level problem through optimizing the passing order of vehicles and
resolves all local conflicts in the lower-level problem, see Fig. 2.
-10-
(4)(1),(5)(2),(6)(3)BBBBBBtttttt===i2(1)((),)iiiitzftz+=2()ifi(),()1min((),())niiitzuziJtzuz=..(2),(2),(4),(9)stab,min,max()iiivvzv,min,max()iiiuuzu,{0,1}ijbi Fig. 2. Bi-level planning framework.
In the upper-level problem, we transfer the problem of finding the optimal passing order into
a tree search problem (Li et al., 2006; Xu et al., 2019b). Next, we use Monte Carlo tree search
with some heuristic rules to accelerate the searching process. Instead of exploring all possible
passing orders like the planning-based methods, the Monte Carlo tree search method tries to
search the passing orders that are promising to be the optimal passing order, and the amount of
this kind of passing order only accounts for a small part of all passing orders.
In the lower-level problem, we design a passing-order-to-trajectory interpretation algorithm
to quickly derive conflict-free trajectories for all vehicles according to the passing priority
represented by the passing order (Malikopoulos et al., 2018; Xu et al., 2019b). The trajectory of
the vehicle that has higher priority will be scheduled earlier. This algorithm provides a
performance evaluation of the given passing order for the upper-level problem. It is worth noting
that different passing-order-to-trajectory
interpretation algorithms can
lead
to different
performance evaluations. Our goal is to propose an algorithm that can quickly obtain an accurate
solution for the lower-level problem. However, sometimes when the lower-level problem is
complicated, we tend to obtain an approximate solution of the lower-level problem with a very
small computation time instead of deriving an accurate solution with a large amount of
computation time since the sub-optimality does not noticeably degenerate the performance of the
whole bi-level planning framework.
Through solving these two problems iteratively, the current best passing order is continuously
updated. When the computation budget is reached, the search process terminates and returns the
best passing order and corresponding conflict-free trajectories of vehicles.
3.1 Upper-level Planning
As pointed out in (Meng et al., 2017), we can formulate the whole problem as a tree search
problem in the solution space that consists of all possible passing orders. Each leaf node represents
a possible passing order of vehicles which can also be denoted as a string (Li et al., 2006). Passing
order indicates the priority of all vehicles and the vehicle which ranks higher in the passing order
has higher priority of occupying a road resource. For example, string CAB means vehicle C has
-11-
Optimizing the passing order through Monte Carlo tree searchObtaining conflict-free trajectories for all vehicles using a passing order to trajectories interpretation algorithmUpper LevelLower LevelA feasible passing orderThe objective value of the given passing orderMaximizing a specific objective through finding a passing order for the critical conflict zoneResolving all local conflicts for vehicles according to the given passing orderObjectivesMethods the highest priority and other vehicles need to decelerate and let it go first when there is a conflict
between them. If there is no conflict between vehicle A and vehicle C, the performance of two
passing orders CAB and ACB would be the same.
The following part takes the scenario shown in Fig. 1(a) as an example to show how to
construct a search tree. To discard some possible passing orders that are not promising to be the
optimal solution, we make the following assumptions: 1) The vehicles in the middle lane can
choose going straight or changing lanes, and we use the index symbol with subscript "change
lane" to represent the vehicles which will change lanes; 2) The vehicles in lane 1 must change
lanes to avoid a collision with the work zone, and the vehicles in lane 3 must not change lanes to
make the middle lane have more space to accommodate the vehicles from lane 1, so we do not use
subscripts to indicate their actions; 3) For vehicles in the same lane, the preceding vehicle should
have higher priority than the following vehicles.
Let us take the scenario shown in Fig. 1(a) as an example to explain how to interpret the tree
representation of the solution space. At first, we set the passing order in the root node to be empty.
Then, each direct child node of the root node (in the second layer) refers to one index symbol that
indicates the first vehicle in a special passing order. Due to the above assumption 3, the first
vehicle only could be the leading vehicle in three lanes shown in Fig. 1(a), i.e., vehicle A, vehicle
B, and vehicle D. Moreover, a subscript "change lane" should be added to vehicle A since it may
change lanes. Next, the nodes in the third layer refer to one string consisting of two indices
symbols that indicate the first two vehicles in a special passing order. As shown in Fig. 3, if we
choose vehicle A with going straight action as the first vehicle in the passing order, then the
vehicle C becomes the new leading vehicle in lane 2, and the second vehicle in the passing order
could be the vehicle B, vehicle C, and vehicle D. Similarly, the child nodes expand their child
nodes, and all possible passing orders are generated as leaf nodes in the bottom layer of the
solution tree as shown in Fig. 3.
It is usually impossible to expand all the nodes of the solution tree within the limited
computation budget when there are lots of unplanned vehicles. Thus, we use MCTS to search
nodes with the potential to be the optimal solution. The successful application of MCTS in the
game of Go shows it is an effective way to deal with such problems (Silver et al., 2017).
MCTS gradually builds a search tree in an iteration way, and one iteration consists of four
steps including selection, expansion, simulation, and backpropagation (Kocsis et al., 2006;
Browne et al., 2012). The detailed iteration operation is shown in Fig. 4. Due to the space limit,
the detail introduction of the four steps is neglected. Interested readers can refer to (Browne et al.,
2012; Xu et al., 2019b).
-12-
Fig. 3. The solution tree stemmed from the intersection scenario shown in Fig. 1(a). The leaf
nodes in the bottom layer represent the complete passing orders for all vehicles. For vehicles in
the middle lane, we use subscript "change lane" to denote whether the vehicle will change lane.
Fig. 4. One iteration of the MCTS.
During the building process of the search tree, the best passing order is continuously updated.
As soon as the computation budget is reached, the search terminates and returns the
state-of-the-art best passing order. The velocity and acceleration profiles of all vehicles can be
calculated according to the best passing order by using a passing-order-to-trajectory interpretation
algorithm that will be introduced in the lower-level planning.
The classical MCTS uses random sampling and adds the uncovered vehicles into the passing
order string one by one until we find a complete passing order string and reach the maximum
depth of the tree from the current new node without branching (Browne et al., 2012). For example,
when we apply a random sampling policy to the node BC shown in Fig. 4, we can randomly
expand a direct child node in its next layer; say node BCA. The node BCA will be further
-13-
RootABDA BA CA C change laneA C BA C DA C B DA C B D E change laneA C B D E A change lane A D A C E change lane A C B E change laneA C E A C B EA C B E change lane DA C B E DRootABCB AB CLeaf Node (Passing Order)SelectionExpansionSimulationBackpropagationSimulation PolicyRootABCB AB CRootABCB AB CRootABCB A expanded by repeating such a process until a leaf node (e.g., node BCADE) is expanded. Finally,
the potential of the new node will be evaluated by the partial passing order and its simulated
off-spring leaf nodes (passing orders).
However, the number of possible passing orders is huge especially when the lane change is
considered. The passing orders generated by random sampling cannot quickly capture the real
potential of a node during simulation. To solve the problem, some heuristic rules based on human
knowledge are added into the simulation policy to help us to decide which nodes (vehicles) should
be expanded (added into the candidate passing order string) first as shown in Algorithm 1.
Before we introduce the Algorithm 1, we first define a set
to include identities of all
vehicles sorted by their longitudinal location. For example,
stores the identity of the vehicle
whose location is the farthest from the entrance in a longitudinal sense.
Algorithm 1 Heuristic Simulation Policy
Input: The set
Output: A possible passing order
1) Set
= 1. Among all vehicles, we consider the vehicle
first.
2) If the action of the considered vehicle is going straight, we add it into the initial passing
order.
3) If the action of the considered vehicle is changing lanes, we judge whether the collision
avoidance conditions are satisfied. If the result is true, we add it into the initial passing order.
Otherwise,
=
+ 1 and consider the vehicle
. Repeat the steps 2 and 3 until a
vehicle is added.
4) We delete the vehicle
from the set
. Repeat the steps 1, 2, and 3 until a complete
passing order is generated.
5) The objective value (10a) of the generated passing order can be easily derived by a
passing-order-to-trajectory interpretation algorithm.
3.2 Lower-level Planning
As aforementioned, the decision variables of the optimization problem (10) are the passing
order, desired arrival times, and acceleration profiles of all vehicles. If a passing order is given, we
can design a passing-order-to-trajectory interpretation algorithm for directly deriving the
remaining variables in the optimization problem, see Algorithm 2.
In Algorithm 2,
is the
th element in the input (partial) passing order,
is a set
which consists of all cells that vehicle
will pass through,
is the largest arrival time that
cell
has been occupied,
represents the desired arrival time to Cell z for vehicle
,
is the minimum arrival time to Cell z for vehicle
. The flow chart of the Algorithm 2 is
shown in Fig. 5.
-14-
(1)i()iii()i()i()PkkiZimax,ztz,,arrivaliztimin,,izti
-15-
Fig. 5. The flow chart of Algorithm 2.
In the green part of the flow chart, we use the collision avoidance conditions proposed in (Li
et al., 2018) to judge whether it is safe to implement a lane change. The collision avoidance
conditions are defined as:
(7)
where
is the distance between vehicle
and ，
is the safety gap,
is the
velocity of vehicle
,
is the safety time headway,
is the minimum brake
acceleration, and
is the maximum brake acceleration. We can combine various
car-following models
such as Newell's car-following model
(Newell, 2002),
the
mass-spring-damper-clutch system-based car-following model (Li et al., 2019) into the algorithm
for guiding the unplanned vehicles to keep a safe and desired distance with its preceding vehicle.
Meanwhile, it is difficult to consider several possible lane change trajectories in the
optimization problem, and all vehicles are supposed to use the same lane change trajectory.
However, one candidate lane change trajectory is easy to make the problem infeasible. So, in the
proposed Algorithm 2 (line 13), some improvement is made. We first construct a trajectory set
which consists of lots of different lane change trajectories that are designed according to the initial
velocity and final velocity of vehicles, then let vehicles that need to change lanes search a suitable
lane change trajectory from the predesigned trajectory set according to its velocity as shown in Fig.
5. Then, we update the road occupancy information according to the trajectory of the vehicle.
Thus, a feasible solution of the optimization problem can be quickly obtained.
When the passing order is determined, the problem of finding corresponding trajectories for
-16-
Predesigned trajectory setLongitudinal position adjustment Trajectory planning()ixt()ixt1()ixt+1()ixt+1()ixt− 1()ixt−frontfrontdFrearreardFStartScheduling trajectories for all unplanned vehicles in turn according to the passing orderAll unplanned vehicles follow their preceding vehiclesDo the longitudinal position distances meet collision avoidance conditions?YNEndfrontdreard22,,max,,,min,,max,,min,,max()()()()()()2()2()()()ijijjiijiibrakejbrakeiibrakeibrakeibrakeibrakeidtFtvtvtFtvtatavtataaav=+−=+−()ijdtij()ijFt()ivti,min,ibrakea,max,ibrakea vehicles can be regarded as a degenerated case of the optimization problem (10) and it can be
easily solved by Algorithm 2. The computation can be finished within several milliseconds. Thus,
the low-level planning can quickly provide a performance evaluation of the given passing order
for the upper-level planning.
4. Simulation Results
We design three experiments to determine the best parameter set for the new cooperative
driving strategy and compare it with some classical ones. The first experiment gives a case study
to explain why the bi-level-based strategy can outperform the classical cooperative driving
strategy. The second experiment introduces how to determine the parameters for the proposed
strategy. Finally, the third experiment compares the performance of different cooperative driving
strategies.
These experiments are conducted for the work zone scenario with three lanes as shown in Fig.
1(a). The vehicles' arrival is assumed to be a Poisson process. We vary the mean value of this
Poisson process to test the performance of the proposed strategy under different traffic demands.
To accurately describe the total delays of vehicles, we adopt the point-queue model in the
simulation (Ban et al., 2012). The model assumes vehicles travel in free flow state until they get to
the boundary of the scenario we study. If the preceding vehicle leaves enough spaces, the first
vehicle in the point-queue will dequeue and enter the scenario. Otherwise, it will stay in the virtual
queue. Each lane has an independent point-queue.
All experiments are implemented using C++ language on a Visual Studio platform in a
personal computer with an Intel i7 CPU and a 16GB RAM.
4.1 Case Study
To intuitively show the effectiveness of the proposed strategy, we first give a case study for a
work zone scenario with 7 CAVs. The bi-level-based strategy and FIFO-based strategy are applied
respectively to plan the trajectories for these vehicles, and the results are shown in Fig. 6.
The left plot in Fig. 6 shows that the movements of vehicles on lane 2 have been greatly
influenced by the lane change vehicle 1 on lane 1. They need to decelerate to leave enough space
for the lane change vehicle, which leads to a bigger passing time. In contrast, the bi-level-based
strategy searches approximately 200 nodes within 0.5s and finds a better passing order in which
vehicle 2 and vehicle 3 go first and then vehicle 1 changes its lane. Besides, the bi-level-based
strategy finds it would be better to let vehicle 6 on lane 2 change its lane to lane 3 to leave more
space for lane change vehicle 7. It is clear that the traffic efficiency is improved by a better
passing order and the trajectories of vehicles tend to be more smooth which helps to reduce energy
consumption.
-17-
Fig. 6. (left) The planned trajectories of vehicles by the FIFO-based strategy. (right) The planned
trajectories of vehicles by the bi-level-based strategy.
4.2 The Choice of Parameters
The parameters in the strategy undoubtedly influence its performance. For example, a bigger
computation time allows us to search more nodes and thus produce better results. However, the
computation time should be as small as possible in practical applications. Besides, it is important
to address the problem of balancing the exploration and exploitation. In the MCTS,
and
are two weighting parameters related to the problem. A larger
encourages more exploration,
and
indicates that we are more concerned about the objective values of the current node or the
best simulated off-spring passing order generated from the current node. More detail introduction
in terms of these parameters can be found in (Xu et al., 2019b).
Since the FIFO-based passing order is the one most common used, we use it as a baseline
solution and define the improvement ratio
of the objective value when being compared with it
as
(21)
where
is the objective value of the FIFO-based passing order, and
is the
objective value of the best passing order found by the bi-level-based strategy.
We first fix the computation time as 0.5 s and vary
and
from 0 to 1 to discuss the
influence of the exploration and exploitation. The average improvement rates for the work zone
scenarios with 10 vehicles are shown in Fig. 7.
-18-
CCFIFOBiLevelFIFOJJJ−−=FIFOJBiLevelJ−C Fig. 7. The improvement rate of the bi-level-based strategy with different parameter settings.
It is clear that the parameter
has an obvious impact on the improvement rates while the
parameter
is not so critical. A larger
leads to more exploration and sometimes a worse
result since we have wasted too much computation resource on exploring useless nodes. But it is
necessary to do some exploration because the improvement rates with
= 0.2 are better than
that with
= 0.
Then, we further study the scenarios with other numbers of vehicles and the results are
similar. It should be noted that the improvement rates for scenarios with a small number of
vehicles are small since the FIFO rule works well for these simple scenarios. Based on these
results, in the rest of the paper, we set
= 0.2 and
= 0.2.
To further determine the appropriate maximum computation time, we investigate the
relationship between the improvement rates and the number of searched nodes to eliminate the
influence of computational power of experimental devices. We select the best parameter
combination shown in Fig. 7 for this experiment. To better understand the performance of the
strategy under different traffic demands, we vary the vehicle arrival rates to generate a series of
driving scenarios with different numbers of vehicles and record corresponding improvement rates
and the number of searched nodes.
-19-
CCCCC Fig. 8. The results of the improvement rates with respect to the number of searched nodes. Since
the number of possible nodes is small when the number of vehicles is 5, its curve ends at abscissa
200.
Fig. 8 shows that the improvement rate increases significantly when the number of searched
nodes increases from 1 to 200, and the improvement rate gets saturated afterward. Thus, it
illustrates that a good enough passing order always can be found through searching 200 possible
nodes for the considered scenarios. Since our experimental device can search 200 nodes within
0.5s, we set the computation time as 0.5s, and it is small enough to be applied in practice.
Besides, when the number of vehicles is small or large, the improvement rate is relatively
small. This is because when the number of vehicles is small, the vehicles may be far away from
each other, and FIFO-based passing order tends to be the best passing order in these simple
driving scenarios; when the number of vehicles is large, there is too little space on the road to
adjust the passing order.
4.3 Comparison of Different Cooperative Driving Strategies
In this experiment, we vary the traffic arrival rates to compare the performance of different
cooperative driving strategies under different traffic demands. For each arrival rate, we simulate a
10-minute traffic process and use the bi-level-based strategy and FIFO-based strategy to
coordinate the traffic process respectively. The comparison results are shown in Table 1.
To compare the coordination performance of different cooperative driving strategies, we
consider two performance indices: the average delay of vehicles and the traffic throughput (the
number of vehicles that has passed the work zone) within a given time interval. The delay of
vehicle
is defined as
(22)
where
is the actual passing time of vehicle
and
is the minimum passing
time of vehicle
.
-20-
i,delay,passing,min,passingiiittt=−,passingiti,min,passingiti Table 1 Comparison results of different cooperative driving strategies
Arrival rate (veh/h)
Strategies
Throughput (veh) Average delay (s)
360
1200
1800
2400
Bi-Level
FIFO
Bi-Level
FIFO
Bi-Level
FIFO
Bi-Level
FIFO
51
51
205
205
296
295
382
372
0.1528
0.1528
0.5981
0.7972
0.9695
1.7412
3.3484
6.8925
The results in Table 1 show that the throughputs under low arrival rates are similar, but
benefits in throughput can be obtained under high arrival rates. This is because there are a few
vehicles in the control zone under low traffic demands, and vehicles still can pass the work zone
area even if the cooperative strategy is inefficient. However, the inefficient cooperative strategy
results in a bigger average delay. The differences between the average delay of two cooperative
strategies increase with the arrival rates, and the delay can be effectively reduced when the arrival
rate is high. Thus, the bi-level-based cooperative strategy is a promising way of traffic
coordination in the future.
5. Conclusion
In this paper, a novel cooperative driving strategy is proposed to improve the safety and
traffic efficiency for driving scenarios allowing lane changes. According to the conflict zone
classification, we design a bi-level-based strategy in which the right-of-way for vehicles is
considered in the upper-level, and the right-of-way of vehicles during the lane changes are solved
in the lower-level. For the upper-level planning, we construct a tree representation for possible
solutions and use the MCTS with some heuristic rules to accelerate the search process. For the
lower-level planning, we design a passing-order-to-trajectory interpretation algorithm to quickly
derive trajectories for vehicles and feedback the corresponding objective value of the given
passing order to the upper-level planning. Finally, the effectiveness of the proposed strategy is
validated through simulation experiments which show that the traffic efficiency is improved when
compared with the classical cooperative driving strategy.
It should be mentioned that the proposed strategy can be easily extended to other driving
scenarios with arbitrary road geometry. However, due to the space limit, the influence of the
penetration rate of CAVs on the strategy has not been covered in the paper. We will leave this
topic for our future studies. Besides, we are currently building several CAVs prototypes so that we
can test our strategy in field studies in the future.
-21-
Acknowledgements
This work was supported in part by the National Key Research and Development Program of
China under Grant 2018YFB1600600, National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant
61673233, 61790565, 61603005, and Beijing Municipal Commission of Transport Program under
Grant ZC179074Z.
References
Ban, X. J., Pang, J., Liu, H. X., Ma, R. (2012) Continuous-time point-queue models in dynamic network loading,
Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 46(3), 360-380.
Browne, C. B., Powley, E., Whitehouse D., Lucas, S. M., Cowling, P. I., Rohlfshagen, P., Tavener, S., Perez, D.,
Samothrakis, S., Colton, S. (2012) A survey of monte carlo tree search methods, IEEE Transactions on
Computational Intelligence and AI in games, 4 (1), 1-43.
Chen, L., Englund, C. (2016) Cooperative intersection management: a survey, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent
Transportation Systems, 17(2), 570 -- 586.
Choi, M., Rubenecia, A. and Choi, H. H. (2018) Reservation-based cooperative traffic management at an
intersection of multi-lane roads, 2018 International Conference on Information Networking (ICOIN), 456-460.
Dresner, K., Stone, P. (2004) Multiagent traffic management: A reservation-based intersection control mechanism,
Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems,
530-537.
Dresner, K., Stone, P. (2008) A multiagent approach to autonomous intersection management, Journal of artificial
intelligence research, 31, 591-656.
Englund, C., Chen, L., Ploeg, J., Semsar-Kazerooni, E., Voronov, A., Bengtsson, H.H. and Didoff, J. (2016) The
grand cooperative driving challenge 2016: boosting the introduction of cooperative automated vehicles, IEEE
Wireless Communications, 23(4), 146-152.
Guler, S. I., Menendez, M., Meier, L. (2014) Using connected vehicle technology to improve the efficiency of
intersections, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 46, 121-131.
Guo, Q., Li, L., Ban, X. (2019) Urban traffic signal control with connected and automated vehicles: A survey,
Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 101, 313-334.
Goodall, N., Smith, B., Park, B. (2013) Traffic signal control with connected vehicles, Transportation Research
Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2381, 65 -- 72.
Hu, X., Sun, J. (2019) Trajectory optimization of connected and autonomous vehicles at a multilane freeway
merging area, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 101, 111-125.
Hult, R., Campos, G.R., Steinmetz, E., Hammarstrand, L., Falcone, P. and Wymeersch, H. (2016) Coordination of
cooperative autonomous vehicles: Toward safer and more efficient road transportation, IEEE Signal
Processing Magazine, 33(6), 74-84.
Ji, J., Khajepour, A., Melek, W. W., Huang, Y. Path planning and tracking for vehicle collision avoidance based on
model predictive control with multiconstraints, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 66(2), 952-964.
Kato, S., Tsugawa, S., Tokuda, K., Matsui, T. and Fujii, H. (2002) Vehicle control algorithms for cooperative
driving with automated vehicles and intervehicle communications, IEEE Transactions on intelligent
transportation systems, 3(3), 155-161.
Kamal, M. A. S., Imura, J. I., Hayakawa, T., Ohata, A. and Aihara, K. (2014) A vehicle-intersection coordination
scheme for smooth flows of traffic without using traffic lights, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent
Transportation Systems, 16(3), 1136-1147.
Kocsis, L., Szepesvari, C. (2006) Bandit based monte-carlo planning, European conference on machine learning,
282-293.
Lawler, E. L., Wood, D. E. (1966) Branch-and-bound methods: A survey, Operations Research, 14(4), 699-719.
-22-
Li, B., Zhang, Y., Feng, Y., Zhang, Y., Ge, Y., Shao, Z. (2018) Balancing computation speed and quality: A
decentralized motion planning method for cooperative lane changes of connected and automated vehicles,
IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 3(3), 340-350.
Li, L., Li, X. (2019) Parsimonious trajectory design of connected automated traffic, Transportation Research Part
B: Methodological, 119, 1-21.
Li, L., Peng, X., Wang, F. Y., Cao, D., Li, L. (2018) A situation-aware collision avoidance strategy for
car-following, IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, 5(5), 1012-1016.
Li, L., Wen, D., Yao, D. (2014) A survey of traffic control with vehicular communications, IEEE Transactions on
Intelligent Transportation Systems, 15(1), 425-432.
Li, L., Wang, F. Y., Kim, H. (2005) Cooperative driving and lane changing at blind crossings, IEEE Proceedings.
Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, 435-440.
Li, L., Wang, F. Y. (2006) Cooperative driving at blind crossings using intervehicle communication, IEEE
Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 55(6), 1712-1724.
Li, L., Wang, F.Y. and Zhang, Y. (2007) Cooperative driving at lane closures, 2007 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles
Symposium, 1156-1161.
Li, Z., Khasawneh, F., Yin, X., Li, A., Song, Z. (2019) A new microscopic traffic model using a
spring-mass-damper-clutch system, arXiv preprint, arXiv: 1903.04469.
Li, P. T., Zhou, X. (2017) Recasting and optimizing intersection automation as a connected-and-automated-vehicle
(cav) scheduling problem: A sequential branch-and-bound search approach in phase-time-traffic hypernetwork,
Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 105, 479-506.
Liu, C., Lin, C. W., Shiraishi, S., Tomizuka, M. (2018) Distributed conflict resolution for connected autonomous
vehicles, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 3(1), 18-29.
Lioris, J., Pedarsani, R., Tascikaraoglu, F. Y., Varaiya, P. (2017) Platoons of connected vehicles can double
throughput in urban roads, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 77, 292 -- 305.
Lu, G., Nie, Y., Liu, X., Li, D. (2019) Trajectory-based traffic management inside an autonomous vehicle zone,
Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 120, 76-98.
Luo, Y., Xiang, Y., Cao, K., Li, K. (2016) A dynamic automated lane change maneuver based on vehicle-to-vehicle
communication, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 62, 87-102.
Newell G. F. (2002) A simplified car-following theory: a lower order model, Transportation Research Part B:
Methodological, 36(3), 195-205.
Malikopoulos, A. A., Cassandras, C. G., Zhang, Y. (2018) A decentralized energy-optimal control framework for
connected automated vehicles at signal-free intersections, Automatica, 93, 244-256.
Mukhtar, A., Xia, L., Tang, T. B. (2015) Vehicle detection techniques for collision avoidance systems: a review,
IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 16(5), 2318-2338.
Meng, Y., Li, L., Wang, F. Y., Li, K., Li, Z. (2017) Analysis of cooperative driving strategies for non-signalized
intersections, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 67(4), 2900-2911.
Morrison, D. R., Jacobson, S. H., Sauppe, J. J. (2016) Branch-and-bound algorithms: A survey of recent advances
in searching, branching, and pruning, Discrete Optimization, 19, 79-102.
Papadimitriou, I. and Tomizuka, M. (2003) Fast lane changing computations using polynomials, Proceedings of
the 2003 American Control Conference, 48-53.
Rios-Torres, J., Malikopoulos, A. A. (2016) A survey on the coordination of connected and automated vehicles at
intersections and merging at highway on-ramps, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems,
18(5), 1066-1077.
Silver, D., Schrittwieser, J., Simonyan, K., Antonoglou, I., Huang, A., Guez, A., Hubert, T., Baker, L., Lai, M.,
Bolton A., Chen, Y., Lillicrap, T., Fan, H., Sifre, L., Driessche, G., Graepel, T., Hassabis, D. (2017) Mastering
the game of Go without human knowledge, Nature, 550, 354-359.
Sukuvaara, T., Nurmi, P. (2009) Wireless traffic service platform for combined vehicle-to-vehicle and
-23-
vehicle-to-infrastructure communications, IEEE Wireless Communications, 16(6), 54-61.
Tsugawa, S. (2002) Inter-vehicle communications and their applications to intelligent vehicles: an overview, IEEE
Intelligent Vehicle Symposium, 564-569.
Ubiergo, G. A., Jin, W. -L. (2016) Mobility and environment improvement of signalized networks through
Vehicle-to-Infrastructure (V2I) communications, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 68,
70 -- 82.
Uno, A., Sakaguchi, T., Tsugawa, S. (1999) A merging control algorithm based on inter-vehicle communication,
Proceedings 1999 IEEE/IEEJ/JSAI International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 783-787.
Wang, Q., Li, Z. and Li, L. (2014) Investigation of discretionary lane-change characteristics using next-generation
simulation data sets, Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 18(3), 246-253.
Xu, B., Li, S. E., Bian, Y., Li, S., Ban, J. X., Wang, J., Li. K. (2018) Distributed conflict-free cooperation for
multiple connected vehicles at unsignalized intersections, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging
Technologies, 93, 322-334.
Xu, H., Feng, S., Zhang, Y., Li, L. (2019a) A Grouping based cooperative driving strategy for CAVs merging
problems, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 68(6), 6125-6136.
Xu, H., Zhang, Y., Li, L. and Li, W. (2019b) Cooperative driving at unsignalized intersections using tree search,
IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.
Yang, K., Guler, S.I. and Menendez, M. (2016) Isolated intersection control for various levels of vehicle
technology: Conventional, connected, and automated vehicles, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging
Technologies, 72, 109-129.
Yu, C., Feng, Y., Liu, H.X., Ma, W., Yang, X. (2018) Integrated optimization of traffic signals and vehicle
trajectories at isolated urban intersections, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 112, 89-112.
Yun, I., Park, B. (2012) Stochastic optimization for coordinated actuated traffic signal systems. Journal of
Transportation Engineering, 138, 819 -- 829.
Zhang, Y., Cassandras, C. G. (2018) A decentralized optimal control framework for connected automated vehicles
at urban intersections with dynamic resequencing, 2018 IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 217-222.
Zhang, Y., Cassandras, C. G. (2019) An impact study of integrating connected automated vehicles with
conventional traffic, Annual Reviews in Control, 48, 347-356.
-24-
|
1802.06444 | 3 | 1802 | 2019-12-02T01:35:56 | Efficient Collaborative Multi-Agent Deep Reinforcement Learning for Large-Scale Fleet Management | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI"
] | Large-scale online ride-sharing platforms have substantially transformed our lives by reallocating transportation resources to alleviate traffic congestion and promote transportation efficiency. An efficient fleet management strategy not only can significantly improve the utilization of transportation resources but also increase the revenue and customer satisfaction. It is a challenging task to design an effective fleet management strategy that can adapt to an environment involving complex dynamics between demand and supply. Existing studies usually work on a simplified problem setting that can hardly capture the complicated stochastic demand-supply variations in high-dimensional space. In this paper we propose to tackle the large-scale fleet management problem using reinforcement learning, and propose a contextual multi-agent reinforcement learning framework including three concrete algorithms to achieve coordination among a large number of agents adaptive to different contexts. We show significant improvements of the proposed framework over state-of-the-art approaches through extensive empirical studies. | cs.MA | cs | EFFICIENT COLLABORATIVE MARL FOR LARGE-SCALE FLEET MANAGEMENT
1
Efficient Collaborative Multi-Agent Deep
Reinforcement Learning for Large-Scale Fleet
Management
9
1
0
2
c
e
D
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
3
v
4
4
4
6
0
.
2
0
8
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Kaixiang Lin, Renyu Zhao, Zhe Xu and Jiayu Zhou
Abstract -- Large-scale online ride-sharing platforms have substantially transformed our lives by reallocating transportation resources
to alleviate traffic congestion and promote transportation efficiency. An efficient fleet management strategy not only can significantly
improve the utilization of transportation resources but also increase the revenue and customer satisfaction. It is a challenging task to
design an effective fleet management strategy that can adapt to an environment involving complex dynamics between demand and
supply. Existing studies usually work on a simplified problem setting that can hardly capture the complicated stochastic demand-supply
variations in high-dimensional space. In this paper we propose to tackle the large-scale fleet management problem using reinforcement
learning, and propose a contextual multi-agent reinforcement learning framework including three concrete algorithms to achieve
coordination among a large number of agents adaptive to different contexts. We show significant improvements of the proposed
framework over state-of-the-art approaches through extensive empirical studies.
Index Terms -- Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning; Deep Reinforcement Learning; Fleet Management
!
1 INTRODUCTION
Large-scale online ride-sharing platforms such as Uber [1],
Lift [2], and Didi Chuxing [3] have transformed the way
people travel, live and socialize. By leveraging the advances
in and wide adoption of information technologies such
as cellular networks and global positioning systems, the
ride-sharing platforms redistribute underutilized vehicles
on the roads to passengers in need of transportation. The
optimization of transportation resources greatly alleviated
traffic congestion and calibrated the once significant gap
between transport demand and supply [4].
One key challenge in ride-sharing platforms is to balance
the demands and supplies, i.e., orders of the passengers
and drivers available for picking up orders. In large cities,
although millions of ride-sharing orders are served every-
day, an enormous number of passengers requests remain
unserviced due to the lack of available drivers nearby. On
the other hand, there are plenty of available drivers looking
for orders in other locations. If the available drivers were
directed to locations with high demand, it will significantly
increase the number of orders being served, and thus si-
multaneously benefit all aspects of the society: utility of
transportation capacity will be improved, income of drivers
and satisfaction of passengers will be increased, and market
share and revenue of the company will be expanded. fleet
management is a key technical component to balance the
differences between demand and supply, by reallocating
• K. Lin and J. Zhou are with the Department of Computer Science and
• R. Zhao and Z. Xu are with Didi Chuxing, Beijing, China.
Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48823.
E-mail: {linkaixi, jiayuz}@msu.edu.
E-mail: {zhaorenyu, xuzhejesse}@didichuxing.com
available vehicles ahead of time, to achieve high efficiency
in serving future demand.
Even though rich historical demand and supply data
are available, using the data to seek an optimal allocation
policy is not an easy task. One major issue is that changes
in an allocation policy will impact future demand-supply,
and it is hard for supervised learning approaches to capture
and model these real-time changes. On the other hand, the
reinforcement learning (RL) [5], which learns a policy by
interacting with a complicated environment, has been nat-
urally adopted to tackle the fleet management problem [6],
[7], [8]. However, the high-dimensional and complicated dy-
namics between demand and supply can hardly be modeled
accurately by traditional RL approaches.
Recent years witnessed tremendous success in deep re-
inforcement learning (DRL) in modeling intellectual chal-
lenging decision-making problems [9], [10], [11] that were
previously intractable. In the light of such advances, in this
paper we propose a novel DRL approach to learn highly
efficient allocation policies for fleet management. There are
significant technical challenges when modeling fleet man-
agement using DRL:
1) Feasibility of problem setting. The RL framework is reward-
driven, meaning that a sequence of actions from the policy is
evaluated solely by the reward signal from environment [12].
The definitions of agent, reward and action space are essen-
tial for RL. If we model the allocation policy using a central-
ized agent, the action space can be prohibitively large since
an action needs to decide the number of available vehicles
to reposition from each location to its nearby locations. Also,
the policy is subject to a feasibility constraint enforcing that
the number of repositioned vehicles needs to be no larger
than the current number of available vehicles. To the best of
our knowledge, this high-dimensional exact-constrain satis-
EFFICIENT COLLABORATIVE MARL FOR LARGE-SCALE FLEET MANAGEMENT
2
faction policy optimization is not computationally tractable
in DRL: applying it in a very small-scale problem could
already incur high computational costs [13].
2) Large-scale Agents. One alternative approach is to instead
use a multi-agent DRL setting, where each available vehicle
is considered as an agent. The multi-agent recipe indeed
alleviates the curse of dimensionality of action space. How-
ever, such setting creates thousands of agents interacting
with the environment at each time. Training a large number
of agents using DRL is again challenging: the environment
for each agent is non-stationary since other agents are learn-
ing and affecting the environment at same the time. Most
of existing studies [14], [15], [16] allow coordination among
only a small set of agents due to high computational costs.
3) Coordinations and Context Dependence of Action space Fa-
cilitating coordination among large-scale agents remains a
challenging task. Since each agent typically learns its own
policy or action-value function that are changing over time,
it is difficult to coordinate agents for a large number of
agents. Moreover, the action space is dynamic changing over
time since agents are navigating to different locations and
the number of feasible actions depends on the geographic
context of the location.
In this paper, we propose a contextual multi-agent DRL
framework to resolve the aforementioned challenges. Our
major contributions are listed as follows:
• We propose an efficient multi-agent DRL setting for large-
scale fleet management problem by a proper design of
agent, reward and state.
• We propose contextual multi-agent reinforcement learning
framework in which three concrete algorithms: contextual
multi-agent actor-critic (cA2C), contextual deep Q-learning
(cDQN), and Contextual multi-agent actor-critic with linear
programming (LP-cA2C) are developed. For the first time
in multi-agent DRL, the contextual algorithms can not
only achieve efficient coordination among thousands of
learning agents at each time, but also adapt to dynamically
changing action spaces.
• In order to train and evaluate the RL algorithm, we
developed a simulator that simulates real-world traffic
activities perfectly after calibrating the simulator using
real historical data provided by Didi Chuxing [3].
• Last but not least, the proposed contextual algorithms
significantly outperform the state-of-the-art methods in
multi-agent DRL with a much less number of repositions
needed.
The rest of paper is organized as follows. We first give
a literature review on the related work in Sec 2. Then the
problem statement is elaborated in Sec 3 and the simulation
platform we built for training and evaluation are introduced
in Sec 6. The methodology is described in Sec 4. Quantitative
and qualitative results are presented in Sec 7. Finally, we
conclude our work in Sec 8.
2 RELATED WORKS
Intelligent Transportation System. Advances in machine
learning and traffic data analytics lead to widespread appli-
cations of machine learning techniques to tackle challenging
traffic problems. One trending direction is to incorporate
reinforcement learning algorithms in complicated traffic
management problems. There are many previous studies
that have demonstrated the possibility and benefits of re-
inforcement learning. Our work has close connections to
these studies in terms of problem setting, methodology and
evaluation. Among the traffic applications that are closely
related to our work, such as taxi dispatch systems or traffic
light control algorithms, multi-agent RL has been explored
to model the intricate nature of these traffic activities [17],
[18], [19]. The promising results motivated us to use multi-
agent modeling in the fleet management problem. In [6], an
adaptive dynamic programming approach was proposed to
model stochastic dynamic resource allocation. It estimates
the returns of future states using a piecewise linear function
and delivers actions (assigning orders to vehicles, reallocate
available vehicles) given states and one step future states
values, by solving an integer programming problem. In [7],
the authors further extended the approach to the situations
that an action can span across multiple time periods. These
methods are hard to be directly utilized in the real-world
setting where orders can be served through the vehicles
located in multiple nearby locations.
Multi-agent reinforcement learning. Another relevant re-
search topic is multi-agent reinforcement
learning [20]
where a group of agents share the same environment, in
which they receive rewards and take actions. [21] compared
and contrasted independent Q-learning and a cooperative
counterpart in different settings, and empirically showed
that the learning speed can benefit from the cooperation
among agents. Independent Q-learning is extended into
DRL in [16], where two agents are cooperating or compet-
ing with each other only through the reward. In [15], the
authors proposed a counterfactual multi-agent policy gra-
dient method that uses a centralized advantage to estimate
whether the action of one agent would improve the global
reward, and decentralized actors to optimize the agent
policy. Ryan et al. also utilized the framework of decentral-
ized execution and centralized training to develop multi-
agent multi-agent actor-critic algorithm that can coordinate
agents in mixed cooperative-competitive environments [14].
However, none of these methods were applied when there
are a large number of agents due to the communication cost
among agents. Recently, few works [22], [23] scaled DRL
methods to a large number of agents, while it is not appli-
cable to apply these methods to complex real applications
such as fleet management. In [24], [25], the authors studied
large-scale multi-agent planning for fleet management with
explicitly modeling the expected counts of agents.
Deep reinforcement learning. DRL utilizes neural network
function approximations and are shown to have largely im-
proved the performance over challenging applications [9],
[11]. Many sophisticated DRL algorithms such as DQN [9],
A3C [26] were demonstrated to be effective in the tasks in
which we have a clear understanding of rules and have easy
access to millions of samples, such as video games [27], [28].
However, DRL approaches are rarely seen to be applied
in complicated real-world applications, especially in those
with high-dimensional and non-stationary action space, lack
of well-defined reward function, and in need of coordina-
tion among a large number of agents. In this paper, we show
that through careful reformulation, the DRL can be applied
EFFICIENT COLLABORATIVE MARL FOR LARGE-SCALE FLEET MANAGEMENT
3
to tackle the fleet management problem.
3 PROBLEM STATEMENT
In this paper, we consider the problem of managing a
large set of available homogeneous vehicles for online ride-
sharing platforms. The goal of the management is to maxi-
mize the gross merchandise volume (GMV: the value of all
the orders served) of the platform by repositioning available
vehicles to the locations with larger demand-supply gap
than the current one. This problem belongs to a variant
of the classical fleet management problem [29]. A spatial-
temporal illustration of the problem is available in Figure 1.
In this example, we use hexagonal-grid world to represent the
map and split the duration of one day into T = 144 time
intervals (one for 10 minutes). At each time interval, the
orders emerge stochastically in each grid and are served by
the available vehicles in the same grid or six nearby grids.
The goal of fleet management here is to decide how many
available vehicles to relocate from each grid to its neighbors
in ahead of time, so that most orders can be served.
To tackle this problem, we propose to formulate the
problem using multi-agent reinforcement learning [20]. In this
formulation, we use a set of homogeneous agents with small
action spaces, and split the global reward into each grid.
This will lead to a much more efficient learning procedure
than the single agent setting, due to the simplified action
dimension and the explicit credit assignment based on split
reward. Formally, we model the fleet management problem
as a Markov game G for N agents, which is defined by
a tuple G = (N,S,A,P,R, γ), where N,S,A,P,R, γ are
the number of agents, sets of states,
joint action space,
transition probability functions, reward functions, and a
discount factor respectively. The definitions are given as
follows:
• Agent: We consider an available vehicle (or equivalently
an idle driver) as an agent, and the vehicles in the same
spatial-temporal node are homogeneous, i.e., the vehicles
located at the same region at the same time interval are
considered as same agents (where agents have the same
policy). Although the number of unique heterogeneous
agents is always N, the number of agents Nt is changing
over time.
• State st ∈ S: We maintain a global state st at each
time t, considering the spatial distributions of available
vehicles and orders (i.e. the number of available vehicles
and orders in each grid) and current time t (using one-
hot encoding). The state of an agent i, si
t, is defined as the
identification of the grid it located and the shared global
t = [st, gj] ∈ RN×3+T , where gj is the one-hot
state i.e. si
encoding of the grid ID. We note that agents located at
same grid have the same state si
t.
• Action at ∈ A = A1 × ... × ANt: a joint action at = {ai
t}Nt
instructing the allocation strategy of all available vehicles
at time t. The action space Ai of an individual agent
specifies where the agent is able to arrive at the next time,
which gives a set of seven discrete actions denoted by
{k}7
k=1. The first six discrete actions indicate allocating the
agent to one of its six neighboring grids, respectively. The
last discrete action ai
t = 7 means staying in the current
grid. For example, the action a1
0 = 2 means to relocate the
1
k=0 γkri
t+k
return: E(cid:2)(cid:80)∞
(cid:3). The individual reward ri
1st agent from the current grid to the second nearby grid
at time 0, as shown in Figure 1. For a concise presentation,
(cid:44) [g0, g1] to represent agent i moving from
we also use ai
t
grid g0 to g1. Furthermore, the action space of agents
depends on their locations. The agents located at corner
grids have a smaller action space. We also assume that the
(cid:44) [g0, g1], then agent i will
action is deterministic: if ai
t
arrive at the grid g1 at time t + 1.
• Reward function Ri ∈ R = S × A → R: Each agent
is associated with a reward function Ri and all agents in
the same location have the same reward function. The i-th
agent attempts to maximize its own expected discounted
t for the
i-th agent associated with the action ai
t is defined as the
averaged revenue of all agents arriving at the same grid as
the i-th agent at time t + 1. Since the individual rewards
at same time and the same location are same, we denote
this reward of agents at time t and grid gj as rt(gj).
Such design of rewards aims at avoiding greedy actions
that send too many agents to the location with high value
of orders, and aligning the maximization of each agent's
return with the maximization of GMV (value of all served
orders in one day). Its effectiveness is empirically verified
in Sec 7.
• State transition probability p(st+1st, at) : S × A × S →
[0, 1]: It gives the probability of transiting to st+1 given
a joint action at is taken in the current state st. Notice
that although the action is deterministic, new vehicles
and orders will be available at different grids each time,
and existing vehicles will become off-line via a random
process.
To be more concrete, we give an example based on the
above problem setting in Figure 1. At time t = 0, agent 1
is repositioned from g0 to g2 by action a1
0, and agent 2 is
also repositioned from g1 to g2 by action a2
0. At time t = 1,
two agents arrive at g2, and a new order with value 10 also
emerges at same grid. Therefore, the reward r1 for both a1
0
and a2
0 is the averaged value received by agents at g2, which
is 10/2 = 5.
It's worth to note that this reward design may not lead to
the optimal reallocation strategy though it empirically leads
to good reallocation policy. We give a simple example to
illustrate this problem. We use the grid world map as show
in Figure 1. At time t = 1, there is an order with value 100
emerged in g1 and another order with value 10 emerged in
g0. Suppose we have two agents that are available in grid
g0 at time t = 0. The optimal reallocation strategy in this
case is to ask one agent stay in g0 and another go to g1, by
which we can receive the total reward 110. However, in the
current setting, each agent trys to maximize its own reward.
As a result, both of them will go to g1 and receive 50 reward
and none of them will go to g1 since the reward they can
receive is less than 50. However, we show that there are few
ways to approximate this global optimal allocation strategy
using the individual action function of each agent.
4 CONTEXTUAL MULTI-AGENT REINFORCEMENT
LEARNING
In this section, we present two novel contextual multi-agent
RL approaches: contextual multi-agent actor-critic (cA2C)
EFFICIENT COLLABORATIVE MARL FOR LARGE-SCALE FLEET MANAGEMENT
4
Fig. 1: The grid world system and a spatial-temporal illus-
tration of the problem setting.
centralized action-value table at each time for all agents,
which can serve as the foundation for coordinating the
actions of agents.
Geographic context. In hexagonal grids systems, border
grids and grids surrounded by infeasible grids (e.g., a lake)
have reduced action dimensions. To accommodate this, for
each grid we compute a geographic context Ggj ∈ R7, which
is a binary vector that filters out invalid actions for agents
in grid gj. The kth element of vector Ggj represents the
validity of moving toward kth direction from the grid gj.
Denote gd as the grid corresponds to the kth direction of
grid gj, the value of the kth element of Ggj is given by:
(cid:26) 1,
0,
and contextual DQN (cDQN) algorithm. We first briefly
introduce the basic multi-agent RL method.
[Gt,gj ]k =
if gd is valid grid,
otherwise,
(4)
(cid:34)
(cid:32)
(cid:33)(cid:35)2
combines
4.1 Independent DQN
Independent DQN [16]
independent Q-
learning [21] and DQN [9]. A straightforward extension
of independent DQN from small scale to a large number
of agents, is to share network parameters and distinguish
agents with their IDs [22]. The network parameters can be
updated by minimizing the following loss function, with
respect to the transitions collected from all agents:
E
Q(si
t, ai
t; θ) −
ri
t+1 + γ max
ai
t+1
Q(si
t+1, ai
t+1; θ(cid:48))
, (1)
where θ(cid:48) includes parameters of the target Q network up-
dated periodically, and θ includes parameters of behavior
Q network outputting the action value for -greedy policy,
same as the algorithm described in [9]. This method could
work reasonably well after extensive tunning but it suffers
from high variance in performance, and it also repositions
too many vehicles. Moreover, coordination among massive
agents is hard to achieve since each unique agent executes
its action independently based on its action values.
4.2 Contextual DQN
Since we assume that the location transition of an agent
after the allocation action is deterministic, the actions that
lead the agents to the same grid should have the same
action value. In this case, the number of unique action-
values for all agents should be equal to the number of grids
(cid:44) [gi, gd]
N. Formally, for any agent i where si
and gi ∈ N er(gd), the following holds:
t) = Q(st, gd)
t = [st, gi], ai
t
Q(si
t, ai
(2)
Hence, at each time step, we only need N unique action-
values (Q(st, gj),∀j = 1, . . . , N) and the optimization of
Eq (1) can be replaced by minimizing the following mean-
(cid:20)
(cid:19)(cid:21)2
squared loss:
Q(st, gd; θ) −
Q(st+1, gp; θ(cid:48))
rt+1(gd) + γ max
(cid:18)
.
gp∈Ner(gd)
(3)
This accelerates the learning procedure since the output
dimension of the action value function is reduced from
Rst → R7 to Rst → R. Furthermore, we can build a
where k = 0, . . . , 6 and last dimension of the vector repre-
sents direction staying in same grid, which is always 1.
Collaborative context. To avoid the situation that agents are
moving in conflict directions (i.e., agents are repositioned
from grid g1 to g2 and g2 to g1 at the same time.), we
provide a collaborative context Ct,gj ∈ R7 for each grid gj at
each time. Based on the centralized action values Q(st, gj),
we restrict the valid actions such that agents at the grid gj
are navigating to the neighboring grids with higher action
values or staying unmoved. Therefore, the binary vector
Ct,gj eliminates actions to grids with lower action values
than the action staying unmoved. Formally, the kth element
of vector Ct,gj that corresponds to action value Q(st, gi) is
defined as follows:
[Ct,gj ]k =
if Q(st, gi) >= Q(st, gj),
otherwise.
(5)
(cid:26) 1,
0,
After computing both collaborative and geographic context,
the -greedy policy is then performed based on the action
values survived from the two contexts. Suppose the original
t) ∈ R7≥0, given
action values of agent i at time t is Q(si
state si
t, the valid action values after applying contexts is as
follows:
q(si
t) = Q(si
t) ∗ Ct,gj ∗ Gt,gj .
(6)
The coordination is enabled because that the action values
of different agents lead to the same location are restricted to
be same so that they can be compared, which is impossible
in independent DQN. This method requires that action
values are always non-negative, which will always hold
because that agents always receive nonnegative rewards.
The algorithm of cDQN is elaborated in Alg 2.
4.3 Contextual Actor-Critic
the contextual multi-agent actor-critic
We now present
(cA2C) algorithm, which is a multi-agent policy gradient
algorithm that tailors its policy to adapt to the dynamically
changing action space. Meanwhile, it achieves not only a
more stable performance but also a much more efficient
learning procedure in a non-stationary environment. There
are two main ideas in the design of cA2C: 1) A centralized
value function shared by all agents with an expected update;
2) Policy context embedding that establishes explicit coordi-
nation among agents, enables faster training and enjoys the
flexibility of regulating policy to different action spaces. The
g0g1t=0t=1g2Timea01=[g0, g2]a02=[g1, g2](cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)Repositions/OrdersTheGridWorldAnorderwithvalue10Reward r1=5 EFFICIENT COLLABORATIVE MARL FOR LARGE-SCALE FLEET MANAGEMENT
Algorithm 1 -greedy policy for cDQN
Require: Global state st
1: Compute centralized action value Q(st, gj),∀j =
1, . . . , N
2: for i = 1 to Nt do
3:
t, ai
t = k).
Compute action values Qi by Eq (2), where (Qi)k =
Q(si
Compute contexts Ct,gj and Gt,gj for agent i.
Compute valid action values qi
ai
t = argmaxkqi
choose an action randomly from the valid actions.
t ∗ Ct,gj ∗ Gt,gj .
t with probability 1 − otherwise
t = Qi
4:
5:
6:
7: end for
8: return Joint action at = {ai
t}Nt
1 .
5
Algorithm 3 Contextual Multi-agent Actor-Critic Policy for-
ward
Require: The global state st.
1: Compute centralized state-value vt
2: for i = 1 to Nt do
3:
4:
Compute contexts Ct,gj and Gt,gj for agent i.
Compute action probability distribution qvalid(si
agent i in grid gj as Eq (10).
Sample action for agent i in grid gj based on action
probability pi.
t) for
5:
6: end for
7: return Joint action at = {ai
t}Nt
1 .
Algorithm 2 Contextual Deep Q-learning (cDQN)
1: Initialize replay memory D to capacity M
2: Initialize action-value function with random weights θ
or pre-trained parameters.
3: for m = 1 to max-iterations do
4:
5:
6:
7:
Reset the environment and reach the initial state s0.
for t = 0 to T do
Sample joint action at using Alg. 1, given st.
Execute at in simulator and observe reward rt and
next state st+1
Store
t, ai
(si
end for
for k = 1 to M1 do
the
of
t+1,∀i = 1, ..., Nt) in D.
t, si
transitions
agents
t, ri
all
t, ai
Sample a batch of transitions (si
t, ri
D, where t can be different in one batch.
ri
Compute
t + γ
maxai
Update Q-network as θ ← θ+∇θ(yi
yi
t
t+1; θ(cid:48)).
target
t+1, ai
t+1) from
∗
t−Q(si
t; θ))2,
Q(si
t, ai
t, si
=
t+1
8:
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
15: end for
end for
centralized state-value function is learned by minimizing
the following loss function derived from Bellman equation:
Vtarget(st+1; θ(cid:48)
L(θv) = (Vθv (si
v, π) =
t) − Vtarget(st+1; θ(cid:48)
π(ai
t+1 + γVθ(cid:48)
tsi
t)(ri
v, π))2,
(7)
t+1)). (8)
(si
v
(cid:88)
ai
t
where we use θv to denote the parameters of the value
network and θ(cid:48)
v to denote the target value network. Since
agents staying unmoved at the same time are treated ho-
mogeneous and share the same internal state, there are
N unique agent states, and thus N unique state-values
(V (st, gj),∀j = 1, ..., N) at each time. The state-value out-
put is denoted by vt ∈ RN , where each element (vt)j =
V (st, gj) is the expected return received by agent arriving
at grid gj on time t. In order to stabilize learning of the
value function, we fix a target value network parameterized
by θ(cid:48)
v, which is updated at the end of each episode. Note
that the expected update in Eq (7) and training actor/critic
in an offline fashion are different from the updates in n-step
actor-critic online training using TD error [26], whereas the
expected updates and training paradigm are found to be
more stable and sample-efficient. This is also in line with
prior work in applying actor-critic to real applications [30].
(cid:26) 1,
0,
Furthermore, efficient coordination among multiple agents
can be established upon this centralized value network.
Policy Context Embedding. Coordination is achieved by
masking available action space based on the context. At each
time step, the geographic context is given by Eq (4) and
the collaborative context is computed according to the value
network output:
[Ct,gj ]k =
if V (st, gi) >= V (st, gj),
otherwise,
(9)
t). Let P(si
t = ksi
where the kth element of vector Ct,gj corresponds to the
t) ∈ R7
probability of the kth action π(ai
>0
denote the original logits from the policy network output
for the ith agent conditioned on state si
t) =
t) ∗ Ct,gj ∗ Ggj denote the valid logits considering both
P(si
geographic and collaborative context for agent i at grid gj,
where ∗ denotes an element-wise multiplication. In order
to achieve effective masking, we restrict the output logits
P(si
t) to be positive. The probability of valid actions for all
agents in the grid gj are given by:
t. Let qvalid(si
πθp (ai
t = ksi
t) = [qvalid(si
[qvalid(si
(cid:107)qvalid(si
The gradient of policy can then be written as:
t)A(si
∇θp J(θp) = ∇θp log πθp (ai
t)]k =
tsi
t, ai
t),
t)]k
t)(cid:107)1
.
(10)
(11)
where θp denotes the parameters of policy network and the
advantage A(si
t, ai
t, ai
t) is computed as follows:
t) = ri
t+1) − Vθv (si
(si
t).
t+1 + γVθ(cid:48)
v
A(si
(12)
The detailed description of cA2C is summarized in Alg 4.
5 EFFICIENT ALLOCATION WITH LINEAR PRO-
GRAMMING
In this section, we present the proposed LP-cA2C that uti-
lizes the state value functions learned by cA2C and compute
the reallocations in a centralized view, which achieves the
best performance with higher efficiency.
From another perspective, if we formulate this problem
as a MDP where we have a meta-agent that controls the
decisions of all drivers, our goal is to maximize the long
term reward of the platform:
Qc(s, a) = E[
γt−1rt(st, at)s0 = s, a0 = a, π∗].
∞(cid:88)
t=1
EFFICIENT COLLABORATIVE MARL FOR LARGE-SCALE FLEET MANAGEMENT
Fig. 2: Illustration of contextual multi-agent actor-critic. The
left part shows the coordination of decentralized execution
based on the output of centralized value network. The right
part illustrates embedding context to policy network.
Algorithm 4 Contextual Multi-agent Actor-Critic Algorithm
for N agents
1: Initialization:
2: Initialize the value network with fixed value table.
3: for m = 1 to max-iterations do
4:
5:
6:
7:
8:
Reset environment, get initial state s0.
Stage 1: Collecting experience
for t = 0 to T do
Sample actions at according to Alg 3, given st.
Execute at in simulator and observe reward rt and
next state st+1.
Compute value network target as Eq (8) and ad-
vantage as Eq (12) for policy network and store the
transitions.
end for
Stage 2: Updating parameters
for m1 = 1 to M1 do
Sample a batch of experience: si
Update value network by minimizing the value
loss Eq (7) over the batch.
t, Vtarget(si
v, π)
t; θ(cid:48)
end for
for m2 = 1 to M2 do
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
15:
16:
17:
6
to the global long term reward.
N(cid:88)
Qi(si, ai) =
i=1
i=1
= Eπ∗
= Eπ∗
N(cid:88)
(cid:35)
(cid:35)
Eπ∗
(cid:34) ∞(cid:88)
(cid:34) ∞(cid:88)
(cid:34) ∞(cid:88)
t=1
t=1
γt−1
γt−1ri
0 = ai
t
0 = si, ai
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)si
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)s0 = s, a0 = a
N(cid:88)
(cid:35)
(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)s0 = s, a0 = a
ri
t
i=1
γt−1rt
t=1
= Qc(s, a)
However, in this work, this simple relationship does not
hold mainly since the number of agents (Nt) is not static.
As shown in Eq (13), the global reward at time t + 1 of
the platform is not equal to the sum of all current agents'
i=1 ri
t+1 = rt+1) even given a
centralized policy π∗.
i=1 ri
reward (i.e.(cid:80)Nt
Nt(cid:88)
Q(si
t, ai
t) =
t+1 (cid:54)=(cid:80)Nt+1
Nt(cid:88)
Eπ∗ [ri
t+1 + γ max
Q(si
t+1, ai
t+1)]
(13)
i=1
i=1
ai
t+1
Ideally, we would like to directly learn the centralized action
value function Qc while it's computational intractable to
explore and optimize the Qc in the case we have substan-
tially large action space. Therefore, we need to leverage the
averaged long term reward of each agent to approximate the
maximization of the centralized action-value function Qc.
In cDQN, we approximate this allocation by avoiding the
greedy allocation with −greedy strategy even during the
evaluation stage. In cA2C, the policy will allocate the agents
in the same location to its nearby locations with certain
probability according to the state-values. In fact, we uses
this empirical strategy to better align the joint actions of each
individual agent with the action from optimal reallocation.
However, both of the cA2C and cDQN try to coordinate
agents from a localized view, in which each agent only
consider its nearby situation when they are coordinating.
Therefore, the redundant reallocation still exists in those
two methods. Other methods that can approximate the
centralized action-value function such as VDN [31] and
QMIX [32] are not able to scale to large number of agents.
In this work, we propose to approximate the centralized
policy by formulating the reallocation as a linear program-
ming problem.
y(st) − λ(cid:107)D (ot+1 − Aty(st))(cid:107)2
2
(14)
(cid:17)
v(st)T At − cT
t
max
y(st)
s.t. y(st) ≥ 0
Bty(st) = dt
batch
a
experience:
t, ai
t), Ct,gj , Ggj , where t can be different
Sample
t, A(si
t, ai
si
one batch.
Update policy network as θp ← θp + ∇θp J(θp).
of
(cid:16)
18:
19:
20: end for
end for
the platform, i.e. (cid:80)
The π∗ in above formulation denotes the optimal global
reallocation strategy. Although the sum of immediate re-
ward received by all agents is equal to the total reward
of the platform, maximizing the long term reward of each
agent is not equal to maximize the long term reward of
i maxai Q(si, ai) (cid:54)= maxa Qc(s, a). In
cooperative multi-agent reinforcement learning, the sum of
rewards of multiple agents is the global reward we want to
maximize. In this case, given a centralized policy (π∗) for all
agents, the summation of long term reward should be equal
where the vector y(st) ∈ RNr(t)×1 denotes the feasible
repositions for all agents at current time step t. Each element
in y(st) represents one reposition from current grid to its
nearby grid. Nr(t) is the total number of feasible reposition
direction. The number of feasible repositions depends on
the current state values in each grid since we reallocate
agents from location with lower state value to the grid with
higher state value. A ∈ RN×Nr(t) is a indicator matrix
that denotes the allocations that dispatch drivers into the
grid, i.e. Ai,j ∈ {0, 1}. Ai,j = 1 means the j-th reposition
reallocates agents into the i-th grid. Similarly, B ∈ RN×Nr(t)
is the indicator matrix that denotes the allocations that
CentralizedValue OutputDynamic Collaborative ContextGeographic ContextAgentAgentAgentAgentParameter-Shared Policy NetworkDecentralizedActorExecutionParameter-Shared Policy NetworkAgent StateGeo-ContextRaw LogitsSampled Action01110…Col-Context00101…11CentralizedCritic NetworkValid Logits EFFICIENT COLLABORATIVE MARL FOR LARGE-SCALE FLEET MANAGEMENT
7
dispatch drivers out of the grid. D ∈ {0, 1}N×N is the
adjacency matrix denotes the connectivity of the grid world.
ot+1 denotes the estimated number of orders in each grid at
next time step. ct ∈ RNr(t)×1 denotes the cost associated
with each reposition and s(st) ∈ RN×1 denotes the state
value for each grid in time step t.
The first term in Eq (14) approximates our goal that we
want to maximize the long term reward of the platform.
Since the state value can be interpreted as the averaged
long term reward one agent will receive if it appears in
certain grid, the first term represents the total reward minus
the total cost associated with the repositions. However,
optimizing the first term will lead to a greedy solution that
reallocates all the agents to the nearby grid with highest
state value minus the cost. To alleviate this greedy realloca-
tion, we add the second term to regularize the number of
agents reallocated to each grid. Since the agent in current
grid can pick up the orders emerged in nearby grids, we
utilize the adjacency matrix to regularize the number of
agents reallocated into a group of nearby grids should
be close to the number of orders emerged in a group of
nearby grids. From another point of view, the second term
more focus on the immediate reward since it prefer the
solution that allocates right amount of agents to pick-up the
orders without consider the future income that an agent can
receive by that reposition. The regularization parameter λ
is used to balance the long term reward and the immediate
reward. The two flow conservation constrains requires the
number of repositions should be positive and the number of
repositions from current grid should be equal to the number
of available agents in current grids.
Ideally, we need to solve a integer programming prob-
lem where our solution satisfies y(st) ∈ Z Nr . However,
solving integer programming is NP-hard in worst case while
solving its linear programming relaxation is in P. In practice,
we solve the linear programming relaxation and round the
solution into integers [33].
6 SIMULATOR DESIGN
A fundamental challenge of applying RL algorithm in real-
ity is the learning environment. Unlike the standard super-
vised learning problems where the data is stationary to the
learning algorithms and can be evaluated by the training-
testing paradigm, the interactive nature of RL introduces
intricate difficulties on training and evaluation. One com-
mon solution in traffic studies is to build simulators for
the environment [8], [18], [19]. In this section, we introduce
a simulator design that models the generation of orders,
procedure of assigning orders and key driver behaviors such
as distributions across the city, on-line/off-line status control
in the real world. The simulator serves as the training envi-
ronment for RL algorithms, as well as their evaluation. More
importantly, our simulator allows us to calibrate the key
performance index with the historical data collected from a
fleet management system, and thus the policies learned are
well aligned with real-world traffics.
The Data Description The data provided by Didi Chuxing
includes orders and trajectories of vehicles in two cities
including Chengdu and Wuhan. Chengdu is covered by a
hexagonal grids world consisting of 504 grids. Wuhan con-
tains more than one thousands grids. The order information
includes order price, origin, destination and duration. The
trajectories contain the positions (latitude and longitude)
and status (on-line, off-line, on-service) of all vehicles every
few seconds.
Timeline Design. In one time interval (10 minutes), the
main activities are conducted sequentially, also illustrated
in Figure 4.
• Vehicle status updates: Vehicles will be stochastically set
offline (i.e., off from service) or online (i.e., start working)
following a spatiotemporal distribution learned from real
data using the maximum likelihood estimation (MLE).
Other types of vehicle status updates include finishing
current service or allocation. In other words, if a vehicle
is about to finish its service at the current time step, or
arriving at the dispatched grid, the vehicles are available
for taking new orders or being repositioned to a new
destination.
• Order generation: The new orders generated at the current
time step are bootstrapped from real orders occurred in
the same time interval. Since the order will naturally
reposition vehicles in a wide range, this procedure keeps
the reposition from orders similar to the real data.
• Interact with agents: This step computes state as input to
fleet management algorithm and applies the allocations
for agents.
• Order assignments: All available orders are assigned
through a two-stage procedure. In the first stage, the
orders in one grid are assigned to the vehicles in the same
grid. In the second stage, the remaining unfilled orders are
assigned to the vehicles in its neighboring grids. In reality,
the platform dispatches order to a nearby vehicle within a
certain distance, which is approximately the range covered
by the current grid and its adjacent grids. Therefore, the
above two-stage procedure is essential to stimulate these
real-world activities and the following calibration. This
setting differentiates our problem from the previous fleet
management problem setting (i.e., demands are served
by those resources at the same location only.) and make
it impossible to directly apply the classic methods such
as adaptive dynamic programming approaches proposed
in [6], [7].
Calibration. The effectiveness of the simulator is guaranteed
by calibration against the real data regarding the most im-
portant performance measurement: the gross merchandise
volume (GMV). As shown in Figure 3, after the calibration
procedure, the GMV in the simulator is very similar to that
from the ride-sharing platform. The r2 between simulated
GMV and real GMV is 0.9331 and the Pearson correlation is
0.9853 with p-value p < 0.00001.
7 EXPERIMENTS
In this section, we conduct extensive experiments to evalu-
ate the effectiveness of our proposed method.
7.1 Experimental settings
In the following experiments, both of training and evalu-
ation are conducted on the simulator introduced in Sec 6.
EFFICIENT COLLABORATIVE MARL FOR LARGE-SCALE FLEET MANAGEMENT
8
current valid actions are [g1, g2] and [g1, g1], the rule-
(cid:44) [g1, gj]) =
based method sample its actions from p(ai
Vrule(t+1, j)/(Vrule(t+1, 2)+Vrule(t+1, 1)),∀j = 1, 2.
t
• Value-Iter: It dynamically updates the value table based
on policy evaluation [5]. The allocation policy is computed
based on the new value table, the same used in the rule-
based method, while the collaborative context is consid-
ered.
• T-Q learning: The standard independent
tabular Q-
learning [5] learns a table qtabular ∈ RT×N×7 with -
greedy policy. In this case the state reduces to time and
the location of the agent.
• T-SARSA: The independent tabular SARSA [5] learns a
table qsarsa ∈ RT×N×7 with same setting of states as T-Q
learning.
• DQN: The independent DQN is currently the state-of-
the-art as we introduced in Sec 4.1. Our Q network is
parameterized by a three-layer ELUs [34] and we adopt
the -greedy policy as the agent policy. The is annealed
linearly from 0.5 to 0.1 across the first 15 training episodes
and fixed as = 0.1 during the testing.
• cDQN: The contextual DQN as we introduced in Sec 4.2.
The is annealed the same as in DQN. At the end of each
episode, the Q-network is updated over 4000 batches, i.e.
M1 = 4000 in Alg 2. To ensure a valid context masking, the
activation function of the output layer of the Q-network is
ReLU + 1.
• cA2C: The contextual multi-agent actor-critic as we intro-
duced in Sec 4.3. At the end of each episode, both the
policy network and the value network are updated over
4000 batches, i.e. M1 = M2 = 4000 in Alg 2. Similar to
cDQN, The output layer of the policy network uses ReLU
+ 1 as the activation function to ensure that all elements in
the original logits P(si
t) are positive.
• LP-cA2C: The contextual multi-agent actor-critic with lin-
ear programming as introduced in Sec 5. During the
training state, we use cA2C to explore the environment
and learn the state value function. During the evaluation,
we conduct the policy given by linear programming.
Except for the first baseline, the geographic context is con-
sidered in all methods so that the agents will not navi-
gate to the invalid grid. Unless other specified, the value
function approximations and policy network in contextual
algorithms are parameterized by a three-layer ReLU [35]
with node sizes of 128, 64 and 32, from the first layer to the
third layer. The batch size of all deep learning methods is
fixed as 3000, and we use ADAMOPTIMIZER with a learning
rate of 1e − 3. Since performance of DQN varies a lot when
there are a large number of agents, the first column in the
Table 1 for DQN is averaged over the best three runs out of
six runs, and the results for all other methods are averaged
over three runs. Also, the centralized critics of cDQN and
cA2C are initialized from a pre-trained value network using
the historical mean of order values computed from ten
episodes simulation, with different random seeds from both
training and evaluation.
To test the robustness of proposed method, we evaluate
all competing methods under different numbers of initial
vehicles accross different cities. The results are summarized
in Table 1, 2, 3. The results of Diffusion improved the perfor-
Fig. 3: The simulator calibration in terms of GMV. The red
curves plot the GMV values of real data averaged over 7
days with standard deviation, in 10-minute time
granularity. The blue curves are simulated results averaged
over 7 episodes.
For all the competing methods, we prescribe two sets of
random seed that control the dynamics of the simulator for
training and evaluation, respectively. Examples of dynamics
in simulator include order generations, and stochastically
status update of all vehicles. In this setting, we can test the
generalization performance of algorithms when it encoun-
ters unseen dynamics as in real scenarios. The performance
is measured by GMV (the total value of orders served in
the simulator) gained by the platform over one episode (144
time steps in the simulator), and order response rate (ORR),
which is the averaged number of orders served divided by
the number of orders generated. We use the first 15 episodes
for training and conduct evaluation on the following ten
episodes for all learning methods. The number of available
vehicles at each time in different locations is counted by a
pre-dispatch procedure. This procedure runs a virtual two-
stage order dispatching process to compute the remaining
available vehicles in each location. On average, the simula-
tor has 5356 agents per time step waiting for management.
All the quantitative results of learning methods presented
in this section are averaged over three runs.
7.2 Performance comparison
In this subsection, the performance of following methods
are extensively evaluated by the simulation.
• Simulation: This baseline simulates the real scenario with-
out any fleet management. The simulated results are cali-
brated with real data in Sec 6.
• Diffusion: This method diffuses available vehicles to
neighboring grids randomly.
• Rule-based: This baseline computes a T × N value table
Vrule, where each element Vrule(t, j) represents the av-
eraged reward of an agent staying in grid gj at time step
t. The rewards are averaged over ten episodes controlled
by random seeds that are different with testing episodes.
With the value table, the agent samples its action based
on the probability mass function normalized from the
values of neighboring grids at the next time step. For
example, if an agent located in g1 at time t and the
EFFICIENT COLLABORATIVE MARL FOR LARGE-SCALE FLEET MANAGEMENT
9
Fig. 4: Simulator time line in one time step (10 minutes).
mance a lot in Table 1, possibly because that the method
sometimes encourages the available vehicles to leave the
grid with high density of available vehicles, and thus the
imbalanced situation is alleviated. However, in a more re-
alistic setting that we consider reposition cost, this method
can lead to negative effective due to the highly inefficient
reallocations. The Rule-based method that repositions vehi-
cles to the grids with a higher demand value, improves the
performance of random repositions. The Value-Iter dynami-
cally updates the value table according to the current policy
applied so that it further promotes the performance upon
Rule-based. Comparing the results of Value-Iter, T-Q learning
and T-SARSA, the first method consistently outperforms the
latter two, possibly because that the usage of a centralized
value table enables coordinations, which helps to avoid
conflict repositions. The above methods simplify the state
representation into a spatial-temporal value representation,
whereas the DRL methods account both complex dynam-
ics of supply and demand using neural network function
approximations. As the results shown in last three rows of
Table 1, 2, 3, the methods with deep learning outperforms
the previous one. Furthermore, the contextual algorithms
largely outperform the independent DQN (DQN), which
is the state-of-the-art among large-scale multi-agent DRL
method and all other competing methods. Last but not least,
the lp-cA2C acheive the best performance in terms of return
on investment (the gmv gain per reallocation), GMV, and
order response rate.
7.3 On the Efficiency of Reallocations
In reality, each reposition comes with a cost. In this sub-
section, we consider such reposition costs and estimated
them by fuel costs. Since the travel distance from one grid to
another is approximately 1.2km and the fuel cost is around
0.5 RMB/km, we set the cost of each reposition as c = 0.6.
In this setting, the definition of agent, state, action and
transition probability is same as we stated in Sec 3. The only
difference is that the repositioning cost is included in the
reward when the agent is repositioned to different locations.
Therefore, the GMV of one episode is the sum of all served
order value substracted by the total of reposition cost in one
episode. For example, the objective function for DQN now
includes the reposition cost as follows:
t+1 − c + γ maxai
ri
,
(15)
(cid:44) [go, gd], and if gd = go then c = 0, otherwise
where ai
t
c = 0.6. Similarly, we can consider the costs in cA2C.
However, it is hard to apply them to cDQN because that
the assumption, that different actions that lead to the same
location should share the same action value, which is not
t+1; θ(cid:48)(cid:17)(cid:105)2
t; θ) −(cid:16)
Q(si
t+1, ai
t+1
E(cid:104)
Q(si
t, ai
held in this setting. Therefore, instead of considering the
reposition cost in the objective function, we only incorporate
the reposition cost when we actually conduct our policy
based on cDQN. Under this setting, the learning objective of
action value of cDQN is same as in Eq (3) while the context
embedding is changed from Eq (4) to the following:
(cid:26) 1,
0,
[Ct,gj ]k =
if Q(st, gi) >= Q(st, gj) + c,
otherwise.
(16)
For LP-cA2C, the cost effect is naturally incorporated in
the objective function as in Eq (14). As the results shown in
Table 4, the DQN tends to reposition more agents while the
contextual algorithms achieve better performance in terms
of both GMV and order response rate, with lower cost.
More importantly, the LP-cA2C outperforms other methods
in both of the performance and efficiency. The reason is
that this method formulate the coordination among agents
into an optimization problem, which approximates the max-
imization of the platform's long term reward in a centralized
version. The centralized optimization problem can avoid
lots of redundant reallocations compared to previous meth-
ods. The training procedures and the network architecture
are the same as described in the previous section.
To be more concrete, we give a specific scenario to
demonstrate that the efficiency of LP-cA2C. Imaging we
would like to ask drivers to move from grid A to nearby grid
B while there is a grid C that is adjacent to both grid A and
B. In the previous algorithms, since the allocation is jointly
given by each agent, it's very likely that we reallocate agents
by the short path A → B and longer path A → C → B
when there are sufficient amount of agents can arrive at
B from A. These inefficient reallocations can be avoided by
LP-cA2C naturally since the longer path only incurs a higher
cost which will be the suboptimal solution to our objective
function compared to the solution only contains the first
path. As shown in Figure 5 (a), the allocation computed
by cA2C contains many triangle repositions as denoted by
the black circle, while we didn't observe these inefficient
allocations in Figure 5 (b). Therefore, the allocation policy
delivered by LP-cA2C is more efficient than those given by
previous algorithms.
7.4 The effectiveness of averaged reward design
In multi-agent RL, the reward design for each agent is
essential for the success of learning. In fully cooperative
multi-agent RL, the reward for all agents is a single global
reward [20], while it suffers from the credit assignment
problem for each agent's action. Splitting the reward to
each agent will alleviate this problem. In this subsection,
we compare two different designs for the reward of each
agent: the averaged reward of a grid as stated in Sec 3
Update distribution of available vehiclesBootstrap new ordersInteract with AgentsStatePolicyActionReposition current available vehiclesDispatch ordersABReward 10
EFFICIENT COLLABORATIVE MARL FOR LARGE-SCALE FLEET MANAGEMENT
TABLE 1: Performance comparison of competing methods in terms of GMV and order response rate under the setting
that each reposition doesn't incur any cost. For a fair comparison, the random seeds that control the dynamics of the
environment are set to be the same across all methods.
100% initial vehicles
Normalized GMV
90% initial vehicles
Normalized GMV
10% initial vehicles
Normalized GMV
Simulation
Diffusion
Rule-based
Value-Iter
T-Q learning
T-SARSA
DQN
cDQN
cA2C
100.00 ± 0.60
105.68 ± 0.64
108.49 ± 0.40
110.29 ± 0.70
108.78 ± 0.51
109.12 ± 0.49
114.06 ± 0.66
115.19 ± 0.46
115.27 ±0.70
ORR
81.80% ± 0.37%
86.48% ± 0.54%
90.19% ± 0.33%
90.14% ± 0.62%
90.06% ± 0.38%
90.18% ± 0.38%
93.01% ± 0.20%
94.77% ± 0.32%
94.99% ±0.48%
98.81 ± 0.50
104.44 ± 0.57
107.38 ± 0.55
109.50 ± 0.68
107.71 ± 0.42
107.69 ± 0.49
113.19 ± 0.60
114.29 ±0.66
113.85 ± 0.69
ORR
80.64% ± 0.37%
84.93% ± 0.49%
88.70% ± 0.48%
89.59% ± 0.69%
89.11% ± 0.42%
88.68% ± 0.42%
91.99% ± 0.30%
94.00% ±0.53%
93.99% ± 0.47%
92.78 ± 0.79
99.00 ± 0.51
100.08 ± 0.50
102.60 ± 0.61
100.07 ± 0.55
99.83 ± 0.50
103.80 ± 0.96
105.29 ± 0.70
105.62 ±0.66
ORR
70.29% ± 0.64%
74.51% ± 0.28%
75.58% ± 0.36%
77.17% ± 0.53%
75.57% ± 0.40%
75.40% ± 0.44%
77.03% ± 0.23%
79.28% ± 0.58%
79.57% ±0.51%
TABLE 2: Performance comparison of competing methods in terms of GMV, order response rate (ORR), and return on
invest (ROI) under the setting that each reposition is associated with a cost.
100% initial vehicles
Normalized GMV
Normalized GMV
90% initial vehicles
ORR
Normalized GMV
10% initial vehicles
ORR
Simulation
Diffusion
Rule-based
Value-Iter
T-Q learning
T-SARSA
DQN
cDQN
cA2C
LP-cA2C
100.00 ± 0.60
103.02 ± 0.41
106.21 ± 0.43
108.26 ± 0.65
107.55 ± 0.58
107.73 ± 0.46
110.81 ± 0.68
112.49 ± 0.42
112.70 ± 0.64
113.60 ±0.56
-
ORR
ROI
81.80% ± 0.37%
86.49% ± 0.42% 0.5890
90.00% ± 0.43% 1.4868
90.28% ± 0.50% 2.0092
90.12% ± 0.52% 2.9201
89.93% ± 0.34% 3.3881
92.50% ± 0.50% 1.7811
94.88% ± 0.33% 2.2207
94.74% ± 0.57% 3.1062
95.27% ±0.36% 4.4633
98.81 ± 0.50
102.35 ± 0.51
105.30 ± 0.42
107.69 ± 0.82
106.60 ± 0.52
106.88 ± 0.45
110.16 ± 0.60
112.12 ± 0.40
112.05 ± 0.45
112.75±0.65
-
ROI
80.64% ± 0.37%
85.00% ± 0.47% 0.7856
88.58% ± 0.37% 1.7983
89.53% ± 0.56% 2.5776
89.17% ± 0.41% 4.2052
88.82% ± 0.37% 5.1559
91.79% ± 0.29% 2.3790
94.17% ± 0.36% 2.7708
93.97% ± 0.37% 3.8085
94.62%±0.47%
5.2719
92.78 ± 0.79
97.41 ± 0.55
99.37 ± 0.36
101.56 ± 0.65
99.99 ± 1.28
99.11 ± 0.40
103.40 ± 0.51
104.25 ± 0.55
104.19 ± 0.70
105.37 ±0.58
-
ROI
70.29% ± 0.64%
74.51% ± 0.46% 1.5600
75.83% ± 0.48% 3.2829
77.11% ± 0.44% 4.5251
75.97% ± 0.91% 5.2527
75.23% ± 0.35% 6.8805
77.14% ± 0.26% 4.3770
79.41% ± 0.48% 4.8340
79.25% ± 0.68% 5.2124
80.15% ±0.46% 7.2949
TABLE 3: Performance comparison of competing methods
in terms of GMV, order response rate and return on invest-
ment in Wuhan under the setting that each reposition is
associated with a cost.
Simulation
Diffusion
Rule-based
Value-Iter
T-Q learning
T-SARSA
DQN
cDQN
cA2C
LP-cA2C
Normalized GMV
100.00 ± 0.48
98.84 ± 0.44
103.84 ± 0.63
107.13 ± 0.70
107.10 ± 0.61
107.14 ± 0.64
108.45 ± 0.62
108.93 ± 0.57
113.31 ± 0.54
114.92 ±0.65
-
ORR
ROI
76.56% ± 0.45%
80.07% ± 0.24% -0.2181
84.91% ± 0.25% 0.5980
85.06% ± 0.45% 1.6156
85.28% ± 0.28% 1.8302
84.99% ± 0.28% 2.0993
86.67% ± 0.33% 1.0747
89.03% ± 0.26% 1.1001
88.57% ± 0.45% 4.4163
89.29% ±0.39%
6.1417
TABLE 4: The effectiveness of contextual multi-agent actor-
critic considering dispatch costs.
DQN
cDQN
cA2C
LP-cA2C
Normalized GMV
110.81 ± 0.68
112.49 ± 0.42
112.70 ± 0.64
113.60 ± 0.56
ORR
92.50% ± 0.50%
94.88% ± 0.33%
94.74% ± 0.57%
95.27% ± 0.36%
Repositions
606932
562427
408859
304752
and the total reward of a grid that does not average on
the number of available vehicles at that time. As shown in
table 5, the methods with averaged reward (cA2C, cDQN)
largely outperform those using total reward, since this de-
sign naturally encourages the coordinations among agents.
Using total reward, on the other hand, is likely to reposition
an excessive number of agents to the location with high
demand.
7.5 Ablations on policy context embedding
In this subsection, we evaluate the effectiveness of context
embedding, including explicitly coordinating the actions
of different agents through the collaborative context, and
eliminating the invalid actions with geographic context. The
TABLE 5: The effectiveness of averaged reward design. The
performance of methods using the raw reward (second
column) is much worse than the performance of methods
using the averaged reward.
Proposed methods
Raw Reward
Normalized GMV/ORR
Normalized GMV/ORR
cA2C 115.27±0.70/94.99% ± 0.48% 105.75 ± 1.17/88.09% ± 0.74%
cDQN 115.19± 0.46/94.77%± 0.32% 108.00 ± 0.35/89.53% ± 0.31%
TABLE 6: The effectiveness of context embedding.
Normalized GMV/ORR
Repositions
cA2C
cA2C-v1
cA2C-v2
cA2C
cA2C-v3
Without reposition cost
115.27 ± 0.70/94.99% ± 0.48%
114.78 ± 0.67/94.52% ± 0.49%
111.39 ± 1.65/92.12% ± 1.03%
112.70 ± 0.64/94.74% ± 0.57%
110.43 ± 1.16/93.79% ± 0.75%
With reposition cost
460586
704568
846880
408859
593796
following variations of proposed methods are investigated
in different settings.
• cA2C-v1: This variation drops collaborative context of
cA2C in the setting that does not consider reposition
cost.
• cA2C-v2: This variation drops both geographic and
collaborative context of cA2C in the setting that does
not consider reposition cost.
• cA2C-v3: This variation drops collaborative context of
cA2C in the setting that considers reposition cost.
The results of above variations are summarized in Ta-
ble 6 and Figure 6. As seen in the first two rows of Table 6
and the red/blue curves in Figure 6 (a), in the setting of zero
reposition cost, cA2C achieves the best performance with
much less repositions (65.37%) comparing with cA2C-v1.
Furthermore, collaborative context embedding achieves sig-
EFFICIENT COLLABORATIVE MARL FOR LARGE-SCALE FLEET MANAGEMENT
11
(a) cA2C
(b) LP-cA2C
Fig. 5: The illustration of allocations of cA2C and LP-cA2C at 18:40, 19:40, 20:40, 21:40, and 22:40, respsectively. The black
circles in the left column highlight the redundant repositions in the allocation policy given by cA2C. In the right column,
there are no such inefficient repositions given by LP-cA2C since we compute the repositions in a global view.
Fig. 6: Convergence comparison of cA2C and its variations
without using context embedding in both settings, with
and without reposition costs. The X-axis is the number of
episodes. The left Y-axis denotes the number of conflicts
and the right Y-axis denotes the normalized GMV in one
episode.
(a) Without reposition cost
(b) With reposition cost
nificant advantages when the reposition cost is considered,
as shown in the last two rows in Table 6 and Figure 6 (b). It
not only greatly improves the performance but also acceler-
ates the convergence. Since the collaborative context largely
narrows down the action space and leads to a better policy
solution in the sense of both effectiveness and efficiency, we
can conclude that coordination based on collaborative con-
text is effective. Also, comparing the performances of cA2C
and cA2C-v2 (red/green curves in Figure 6 (a)), apparently
the policy context embedding (considering both geographic
and collaborative context) is essential to performance, which
greatly reduces the redundant policy search.
7.6 Ablation study on grouping the locations
This section studies the effectiveness of our regularization
design for LP-cA2C. One key difference between our work
EFFICIENT COLLABORATIVE MARL FOR LARGE-SCALE FLEET MANAGEMENT
12
and traditional fleet management works [6], [7] is that we
didn't assume the drivers in one location can only pick up
the orders in the same location. On the contrary, one agent
can also serve the orders emerged in the nearby locations,
which is a more realistic and complicated setting. In this
case, we regularize the number of agents repositioned into a
set of nearby grids close to the number of estimated orders
at next time step. This grouping regularization in Eq (14) is
more efficient than the regularization in Eq (17) requiring
the number of agents repositioned into each grid is close
to the number of estimated orders at that gird since lots of
reposition inside the same group can be avoided. As the
results shown in Table 7, using the group regularization
in Eq (14) reallocates less agents while achieves same best
performance as the one in Eq (17) (LP-cA2C').
(v(st)T At − cT
t )y(st) − λ(ot − Aty(st))2
(17)
max
y(st)
TABLE 7: The effectiveness of group regularization design.
The results are averaged over three runs.
LP-cA2C
LP-cA2C'
Normalized GMV
113.56 ± 0.61
113.60 ± 0.56
ORR
95.24% ± 0.40%
95.27% ± 0.36%
Repositions
ROI
341774
304752
3.9663
4.4633
7.7 Qualitative study
In this section, we analyze whether the learned value func-
tion can capture the demand-supply relation ahead of time,
and the rationality of allocations. To see this, we present a
case study on the region nearby the airport. The state value
and allocation policy is acquired from cA2C that was trained
for ten episodes. We then run the well-trained cA2C on one
testing episode, and qualitatively exam the state value and
allocations under the unseen dynamics. The sum of state
values and demand-supply gap (defined as the number of
orders minus the number of vehicles) of seven grids that
cover the CTU airport is visualized. As seen in Figure 8,
the state value can capture the future dramatic changes of
demand-supply gap. Furthermore, the spatial distribution
of state values can be seen in Figure 7. After the midnight,
the airport has a large number of orders, and less available
vehicles, and therefore the state values of airport are higher
than other locations. During the daytime, more vehicles
are available at the airport so that each will receive less
reward and the state values are lower than other regions,
as shown in Figure 7 (b). In Figure 7 and Figure 8, we can
conclude that the value function can estimate the relative
shift of demand-supply gap from both spatial and temporal
perspectives. It is crucial to the performance of cA2C since
the coordination is built upon the state values. Moreover,
as illustrated by blue arrows in Figure 7, we see that the
allocation policy gives consecutive allocations from lower
value grids to higher value grids, which can thus fill the
future demand-supply gap and increase the GMV.
8 CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, we first formulate the large-scale fleet manage-
ment problem into a feasible setting for deep reinforcement
learning. Given this setting, we propose contextual multi-
in which two
agent reinforcement learning framework,
(a) At 01:50 am.
(b) At 06:40 pm.
Fig. 7: Illustration on the repositions nearby the airport at
1:50 am and 06:40 pm. The darker color denotes the higher
state value and the blue arrows denote the repositions.
Fig. 8: The normalized state value and demand-supply gap
over one day.
contextual algorithms cDQN and cA2C are developed and
both of them achieve the large scale agents' coordination in
fleet management problem. cA2C enjoys both flexibility and
efficiency by capitalizing a centralized value network and
decentralized policy execution embedded with contextual
information. It is able to adapt to different action space in
an end-to-end training paradigm. A simulator is developed
and calibrated with the real data provided by Didi Chux-
ing, which served as our training and evaluation platform.
Extensive empirical studies under different settings in sim-
ulator have demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed
framework.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This material is based in part upon work supported by the
National Science Foundation under Grant IIS-1565596, IIS-
1615597, IIS-1749940 and Office of Naval Research N00014-
14-1-0631, N00014- 17-1-2265.
EFFICIENT COLLABORATIVE MARL FOR LARGE-SCALE FLEET MANAGEMENT
REFERENCES
[1] Uber. [Online]. Available: https://www.uber.com/
[2] Lyft. [Online]. Available: https://www.lyft.com/
[3] D. Chuxing. [Online]. Available: http://www.didichuxing.com/
[4] Z. Li, Y. Hong, and Z. Zhang, "Do on-demand ride-sharing ser-
vices affect traffic congestion? evidence from uber entry," Working
paper, available at SSRN: https://ssrn. com/abstract= 2838043,
Tech. Rep., 2016.
[5] R. S. Sutton and A. G. Barto, Reinforcement learning: An introduction.
MIT press Cambridge, 1998, vol. 1, no. 1.
[6] G. A. Godfrey and W. B. Powell, "An adaptive dynamic program-
ming algorithm for dynamic fleet management, i: Single period
travel times," Transportation Science, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 21 -- 39, 2002.
[7] -- -- , "An adaptive dynamic programming algorithm for dynamic
fleet management, ii: Multiperiod travel times," Transportation
Science, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 40 -- 54, 2002.
[8] C. Wei, Y. Wang, X. Yan, and C. Shao, "Look-ahead insertion policy
for a shared-taxi system based on reinforcement learning," IEEE
Access, 2017.
[9] V. Mnih, K. Kavukcuoglu, D. Silver, A. A. Rusu, J. Veness, M. G.
Bellemare, A. Graves, M. Riedmiller, A. K. Fidjeland, G. Ostrovski
et al., "Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning,"
Nature, vol. 518, no. 7540, pp. 529 -- 533, 2015.
[10] D. Silver, A. Huang, C. J. Maddison, A. Guez, L. Sifre, G. Van
Den Driessche, J. Schrittwieser, I. Antonoglou, V. Panneershelvam,
M. Lanctot et al., "Mastering the game of go with deep neural
networks and tree search," Nature, vol. 529, no. 7587, pp. 484 -- 489,
2016.
[11] D. Silver, J. Schrittwieser, K. Simonyan, I. Antonoglou, A. Huang,
A. Guez, T. Hubert, L. Baker, M. Lai, A. Bolton et al., "Mastering
the game of go without human knowledge," Nature, vol. 550, no.
7676, p. 354, 2017.
[12] K. Arulkumaran, M. P. Deisenroth, M. Brundage, and A. A.
Bharath, "A brief survey of deep reinforcement learning," arXiv
preprint arXiv:1708.05866, 2017.
[13] T.-H. Pham, G. De Magistris, and R. Tachibana, "Optlayer-
practical constrained optimization for deep reinforcement learning
in the real world," arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.07643, 2017.
[14] R. Lowe, Y. Wu, A. Tamar, J. Harb, P. Abbeel, and I. Mordatch,
"Multi-agent actor-critic for mixed cooperative-competitive envi-
ronments," arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.02275, 2017.
[15] J. Foerster, G. Farquhar, T. Afouras, N. Nardelli, and S. White-
son, "Counterfactual multi-agent policy gradients," arXiv preprint
arXiv:1705.08926, 2017.
[16] A. Tampuu, T. Matiisen, D. Kodelja, I. Kuzovkin, K. Korjus, J. Aru,
J. Aru, and R. Vicente, "Multiagent cooperation and competition
with deep reinforcement learning," PloS one, vol. 12, no. 4, p.
e0172395, 2017.
[17] B. Bakker, S. Whiteson, L. Kester, and F. C. Groen, "Traffic light
control by multiagent reinforcement learning systems," in Interac-
tive Collaborative Information Systems. Springer, 2010, pp. 475 -- 510.
[18] K. T. Seow, N. H. Dang, and D.-H. Lee, "A collaborative multiagent
taxi-dispatch system," IEEE T-ASE, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 607 -- 616, 2010.
[19] M. Maciejewski and K. Nagel, "The influence of multi-agent coop-
eration on the efficiency of taxi dispatching," in PPAM. Springer,
2013, pp. 751 -- 760.
[20] L. Busoniu, R. Babuska, and B. De Schutter, "A comprehensive
survey of multiagent reinforcement learning," IEEE Transactions
on Systems, Man, And Cybernetics-Part C: Applications and Reviews,
38 (2), 2008, 2008.
[21] M. Tan, "Multi-agent reinforcement learning: Independent vs.
cooperative agents," in ICML, 1993, pp. 330 -- 337.
[22] L. Zheng, J. Yang, H. Cai, W. Zhang, J. Wang, and Y. Yu, "Ma-
gent: A many-agent reinforcement learning platform for artificial
collective intelligence," arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.00600, 2017.
[23] Y. Yang, R. Luo, M. Li, M. Zhou, W. Zhang, and J. Wang, "Mean
field multi-agent reinforcement learning," ICML, 2018.
[24] D. T. Nguyen, A. Kumar, and H. C. Lau, "Collective multiagent
sequential decision making under uncertainty," AAAI, 2017.
[25] -- -- , "Policy gradient with value function approximation for
collective multiagent planning," NIPS, 2017.
[26] V. Mnih, A. P. Badia, M. Mirza, A. Graves, T. Lillicrap, T. Harley,
D. Silver, and K. Kavukcuoglu, "Asynchronous methods for deep
reinforcement learning," in ICML, 2016, pp. 1928 -- 1937.
[27] G. Brockman, V. Cheung, L. Pettersson, J. Schneider, J. Schul-
man, J. Tang, and W. Zaremba, "Openai gym," arXiv preprint
arXiv:1606.01540, 2016.
13
[28] M. G. Bellemare, Y. Naddaf, J. Veness, and M. Bowling, "The
arcade learning environment: An evaluation platform for general
agents." J. Artif. Intell. Res.(JAIR), vol. 47, pp. 253 -- 279, 2013.
[29] P. J. Dejax and T. G. Crainic, "Survey papera review of empty
flows and fleet management models in freight transportation,"
Transportation science, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 227 -- 248, 1987.
[30] D. Bahdanau, P. Brakel, K. Xu, A. Goyal, R. Lowe, J. Pineau,
A. Courville, and Y. Bengio, "An actor-critic algorithm for se-
quence prediction," arXiv preprint arXiv:1607.07086, 2016.
[31] P. Sunehag, G. Lever, A. Gruslys, W. M. Czarnecki, V. Zambaldi,
M. Jaderberg, M. Lanctot, N. Sonnerat, J. Z. Leibo, K. Tuyls
et al., "Value-decomposition networks for cooperative multi-agent
learning," arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.05296, 2017.
[32] T. Rashid, M. Samvelyan, C. S. de Witt, G. Farquhar, J. Foerster,
and S. Whiteson, "Qmix: Monotonic value function factorisa-
tion for deep multi-agent reinforcement learning," arXiv preprint
arXiv:1803.11485, 2018.
[33] J. S. Dibangoye and O. Buffet, "Learning to act in decentralized
partially observable mdps," Ph.D. dissertation, INRIA Grenoble-
Rhone-Alpes-CHROMA Team; INRIA Nancy, ´equipe LARSEN,
2018.
[34] D.-A. Clevert, T. Unterthiner, and S. Hochreiter, "Fast and accurate
deep network learning by exponential linear units (elus)," arXiv
preprint arXiv:1511.07289, 2015.
[35] K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, and J. Sun, "Identity mappings in deep
residual networks," in ECCV. Springer, 2016, pp. 630 -- 645.
Kaixiang Lin received the B.S. degree from the
University of Science and Technology of China,
Hefei, China, in 2014, and is currently work-
ing toward the Ph.D. degree at Michigan State
University, East Lansing, MI, USA. His research
interests include machine learning, data mining
and reinforcement learning, with applications to
the large-scale traffic data and various domains.
Renyu Zhao received B.S. and M.E. degrees
from China Agriculture University, Beijing, China,
and Peking University, Beijing, China, in 2007
and 2013 respectively. He is a senior research
engineer in Didi AI Labs, Beijing, China. His
research interests include spatiotemporal data
mining, stochastic process, as well as spectral
graph theory, Bayesian analysis, etc.
Zhe Xu received the B.S. degree in informa-
tion engineering from Shanghai Jiao Tong Uni-
versity, Shanghai, China, in 2011. He received
the Ph.D. degree from the Institute of Image
Communication and Networking, Shanghai Jiao
Tong University, Shanghai, China, and Quantum
Computation and Intelligent Systems, University
of Technology, Sydney, N.S.W., Australia. His
research interests include computer vision, web
mining, machine learning, and multimedia anal-
ysis.
Jiayu Zhou received the Ph.D. degree in com-
puter science from Arizona State University,
Tempe, AZ, USA, in 2014. He is an Assistant
Professor with the Department of Computer Sci-
ence and Engineering at Michigan State Univer-
sity, East Lansing, MI, USA. His research inter-
ests include large-scale machine learning and
data mining, and biomedical
informatics. Prof.
Zhou served as Technical Program Committee
Member of premier conferences such as NIPS,
ICML, and SIGKDD. He was the recipient of
the Best Student Paper Award at the 2014 IEEE INTERNATIONAL
CONFERENCE ON DATA MINING (ICDM) and the Best Student Paper
Award at the 2016 International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging
(ISBI).
|
cs/0502081 | 1 | 0502 | 2005-02-20T09:08:03 | Tables, Memorized Semirings and Applications | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.DM"
] | We define and construct a new data structure, the tables, this structure generalizes the (finite) $k$-sets sets of Eilenberg \cite{Ei}, it is versatile (one can vary the letters, the words and the coefficients). We derive from this structure a new semiring (with several semiring structures) which can be applied to the needs of automatic processing multi-agents behaviour problems. The purpose of this account/paper is to present also the basic elements of this new structures from a combinatorial point of view. These structures present a bunch of properties. They will be endowed with several laws namely : Sum, Hadamard product, Cauchy product, Fuzzy operations (min, max, complemented product) Two groups of applications are presented. The first group is linked to the process of "forgetting" information in the tables. The second, linked to multi-agent systems, is announced by showing a methodology to manage emergent organization from individual behaviour models. | cs.MA | cs |
Tables, Memorized Semirings and Applications
Cyrille Bertelle ∗,
G´erard H. E. Duchamp †
and
Khalaf Khatatneh‡§
ßKeywords: Tables, k-subsets, efficient data
structures, efficient algebraic structures.
0
Introduction
The following is intended to be a contribution
in the area of what could be called efficient al-
gebraic structures or efficient data structures.
In fact, we define and construct a new data
structure, the tables, which are special kinds
of two-raws arrays. The first raw is filled with
words and the second with some coefficients.
This structure generalizes the (finite) k-sets
sets of Eilenberg [6], it is versatile (one can vary
the letters, the words and the coefficients), eas-
ily implemented and fast computable. Varying
the scalars and the operations on them, one can
obtain many different structures and, among
them, semirings. Examples will be provided
and worked out in full detail.
Here, we present a new semiring (with sev-
eral semiring structures) which can be applied
to the needs of automatic processing multi-
agents behaviour problems. The purpose of
this account/paper is to present also the basic
elements of this new structures from a com-
binatorial point of view. These structures
present a bunch of properties. They will be
endowed with several
laws namely : Sum,
Hadamard product, Cauchy product, Fuzzy op-
erations (min, max, complemented product)
Two groups of applications are presented.
The first group is linked to the process of "for-
getting" information in the tables and then
obtaining,
for instance, a memorized semir-
ing.The latter is specially suited to solve the
shortest path with addresses problem by re-
peated squaring over matrices with entries in
this semiring.
The second, linked to multi-agent systems, is
announced by showing a methodology to man-
age emergent organization from individual be-
haviour models.
∗LIH, Laboratoire d'Informatique du Havre, 25 rue Philippe Lebon, BP 540 76058 Le Havre cedex, France
†LIPN, Institut Galil´ee - Universit´e Paris XIII 99, avenue Jean-Baptiste Cl´ement, 93430 Villetaneuse, France
‡LIFAR, Facult´e des Sciences et des Techniques, 76821 Mont-Saint-Aignan Cedex, France
§[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
1
1 Description of
the data
structure
cients)of the table. The order of the columns
is not relevant. Thus, a table reads
1.1 Tables and operations on tables
The input alphabet being set by the automaton
under consideration, we will here rather focus
on the definition of semirings providing transi-
tion coefficients. For convenience, we first be-
gin with various laws on R+ := [0, +∞[ includ-
ing
1. + (ordinary sum)
2. × (ordinary product)
3. min (if over [0, 1], with neutral 1, oth-
erwise must be extended to [0, +∞] and
then, with neutral +∞) or max
4. +a defined by x +a y := loga(ax + ay)
(a > 0)
5. +[n] (Holder laws) defined by x +[n] y :=
n√xn + yn
6. +s (shifted sum, x +c y := x + y − 1, over
whole R, with neutral 1)
7. ×c (complemented product, x + y − xy,
can be extended also to whole R, stabi-
lizes the range of probabilities or fuzzy
[0, 1] and is distributive over the shifted
sum)
ßA table T is a two-rows array, the first row
being filled with words taken in a given free
monoid (see [4], [7] in this conference or [8]).
The set of words which are present in the first
row will be called the indices of the table (I(T ))
and for the second row the values or (coeffi-
(cid:26) indices set of words I(T )
bottom row V (T )
values
(1)
The laws defined on tables will be of two types:
pointwise type (subscript p) and convolution
type (subscript c).
Now, we can define the pointwise composition
(or product) of two tables, noted ∗p.
Let us consider, two tables T1, T2 and a law ∗
T1 =
u1 u2
p1
p2
and
T2 =
v1
q1
v2
q2
···
···
···
···
uk
pk
vl
ql
then T1∗pT2 is defined by Ti[w] if w ∈ I(Ti)
and w /∈ I(T3−i) and by T1[w] ∗ T2[w] if w ∈
I(T1) ∩ I(T2)
ßIn particular one has I(T1∗pT2) = I(T1) ∪
I(T2).
Note 1 i) At this stage one do no need any
neutral. The structure automatically creates it
(see algebraic remarks below for full explana-
tion).
ii) The above is a considerable generalization of
an idea appearing in [3], aimed only to semir-
ings with units.
ßFor convolution type, one needs two laws, say
⊕,⊗, the second being distributive over the
first, i.e. identically
x ⊗ (y ⊕ z) = (x ⊗ y) ⊕ (x ⊗ z) and
(y ⊕ z) ⊗ x = (y ⊗ x) ⊕ (z ⊗ x)
(2)
(see
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/
2
Semiring.html).
The set of indices of T1∗cT2 (I(T1∗cT2)) is the
concatenation of the two (finite) langages I(T1)
and I(T2) i.e. the (finite) set of words
I(T1)I(T2) = {uv}(u,v)∈I(T1)×I(T2).
(3)
then, for w ∈ I(T1)I(T2), one defines
T1 ⊗c T2[w] = Muv=w(cid:16)T1[u] ⊗ T2[v](cid:17)
(4)
the interesting fact is that the constructed
structure (call it T for tables) is then a semiring
(T ,⊕p,⊗c) (provided ⊕ is commutative and -
generally - without units, but this is sufficient
to perform matrix computations). There is, in
fact no mystery in the definition (3) above, as
every table can be decomposed in elementary
bits
T1 =
u1 u2
p2
p1
···
···
uk
pk
=
k
Mi=1
ui
pi
(5)
one has, thanks to distributivity, to understand
the convolution of these indecomposable ele-
ments, which is, this time, very natural
u1
p1 Oc
u2
p2
:=
u1u2
p1 × p2
(6)
1.2 Why semirings ?
In many applications, we have to compute the
weights of paths in some weighted graph (short-
est path problem, enumeration of paths, cost
computations, automata, transducers to cite
only a few) and the computation goes with two
main rules: multiplication in series (i.e. along a
path), and addition in parallel (if several paths
3
are involved).
This paragraph is devoted to showing that, un-
der these conditions, the axioms of Semirings
are by no means arbitrary and in fact unavoid-
able. A weighted graph is an oriented graph to-
gether with a weight mapping ω : A 7→ K from
the set of the arrows (A) to some set of coef-
ficients K, an arrow is drawn with its weight
(cost) above as follows a = q1
For such objects, one has the general conven-
tions of graph theory.
α→ q2.
• t(a) := q1 (tail)
• h(a) := q2 (head)
• w(a) := α (weight).
A path is a sequence of arrows c = a1a2 ··· an
such that h(ak) = t(ak+1) for 1 ≤ k ≤ n − 1.
The preceding functions are extended to paths
by t(c) = t(a1), h(c) = h(an), w(c) =
w(a1)w(a2)··· w(an) (product in the set of co-
efficients).
For example with a path of length 3 and (k =
N),
u = p 2→ q 3→ r 5→ s
(7)
one has t(u) = p, h(u) = s, w(u) = 30.
ßAs was stated above, the (total) weight of a
set of paths with the same head and tail is the
sum of the individual weights. For instance,
with
q1
q2
(8)
α→β
→
the weigth of this set of paths est α + β. From
the rule that the weights multiply in series and
add in parallel one can derive the necessity of
the axioms of the semirings. The following di-
agrams shows how this works.
Diagram
Identity
β
α→
→ q
→
q
γ
α
→
β
→
p
p
p α→ q
p
β
γ
→ r
→ r
β
→
→ r
γ
α
→
β
→
q
p α→ q
α + (β + γ) = (α + β) + γ
α + β = β + α
→ s α(βγ) = (αβ)γ
γ
(α + β)γ = αγ + βγ
α(β + γ) = αβ + αγ
these identities are familiar and bear the fol-
lowing names:
Line Name
I
II
III
IV
V
Associativity of +
Commutativity of +
Associativity of ×
Distributiveness (right) of × over +
Distributiveness (left) of × over +
1.3 Total mass
The total mass of a table is just the sum of the
coefficients in the bottom row. One can check
that
mass(T 1 ⊕ T 2) = mass(T 1) + mass(T 2);
mass(T 1 ⊗ T 2) = mass(T 1) · mass(T 2)(9)
this allows, if needed, stochastic conditions.
1.4 Algebraic remarks
We have confined in this paragraph some proofs
of structural properties concerning the tables.
The reader may skip this section with no seri-
ous harm.
First, we deal with structures with as little as
possible requirements, i.e. Magmas and Semir-
ings. For formal definitions, see
4
http://
encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/
Magma%20category
ßhttp://mathworld.wolfram.com/
Semiring.html
Proposition 1 (i) Let (S,∗) be a magma, Σ
an alphabet, and denote T [S] the set of tables
with indices in Σ∗ and values in S. Define ∗p
as in (1.1). Then
i) The law ∗ is associative (resp. commutative)
iff ∗ is. Moreover the magma (T [S], ∗) always
possesses a neutral, the empty table (i.e. with
an empty set of indices).
ii) If (K,⊕,⊗) is a semiring, then (TK,⊕,⊗)
is a semiring.
Proof. (Sketch) Let S(1) the magma with unit
built over (S ∪ {e}) by adjunction of a unit.
Then, to each table T , associate the (finite sup-
ported) function fT : Σ∗ 7→ S(1) defined by
fT (w) = (cid:26) T [w]
e
if w ∈ I(T )
otherwise
(10)
then, check that fT1∗pT2 = fT1∗1fT2 (where ∗1
is the standard law on S(Σ∗)
(1) ) and that the cor-
respondence is a isomorphism. Use a similar
technique for the point (ii) with K0,1 the semir-
ing with units constructed over K and show
that the correspondence is one-to-one and has
K0,1hΣi as image.
Note 2 1) Replacing Σ∗ by a simple set, the
(i) of proposition above can be extended with-
out modification (see also K-subsets in [6]).
2) If one replaces the elements of free monoid
on the top row by elements of a semigroup S
and admits some colums with a top empty cell,
we get the algebra of S(1).
3) Pointwise product can be considered as be-
ing constructed with respect to the (Hadamard)
coproduct c(w) = w ⊗ w whereas convolution is
w.r.t. the Cauchy coproduct
to such a table, one can associate
φ(T ) := [{u1, u2 ··· uk}, l1] in the memo-
rized semiring. It is easy to check that φ
transports the laws and the neutrals and
obtain the result.
c(w) = Xuv=w
u ⊗ v
(11)
(see [5]).
2 Applications
2.1 Specializations and images
1. Multiplicities,
Stochastic
and
Boolean. --
Whatever the multiplicities, one gets the
classical automata by emptying the al-
phabet (setting Σ = ∅). For stochastic,
one can use the total mass to pin up out-
going conditions.
2. Memorized Semiring. --
We explain here why the memorized
semiring, devised at first to perform ef-
ficient computations on the shortest path
problem with memory (of addresses) can
be considered as an image of a "table
semiring" (thus proving without compu-
tation the central property of [9]).
Let T be here the table semiring with co-
efficients in ([0, +∞], min, +). Then a ta-
ble
T =
u1
l1
···
···
uk
lk
···
···
un
ln
(12)
can be written so that l1 = ··· =
lk < lm for m > k (this amounts
to say that the set where the mini-
mum is reached is {u1, u2 ··· uk}). Then,
5
2.2 Application to evolutive systems
Tables are structured as semirings and are
flexible enough to recover and amplify the
structures of automata with multiplicities and
transducers. They give operational tools for
modelling agent behaviour for various simu-
lations in the domain of distributed artificial
intelligence [2]. The outputs of automata with
multiplicities or the values of tables allow to
modelize in some cases agent actions or in other
cases, probabilities on possible transitions be-
tween internal states of agents behaviour.
In
all cases, the algebraic structures associated
with automata outputs or tables values is very
interesting to define automatic computations in
respect with the evolution of agents behaviour
during simulation.
One of ours aims is to compute dynamic multi-
agent systems formations which emerge from a
simulation. The use of table operations deliv-
ers calculable automata aggregate formation.
Thus, when table values are probabilities, we
are able to obtain evolutions of these aggrega-
tions as adaptive systems do.
With the definition of adapted operators com-
ing from genetic algorithms, we are able to rep-
resent evolutive behaviors of agents and so evo-
lutive systems [1]. Thus, tables and memorized
semiring are promizing tools for this kind of
implementation which leads to model complex
systems in many domains.
References
[1] Bertelle C., Flouret M., Jay V., Olivier
D., Ponty J.-L., Genetic Algorithms on
Automata with Multiplicities for Adap-
tative Agent Behaviour in Emergent
Organisations.
[2] Bertelle C., Flouret M., Jay V., Olivier
D., Ponty J.-L., Automata with Multi-
plicities as Behaviour Model in Multi-
Agent Simulations SCI 2001.
[3] Champarnaud J.-M., Duchamp G.,
Derivatives of rational expressions
and related theorems, T.C.S. 313 31
(2004).
[4] Duchamp G., Hatem Hadj Kacem, ´Eric
Laugerotte, On the erasure of several
letter-transitions, JICCSE'04
[5] Duchamp G., Flouret M., Laugerotte
E., Luque J-G., Direct and dual
laws
for automata with multiplicites, Theo-
ret. Comput. Sci. 267 (2001) 105-120.
[6] Eilenberg S., Automata, languages and
machines, Vol A, Acad. Press (1974).
[7] Laugerotte E., Abbad H., Symbolic
computation on weighted automata,
JICCSE'04.
[8] Lothaire M., Combinatorics on words,
Cambridge University Press (new edi-
tion), 1997.
[9] Khatatneh K., Construction of a mem-
orized semiring, DEA ITA Memoir,
University of Rouen (2003).
6
|
1505.00956 | 2 | 1505 | 2015-06-02T17:30:59 | Informational parasites in code evolution | [
"cs.MA"
] | In a previous study, we considered an information-theoretic model of code evolution. In it, agents obtain information about their (common) environment by the perception of messages of other agents, which is determined by an interaction probability (the structure of the population). For an agent to understand another agent's messages, the former must either know the identity of the latter, or the code producing the messages must be universally interpretable. A universal code, however, introduces a vulnerability: a parasitic entity can take advantage of it. Here, we investigate this problem. In our specific setting, we consider a parasite to be an agent that tries to inflict as much damage as possible in the mutual understanding of the population (i.e. the parasite acts as a disinformation agent). We show that, after introducing a parasite in the population, the former adopts a code such that it captures the information about the environment that is missing in the population. Such agent would be of great value, but only if the rest of the population could understand its messages. However, it is of little use here, since the parasite utilises the most common messages in the population to express different concepts. Now we let the population respond by updating their codes such that, in this arms race, they again maximise their mutual understanding. As a result, there is a code drift in the population where the utilisation of the messages of the parasite is avoided. A consequence of this is that the information that the parasite possesses but the agents lack becomes understandable and readily available. | cs.MA | cs | Informational parasites in code evolution
Andr´es C. Burgos1 and Daniel Polani2
1,2Adaptive Systems Research Group, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK
[email protected]
5
1
0
2
n
u
J
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
2
v
6
5
9
0
0
.
5
0
5
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract
In a previous study, we considered an information-theoretic
model of code evolution. In this model, agents bet on (com-
mon) environmental conditions using their sensory informa-
tion as well as that obtained from messages of other agents,
which is determined by an interaction probability (the struc-
ture of the population). For an agent to understand another
agent's messages, the former must either know the identity of
the latter, or the code producing the messages must be univer-
sally interpretable.
A universal code, however, introduces a vulnerability: a para-
sitic entity can take advantage of it. Here, we investigate this
problem. In our specific setting, we consider a parasite to be
an agent that tries to inflict as much damage as possible in the
mutual understanding of the population (i.e. the parasite acts
as a disinformation agent). We show that, after introducing
a parasite in the population, the former adopts a code such
that it captures the information about the environment that is
missing in the population. Such an agent would be of great
value, but only if the rest of the population can understand
its messages. However, it is of little use here, since the para-
site utilises the most common messages in the population to
express different concepts.
Now we let the population respond by updating their codes
such that, in this arms race, they again maximise their mu-
tual understanding. As a result, there is a code drift in the
population where the utilisation of the messages of the para-
site is avoided. A consequence of this is that the information
that the parasite possesses but which the agents lack becomes
understandable and readily available.
Introduction
Codes shared among entities are ubiquitous in nature, not
only present in biological systems, but also, at the least, in
technological ones (Doyle, 2010). We define a code as a
probabilistic mapping from an "input" random variable (e.g.
environmental variable) to a set of outputs (e.g. messages).
A code, then, implies a representation of the input variable.
When representations are shared among entities, they be-
come conventions which are used for communication (Bur-
gos and Polani, 2014, 2015). The correct use of these con-
ventions for communicating can be interpreted as "honest
signalling". For instance, the TCP/IP protocol allows the in-
teraction of hardware and software in a code-based, "plug-
and-play" fashion, as long as they obey the protocol (Doyle,
2010). In biology, the genetic code acts as an innovation-
sharing protocol, one that allows the exchange of innova-
tions through horizontal gene transfer (HGT) (Woese, 2004).
However, communication protocols introduce vulnerabili-
ties: parasitic agents can take advantage of them (Ackley
and Littman, 1994; Doyle, 2010). For instance, the chem-
ical cues that ant colonies use to recognise nest-mates can
be mimicked by slave-making workers for social integration
(D'Ettorre et al., 2002). On the Internet, one can take advan-
tage of machine communication protocols (TCP/IP) to force
target computers to perform computations on behalf of a re-
mote node, in what is called "parasitic computing" (Barab´asi
et al., 2001).
Parasites benefit from their interaction with other agents,
while reducing the fitness of the attacked hosts. Never-
theless, parasites can be a positive force in evolution. For
instance, they can be generators of biodiversity, achieving
more resistance to future attacks (Brockhurst et al., 2004).
In an artificial setting, the presence of parasites was shown
to attain more efficient communication between agents of a
population, increasing their reproductive success (Robbins,
1994). Furthermore, some authors suggest that a healthy
ecosystem is one rich in parasites (Hudson et al., 2006).
In this work, we study this apparent contradiction from an
information-theoretic perspective.
We look at some aspects of the co-evolutionary arms race
between host and parasite. Particularly, we would like to
characterise informationally the behaviour of parasites and
the consequences for the host. For this purpose, we assume
a simple scenario where organisms seek to maximise their
long-term growth rate by following a bet-hedging strategy
(Seger and Brockmann, 1987). We know that maximising
their information about the environment achieves this (Shan-
non, 1948; Kelly, 1956). Then, individuals obtaining extra
environmental information from other individuals will have
an advantage over those that do not, since they would be
able to better predict the future environmental conditions
(Donaldson-Matasci et al., 2010). However, as we showed
in a previous work, for simple agents which do not have the
ability to identify who they are listening to, a shared code
among the population is necessary to interpret the transmit-
ted information and therefore improve predictions (Burgos
and Polani, 2014, 2015). Here, we keep this assumption
with respect to the agents, and we study the effects of in-
troducing a parasite in a population that previously evolved
its codes as well as its structure.
Model
In our previous model of code evolution (Burgos and Polani,
2014, 2015), the outputs or messages of an agent were pro-
duced according to a code, which was a conditional prob-
ability from sensor states to messages. The probability of
each sensor state of an agent conditioned on the environ-
mental variable µ was given. The information about the en-
vironment of each agent was obtained by considering the
mutual information between the environmental variable and
its sensor variable, together with the outputs of other agents.
These outputs would be perceived or not, according to the
structure of the population. The codes, as well as the pop-
ulation structure, were optimised in order to maximise what
was called the similarity of the codes (we will introduce a
more suitable term below) among the interacting agents of
the population.
Here, instead, we consider a simplified model where the
sensor states of an agent are the agent's messages, which
are represented by a random variable XΘ.
is,
p (XΘ µ, Θ = θ) gives the probability distribution of the
sensor states (and, simultaneously, the messages) of an agent
θ given the environmental conditions µ.
That
Agents perceive the sensor states (messages) of other agents
according to the structure of the population, which is given
by p(Θ, Θ(cid:48)). This joint probability induces a weighted
graph, where agents represent the nodes of the graph and
there is an edge from agent θ to an agent θ(cid:48) if p(θ, θ(cid:48)) > 0
(which is the weight of the edge). We interpret p(θ, θ(cid:48)) as the
probability of interaction between these two agents, and thus
we require that p(θ, θ(cid:48)) = p(θ(cid:48), θ) (interactions are symmet-
rical) and p(θ, θ) = 0 for every agent θ (self-interaction is
excluded).
We now consider a population of agents where interact-
ing agents maximise their mutual understanding. This is
XΘ
Θ
µ
Ξ
XΘ(cid:48)
Θ(cid:48)
Figure 1: Bayesian network representing the relation of the vari-
ables in the simplified model of code evolution. XΘ(cid:48) is an i.i.d
copy of XΘ. Θ and Θ(cid:48) selects agents from the same set, but their
probability distributions are not necessary the same. These two
variables depend on a common variable Ξ to model more general
interaction structures.
formally defined by I (XΘ ; XΘ(cid:48)), and, when this value
achieves its maximum, the mapping that results from the
agents' codes, p (XΘ XΘ(cid:48)), is deterministic. It is impor-
tant to note here that this model allows the agents to clus-
ter into different sub-populations due to differences in their
codes. Therefore, each sub-population could have its own
convention for representing different aspects about the envi-
ronment, and the conventions used can be as varied as possi-
ble, as long as the mapping p (XΘ XΘ(cid:48)) is universal among
all sub-populations.
For cases where the mutual understanding is locally optimal,
the codes of the agents are related to each other in one of two
possible manners: (a) within each sub-population, all agents
have the same code, and the mapping p (XΘ XΘ(cid:48)) is the
identity matrix; or (b) within each sub-population, there are
two types of agents (where the type is given by the agent's
code), and the interaction is only between agents of differ-
ent type. In this case, the graph induced by the interaction
probability is bipartite between the types.
For cases where an agent interacts with more than one type
of agent, then p (XΘ XΘ(cid:48)) will necessarily be probabilis-
tic, and thus the mutual understanding among the popu-
lation will decrease. We can measure the total amount
of information about the environment of an agent θ by
I (µ ; XΘ, XΘ(cid:48) Θ = θ). And, since the interaction prob-
ability is symmetric, the proposed measure for agent θ is
equal to I (µ ; XΘ, XΘ(cid:48) Θ(cid:48) = θ). Let us note that, when-
ever the mutual understanding of a population is optimal,
then the individuals that interact necessarily capture the
same aspects of the environment. Then, at the optimum
of mutual understanding in a population, agents do not in-
crease their information by reading other agent's messages,
although this indeed plays an important role in the evolution
of codes. Nevertheless, the ties that an agent establishes are
relevant for other purposes, which we study in the following
sections.
Informational parasitism
There are different ways to define an informational para-
site. Here, we adopt the model that characterises an infor-
mational parasite as an agent π that tries to minimise the
mutual understanding between the agents with whom it in-
teracts. An informationally antagonistic parasite is not typi-
cal for biology, as the parasite is concentrating at abusing the
host system for its own interest, but does not care about the
host except for avoiding detection. However, in the context
of social networks or news sources, such a parasite can be
considered a "troll" or a "disinformation" (FUD) agent who
has direct interest in damaging the mutual understanding of
the other agents of the population and/or their confidence in
their knowledge of the true state of the environment.
In our case, the parasite will choose its code in such a way
that the value I (XΘ ; XΘ(cid:48)) is minimised. This is an ex-
treme case of parasitism, where the parasite may kill its
host as a result of maximising damage. Usually, the known
parasites manipulate their hosts in order to benefit from
it, decreasing their fitness such that it would not kill them
(Schmid-Hempel, 1998). Although the defined type of par-
asite is not common in biology, it is still a possibility in the
range of behaviours that decrease fitness of the host while
increasing the attacker's fitness.
We now analyse the consequences of introducing a parasite
in a population for a few very simple, but illustrative, sce-
narios. First, let us define the following types of codes:
1 2
3 4
x2 x2
x1 x1
x1 x1
x2 x2
x1 x2
x1 x2
x2 x1
x2 x1
states of µ
type φ1
type φ2
type φ3
type of φ4
Figure 2: The left-most grid shows an illustration of the environ-
ment, although it does not denote its real structure. Then, each type
shows a partition of the environmental states induced by an agent's
code (codes here are deterministic). The types φ1 and φ2 capture
the first bit of µ. Types φ3 and φ4 capture the second bit of µ.
Let us analyse a few simple scenarios where a parasite at-
tacks a population. Let us assume that two (non-parasitic)
agents share the same code, for instance, agents θ1 and θ2
are of type φ1, and that these agents interact only with each
other (their mutual understanding is 1 bit). Now, if we min-
imise their mutual understanding by introducing a parasite
π, the optimal configuration is the following: the parasite
interacts with one agent only and the parasite's code is of
type φ2 (the "opposite" of type φ1). The mutual understand-
ing between all three agents now is zero. Let us note that, in
this case, the environmental information of each agent, be-
fore and after introducing the parasite, is 1 bit, which is the
amount of information each of them acquire through their
corresponding sensors.
Let us consider now a more interesting case:
two sub-
populations of two agents each, where agents only interact
with agents within the sub-population and where the codes
are the following: in the first sub-population, we have agents
θ1 and θ2 of code type φ1 (they capture the first bit of µ); and
in the second sub-population, we have agents θ3 and θ4 of
code type φ3 (they capture the second bit of µ). Now, when
we introduce a parasite, two configurations achieve zero mu-
tual understanding: in both, the parasite interacts with every
agent, but in the first one, it adopts the "opposite" code of
agents θ1 and θ2, which is code type φ2, while in the sec-
ond one, it adopts the "opposite" code of agents θ3 and θ4,
which is code type φ4. Here, in the first case, the environ-
mental information of agents θ3 and θ4 increases, since the
parasite conveys information captured by agents θ1 and θ2
(captured by the parasite through its "opposite" code) that
the former two agents do not possess. In the same way, for
the second configuration, agents θ1 and θ2 are benefited by
their interactions with the parasite, since here also, the para-
site conveys information they lack.
Methods
All optimisations were performed using a genetic algo-
rithm (GA). We utilised the C++ library GAlib v2.4.7 (Wall,
1996). The GA searches for a particular (possibly local)
optimum, and this optimum corresponds to an evolutionary
process that has converged. In order to accelerate computa-
tions, we assume the following: the probability distribution
over µ is uniform, the codes of all agents are determinis-
tic, and the interaction probability between any two agents
is given by one over the amount of interactions. To visu-
alise the evolution of the codes of the agents, we use the
method of multidimensional scaling provided by R version
2.14.1 (2011-12-22). This method takes as input the distance
matrix between codes, and plots them in a two-dimensional
space preserving the distances as well as possible.
Results
We study the introduction of a parasite in a population where
the mutual understanding was previously maximised. We
consider a population of 256 agents, in an environment with
16 equally likely states, where agents can encode the envi-
ronment using 16 different symbols. In this way, agents can
potentially capture by themselves all the information about
µ. As a result of the optimisation process, we obtained 5
sub-populations, where, in each of them, the induced inter-
action graph is bipartite. Therefore, there are 10 different
codes globally, two per sub-population. In Fig. 3 we show
the distance between the resulting codes, with point's size
proportional to the number of agents that adopted each code.
The distance used is the Jensen-Shannon divergence (see
(Burgos and Polani, 2014)). The average mutual understand-
ing in the population is I (XΘ ; XΘ(cid:48)) = 3.93 bits, which,
coincidentally, is also the mutual understanding within each
sub-population (this does not need to hold necessarily).
ery other agent is maximal (the distance is 4, the maximum
achievable with 16 states). The resulting average mutual un-
derstanding now is I (XΘ ; XΘ(cid:48)) = 2.55 bits (before the at-
tack, it was 3.93 bits), and the code of the parasite is shown
in Fig. 4.
1
5
9
2
6
3
7
10
11
13
14
15
4
8
12
16
x3
x3
x13
x3
x3
x3
x3
x3
x3
x12
x12
x3
x3
x12
x3
x16
(a) states of µ
(b) code of π
Figure 4: (a) Illustration of the environment µ, although the grid
does not denote its real structure. (b) Partition of the environmental
states induced by the code of the parasite π.
To understand the choice of code by the parasite, we anal-
yse the joint probability p(XΘ, XΘ(cid:48)) before introducing the
parasite in the population. Our results show that the parasite
encodes the environment through the messages that are most
commonly used among the population. In this case, the par-
asite chose 4 messages (x3, x12, x13 and x16), all of them
among the most popular in the population (see Fig. 5).
Figure 3: 2-dimensional plot of the distance between the codes:
each point represents a particular code, and its size is relative to the
number of agents adopting that particular code. The colour of the
points denotes the sub-population to which the codes belong.
Blending in with the crowd
We introduce now a parasite π in the population, and we let
it freely choose with whom it interacts, as well as its code
(the parasite is introduced before the optimisation process
begins, at generation 0). However, the parasite is allowed
to use 32 symbols to encode µ, instead of 16, as we did for
the rest of the agents. The reason for allowing a larger set
of symbols to the parasite is that, otherwise, we will be forc-
ing the parasite to use the symbols used by the population.
We allow the double amount of symbols to enable the para-
site to perfectly encode the environment while avoiding all
symbols already in use.
We found that after optimisation, the parasite interacts with
every agent of the population, and its code distance to ev-
Figure 5: Joint probability of messages p(XΘ, XΘ(cid:48) ) of the pop-
ulation before the parasitic attack. Values are normalised to the
maximum of all values, in this case p(x3, x(cid:48)
3) = 0.125. White
squares have probability zero.
l−1.5−1.0−0.50.00.51.01.5−1.5−1.0−0.50.00.51.01.5lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllx01x02x03x04x05x06x07x08x09x010x011x012x013x014x015x016x1x2x3x4x5x6x7x8x9x10x11x12x13x14x15x16 As a consequence of this antagonistic behaviour, the par-
asite blends in the population. This suggests that the par-
asite would try to avoid being identified by its messages.
Our model allows us to measure how "identifiable" agents
are by comparing the average joint messages. For instance,
this can be measured by the mutual information between the
agent selector and the joint messages, I (Θ XΘ, XΘ(cid:48)). For
a population with a universal code, this measure is zero, that
is, we cannot identify any agent. Here, we want to know
particularly how much we can identify the parasite by its
messages. Then, we can consider the following measure:
DKL (p(XΘ, XΘ(cid:48) Θ = π) p(XΘ, XΘ(cid:48)))
(1)
In Fig. 6, we show the values of Eq. 1 during the optimi-
sation process, which shows that the divergence diminishes
as the parasite minimises the mutual understanding of the
population.
(cid:1)
)
(cid:48)
Θ
X
,
Θ
X
(
p
)
π
=
Θ
(cid:48)
Θ
X
,
Θ
X
(
p
(cid:0)
L
K
D
3.6
3.5
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.1
3
2.9
0
10
20
30
generation
40
50
Figure 6: We measure how much we can identify the parasite
from its messages. As a consequence of maximising damage to
the population, the parasite blends in. The parasite is introduced at
generation 0.
Missing environmental aspects
However, it is not only a question of choosing common mes-
sages: they must not coincide with other agent's codes given
the environmental conditions.
In other words, these mes-
sages that are popular among the population will be used by
the parasite to express different aspects of µ. Otherwise, if
the parasite expresses overlapping aspects, then there might
be coincidences with one or more sub-population's adopted
conventions. Consequently, the parasite will capture miss-
ing aspects in the population. This can be measured by how
much information the code of the parasite adds about µ if
we look at the average messages. Formally,
I (µ ; XΘ(cid:48) XΘ, Θ(cid:48) = π)
(2)
2 is plotted in Fig.
through its sensors only,
The value of Eq.
7 dur-
ing the optimisation process.
After convergence, we
have that I (µ ; XΘ(cid:48) XΘ, Θ(cid:48) = π) = 1.30 bits, while
is
what the parasite acquires,
I (µ ; XΘ Θ = π) = 1.32 bits. That is, almost all the
information it captures is missing in the population. If we
consider the perceived information from µ together with the
environmental information provided by the population, the
parasite captures I (µ ; XΘ, XΘ(cid:48) Θ = π) = 4 bits, which
is the maximum possible, and this means that the parasite
always correctly predicts the environment.
)
)
π
=
(cid:48)
Θ
,
Θ
X
(cid:48)
Θ
X
;
µ
(
I
1.3
1.2
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0
10
20
30
generation
40
50
Figure 7: Amount of information the parasite possesses that the
population lacks. The parasite is introduced at generation 0.
Robustness against parasites
After the parasitic attack, each sub-population has dimin-
ished its mutual understanding by different quantities. Al-
though the (former) sub-populations now share a common
agent (the parasite, and thus are not strictly speaking differ-
ent sub-populations), we maintain the colours used in Fig.
3 to identify them. In Table 8 we show a summary of the
outcome of the parasitic attack.
As Table 8 shows, in general, larger sub-populations are less
damaged by a parasitic intrusion. This phenomenon is due
to the large number of interactions among friendly agents,
which diminishes the influence of any single agent by con-
sidering the average of the perceived messages. The ex-
ception in the example is the second largest sub-population,
which becomes more damaged than the third largest sub-
population. The reason why we see this is that the former
Colour
Size
Sizes of types
I1
I2
I3
47
35
16
8
7
41, 6
33, 2
11, 5
5, 3
5, 2
3.93
2.85
3.59
3.93
2.15
3.05
3.93
2.54
3.33
3.93
2.16
2.98
3.93
1.83
2.65
113
95, 18
3.93
2.55
3.50
Figure 8: Summary of the parasitic attack for each sub-population.
The colours of each sub-population are the same as the ones in Fig.
3. I1 is the mutual understanding before the parasitic attack, I2 is
the mutual understanding after the parasitic attack, and I3 is the
mutual understanding after the population's response.
sub-population is highly unbalanced, having a small num-
ber of agents of one type. Then, agents of the most numer-
ous type interact only with a small number of agents, and
therefore are more vulnerable to malicious agents.
Another way in which a population can defend itself against
parasitic attacks is through diversification of their codes.
Particularly, agents can reduce damage by using synonyms
to express the same conditions. The presence of synonyms
presents an obstacle for the parasite: when trying to con-
fuse agents by expressing different conditions with a chosen
symbol, the meaning of the correspondent synonym is not
obfuscated.
We study this by comparing populations with different
amounts of code types, while maintaining the same popu-
lation structure. The setup is the following: the population
is well-mixed (every agent interacts with every other agent),
and first we randomly sample a code for every one of the
64 agents with symbols in the range [1, 16]. This population
has one type of code only, and the used sample has a mutual
understanding of 3.5 bits. Then, we produce a new popula-
tion by modifying the code of half of the agents, such that
p (x + 16 µ) := p (x µ) and then we set p (x µ) := 0
(here, x + 16 is a synonym of x). In this way, the mutual un-
derstanding remains the same for the modified population,
which now has two types. Each new type is introduced in a
similar fashion, always mapping the original code to a set of
(16) unused symbols.
We perform the minimisation of the mutual understanding
on each population by introducing a parasite until conver-
gence. We show in Fig. 9 the values of I(XΘ ; XΘ(cid:48))
during the optimisation process for each population. Our
results confirm our expectations: more diverse populations
are more resistant to parasitic attacks.
)
(cid:48)
Θ
X
;
Θ
X
(
I
3.5
3.45
3.4
3.35
3.3
3.25
3.2
1 type
2 types
4 types
8 types
0
50
100
150
200
generation
Figure 9: Mutual understanding of populations with varying
amounts of types of codes during optimisation. Populations with
more types of codes are more resistant to parasitic attacks. In all
cases, the parasite was introduced at generation 0.
Code diversification
Now we let the population respond to the parasitic attack.
If we let the rest of the agents respond to the parasite by
freely changing the structure of the population, then our sim-
ulations shows that the parasite becomes isolated from the
population, which is the expected outcome. However, we
consider here a scenario where the structure of the popula-
tion is maintained, and agents can only respond to the attack
by updating their codes. In the same way as we did with
the parasite, we allow the agents to choose from a larger set
of messages (we consider 32 symbols to give the option to
agents of changing completely their encoding of µ).
After convergence, the population's mutual understanding
recovered to a value of I (XΘ ; XΘ(cid:48)) = 3.50 bits (see Ta-
ble 8 for a summary). In response to the parasitic attack,
the agents of the population replaced, mostly, the symbols
utilised by the parasite with unused ones. In Fig. 10, we
can see how the joint probability p(XΘ, XΘ(cid:48)) changed after
the population's response. Here, the symbols present in the
parasite's code (x3, x12, x13 and x16) are mostly removed
from the population's codes.
Three important features follow from the population's re-
sponse: first, new code profiles are created in the population.
For instance, the orange, purple and green sub-populations
shown in Fig. 3 now consist of three types of codes (see
Fig. 11. Nevertheless, the bipartite property is kept, but,
instead, synonyms were adopted by one type in these sub-
populations. This is due to the large amount of symbols
available that, in the case they are not in use within the
agent's type, are detached from any meaning and thus would
not create confusion.
(a) after the parasitic attack.
(b) after the population's
response.
Figure 10: Joint probability of messages p(XΘ, XΘ(cid:48) ) (a) after the
parasitic attack and (b) after the population's response.
This can be appreciated in Fig. 12, where we represent the
code of an agent before and after the population's response
to the parasitic attack. This agent updated its code such that
most symbols used by the parasite are avoided (x3 and x12
are changed for x29 and x21, respectively). On the other
hand, x13 is kept. To check whether this is an optimal solu-
tion, we manually updated the code of all agents of the same
type, changing x13 with every other possible symbol. In-
deed, using this particular symbol occupied by the parasite
maximises the population's mutual understanding. The rea-
son for this is that, since all other symbols are occupied by
more than one agent, x13 is the one that confuses the popu-
lation the least.
Second, by drifting from the parasite's symbols, agents may
update their codes in such a way that, after the update, they
capture more environmental information. This is the case of
the type shown in Fig. 12: before the update, environmen-
tal states 9 and 16 (see Fig. 4a to locate these states) were
represented by x3, while after the update, these states are
distinguished from one another.
Third, and most important, the information that the parasite
offers can now be understood (although not entirely) by the
population: the missing information is mostly expressed us-
ing symbols that are not occupied any more by the agents of
the population. This cannot be shown in the example, since
changes in the agent's codes after the response to the attack
may result in an overlap with the information that the para-
site captures. However, we can manipulate the resulting con-
figuration after the parasitic attack to show that agents now
consider the information offered by the parasite. For each
agent that is not the parasite, we update its code such that
p (x + 16 µ) := p (x µ) and then we set p (x µ) := 0.
In this way, we make sure that all agents capture the same
aspects of µ as before the update, without interference (all
of the parasite's symbols are in the range [1, 16]).
Figure 11: 2-dimensional plot of the distance between the codes
after the population's response to the parasite attack. Each point
represents a particular code, and its size is relative to the number
of agents adopting that particular code. The colour of the points
denotes the sub-population to which the codes belong. The black
diamond represents the parasite's code.
Now, we measure the average environmental
informa-
tion before and after the change. Before, the value was
I (µ ; XΘ, XΘ(cid:48)) = 3.70 bits, and after, I (µ ; XΘ, XΘ(cid:48)) =
3.72 bits. The increase is small, but we are considering one
parasite only. If we introduce 8 parasites in the population,
then the increase in the average environmental information
is more significant: from 3.43 bits to 3.73 bits after updat-
ing the codes. It is worth noting that, if the parasites interact
between themselves, then they would try to capture not only
environmental information that is not present in the popula-
tion, but also that is not captured by the other parasites.
Discussion and conclusions
We have considered a scenario where a parasite is introduced
in a previously evolved population, and, after convergence,
we looked at the response of the population, in one step of
many in the co-evolutionary arms race. We considered one
step only since, in this setting where the agent's behaviours
are not unified, the arms race will cycle continuously.
Our model shows interesting behaviour consistent with em-
pirical observations. For instance, parasites are known to
mimic the chemical signatures utilised by the attacked host
(D'Ettorre et al., 2002; Lorenzi et al., 2014). In this way,
identification of the parasite by the population becomes
harder. We measured this property during the parasite's at-
tack, showing that as it increased damage in the mutual un-
derstanding of the population, it blended in. Additionally,
l−2−1012−2−1012llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll x15
x8
x5
x9
x3
x12
x15
x8
x6
x7
x2
x10
x13
x11
x4
x8
x1
x3
x5
x9
x29
x21
x6
x7
x2
x4
x8
x1
x10
x13
x11
x19
(a) before the parasitic attack
(b) after the parasitic attack
Figure 12: Partition of the environmental states induced by the
code of an agent (a) before, and (b) after the parasitic attack.
we showed that it becomes parasitically dependent on the
population, as most of the environmental information it uses
to predict the environment comes from the population.
We have also showed which properties a population may
have in order to be robust against parasitic attacks. For in-
stance, large populations are more resilient, since its numer-
ous members provide a solid standard from which pertur-
bations become less significant. Another way in which the
population becomes resilient is for the population's agents to
utilise synonyms. If the parasite intends to create confusion
among the population by using messages that have a differ-
ent meaning for the rest of the agents, then when synonyms
are present, then they do not present any ambiguities.
The presence of parasites in a population can be, in the
long term, a positive force (Hudson et al., 2006). For in-
stance, they increase the diversity of the population, which
in our scenario was manifested in the creation of new types
of codes by using synonyms. As we have seen, this makes
the population more robust to subsequent attacks in their co-
evolution. Second, parasites are able to capture information
about the environment which is not captured by any other
agent. Most of this information is not understandable by the
agents until they respond to the parasitic attack by drifting
their codes.
The code drift has two effects: first, it makes the parasite
easier to identify, since it is the only agent using a particu-
lar set of messages; and second, after the messages used by
the parasite are avoided, the parasite's information becomes
understandable for the whole population. Therefore, after
the population recovers from the attack, agents can improve
their predictions of the environment. The parasite, after the
population's response, can still perfectly predict the state of
the environment, but with one major drawback: it becomes
easily identifiable, and thus the population have the possi-
bility to take action (for instance, by avoiding interaction)
when a future attack begins.
References
Ackley, D. H. and Littman, M. L. (1994). Altruism in the evolution
of communication. In Artificial life IV, pages 40 -- 48.
Barab´asi, A.-L., Freeh, V. W., Jeong, H., and Brockman, J. B.
(2001). Parasitic computing. Nature, 412(6850):894 -- 897.
Brockhurst, M. a., Rainey, P. B., and Buckling, A. (2004). The ef-
fect of spatial heterogeneity and parasites on the evolution of
host diversity. Proceedings. Biological sciences / The Royal
Society, 271(April 2003):107 -- 111.
Burgos, A. C. and Polani, D. (2014). An informational study of
the evolution of codes in different population structures. In
ALIFE 14: The Fourteenth Conference on the Synthesis and
Simulation of Living Systems, volume 14, pages 352 -- 359.
Burgos, A. C. and Polani, D. (2015). An informational study of the
evolution of codes and of emerging concepts in population of
agents. Accepted to "Artificial Life".
D'Ettorre, P., Mondy, N., Lenoir, A., and Errard, C. (2002). Blend-
ing in with the crowd: social parasites integrate into their host
colonies using a flexible chemical signature. Proceedings. Bi-
ological sciences / The Royal Society, 269(1503):1911 -- 8.
Donaldson-Matasci, M. C., Bergstrom, C. T., and Lachmann, M.
(2010). The fitness value of information. Oikos, 119(2):219 --
230.
Doyle, J. C. (2010). The Architecture of Robust, Evolvable Net-
works. The Lee Center, pages 12 -- 14.
Hudson, P. J., Dobson, A. P., and Lafferty, K. D. (2006).
Is a
healthy ecosystem one that is rich in parasites? Trends in
Ecology and Evolution, 21(7):381 -- 385.
Kelly, J. (1956). A new interpretation of information rate. IEEE
Transactions on Information Theory, 2(3):185 -- 189.
Lorenzi, M. C., Azzani, L., and Bagn`eres, A. G. (2014). Evolu-
tionary consequences of deception: Complexity and informa-
tional content of colony signature are favored by social para-
sitism. Current Zoology, 60:137 -- 148.
Robbins, P. (1994). The effect of parasitism on the evolution of a
communication protocol an artificial life simulation. In Pro-
ceedings of the third international conference on Simulation
of adaptive behavior: from animals to animats 3: from ani-
mals to animats 3, pages 431 -- 437. MIT Press.
Schmid-Hempel, P. (1998). Parasites in social insects. Princeton
University Press.
Seger, J. and Brockmann, H. J. (1987). What is bet-hedging? Ox-
ford surveys in evolutionary biology.
Shannon, C. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication.
Bell Systems Technical Journal, 27:379 -- 423.
Wall, M. (1996). Galib: A c++ library of genetic algorithm compo-
nents. Mechanical Engineering Department, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, 87:54.
Woese, C. R. (2004). A new biology for a new century. Microbiol-
ogy and Molecular Biology Reviews, 68(2):173 -- 186.
|
1909.09390 | 1 | 1909 | 2019-09-20T09:37:06 | SPSC: a new execution policy for exploring discrete-time stochastic simulations | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.PF"
] | In this paper, we introduce a new method called SPSC (Simulation, Partitioning, Selection, Cloning) to estimate efficiently the probability of possible solutions in stochastic simulations. This method can be applied to any type of simulation, however it is particularly suitable for multi-agent-based simulations (MABS). Therefore, its performance is evaluated on a well-known MABS and compared to the classical approach, i.e., Monte Carlo. | cs.MA | cs |
SPSC: a new execution policy for exploring
discrete-time stochastic simulations
Yu-Lin Huang, Gildas Morvan, Fr´ed´eric Pichon, and David Mercier
Univ. Artois, EA 3926, Laboratoire de G´enie Informatique et d'Automatique de
l'Artois (LGI2A), B´ethune, France.
{ylin.huang, firstname.lastname}@univ-artois.fr
Abstract. In this paper, we introduce a new method called SPSC (Sim-
ulation, Partitioning, Selection, Cloning) to estimate efficiently the prob-
ability of possible solutions in stochastic simulations. This method can
be applied to any type of simulation, however it is particularly suitable
for multi-agent-based simulations (MABS). Therefore, its performance
is evaluated on a well-known MABS and compared to the classical ap-
proach, i.e., Monte Carlo.
Keywords: stochastic simulation · multi-agent-based simulation · solu-
tion space exploration
1
Introduction
Multi-agent-based simulations (MABS) are widely used in various fields to study
complex systems [6]. Most of them are combined with stochasticity to represent
non fully controllable phenomena and use a discrete-time approach to facilitate
model construction. Such model can generally be described as taking some initial
conditions and some parameter set as inputs, in order to return outputs at each
time step (c.f. Figure 1).
Before running into exploration of the parameter set or the initial condition
space, we must first analyze outcomes from a fixed parameter set and initial
conditions. Let us denote a stochastic simulation outputs (called observables in
the following) at a final time step T as a random vector X T . Then a key question
to address is: what is the probability P(X T ∈ S) = θS of a specific solution S?
Initial conditions
Parameter set
Observables
Stochastic
Model
∆t
Fig. 1. Illustration of a discrete-time stochastic simulation
The classical method to handle this question is Monte Carlo simulation
(MC) [7]. It consists in simulating a number n of replications and building an
2
Y-L. Huang et al.
estimator θS of θS defined as:
n(cid:88)
i=1
θS =
1
n
1S (X i
T )
(1)
where 1S is the indicator function of the set S and X i
T the value of observables
in the ith replication. The issue with this approach is that for the estimator to
be good, the number n has generally to be large, as illustrated in Section 2.
Some methods have been developed to speed-up the computation of such
simulations, such as splitting [3] or polyagent [5]. However, they look for specific
solutions (rare or mean), assume a particular modeling approach (Markov chains
or agent-based) and require some low-level manipulations of the model.
In this paper, we propose a policy that simulates an authorized number N of
replications and is as generic as the MC approach yet provides a better estimator
when computational resources are limited (i.e. small N ).
The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 recalls and illustrates a stan-
dard approach to determine the required number of replications in Monte Carlo
simulation for a single observable. The design principles and the approach pro-
posed to answer the above-mentioned issues are presented in Section 3 and then
applied to a classical MABS in Section 4. Section 5 concludes the paper.
2 Monte Carlo simulation, how many replications?
We recall in this section a standard approach to determine the number n(XT,i) of
replications to obtain a good estimator θSi of the probability P(XT,i ∈ Si) = θSi
of some solution Si where XT,i is one observable of the vector X T . Suppose a
desired relative error for the estimator θSi at confidence level 1 − α :
P(
θSi − θSi
θSi
≤ ) ≥ 1 − α.
(2)
The minimal value for n(XT,i) to verify (2) can be determined by applying the
following algorithm [1, p. 449]:
T,i, . . . , X n0
1. Simulate n0 replications. (n0 observations X 1
T,i)
2. Compute
2 ) · si
Z1−( α
· X T,i
(3)
where Z1−(α/2) is the 100(1 − α/2) quantile of the normal distribution, si
stands for the sample standard deviation over the n0 observations and X T,i
is the sample mean value over the n0 observations. The conventional values
for n0, and α are respectively 150, 0.05 and 0.05.
n(XT,i) = (cid:100)(
)2(cid:101)
Afterward, we can then deduce the necessary number n satisfying every observ-
able as:
n = max
XT ,i∈XT
n(XT,i)
(4)
SPSC: A new execution policy for stochastic simulations
3
To illustrate this algorithm, let us take an academic example. We consider an
environment containing vegetation and 2 types of agents: preys consuming the
vegetation and predators hunting preys for food. Both preys and predators can
move without restriction in the environment. This model has been implemented
on the Similar platform [4] and is based on the NetLogo wolf sheep predation
model [8]. The set of observables here consists of the populations of different
species at each time step. The necessary number n for some arbitrarily chosen
parameter set and initial state of the simulation, using the conventional values
for n0, and α, is 3600 (c.f. Table 1). However, if we want a more precise estima-
tion, the necessary number n of replications increases drastically: for example,
considering a relative error = 0.005 yields a necessary number of replications
n = 7249285.
Table 1. Determination of the necessary number of replications for the prey predator
model implemented on the Similar platform. The parameters applied are n0 = 150,
= 0.05 and α = 0.05.
XT,i
si
X T,i
n(XT,i)
number of preys
number of predators
697.83
196.95
783.77
128.67
1219
3600
3 A new execution policy for stochastic simulations
In this section, we introduce a new execution policy for stochastic simulations
called SPSC (Simulation, Partitioning, Selection, Cloning). This approach relies
on a decomposition of the probability of interest that we explain first.
3.1 Decomposition of the probability of interest
The probability P(X T ∈ S) concerns the observables with respect to a specific
solution S at some final time step T . Thanks to the law of total probability,
considering some intermediate time step j before T , we can write
P(X T ∈ SX j ∈ Sj)P(X j ∈ Sj)
P(X T ∈ S) =
(5)
(cid:88)
Sj∈Pj
where Pj is a partition of the state space of the random vector X j.
More generally, considering all time steps before T , we can obtain the follow-
ing decomposition by assuming a discrete-time system where X i depends only
on X i−1:
4
Y-L. Huang et al.
P(X T ∈ S) =
T−1(cid:89)
i=0
(cid:88)
ST−1∈PT −1
...S1∈P1
P(X i+1 ∈ Si+1X i ∈ Si)
(6)
where Pi, i = 1, ..., T − 1, is a partition of the state space of X i, ST = S and
S0 is the initial state of the simulation.
3.2 SPSC: Simulation, Partitioning, Selection, Cloning
Inspired by the decomposition (6), we split the time interval [0, T ] into m pieces:
[t(0), t(1)], [t(1), t(2)], ..., [t(m−1), t(m)] where t(0) = 0 < t(1) < ... < t(m−1) <
t(m) = T . Then, for each interval [t(i), t(i+1)] the following steps are applied (c.f.
Figures 2 and 3):
Simulation Simulate N replications from t(i) to t(i+1), i ∈ {0, . . . , m − 1},
where N corresponds to the number of replications we authorize for the
simulation.
Partitioning At time t(i+1), form a partition of the space of observables of
these N replications. This can be done by applying a clustering algorithm.
Selection Choose one or multiple representative replications (which we call
delegates) from each partition and discard the other replications.
Cloning Clone the selected delegates to obtain N replications in total.
Initial states
enter
at time t(0)
CLONING
SIMULATION
exit
at time t(m)
Final states
loop from t(0) to t(m−1)
SELECTION
PARTITIONING
Fig. 2. SPSC process diagram
Once the iterations are finished, we have created for each t(i) a partition
P(i) for the state space of X t(i). For an element S(i) ∈ P(i) of the partition at
time step t(i), after the selection and cloning steps, it has ni cloned replications.
Besides, among these ni cloned replications, after evolving to the next time step
SPSC: A new execution policy for stochastic simulations
5
t(i+1), some of them (ni+1 replications) belong to some element S(i+1) ∈ P(i+1).
We propose to use the numbers ni and ni+1 to approximate the conditional
probability P(X t(i+1) ∈ S(i+1)X t(i) ∈ S(i)) by:
P (X t(i+1) ∈ S(i+1)X t(i) ∈ S(i)) =
ni+1
ni
(7)
Finally, we define an estimator θS for P(X T ∈ S) using a similar decomposition
as that of Equation (6), based on time steps t(i) and (7):
θS =
P (X t(i+1) ∈ S(i+1)X t(i) ∈ S(i))
(8)
(cid:88)
m−1(cid:89)
S(m−1)∈P(m−1)
i=0
...
S(1)∈P(1)
where S(m) = S and S(0) = S0.
First
replication
Cloning
and
Simulation
Partitioning
Selection
Cloning
and
Simulation
Partitioning
delegate
of S 1
(1)
delegate
of S 2
(1)
delegate
of S 3
(1)
delegate
of S 1
(2)
delegate
of S 3
(2)
delegate
of S 2
(2)
t(0)
t(1)
t(2)
Fig. 3. Illustration of the first and second iterations of SPSC, starting from a single
initial state.
3.3 Implementation
We describe here a simple implementation of SPSC used in the experiment in
Section 4:
Simulation No special action is taken in this step.
Partitioning N replications provide N instances of observables. To form a par-
tition in the space of observables, we can take advantage of existing unsuper-
vised learning algorithm which can separate instances by multiple subgroups.
The well-known clustering process kmeans has been chosen to fulfill the task.
The number of cluster k is preset to 15.
6
Y-L. Huang et al.
Selection From any element S(i) ∈ P(i) of an intermediate partition, we select
the replication which is the nearest to the center using euclidean distance on
the space of observables.
Cloning After partitioning and selection, k delegates are obtained to be cloned.
k (cid:99) times. If
To come back to N replications in total, we clone each delegate (cid:98) N
k does not divide N , we select randomly the remainder number N − k ∗(cid:98) N
k (cid:99)
of delegates to produce one more clone per selected delegate.
The time interval [0, T ] is homogeneously split into m = 5 pieces (i.e. ∀i ∈
{0, 1, . . . , 5}, t(i) = i × T
5 ).
4 Experiment
Let us take the prey predator model mentioned previously in Section 2 as an
example. As this model is well-known and well-studied, we can give some possible
solutions before launching simulations:
S1: Extinction of preys and predators, only vegetation remains.
S2: Predators go extinct, preys live without nature enemy's harass.
S3: All species survive and form a stable ecosystem.
Now the question is, for an arbitrary parameter set and initial condition, what
is the probability of these solutions at a given time step (e.g. T = 1000)? To
answer this question, the MC approach recalled in Section 2 is generally used.
In the following, we compare the performances of MC and SPSC. The valida-
tion is done by comparing the outputs of these methods with the same limited
number of replications N = 50. By repeating the simulations 1000 times, we
will be able to compare statistically the results obtained by MC and SPSC. Two
performance measures are considered here : 1) The detection rate of a specific
solution S. 2) The precision of the probability estimator for a specific solution.
Before evaluating these performance measures, we have done 30000 replications
using MC in order to provide reference values for the comparisons:
Pref (S1) ≈ 0.0065, Pref (S2) ≈ 0.0126, Pref (S3) ≈ 0.981
(9)
The detection rates obtained with MC and SPSC policies, i.e, the capacity
of identifying a specific solution, from N = 50 replications are summed up in
Table 2. The first three columns indicate the detection rate of single solutions and
the last column indicate the detection rate for the three solutions simultaneously.
We can then deduce that SPSC explores more efficiently the solution space.
To evaluate the precision of the probability estimator, the absolute error
between the probability estimator outcomes and the references is computed:
Err(Si) = P (Si) − Pref (Si).
(10)
Furthermore, to gain an entire vision on the three solutions simultaneously, we
consider also the mean of three solutions relative errors:
.
P (Si) − Pref (Si)
Err =
(cid:88)
1≤i≤3
Pref (Si)
(11)
SPSC: A new execution policy for stochastic simulations
7
Table 2. Detection rates obtained with MC and SPSC when launching 50 replications.
S1
MC 0.236
SPSC 0.332
S2
0.455
0.617
S3
1
1
S1, S2 and S3
0.102
0.203
Histograms of these errors for the policies SPSC and MC are shown in Fig. 4.
Fig. 4. Comparison of errors
We can notice that the distribution of errors are not normal nor symmetric.
Thus, to compare the errors from MC and SPSC policies, the Wilcoxon-Mann-
Whitney test is applied with the threshold α = 0.05. The test results are pre-
sented in Table 3 with p-value and alternative hypotheses, we can then conclude
that SPSC yields better probability estimates for each solution than MC.
Table 3. Hypothesis and p-value given by Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test.
Target solution Alternative hypotheses
p-value
Conclusion
S1
S2
S3
S1, S2 and S3
ErrSP SC < ErrM C
ErrSP SC < ErrM C
ErrSP SC < ErrM C
ErrSP SC < ErrM C
2.2e-16 ErrSP SC < ErrM C
3.163e-16 ErrSP SC < ErrM C
9.849e-09 ErrSP SC < ErrM C
2.2e-16 ErrSP SC < ErrM C
0.000.020.040.060.0802004006008001000SPSCS1absolute errors0.000.020.040.060.0802004006008001000S2absolute errors0.000.020.040.060.0802004006008001000S3absolute errors0123402004006008001000Meanrelative errors0.000.020.040.060.0802004006008001000MC0.000.020.040.060.08020040060080010000.000.020.040.060.08020040060080010000123402004006008001000 8
Y-L. Huang et al.
5 Conclusions and perspectives
We have introduced a generic policy called SPSC for executing stochastic simu-
lations that deals with the weakness of MC when the number of replications is
limited. It treats simulations as black boxes and therefore, does not rely upon a
priori knowledge. We have also presented a simple implementation of SPSC and
run it on a classic stochastic MABS model. By comparing the results obtained
with SPSC and with MC, we can conclude that SPSC gives a better solution
probability estimation and can reveal more different solutions than MC.
The first perspectives of this work are related to the impact of the parame-
ters (N , k, etc.), the partitioning algorithm as well as the selection and cloning
strategies on the performance. For instance, instead of having the same number
of clones for each delegate, we could clone more the delegates from small parti-
tions and less the delegates from large partitions. Theoretical properties of the
proposed solution as well as its interest for multimodal transport simulation will
also be investigated.
Moreover, since we deal with small sample size at each intermediate time
step, we could take advantage of modern tools [2] for statistical inference to
compute the estimator θS .
Acknowledgement
The ELSAT2020 project is co-financed by the European Union with the Euro-
pean Regional Development Fund, the French state and the Hauts de France
Region Council.
References
1. Banks, J., Carson II, J., Nelson, B., Nicol, D.: Discrete-event system simulation.
Pearson, 5th edn. (2010)
2. Kanjanatarakul, O., Denoeux, T., Sriboonchitta, S.: Prediction of future observa-
tions using belief functions: A likelihood-based approach. Int J Approx Reason 72,
71 -- 94 (2016)
3. L'Ecuyer, P., Le Gland, F., Lezaud, P., Tuffin, B.: Rare Event Simulation using
Monte Carlo Methods, chap. Splitting Techniques. Wiley (2009)
4. Morvan, G., Kubera, Y.: On time and consistency in multi-agent-based simulations.
CoRR arXiv:1703.02399 (2017)
5. Parunak, H.: Pheromones, probabilities and multiple futures. In: Multi-Agent-Based
Simulation XI, LNCS, vol. 6532, pp. 44 -- 60. Springer (2011)
6. Railsback, S., Grimm, V.: Agent-Based and Individual-Based Modeling: A Practical
Introduction. Princeton University Press (2011)
7. Rubinstein, R.Y., Kroese, D.P.: Simulation and the Monte Carlo method. John
Wiley & Sons, third edn. (2016)
8. Wilensky, U.: NetLogo wolf sheep predation model. http://ccl.northwestern.
edu/netlogo/models/WolfSheepPredation, Center for Connected Learning and
Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University. Evanston, IL. (1997)
|
1901.00441 | 1 | 1901 | 2018-12-07T18:10:11 | Hierarchical Fuzzy Opinion Networks: Top-Down for Social Organizations and Bottom-Up for Election | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.SI",
"eess.SY"
] | A fuzzy opinion is a Gaussian fuzzy set with the center representing the opinion and the standard deviation representing the uncertainty about the opinion, and a fuzzy opinion network is a connection of a number of fuzzy opinions in a structured way. In this paper, we propose: (a) a top-down hierarchical fuzzy opinion network to model how the opinion of a top leader is penetrated into the members in social organizations, and (b) a bottom-up fuzzy opinion network to model how the opinions of a large number of agents are agglomerated layer-by-layer into a consensus or a few opinions in the social processes such as an election. For the top-down hierarchical fuzzy opinion network, we prove that the opinions of all the agents converge to the leaders opinion, but the uncertainties of the agents in different groups are generally converging to different values. We demonstrate that the speed of convergence is greatly improved by organizing the agents in a hierarchical structure of small groups. For the bottom-up hierarchical fuzzy opinion network, we simulate how a wide spectrum of opinions are negotiating and summarizing with each other in a layer-by-layer fashion in some typical situations. | cs.MA | cs | 1
Hierarchical Fuzzy Opinion Networks:
Top-Down for Social Organizations and
Bottom-Up for Election
Li-Xin Wang
Abstract -- A fuzzy opinion is a Gaussian fuzzy set with the
center representing the opinion and the standard deviation
representing the uncertainty about the opinion, and a fuzzy
opinion network is a connection of a number of fuzzy opinions in a
structured way. In this paper, we propose: (a) a top-down
hierarchical fuzzy opinion network to model how the opinion of a
top leader is penetrated into the members in social organizations,
and (b) a bottom-up fuzzy opinion network to model how the
opinions of a
large number of agents are agglomerated
layer-by-layer into a consensus or a few opinions in the social
processes such as an election. For the top-down hierarchical fuzzy
opinion network, we prove that the opinions of all the agents
converge to the leader's opinion, but the uncertainties of the
agents in different groups are generally converging to different
values. We demonstrate that the speed of convergence is greatly
improved by organizing the agents in a hierarchical structure of
small groups. For the bottom-up hierarchical fuzzy opinion
network, we simulate how a wide spectrum of opinions are
negotiating and summarizing with each other in a layer-by-layer
fashion in some typical situations.
Index Terms -- Opinion dynamics; social hierarchy; fuzzy
opinion networks.
I. INTRODUCTION
Hierarchy is the most popular structure in social organizations
such as government, army, company, etc. [1,2,3]. In a company,
for example, it is typically structured with a relatively small top
management team, at least one layer of middle management,
and a large number of lower level employees responsible for
day-to-day operations [4]. Why is hierarchy so pervasive in
human societies across almost all cultures throughout time [5],
giving the fact that hierarchy is in direct opposition to some of
the best ideas humanity has produced such as democracy,
equality, fairness, and justice [1] ? The interdisciplinary
research on social hierarchy in sociology [6,7], psychology
[8,9], management [10], economics [11], and other disciplines
suggest a number of reasons. First, hierarchy establishes social
order that is appealing psychologically to individuals who need
Li-Xin Wang is with the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences,
Beijing, P.R. China (e-mail: [email protected]).
safety and stability (people come and go, but the system
remains). Second, hierarchy provides incentives for individuals
in organizations to work hard to obtain higher rank to satisfy
material self-interest and their need for control that in turn
serves the organization's interests (motivating the individuals
to work hard for the organization). Third, hierarchy facilitates
coordination and improves efficiency in comparison to other
more egalitarian structures such as free markets (the rapid
development of China's "state capitalism" economy in recent
years is an example, which has led to the deglobalization
movement in the "laisser-faire capitalism" economies to
reestablish the hierarchy). Fourth, hierarchical differentiation
between people fosters more satisfying working relationships
(leaders provide the guidance their followers need, and
followers execute what the leaders want to be realized).
Although hierarchy has been studied in social sciences for a
long time (back to Marx and Engels [12] in 1846), the research
is largely qualitative without mathematical modeling. Usually,
some concepts or variables are defined verbally, then a theory is
developed that describes the relationships among these
variables using natural languages rather than mathematical
equations [13]. The most mathematically advanced study
related to social hierarchy is perhaps the multidisciplinary field
of opinion dynamics where the researchers from mathematical
sociology [14], economics [15,16], physics [17,18], social
psychology [19], control [20], signal processing [21], fuzzy
systems [22], etc., join forces to tackle the problem. A
shortcoming of the mainstream opinion dynamics models
[23,24] is that the uncertainties of the opinions are not included
in the models. Human opinions are inherently uncertain so that
an opinion and
its uncertainty should be considered
simultaneously to give the accurate picture of the opinion. For
example, when we are asked to review a research paper, we
need to give an overall rating for the paper and, at the same time,
we must claim our level of expertise on the subject which is a
measure of uncertainty about the overall rating. In fact, the
uncertainty may be more important than the opinion itself in
many situations, because the uncertainty is more directly
related to the psychological pressure of the agent when the
opinion is broadcasted [25].
2
The fuzzy opinion networks (FONs) proposed in [22] model
an opinion by a Gaussian fuzzy set whose center and standard
deviation represent the opinion and its uncertainty, respectively,
so that the interactions between the opinions and their
uncertainties are systematically exploited. The goal of this
paper is to use the FON framework to model social hierarchy.
According to [2], social hierarchies can be classified into two
types: i) formal hierarchies that are delineated by rule and
consensually agreed upon, and ii) informal hierarchies that are
established and subjectively understood during the interaction
among social members. Formal hierarchies are top-down -- a
hierarchical structure is designed first and members at different
levels are then recruited; informal hierarchies are bottom-up -- a
hierarchical structure emerges after the free interaction among
the community members. We will use fuzzy opinion networks
to model both formal and informal hierarchies. To model the
formal hierarchy, we first define a basic leader-follow group of
fuzzy agents and study its basic convergence properties, then
we connect the basic leader-follower groups in a hierarchical
fashion to get the final hierarchical fuzzy opinion network. To
model an informal hierarchy, we let a large number of fuzzy
agents to interact with each other based on a local reference
scheme, and we see the initially very diversified opinions are
merging gradually in a hierarchical fashion into a consensus or
a number of representative opinions -- a process very similar to
an election in a democratic society.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section II, the
top-down hierarchical fuzzy opinion networks are constructed
and their convergence properties are proved. We also show that
the speed of convergence to the top leader's opinion is greatly
improved by organizing the followers into a hierarchical
structure rather than in a flat nonhierarchical fashion. In Section
III, we construct the bottom-up hierarchical fuzzy opinion
networks through the natural process of free interacting among
a large number of fuzzy agents based on the local reference
scheme, and we simulate a number of typical scenarios --
consensus reaching, polarization, or converging to multiple
ends. Finally, Section IV concludes the paper and the Appendix
contains the proofs of the theorems in the paper.
II. TOP-DOWN HIERARCHICAL FUZZY OPINION NETWORKS
We start with the definition of fuzzy opinion networks (FON)
and bounded confidence FONs1, and then introduce the basic
leader-follower group which is the basic building block of the
top-down hierarchical fuzzy opinion networks.
Definition 1: A fuzzy opinion is a Gaussian fuzzy set with
membership function
where the center
represents the opinion and the standard deviation
characterizes the uncertainty about the opinion . A Fuzzy
1 The concept of FON was introduced in [22] and the basic convergence
properties of bounded confidence FONs were studied in [26].
Opinion Network (FON) is a connection of a number of
Gaussian nodes, where a Gaussian node is a 2-input-1-output
fuzzy opinion
function
with Gaussian membership
whose center and standard deviation
are two input fuzzy sets to the node and the fuzzy set itself is
the output of the node. A Gaussian node is also called an agent,
a node, or a fuzzy node throughout this paper.
The connection of the fuzzy nodes can be static or
dynamically changing with time and the status of the nodes.
The bounded confidence fuzzy opinion networks, defined
below, are FONs with connections that are dynamically
changing according to the states of the nodes -- if the fuzzy
opinions of two nodes are close enough to each other, they are
connected; otherwise, they are disconnected.
Definition 2: A bounded confidence fuzzy opinion network
(BCFON) is a dynamic connection of n fuzzy nodes
( ) with membership functions
, where the center input and the standard
deviation input to node at time ( )
are determined as follows: the center input is a
weighted average of the outputs of the n fuzzy nodes at
the previous time point :
with the weights
where ( ) is the collection of nodes that are
connected to node at time t, defined as:
where represents the closeness between
fuzzy opinions and , are constants and
denotes the number of elements in ; and, the
standard deviation input are determined according to
one of the two schemes:
(a) Local reference scheme:
(b) External reference scheme:
where denotes the center of fuzzy set , is an
external signal and is a positive scaling constant. The initial
fuzzy opinions ( ) are Gaussian fuzzy sets
3
Fig. 1:The basic leader-follower group, where the leader passes his opinion to each of the n followers who are connected among
themselves in the bounded confidence fashion.
the initial uncertainties are given.
, where the initial opinions and
It was proved in [26] that the opinions and their
uncertainties of the Gaussian nodes in the BCFON
are evolving according to the following dynamic equations.
The Evolution of BCFON: The fuzzy opinions
( ; ) in the BCFON are Gaussian fuzzy
sets:
where the opinions and their uncertainties
are evolving according to the following dynamic equations:
and the uncertainty input
for local reference scheme, or
for external reference scheme with initial condition
(initial opinion of agent ) and (uncertainty
about the initial opinion), where , are
constants.
where the weights
We now define the basic leader-follower group which is the
basic building block of the top-down hierarchical fuzzy opinion
networks of this paper.
Definition 3: A basic leader-follower group (BLFG),
illustrated in Fig. 1, consists of a leader node with
and n follower
membership function
nodes ( ) with membership functions
, where the leader node passes his
opinion to each of the n follower nodes and the n
follower nodes are connected among themselves in the
bounded confidence fashion. Specifically, the leader's opinion
and its uncertainty are not influenced by the n
followers, and the opinions and their uncertainties
of the n followers are evolving according to the following
dynamic equations:
where is given in (10) with , and the
uncertainty input is chosen either with the local
reference scheme (11), or with the leader reference scheme:
We see from (13) that the opinion of follower i is updated
as the average of the neighbor's opinions
plus
the leader's opinion . For the uncertainty of follower i,
we see from (14) that it is updated as the average of the
neighbor's uncertainties
plus
the
uncertainty input which takes either the local
reference scheme (11) or the leader reference scheme (15). In
the local reference scheme, agent i views the average of his
neighbor's opinions as the reference, so the closer his opinion is
22()()ennxxtt2323()()exxtt2222()()exxtt2121()()exxtt22()()eaaxxttFollowersLeader()axt()axt()axt()axt
4
Fig. 2: A simulation run of the basic leader-follower group with local
reference scheme, where the top and bottom sub-figures plot the
opinions and the uncertainties of the n=156 followers,
respectively; the leader's opinion .
to this average, the less uncertainty he has. In the leader
reference scheme, however, agent i views the leader's opinion
as the reference, so the closer his opinion is to the leader's
opinion , the less uncertainty he has.
To get a feel of the dynamics of the opinions and their
uncertainties of the agents in the basic leader-follower group,
let's see an example.
Example 1: Consider the basic leader-follower group of Fig.
1 with followers. With , , the
leader's opinion and the initial ( )
uniformly distributed over the interval [5,25] (
) and their uncertainties for all
, Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 show the simulation runs of the
dynamic model with local reference scheme (11) and leader
reference scheme (15), respectively, where the top sub-figures
of Figs. 2 and 3 plot the opinions of the
followers and the bottom sub-figures plot the uncertainties
.
We see from Figs. 2 and 3 that for both the local and leader
reference schemes, the opinions of all the followers
converge to the leader's opinion , but the speed of
convergence is slow. In the following theorem, we prove that
convergence to the leader's opinion is indeed guaranteed, but
the speed of convergence is greatly influenced by the number of
followers in the group.
Theorem 1: Consider the basic leader-follower dynamics of
(13), (14) and (10) with local reference scheme (11) or leader
reference scheme (15), and suppose the leader's opinion
is a constant. Starting from arbitrary initial
opinions and uncertainties ,
we have:
Fig. 3: A simulation run of the basic leader-follower group with leader
reference scheme, where the top and bottom sub-figures plot the
opinions and the uncertainties of the n=156 followers,
respectively; the leader's opinion .
(a) the followers converge to a consensus in finite time, i.e.,
there exists such that and for all
and all ;
(b) the opinion consensus converges to the leader's
opinion according to
where ;
(c) for local reference scheme (11), the uncertainty
consensus (a constant) for all ;
(d) for leader reference scheme (15), the uncertainty
consensus is changing according to
for , from which we get
.
The proof of Theorem 1 is given in the Appendix.
From (16) in Theorem 1 we see that the opinion consensus
converges to the leader's opinion with the factor
,
i.e., the error is reduced by
each time step, so in
k time steps the error is reduced by
which gives
With (reduce to error to 1%), Fig. 4 plots the k as
function of n, from which we see that the steps needed to reduce
the error increases about linearly with the number of followers
020406080100120140160510152025Opinions of the n=156 followers with local reference scheme; the leader opinion xa=10topinions0204060801001201401600.99511.0051.011.0151.021.0251.031.035Uncertainties of the n=156 followers with local reference schemetuncertainties020406080100120140160510152025Opinions of the n=156 followers with leader reference scheme; the leader opinion xa=10topinions02040608010012014016011.522.533.544.5Uncertainties of the n=156 followers with leader reference schemetuncertainties
5
, Figs. 7 and 8 show the
all their uncertainties
simulation runs of the dynamic model with local reference
scheme (11) and leader reference scheme (15), respectively,
where the top sub-figures of Figs. 7 and 8 plot the opinions
of the agents in Levels 1 and 2 and the bottom
sub-figures plot the corresponding uncertainties
.
Similarly, in the 4-level TD-HFON (right in Fig. 6), Level-1
consists of 25 groups with 5 agents in each group, Level-2
consists of 5 groups with 5 agents in each group and these 25
agents are the leaders of the 25 groups in Level-1, Level-3
consists of a single group of 5 agents who are the leaders of the
5 groups in Level-2, and Level-4 is the top leader who is the
leader of the 5-agent group in Level-3. With ,
, the top leader's opinion and the initial
(
opinions of the 5 agents in a group
)
uniformly distributed over the interval [5,25] (
) and all their uncertainties
,
Figs. 9 and 10 show the simulation runs of the dynamic model
with local reference scheme (11) and leader reference scheme
(15), respectively, where the top sub-figures of Figs. 9 and 10
of the agents in Levels 1, 2
plot the opinions
and 3 and the bottom sub-figures plot the corresponding
uncertainties
.
Comparing Fig. 2 and 3 with Figs. 7-10, we have the
following observations:
(a) The opinions
of all the agents converge to the
the agents are organized
leader's opinion no matter
hierarchically in small groups or in one large group.
(b) The speed of convergence to the leader's opinion is
greatly improved when the agents are organized hierarchically
in small groups; the more the levels or the smaller the groups,
the faster the convergence will be (comparing the top
sub-figures of Figs. 2, 7 and 9 for the local reference scheme,
and the top sub-figures of Figs. 3, 8 and 10 for the leader
reference scheme).
(c) Although the opinions
of all the agents converge to
in general
the leader's opinion, their uncertainties
converge to different values for agents in different groups,
reflecting the different processes that the agents in different
groups were experiencing during the convergence to the
leader's opinion.
Indeed, we will prove in the following theorem that the
observations above are true in general.
Fig. 4: Plot of (18), the steps k needed to reduce the error to
1% as function of number of followers n in group.
in the group, meaning that larger groups are more difficult to
converge to the leader's opinion than smaller groups.
The conclusion from (18) and Fig. 4 is that to speed up the
convergence of the followers' opinions to the leader's opinion,
reducing the size of the group is crucial. Organizing the
followers hierarchically in smaller groups, as we will do next
through the top-down hierarchical fuzzy opinion networks, is
an efficient way to speed up the convergence.
We now introduce the top-down hierarchical fuzzy opinion
networks.
Definition 4: A top-down hierarchical fuzzy opinion
network (TD-HFON), illustrated in Fig. 5, is constructed from a
number of basic leader-follower groups of Fig. 1 in a
in Level l is a follower
multi-layer structure, where an agent
to an agent in Level l+1 and is a leader to some agents in Level
, l is the level index ( ), i is
l-1. In the notation
the group index ( ), j is the index in the group
is a Gaussian fuzzy set with center
(
and standard deviation
To see how fast the hierarchical structure can speed up the
convergence to the leader's opinion, we reorganize the n=156
followers in Example 1 into a 3-level and a 4-level TD-HFONs
in the following example.
), and
.
Example 2: Consider the 3-level and 4-level TD-HFONs in
Fig. 6. In the 3-level TD-HFON (left in Fig. 6), Level-1 consists
of 12 groups with 12 agents in each group, Level-2 consists of a
single group of 12 agents with each agent being the leader of
one the 12 groups in Level-1, and Level-3 is the top leader who
is the leader of the 12-agent group in Level-2. With ,
, the top leader's opinion and the initial
(
opinions of the 12 agents in a group
) uniformly distributed over
the interval [5,25] (
) and
02040608010012014016018020001002003004005006007008009001000Steps needed to reduce error to 1% as function of follower numbernumber of followers n in a groupsteps needed to reduce the error to 1%
6
Fig. 5:The top-down hierarchical fuzzy opinion networks.
Fig. 6: Reorganizing the agents in Example 1 into a 3-level TD-HFON with 12 followers in each group (left) and a 4-level TD-HFON with
5 followers in each group (right).
11XlLevel 1Level L (Top Leader)Level 3Level 23Xlln2Xlln1Xlln22Xl21Xl13Xl12XlLevel lLevel l+1Level L-122()()eaaxxtt()axt()axt()axt()axt11()lxt3()llnxt2()llnxt1()llnxt22()lxt21()lxt13()lxt12()lxt11XL11XLLn13XL12XL11()Lxt11()LLnxt12()Lxt13()Lxt111Xl112Xl111()lxt112()lxt111()lxt112()lxtLevel 1Level 3Level 212 agents12 agents12 agents12 agents5 agents5 agents5 agents5 agents5 agents5 agents25 agents in 5 groups5 agentsLevel 4156 agents in a 3-level TD-HFON with 12 followers each group155 agents in a 4-level TD-HFON with 5 followers each group
7
Fig. 7: The opinions (top) and their uncertainties (bottom) of the
n=156 agents in the 3-level TD-HFON of Fig. 6 with local reference
scheme.
Fig. 9: The opinions (top) and their uncertainties (bottom) of the
n=155 agents in the 4-level TD-HFON of Fig. 6 with local reference
scheme.
Fig. 8: The opinions (top) and their uncertainties (bottom) of the
n=156 agents in the 3-level TD-HFON of Fig. 6 with leader reference
scheme.
Fig. 10: The opinions (top) and their uncertainties (bottom) of the
n=155 agents in the 4-level TD-HFON of Fig. 6 with leader reference
scheme.
Theorem 2: Consider the general TD-HFON in Fig. 5 with
dynamics of all the groups following (13), (14) and (10) with
local reference scheme (11) or leader reference scheme (15),
and suppose the top leader's opinion is a constant.
and
Starting from arbitrary
uncertainties
, we have:
initial opinions
(a) the opinions
opinion ;
of all the agents (
) converge to the leader's
(b) the uncertainties
of the followers in the same
leader-follower group converge to a constant, but different
groups in general converge to different values.
The proof of Theorem 2 is given in the Appendix.
We now move to the next section to study the bottom-up
hierarchical fuzzy opinion networks.
III. BOTTOM-UP HIERARCHICAL FUZZY OPINION NETWORKS
As we discussed in the Introduction that although social
hierarchy is prevalent throughout culture and time, hierarchy is
against some of the best values of humanity -- hierarchy is
undemocratic, unequal, unfair, and unjust. So, if we have to
choose hierarchy to govern a large population such as a nation,
we should have some counter measures to prevent those in the
higher levels to abuse their power. Election by the general
public is the way of choice of most countries in the world to
select their top leaders. In the election scenario, the opinions of
the large population are initially very diversified and many
small leaders are emerging to represent different interest groups,
then these small leaders have to compromise with each other to
select
this process continues
level-by-level in a bottom-up fashion until some consensuses
are reached. We now propose the bottom-up hierarchical fuzzy
opinion networks to model such processes.
the middle-level
leaders,
0102030405060708090100510152025Opinions of the n=156 agents in 3-level TD-HFON with local reference scheme; the leader opinion xa=10topinions010203040506070809010011.0051.011.0151.021.025Uncertainties of the n=156 agents in 3-level TD-HFON with local reference schemetuncertainties0102030405060708090100510152025Opinions of the n=156 agents in 3-level TD-HFON with leader reference scheme; the leader opinion xa=10topinions010203040506070809010011.11.21.31.41.51.61.71.8Uncertainties of the n=156 agents in 3-level TD-HFON with leader reference schemetuncertainties0102030405060708090100510152025Opinions of the n=155 agents in 4-level TD-HFON with local reference scheme; the leader opinion xa=10topinions010203040506070809010011.051.11.15Uncertainties of the n=155 agents in 4-level TD-HFON with local reference schemetuncertainties0102030405060708090100510152025Opinions of the n=155 agents in 4-level TD-HFON with leader reference scheme; the leader opinion xa=10topinions010203040506070809010011.11.21.31.41.5Uncertainties of the n=155 agents in 4-level TD-HFON with leader reference schemetuncertainties
8
Fig. 11:The bottom-up hierarchical fuzzy opinion networks.
Definition 5: A bottom-up hierarchical fuzzy opinion
network (BU-HFON), illustrated in Fig. 11, is the layered
connection of a number of bounded confidence fuzzy opinion
networks (BCFON) with local reference scheme (Definition 2),
where the converged opinions of a lower level BCFON are
passed to the upper level BCFON as the initial opinions.
We now simulate the BU-HFON to see how the initial fuzzy
opinions are agglomerated layer-by-layer in some typical
situations.
Example 3: Consider a 5-level BU-HFON of Fig. 11 (L=5)
with agents in Level 1 whose initial opinions
(i=1,2, …, n) are randomly
and initial uncertainties
distributed over the intervals [5,25] and (0,1), respectively. The
five BCFONs in the five levels are evolving according to the
dynamic equations (7)-(11), where for Level 1
BCFON, for Level 2 BCFON, for Level 3
BCFON, for Level 4 BCFON and for
Level 5 BCFON. The meaning of these 's are explained as
follows.
For the Level 1 agents (the general public), we choose a large
(=0.95) because the general public has no obligation to reach
some consensuses so that they can show little sign of
compromise (a large means talking only to those whose
opinions are very close to each other). For the Level 2 agents
(the local representatives of the general public), they have to
show some sign of compromise in order for the process to
continue, so we choose a little smaller (=0.7) to model the
situation. Then, the Level 3 agents must be even more
compromising in order to reach some rough consensuses, so we
choose a even smaller (=0.45) for these middle level agents.
This process continues with smaller and smaller 's for the
upper level agents ( for Level 4 and for
Level 5) because the higher the level they are in, the more
pressure they have to reach the final consensus (this is why
many elected agents fall to realize their election promises when
they are in the office, because they have to consider many
different concerns when they are in the higher levels).
With b=0.5 for all the BCFONs and each BCFON evolving
40 time steps, i.e., the Level 1 BCFON is operating from t=0 to
t=40, then followed by the Level 2 BCFON which is operating
from t=41 to t=80 with the converged fuzzy opinions of the
Level 1 BCFON as the initial values, this process continues
with the Level 3 BCFON operating from t=81 to t=120, the
Level 4 BCFON operating from t=121 to t=160 and the Level 5
BCFON operating from t=160, Fig. 12 shows a simulation run
in a typical situation, where the top and bottom sub-figures in
Level 1Level 211X0（）1X0n（）1-1X0n（）1-2X0n（）15X0（）14X0（）13X0（）12X0（）BCFON121X0（）24X0（）23X0（）22X0（）22X0n（）22-1X0n（）31X0（）33X0（）32X0（）33X0n（）33-1X0n（）Initial fuzzy opinionsConverged fuzzy opinions from Level 1Converged fuzzy opinions from Level 2BCFON2Level LL1X0（）2X0L（）X0LLn（）1XmXConverged fuzzy opinions from Level L-1Final fuzzy opinionsBCFONL
9
Fig. 12: The opinions (top) of the agents in different levels and their
uncertainties (bottom).
Fig. 14: The opinions (top) of the agents in different levels and their
uncertainties (bottom).
Fig. 13: The opinions (top) of the agents in different levels and their
uncertainties (bottom).
Fig. 15: The opinions (top) of the agents in different levels and their
uncertainties (bottom).
Fig. 12 show the opinions ( of (7)) of the agents and their
uncertainties ( of (8)), respectively. We see from top
sub-figure of Fig. 12 that the Level 1 general public ( )
converge to a large number of opinions due to the large
(=0.95), then with a smaller (=0.7) the Level 2 agents
converge to about 17 opinions, which are further combined by
the Level 3 agents (with ) into 11 opinions, and
continuing with the Level 4 agents reach 5 opinions,
finally, the top level agents have to adopt a very small
to reach a single consensus. The bottom sub-figure
of Fig. 12 shows that the uncertainties are getting larger and
larger for the higher level agents, reflecting the fact that the
higher level agents must demonstrate more compromises which
result in more uncertainties about their decisions.
Figs. 13-15 show the simulation runs in other typical
situations, where a consensus is reached in Fig. 13, but in the
situations of Figs. 14 and 15, a consensus cannot be reached
after five rounds of negotiations. Comparing the bottom
sub-figures of Figs. 12-15 we see that the uncertainties of the
Level 5 agents are high if they converge to a single consensus
(Figs. 12 and 13), but if they converge to two consensuses (Fig.
14), their uncertainties are much lower, and if they are allowed
to keep three different opinions (Fig. 15), their uncertainties are
even lower. This demonstrates that the uncertainty in our
HFON model provides a good measure for the psychological
pressures of the agents in different levels.
020406080100120140160180200510152025Opinions of the agents in different levels of the BU-HFONtopinions0204060801001201401601802000123456Uncertainties of the agents in different levels of the BU-HFONtuncertaintiesLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5d=0.95d=0.7d=0.45d=0.2d=0.05020406080100120140160180200510152025Opinions of the agents in different levels of the BU-HFONtopinions0204060801001201401601802000123456Uncertainties of the agents in different levels of the BU-HFONtuncertaintiesLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5d=0.95d=0.7d=0.45d=0.2d=0.05020406080100120140160180200510152025Opinions of the agents in different levels of the BU-HFONtopinions0204060801001201401601802000123456Uncertainties of the agents in different levels of the BU-HFONtuncertaintiesLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5d=0.95d=0.7d=0.45d=0.2d=0.05020406080100120140160180200510152025Opinions of the agents in different levels of the BU-HFONtopinions0204060801001201401601802000123456Uncertainties of the agents in different levels of the BU-HFONtuncertaintiesLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5d=0.95d=0.7d=0.45d=0.2d=0.05
10
IV. CONCLUDING REMARKS
ii) there is such that the lowest positive entry of
in
The top-down and bottom-up hierarchical fuzzy opinion
networks (HFON) developed
this paper provide a
mathematical framework to model the dynamical propagation
and formation of opinions and their uncertainties through the
hierarchical structures. For the top-down HFON, we prove that
the opinions of all followers throughout the hierarchy converge
to the top leader's opinion, but the uncertainties of the followers
in different groups are different, which means that although all
the followers have to follow the top leader's opinion, their
psychological acceptance (the uncertainty) for the top leader's
opinion is different. We show that the iterations needed to
reduce the tracking error between the followers and leader's
opinions by a certain percentage is proportional to the number
of followers in the group, this means that organizing the
followers hierarchically can greatly improve the efficiency; for
example, if we organize 155 followers in a 4-level top-down
HFON with five followers in each leader-follower group, then
the speed of convergence to the top leader's opinion is
approximately
times faster than organizing the 155
followers in a single flat group. For the bottom-up HFON, we
show that the psychological pressure (the uncertainty) of the
agents in the higher levels is greater than those in the lower
levels because the higher level agents have to make more
compromises (tougher decisions), also we show that the
uncertainties are lower if the higher level agents are allowed to
keep different opinions.
In the future research, we will apply the HFON models to
some real organizations and real election scenarios.
APPENDIX
Proof of Theorem 1: (a) Let
and
with
for , ,
for and
Then, with the leader's opinion being a constant,
the opinion dynamic equation (13) can be rewritten in the
matrix form:
We need the follow Lemma from [27] to continue our proof.
Lemma: If the row-stochastic matrix in (A4) satisfies
the following three conditions:
i) the diagonal of is positive, i.e., for
,
is greater than , and
iii) any two nonempty saturated sets for have a
intersection, where is
nonempty
saturated for if and implies ,
then a consensus is reached for in finite time.
We now show that the of (A1)-(A3) satisfies the three
conditions in the Lemma. Since according to the
definition of in (10), we have
for
; with , condition i) in the
Lemma is satisfied. Since , it follows that any
positive
, hence condition ii) of
the Lemma is satisfied. To check condition iii), notice from (A1)
that
for , which implies
that any two nonempty saturated sets for
must contain the element , hence condition iii) of
the Lemma is satisfied. Consequently, according to the Lemma,
the followers converge to a consensus in
finite time, i.e., there exists such that for all
and all .
To prove for and , notice
that for , for the local reference scheme
(11), and for the leader reference
scheme (15). Substituting these into the dynamic
equation (14) of , we have for that
for the local reference scheme (11), and
for the leader reference scheme (15). Since the right hand sides
of both (A5) and (A6) are independent of , we have in both
cases that . This completes the proof of (a) of
Theorem 1.
(b) Since for all when , we
have from (13) that
or
for , and (16) follows from (A8).
(c) The conclusion follows from (A5).
(d) Substituting into (A6), we have
for , and (17) follows from (A9) and (16).
Proof of Theorem 2:
leader-follower group in the HFON and let
(a) Consider an arbitrary
be the group
11
) be the followers'
(
leader's opinion and
followers are connected to each other
opinions. Since all the
through the group leader (the group leader is a common
element in any saturated set), we have from the Lemma that the
followers converge to a consensus in finite steps, i.e., there
when , so from
exists such that
(13) we have
or
for . If
converges to , then since
we
converges to , i.e., if the group
have from (A11) that
leader's opinion converges to the top leader's opinion , then
consensus of the followers in the group also converges to .
Since the top leader and the agents in Level L-1 form a basic
leader-follower group, we have from Theorem 1 that the
opinions of the agents in Level L-1 converge to the top leader's
opinion . Hence, by induction, we have that the opinions of
all the agents converge to the top leader's opinion .
(
(b) For the agents in the same group (say group in Level ),
we can use the same method as in the proof of Theorem 1 to
) reach a
show that their uncertainties
in finite time which converges to the constant
consensus
for the local reference scheme or to the constant
leader
reference scheme. Since these converged values are group
dependent, they are in general different for different groups.
the
for
REFERENCES
[1] Diefenbach, T., Hierarchy and Organisation: Toward a General
Theory of Hierarchical Social Systems, Routledge, New York,
2013.
[2] Magee, J.C. and A.D. Galinsky, "Social hierarchy: The
self-reinforcing nature of power and status," Academy of
Management Annals, vol. 2, no. 1, 2008.
[3] Acemoglu, D. and J.A. Robinson, Economic Origins of
Dictatorship and Democracy, Cambridge University Press, NY,
2006.
[4] Mintzberg, H., The Structuring of Organizations: A Synthesis of
the Research, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1979.
[5] Leavitt, H. J., Top Down: Why Hierarchies Are Here to Stay and
How to Manage Them More Effectively, Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School Press, 2005.
[6] Bearman, P.S. and P. Parigi, "Cloning headless frogs and other
important matters: Conversion topics and network structure,"
Social Forces 83: 535-557, 2004.
[7] Sidanius, J., and F. Pratto, Social Dominance: An Intergroup
Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression, New York:
Cambridge University Press, 1999.
[8] Baron, J. N. and J. Pfeffer, "The social psychology of
organizations and inequality," Social Psychology Quarterly, vol.
57, no.3, pp: 190-209, 1994.
[9] Mason, W.A., F.R. Conrey and E.R. Smith, "Situating social
influence processes: Dynamic, multidirectional flows of influence
within social networks," Personality and Social Psychology
Review 11(3): 279-300, 2007.
[10] Bunderson, J.S., G.S. van der Vegt, Y. Cantimur and F. Rink,
"Different views of hierarchy and why they matter: Hierarchy as
inequality or as cascading influence," Academy of Management
Journal, vol. 59, no. 4, 2016.
[11] Athey, S., E. Calvano and S. Jha, "A theory of community
formation and social hierarchy," https://ssrn.com/abstract
=2823777, 2016.
[12] Marx, K. and F. Engels, The German ideology (C. J. Arthur,
Ed.), New York: International Publishers, 1970 (Originally
published 1846)
[13] Myers, D.G., Social Psychology (9th Edition), McGraw-Hill
Education (Asia), 2008.
[14] Friedkin, N.E., "The problem of social control and coordination
of complex systems in sociology: A look at the community
cleavage problem," IEEE Control Systems Magazine 35(3):
40-51, 2015.
[15] Acemoglu, D. and A. Ozdaglar, "Opinion dynamics and learning
in social networks," Dynamic Games and Applications 1.1: 3-49,
2011.
[16] Jackson, M.O., Social and Economic Networks, Princeton
University Press, 2008.
[17] Lorenz, J., "Continuous opinion dynamics under bounded
confidence: A survey," International Journal of Modern Physics
C 18(12): 1819 -- 1838, 2007.
[18] Sornette, D., "Physics and financial economics (1776-2014):
Puzzles, Ising and agent-based models," Rep. Prog. Phys. 77,
2014.
[19] Hegselmann, R. and U. Krause, "Opinion dynamics and
bounded confidence: Models, analysis, and simulations," Journal
of Artificial Societies and Social Simulations 5(3):
http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/5/3/2.html, 2002.
[20] Proskurnikov, A.V. and R. Tempo, "A tutorial on modeling and
analysis of dynamic social networks. Part II," Annual Reviews in
Control, vol. 45, pp. 166-190, 2018.
[21] Chamley, C., A. Scaglione, and L. Li, "Models for the diffusion
of beliefs in social networks: An overview," Signal Processing
Magazine 30(3): 16-29, 2013.
[22] Wang, L.X. and J.M. Mendel, "Fuzzy opinion networks: A
mathematical framework for the evolution of opinions and their
uncertainties across social networks," IEEE Trans. on Fuzzy
Systems, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 880-905, 2016.
[23] DeGroot, M.H., "Reaching a consensus," Journal of the
American Statistical Association 69: 118-121, 1974.
[24] Hegselmann, R. and U. Krause, "Opinion dynamics under the
influence of radical groups, charismatic leaders, and other
constant signals: A simple unifying model," Networks and
Heterogeneous Media 10(3): 477-509, 2015.
12
[25] Kahneman,D., Thinking: Fast and Slow, Farrar, Straus, New
York, 2011.
[26] Wang, L.X., "Modeling stock price dynamics with fuzzy opinion
networks," IEEE Trans. on Fuzzy Systems, vol. 25, no. 2, pp.
277-301, 2017.
[27] Krause, U., Positive Dynamical Systems in Discrete Time：
Theory, Models, and Applications, De Gruyter, Berlin, 2015.
|
1608.04511 | 1 | 1608 | 2016-08-16T08:07:41 | AntPaP: Patrolling and Fair Partitioning of Graphs by A(ge)nts Leaving Pheromone Traces | [
"cs.MA"
] | A team of identical and oblivious ant-like agents - a(ge)nts - leaving pheromone traces, are programmed to jointly patrol an area modeled as a graph. They perform this task using simple local interactions, while also achieving the important byproduct of partitioning the graph into roughly equal-sized disjoint sub-graphs. Each a(ge)nt begins to operate at an arbitrary initial location, and throughout its work does not acquire any information on either the shape or size of the graph, or the number or whereabouts of other a(ge)nts. Graph partitioning occurs spontaneously, as each of the a(ge)nts patrols and expands its own pheromone-marked sub-graph, or region. This graph partitioning algorithm is inspired by molecules hitting the borders of air filled elastic balloons: an a(ge)nt that hits a border edge from the interior of its region more frequently than an external a(ge)nt hits the same edge from an adjacent vertex in the neighboring region, may conquer that adjacent vertex, expanding its region at the expense of the neighbor. Since the rule of patrolling a region ensures that each vertex is visited with a frequency inversely proportional to the size of the region, in terms of vertex count, a smaller region will effectively exert higher "pressure" at its borders, and conquer adjacent vertices from a larger region, thereby increasing the smaller region and shrinking the larger. The algorithm, therefore, tends to equalize the sizes of the regions patrolled, resembling a set of perfectly elastic physical balloons, confined to a closed volume and filled with an equal amount of air. The pheromone based local interactions of agents eventually cause the system to evolve into a partition that is close to balanced rather quickly, and if the graph and the number of a(ge)nts remain unchanged, it is guaranteed that the system settles into a stable and balanced partition. | cs.MA | cs |
AntPaP: Patrolling and Fair Partitioning of
Graphs by A(ge)nts Leaving Pheromone Traces
Gidi Elazar and Alfred M. Bruckstein
Multi Agent Robotic Systems (MARS) Lab
Technion Autonomous Systems Program (TASP)
Center for Intelligent Systems (CIS)
Department of Computer Science
Technion, Haifa 32000, Israel
Abstract. A team of identical and oblivious ant-like agents -- a(ge)nts
-- leaving pheromone traces, are programmed to jointly patrol an area
modeled as a graph. They perform this task using simple local interac-
tions, while also achieving the important byproduct of partitioning the
graph into roughly equal-sized disjoint sub-graphs. Each a(ge)nt begins
to operate at an arbitrary initial location, and throughout its work does
not acquire any information on either the shape or size of the graph,
or the number or whereabouts of other a(ge)nts. Graph partitioning oc-
curs spontaneously, as each of the a(ge)nts patrols and expands its own
pheromone-marked sub-graph, or region. This graph partitioning algo-
rithm is inspired by molecules hitting the borders of air filled elastic
balloons: an a(ge)nt that hits a border edge from the interior of its re-
gion more frequently than an external a(ge)nt hits the same edge from
an adjacent vertex in the neighboring region, may conquer that adja-
cent vertex, expanding its region at the expense of the neighbor. Since
the rule of patrolling a region ensures that each vertex is visited with
a frequency inversely proportional to the size of the region, in terms of
vertex count, a smaller region will effectively exert higher "pressure" at
its borders, and conquer adjacent vertices from a larger region, thereby
increasing the smaller region and shrinking the larger. The algorithm,
therefore, tends to equalize the sizes of the regions patrolled, resembling
a set of perfectly elastic physical balloons, confined to a closed volume
and filled with an equal amount of air. The pheromone based local inter-
actions of agents eventually cause the system to evolve into a partition
that is close to balanced rather quickly, and if the graph and the number
of a(ge)nts remain unchanged, it is guaranteed that the system settles
into a stable and balanced partition.
1
Introduction
Patrolling is continuously traveling through an environment in order
to supervise or guard it. Although mostly used to refer to humans
guarding an area, the term patrolling is also used to describe sur-
veying through a digital, virtual environment. Consider, for example,
the task of repeatedly reading web pages from the world-wide-web
in order to keep an updated database representing the links between
pages, possibly for the purpose of later retrieval of pages in an a
accurate and prompt manner. These problems exhibit similarities,
in the sense that they can be represented as traveling through the
vertices of a graph. But there are also differences: a physical area is
usually fixed in size, whereas the virtual area is, in general, prone
to constant change. The number of human guards is, generally, fixed
for the particular area being patrolled, while the number of soft-
2
ware agents or "bots" performing a large scale patrolling task may
be subject to change as well.
Partitioning a graph into similar sized components is an impor-
tant and difficult task in many areas of science and engineering. To
name few examples, we can mention the partitioning of a netlist of
an electronic VLSI design [5], the need for clustering in data mining
[4], and the design of systems that balance the load on computer
resources in a networked environment [6].
The general graph partition problem is loosely defined as dividing
a graph into disjoint, connected components, such that the compo-
nents are similar to each other in some sense. Practical considera-
tions impose additional constrains. For example, an important prob-
lem, known as the graph k-cut, requires a partition where the sum of
the weights of vertices belonging to each component is more or less
equal, and additionally, the number and/or the sum of weights of
edges that connect disjoint components is minimized [7]. The k-cut
problem can model the distribution of tasks between computers on
a network, while minimizing communication requirements between
them.
In this work we define a patrolling strategy that fairly divides
the work of patrolling the environment among several a(ge)nts by
partitioning it into regions of more or less the same size. We have
no constraints on edges connecting different components, but we im-
3
pose strict restrictions on our patrolling agents in search for a heuris-
tic multi-agent graph partitioning algorithm that may continuously
run in the background of a host application. We are interested in
programming the same behavior for each individual ant-like agent,
which should be very simple in terms of resources, hardware or com-
munications. Furthermore the agents have no id's, hence are part of
a team of units that are anonymous and indistinguishable to each
other. Our a(ge)nts should have very little knowledge about the sys-
tem or environment they operate in, have no awareness on the size or
shape of the graph, no internal memory to accumulate information,
nor a sense of the number and locations of other agents active in the
system. These limitations mean that such a multi agent process has
inherent scalability; the environment might be large, complex, and
subject to changes, in terms of vertices, edges and even the num-
ber of agents, and our simple agents should still be able to patrol
it, while also evolving towards, and ultimately finding balanced par-
titions, if such partitions exist. To simplify the discussion, we will
think of a graph to be partitioned as a planar area, and the task at
hand will be to partition the area into regions of more or less the
same size. The area is modeled as a grid, where each vertex is a unit
area, thus a balanced partition should have components of roughly
the same number of vertices. In our scheme, agents are each given
the task to patrol and define a region of their own, and have the
4
ability to expand their region via conquests. Like ants, our agents
leave pheromone marks on their paths. The marks decay with time
and are subsequently used as cues by all the agents to make decisions
about their patrolling route and about the possibility to expand their
region. By assumption, each agent operates locally, thus it can sense
levels of pheromones or leave pheromone marks on the vertex it is
located, on its edges and on adjacent vertices.
While patrolling its region, an agent visits a vertex and reads
the intensity of pheromone marks that remain from previous visits.
It then uses the reading, and the known rate of pheromone decay,
to calculate the vertex's idle-time -- the time that passed since the
previous visit. Using the decaying pheromone mark we can chose a
patrolling rule according to which the agents visit the vertices of
their region in repetitive cycles, each vertex being marked with a
pheromone once on each cycle. The patrolling process hence ensures
that the idle-time measured by agents on visits to their region's
vertices is the same, effectively encoding their region's cover time --
the time that takes for an a(ge)nt to complete a full patrolling cycle
-- and therefore it can also be used to estimate the region's size: the
shorter the cover time, the smaller the region.
We assume that each agent detects pheromones without being
able to distinguish between them, except for recognizing its own
pheromone. When an a(ge)nt hits a border edge -- an edge that
5
connects its region with one that is patrolled by another agent - it
can use the neighbor's idle-time (encoded in its pheromone marks)
to calculate the size of the neighboring region, and thereby decide
whether to try to conquer the vertex "on the other side of the border".
This causes an effect that mimics pressure equalization between gas-
filled balloons: at two vertices on opposing ends of a border edge,
the agent that hits the border more frequently is the agent with
a shorter cover time (patrolling the smaller region) hence it may
attempt a conquest.
We define that in a balanced partition, any pair of neighboring
regions have a size difference of at most one vertex. This means
that for a graph G and k agents, our partitioning heuristics ensures
a worst case difference of k − 1 vertices between the largest and
smallest of the regions, once a balanced partition is reached. For ex-
ample in a graph of 1 million vertices (e.g. database entries, each
representing a web page) and 10 agents (network bots patrolling the
pages), this difference is truly negligible. Additionally, the length
of the patrolling path is predetermined, and is proportional to the
size of the region being patrolled, therefore when a balanced parti-
tion is reached, the algorithm guarantees that the idleness of any of
the vertices of the graph is bounded by a number of steps equal to
− 1, about twice the size of the largest possi-
+ (k − 1)
2
(cid:18)(cid:22)G
(cid:23)
k
(cid:19)
6
ble region (Note that Gdenotes the number of vertices in the graph
G).
In Figure 1 one can see a series of snapshots depicting 8 patrolling
agents working to partition a 50x50 grid. The first snapshot shows
an early phase of the joint patrolling algorithm, where agents already
captured some of the vertices around their initial random locations,
in the second, the area is almost covered and most of the vertices of
the graph are being patrolled, the third exhibits a phase when all the
area is covered but the regions are not balanced, and finally, the last
snapshot shows a balanced partition that the system evolved into.
This Figure exhibits typical stages in the evolution of such a sys-
tem, for which balanced partitions exist, and the environment graph
remains stationary for a time long enough for agents to find one of
them. Often, the agents will relatively quickly find a partition that
covers the graph, and is close to being balanced. Then, on station-
ary graphs, they may spend a rather long time to reach a perfectly
balanced partition. In a time varying environment the system will
continuously adapt to the changing conditions.
2 Related Work
The concept of partitioning a graph with a(ge)nts patrolling a region
and exerting pressure on neighboring regions was first presented by
Elor and Bruckstein in [1]. They proposed a patrol algorithm named
7
Fig. 1. Evolution of a 50x50 Grid Graph Partitioning by 8 A(ge)nts
BDFS -- Balloon DFS -- and this work is a follow up research on
this problem. According to BDFS, an agent patroling a smaller re-
gion conquers vertices from a neighboring larger region. To achieve
the goal of patrolling an area, BDFS uses a variation of Multi-Level
Depth-First-Search (MLDFS), an algorithm presented by Wagner,
Lindenbaum and Bruckstein in [2]. The task of the MLDFS too, was
to distribute the work of covering "tiles on a floor" among several
8
identical agents. The floor-plan mapping of the tiles is unknown and
may even be changing, an allegory for moving furniture around while
agents are busy cleaning the floor. MLDFS implements a generaliza-
tion on DFS: agents leave decaying pheromone marks on their paths
as they advance in the graph, and then use them either to move
to the vertex least recently visited or to backtrack. When none of
the choices are possible, either when the graph covering ends, or fol-
lowing to changes in the graph or loss of tracks due to noise in the
pheromone marks, agents reset, thus starting a new search. The time
of reset, named "the time where new history begins", is stored in the
agents' memory, as a search-level variable. After a reset, the cycle
repeats, hence an agent traces pheromone marks left in an earlier
cycle. The mere existence of a pheromone mark is, however, not suf-
ficient for agents to choose a path not yet taken during the current
search cycle. To select the next step, agents use the value stored in
the search-level variable as a threshold: any pheromone that was
marked on a vertex or edge prior to this time must have been the
result of marking in an earlier cycle. In MLDFS, pheromones of all
agents are the same, and agents are allowed to step on each other's
paths. For the task of partition a graph, in BDFS each agent has
its own pheromone and it performs MLDFS cycles on its "own" re-
gion of the graph, leaving its particular pheromone marks. As long
as the region is stationary, BDFS agents exactly repeat their pre-
9
vious route. If the region changes, either expands or shrinks, it will
cause BDFS to look for a new and possibly substantially different
route before settling into the next search cycle. This occurs due to a
subtlety in the way that depth-first-search defines a spanning tree,
a special type of tree called a palm tree, were each edge (v, w) not
in the spanning tree connects a vertex v with one of its ancestors,
see e.g. Tarjan [8]. The spanning tree defined during a BDFS search
cycle does not consider all edges emanating from all of the region's
vertices, simply because some of the edges connect to vertices on
neighboring regions. When BDFS conquers a vertex, it is possible
that this vertex has more than one edge connecting to the region.
All these edges will now be considered during the next search cycle,
a process that may dictate a different palm tree. We call this event
- respanning. In the algorithm we define here, named Ant Patrolling
and Partitioning, or AntPaP, we use a different generalization of
DFS that avoids respanning. Furthermore we reduce the require-
ments on the agent's capabilities. For example, our agents have no
memory, and also cannot control the levels of pheromones they leave,
the pheromone level at the time of a marking is always the same. We
further add the possibility for agents to lose a vertex if a conquest
fails, and we provide a proof of convergence to balanced partitions,
while experimentally observing much faster evolution towards such
partitions.
10
The subject of multi-agent patrolling has been extensively stud-
ied. Lauri and Charpillet [12] also use an "ants paradigm", where a
method based on Ant Colony Optimization (ACO), introduced by
Dorigo, Maniezzo, and Colorni in [13]. ACO provides multi-agent
solutions for various problems, for example the Traveling Salesman
Problem (TSP) in complete and weighted graphs by a so-called ant-
cycle algorithm. Ants move to the next vertex according to a prob-
ability that is biased by two parameters: the closest neighbor vertex
(corresponding to the lowest edge weight) and the level of pheromone
on the edge. During their search, ants record their path to avoid vis-
iting the same vertex twice. Since at each step all ants traverse one
edge to a neighboring vertex, all ants complete their travel at the
same time. Thereafter each ant leaves pheromone marks on the en-
tire path it took. Due to the probability bias, shorter edges have
a higher probability to be traversed, thus it is probable that mul-
tiple ants traversed them, hence they tend to accumulate stronger
pheromone levels. The cycles repeat, and with each cycle the biasing
gets stronger towards the shortest path. The process ends after a
a-priori given number of cycles complete or when the ants all agree
on the shortest path. For the patrolling problem, Lauri et. al. [12]
used this method to find multiple paths, one for each agent, before
the agents begin their joint work. Their algorithm employs multiple
colonies of ants where each agent is assigned one ant on each colony.
11
Ants in a colony cooperate (exchange information regarding their
choices) to divide the exploration into disjoint paths , leading the
agents to eventually cooperate in the patrolling task. Unlike for the
TSP, the environment graph is not required to be complete, and ants
are allowed to visit a vertex more than once when searching for a
patrolling route.
Chevaleyre, Yann, Sempe, and Ramalho [11] compared cyclic pa-
trolling strategies, in which agents tend to follow each other, to par-
titioning strategies, in which agents patrol each its own region. By
applying several algorithms on several graphs examples, they found
that the choice of strategy should be based on the shape of the graph.
The partitioning based strategy gets better results on "graphs having
'long corridors' connecting sub-graphs", i.e. if there are high weight
edges that are slow to traverse, it is better not traverse them at all
by allocating them to connect disjoint partitions.
There is substantial research on heuristics for partitioning of a
graph, and some of it even related to multi-agent scenarios. Inspired
by ants, Comellas and Sapena [10] presented yet another Ants al-
gorithm to find a k-cut solution to a graph. The system is initiated
by randomly coloring all the graph vertices in a more or less even
number of colors and positioning the agents randomly on the graph.
Then a local cost value is calculated for each of the vertices, storing
the percentage of neighbors that have the same color as its own.
12
Agents will then iteratively move to a neighboring vertex v that
has the lowest cost (i.e. with the most neighbors of a different color
than its own), and then switch colors with a random vertex u on
the graph, where the color of u is the one most suitable for v, i.e.
similar to most of v's neighbors. u is selected from from a random
list of vertices colored with the same color as u, by choosing from
this list the one with lowest cost (most neighbors colored differently
than u). Then the cost value is refreshed for both v and u. On each
iteration the number of cuts, defined as the number of edges con-
necting vertices of different colors, is calculated over all the edges
of the graph and the lowest value is stored. The choices of agent
moves are stochastic, i.e. agents have a probability p to select the
next vertex to move to by using the cost value, otherwise it selects
another neighbor vertex at random. This allows the system to es-
cape from local minima. Unlike our algorithm, agents of Comellas
and Sapena's Ants aim to find a k-cut, and while doing so do not
leave pheromones to be used as cues on vertices and edges they visit
as our agents do. Also, their agents are assumed to have the ability
to look at vertices that are anywhere in the graph and change their
values, thus their sensing is not local as in our algorithm. In Ants,
each iteration relies on a global calculation that involves access to
values on all edges of the graph, in order to measure the quality of
the partition so far determined, as well as storing the result.
13
Inspired by bee foraging, McCaffrey [9] simulates a bee colony
in order to find a k-cut graph partition. Each of the agents, in this
case called bees, is assumed to know in advance the size and shape of
the graph, as well as the number of components desired. The agent
must have an internal memory to store an array of vectors listing
the vertices of all sub-graphs of a proposed solution, as well as the
number of cuts this partition has, as a measure of its quality. In a
hive, some 10% of the bees are considered scouts, all other agents
being in one of two states, active or inactive. Emulated scouts select a
random partition of the graph. If the selection is better than what the
scout previously found, it stores it in its memory and communicates
it to other bees in the hive that are in an inactive state. Some of
those store the scout's solution in their own memory, change their
state to active and begin to search for a better partition around this
solution. If an active bee finds an improved solution it communicates
it to the bees that are left in the hive. After looking at neighboring
solutions for a long enough time, the active bee returns to the hive
and becomes inactive again. The algorithm, therefore, is constantly
searching for improvements in the quality of the partition that the
bees collectively determine.
The partitioning and patrolling multi-agent algorithms that we
have surveyed above, all assume that agents posses substantial in-
ternal memory. Some algorithms assume that the agents are able to
14
sense and even change values of vertices and/or edges in graph loca-
tions that are distant from their position in the graph, and sometimes
they can even sense and/or store a representation of the whole graph
in their memory. Patrolling algorithms may be partition based, and
then the task is divided into two stages. In the first stage the graph
is partitioned into disjoint components, and at the second stage each
of the agents patrols one of those components.
In our case, partitioning the graph, and thereby balancing the
workload among our agents, is a requirement. Our algorithm does
not have stages, the agents simply perform pheromone directed local
steps thereby carrying out a patrolling algorithm, and while doing so
also implicitly cooperate in partitioning the graph. Our agents have
no internal memory at all. Their decisions are based on pheromone
readings from vertices and edges alone, and they can only sense or
leave pheromone marks around their graph location. One may view
our solution for patrolling and partitioning the graph environment
as using the graph as a shared distributed memory for our oblivious
agents.
15
3 The AntPaP Algorithm and Empirical Results
The task analyzed here is the partition of an area or environment
into regions of similar size by a set of agents with severe restrictions
on their capabilities. The inspiration for the algorithm are gas filled
balloons; consider a set of elastic balloons located inside a box, and
being inflated at a constant and equal rate, until the balloons oc-
cupy the entire volume of the box. While inflating, it may be that
one balloon disturbs the expansion of another balloon. This may
cause a momentarily difference of the pressure in the balloons, un-
til the pressure difference is large enough to displace the disturbing
balloon and provide space for the expansion of the other. Since the
amount of gas is equal for all balloons, they will each occupy the
same part of the volume, effectively partitioning it into equal parts.
Our agents mimic this behavior by patrolling a region of the area
"of their own", while continuously aiming to expand it. The area is
modeled by a graph and the region is a connected component of
the graph. When expanding regions touch, the agent on the smaller
region may conquer vertices of the larger region. We assume that
initially a given number of agents are randomly placed in the envi-
ronment, they start the process of expanding and this process goes
on forever. Eventually the expansion is "contained" due to the inter-
action between the regions of the agent, hence the process will lead
16
to an equalization of the sizes of the regions patrolled by the agents.
In the discrete world of our agents a partition to regions of exactly
the same size may not exist, therefore we define a balanced partition
as such that any two neighboring regions may have a size difference
of at most one vertex.
17
Agent Modeling and Implementation Details
For simplicity, a(ge)nts operate in time slots, in a strongly asyn-
chronous mode, i.e. within a time interval every agent operates at
some random time, so that they do not interfere with each other.
During a given time slot, each agent may move over an edge to an-
other vertex, and may leave pheromone marks on a vertex and/or
edges. The marks, if made, are assumed to erase or coexist with the
pheromone that remained there from the previous visit. Agents have
no control over the amount of pheromone they leave, its initialization
level being always the same. Thereafter, the pheromone level decays
in time. Each agent has its own pheromone, thus pheromones are like
colors identifying the disjoint components and hence the partition-
ing of the graph. The agents themselves can only tell if a pheromone
is their own or not. Agents are oblivious, i.e. have no internal mem-
ory. On each time slot, an agent reads remaining pheromone levels
previously marked on the vertex it is located and its surroundings,
and bases its decisions solely upon these readings. The readings and
decisions are transient, in the sense that they are forgotten when the
time slot advances. Decaying pheromone marks on vertices and edges
linger, serving both as distributed memory as well as means of com-
munication. In our model, agents leave pheromones in two patterns:
one pheromone pattern is marked when agents advance in their pa-
trolling route, and the second pattern is used when agents decide to
18
remain on the same vertex. Pheromones are decaying in time, thus
once marked on a vertex or edge, their level on the vertex or edge de-
creases with each time step. A straightforward way for implementing
such behavior in a computer program, is to use the equivalent "time
markings", i.e. stamping the time at which a pheromone is marked
on the vertex or edge. We therefore denote by ϕ0 (v) the time of
pheromone marking on vertex v, hence ϕ0 (v) = t means that an
agent left a pheromone on vertex v at time t. As time advances, the
"age" of the pheromone on vertex v, i.e. the time interval since it
was marked, which can be calculated as t − ϕ0 (v) where t is the
current time, advances as well. This is equivalent to measuring the
level of the temporally decaying pheromone on vertex v, and using
its value along with the known rate of decay to calculate its "age".
Similarly, ϕ (u, v) = t is a time marking, equivalent to the decay-
ing pheromone level on the edge, where ϕ (u, v) and ϕ (v, u) are not
necessarily the same. The use of time markings require the computer
program implementation to know the current time t in order to be
able to calculate the age of pheromones. However, the knowledge of
current time is strictly limited to its use in the emulation of tem-
porally decaying pheromones by equivalent time markings, thus it
does not depart from our paradigm of obliviousness and local deci-
sions based on decaying pheromone markings only. When an agent
decides to leave a pheromone mark on a vertex, it may avoid erasing
19
the pheromone that remains from the previous (most recent) visit.
We denote the previous time marking as ϕ1 (v), thus when an agent
marks a pheromone on vertex v, the computer program implemen-
tation moves the value stored in ϕ0 (v) to ϕ1 (v) and afterwards
sets the new time mark to ϕ0 (v). Hence, the value, ϕ0 (v) − ϕ1 (v)
encodes the idle time of the vertex v.
The Patrol Algorithm
Agents patrol their region in a DFS-like route, in the sense that
they advance into each vertex once and backtrack through the same
edge once during a complete traversal of their region. When an agent
completes traversing the region it resets (i.e. it stays at the same lo-
cation for one time step and refreshes its pheromone mark), and sub-
sequently starts the search again. The cycles repeat the same route
as long as the region is unchanged. When the region does change
-- either expanding or shrinking -- out agents persist on keeping ad-
vancing and backtracking into a vertex through the same edge that
was used to conquer the vertex. This is implemented by marking
"pair trails", i.e. leaving pheromones over edges as well as vertices,
when conquering and (subsequently) advancing into a vertex. A pair
trail is a directed mark from a vertex u to an adjacent vertex v,
of the form ϕ0 (v) = ϕ (u, v) = ϕ (v, u), and is one of the two
pheromone patterns that agents leave. This behavior results in a
patrolling process that follows the pair trails, were agents advance
20
through the earliest marked pair trail, refreshing the marks while
doing so. When all pair trails to advance through are exhausted, it
backtracks through the same pair trail it entered. An example of a
route and the spanning tree it defines are depicted in Figure 2. The
departure from the classic DFS is that edges that are not marked as
pair trails are ignored. The pair trails mark a spanning tree (which is
not necessarily a palm tree) of the region, where its root is the ver-
tex where the search cycle begins, and each pair trail marks the path
advancing upwards the tree. When an agent backtracks to the root,
it has no untraveled pair trail to advance through, and it restarts
the search cycle remaining one time slot in the root. It then uses the
second marking pattern which is simply leaving a pheromone on the
vertex, denoted as ϕ0 (u) = t, where u is the root.
Fig. 2. An example of a patrolling route in a region, and the spanning tree it defines.
The arrows indicate pair trail directions: advance in the direction of the arrow, and
(eventually) backtrack the other way
Since agents advance and backtrack once from each vertex in their
region (except the root) and then restart a patrolling cycle in the
21
root, the number of steps in one patrolling cycle, called the cover
time, is ∆tα = 2Gα − 1. Gα denotes the region of agent α, the
set of vertices that are part of α(cid:48)s patrolling cycle. Patrolling cycles
repeat the exact same route as long as the region remains unchanged,
hence the idle time of any vertex v of the region is also the region's
cover time ϕ0 (v) − ϕ1 (v) = ∆tα. Thus the pheromone markings
on the vertex can be used to calculate the size of the region Gα =
∆tα + 1
.
2
Conquest
To expand their region, agents may conquer vertices adjacent to
(vertices of) their region. For agent α to attempt to launch a con-
quest from a vertex u ∈ Gα to a target vertex v, the following
conditions must apply:
(1) v is not part of α's region, v /∈ Gα, let us then assume that
v ∈ Gβ of another agent β
(2) u is subject to a double visit by α, i.e. α visits u leaving pheromone
marks twice, while v was not visited even once by β during the
same period of time. Since the time difference between the two
visits by α is the cover time and the cover time is proportional to
the size of the region, it means that α's region is smaller than β's,
Gα < Gβ. An agent may check for this condition by evaluating
if ϕ1 (u) > ϕ0 (v).
22
(3) If the double visit condition is met, thus β's region is larger, allow
a conquest attempt if it is not larger by exactly one vertex -- since
a difference of one vertex is considered balanced.
(4) If the double visit condition is met and β's region is larger by ex-
actly one vertex, allow a conquest attempt if vertex v is stagnated
-- it's pheromones are older than their purported cover time. An
agent checks this by comparing the idle time t − ϕ0 (v) to the
cover time ϕ0 (v) − ϕ1 (v).
Depending on the above conditions, an agent may stochastically at-
tempt the conquest of vertex v, with a predefined probability 0<ρc<1.
This mechanism works even if v is not part of any of the other agent's
regions, v /∈ Gi, ∀i. In such case the pheromone marks on v will
never be refreshed and the conquest conditions hold.
Temporary Inconsistency
When a region expands or shrinks as result of conquests, its be-
comes inconsistent in the sense that the size of the region changed,
but at least some of the pheromone marks on its vertices encoding
the cover time (ϕ0 (v) − ϕ1 (v)) do not reflect that immediately. To
regain consistency on a vertex u, the pheromone marks on u must
be refreshed, hence an agent must leave there a fresh pheromone,
and that may occur only when the agent advances into vertex u
through a pair trail. Therefore, there is a delay in the propagation
of the change, thus there will be a temporary inconsistency between
23
the actual size of the region and the cover time encoded on region's
vertices. That inconsistency is certainly not desirable since it might
result in a miscalculation of conquest conditions. Consider an agent
α with a larger region than two of its neighbors β and γ. Both
neighbors will be attempting to conquer vertices from α. Since all
agents' awareness is local, β and γ have no means to know that α
is shrinking due to the work of the other as well, and as β and γ
repeatedly conquer vertices from α, the combined conquests may ac-
cumulate to "eat up" too much out of α's region up to a point where
the imbalance is reversed, and the areas of both β and γ are now
larger than α's. Nonetheless, the inconsistency is temporary. It is
convenient to analyze this issue by considering the spanning tree of
pair trails. When an agent conquers a vertex and expands its region,
it results in adding a leaf to the spanned tree, and losing a vertex
to another agent results in the pruning of the tree, the splitting of
the tree into two or more branches, while the losing agent remains
on one of them. In either case, the follow the pair trails strategy
ensures that the new route remains well defined. It is therefore suffi-
cient for an agent to patrol its region twice, to ensure that the region
is consistent, as described in the following Lemma:
Lemma 1. A region is consistent if it has remained unchanged for
a period of time which is twice its cover time.
24
Proof. On the first cycle, the agent leaves a fresh pheromone, ϕ0, on
each vertex, while the previous most recently visit, ϕ1, may reflect an
inconsistent state. The second cycle repeats the exact same route as
the first, since the region remains unchanged, and now both the most
recent visit as well as the one preceding it, indicated by pheromone
levels ϕ0 and ϕ1, are updated, thus ϕ0 − ϕ1 reflects the cover time
(cid:117)(cid:116)
on all vertices of the route and the region becomes consistent.
Losing a Vertex
When balloons are inflated in a box, to the observer it looks as a
smooth evolution where the balloons steadily grow and occupy more
of the volume until the box is filled. But unlike gas inside a balloon
that exerts pressure in all directions concurrently, our discrete agents
work in steps, where at each step they attend one vertex of their re-
gion, while the other vertices may be subject to conquests by other
agents. Since regions are defined by patrolling routes, an agent α, by
conquest of a single vertex from β, may prune β's region in a way
that leaves β to patrol a much smaller region effectively rendering
it smaller than α's. Now the "balance tilts", as the region that was
larger prior to the conquest becomes the smaller. Pruning may cut a
spanning tree into two or more sections, but in many cases the sec-
tions of the tree may still be connected by edges that are not marked
by a pair trail. In such case, β has an opportunity to mark a pair trail
over such an edge and regain access to a branch still marked with
25
its own pheromones. Yet, sometimes the pruning divides the region
into two unconnected components. We call these balloon explosions,
and when these occur it is more difficult for the agent that lost part
of its region to regain its loss. Therefore, when an agent launches
a conquest attempt it is not always clear if its success will advance
or set-back the evolution towards convergence. It is then natural to
add the following vertex loss rule: should an agent fail the conquest
attempt, there is a predefined probability 0 < ρl < 1 for losing the
vertex from which the attempt was launched. Losing the vertex may
indeed be a better evolution step than succeeding in that conquest,
resembling actions of withdrawal from local minima used in simu-
lated annealing. In fact, this property becomes instrumental in our
convergence proof for the AntPaP algorithm. In order to prevent an
agent from "cutting the branch it is sitting on", we limit vertex loss
events to steps of the patrolling process in which agents backtrack,
and, symmetrically restrict conquests to steps in which the agents
advance.
We next list the algorithm describing the work of each agent on
the graph environment.
26
Rule AntPaP
Entry point of an agent α at time step t.
Upon entry, the agent is located on vertex u.
Pseudo Code
Description
for each ∃v ∈ N (u) (Self (v) = f alse) ∧ (ϕ1 (u) > ϕ0 (v))
if (ϕ0 (u) − ϕ1 (u)) + 2 (cid:54)= (ϕ0 (v) − ϕ1 (v))
or (t − ϕ1 (v)) > (ϕ0 (v) − ϕ1 (v)) then
if (cid:64)v ∈ N (u)ϕ (u, v) = ϕ0 (u) + 1 then
if (AgentPresent (v) = f alse) ∧ (x < ρc) then
ϕ (u, v) = t; ϕ (v, u) = t; ϕ0 (v) = t
ϕ1 (v) = 0
goto v ; return
lose = (y < ρl)
else lose = (y < ρl)
if ∃v = argmin
v∈N (u)
then
{ϕ0 (v) , s.t.ϕ1 (u) > ϕ0 (v) , Self (v) = true}
ϕ (u, v) = t ; ϕ (v, u) = t ; ϕ0 (v) = t ; ϕ1 (v) = 0
goto v ; return
if ∃v = argmin
v∈N (u)
{ϕ (u, v) , s.t. ϕ (u, v) in a pair trail} then
if (ϕ (u, v) = ϕ (v, u) = ϕ0 (v)) ∧ (ϕ0 (u) > ϕ0 (v)) then
ϕ1 (v) = ϕ0 (v)
ϕ (u, v) = t ; ϕ (v, u) = t ; ϕ0 (v) = t
goto v; return
if (ϕ (u, v) = ϕ (v, u) = ϕ (u)) then
if lose then
ϕ0 (u) , ϕ1 (u) = 0,∀w ∈ N (u) , ϕ (u, w) , ϕ (w, u) = 0
goto v; return
ϕ1 (v) = ϕ0 (v) ; ϕ0 (u) = t
return
27
Explore border
for each neighbor v of u, not marked by α's
pheromone, and meeting the double hit.
if size difference(cid:54)= 1,
or v is stagnated (pruned or empty) then,
if not backtracked to u
if chance allows conquest (x random ∈ [0, 1])
Conquer vertex v
mark pair-trail into v
move to v and exit this step
if no conquest, set lose flag (y random ∈ [0, 1])
Rejoin Isolated
if v has α(cid:48)s (self) mark but double visit is met,
rejoin v. Move to v and exit this step
select v of the oldest pair-trail
Advance
if pair-trail points into v, and mark on v is older
keep previous time-mark
refresh the pair-trail pointing to v
move to v and exit this step
Backtrack
if pair-trail points into u
Lose
if lose flag is set
remove time marks of u and its pair-trails
move to v and exit this step
Reset
refresh vertex u
exit this step
4 Typical Evolution of Patrolling and Partitioning
During a patrolling cycle, an agent attempts conquests over all the
border edges of all vertices of its region. Hence its region may expand
with additional vertices bordering its route. This causes the spanning
tree defined by its DFS-route to have an ever growing number of
branches as the patrolling cycles continue, resulting in a tree shape
resembling a "snow flake" .
Additionally, agents have a strong tendency to form "rounded"
regions, if the environment and other agents' regions allow it. This
happens because vertices that are candidates for conquest and are
adjacent to more than one of the region's vertices, have a higher
probability to be conquered and incorporated into the patrolled re-
gion.
Fig. 3. Rounded and Thick Regions build-up by 12 ants on a 50x50 grid
28
These two properties, the snow-flake like spanning tree and rounded
build-ups, often assist in achieving a smooth evolution towards con-
vergence. Thick regions make the possibility of major "balloon explo-
sions" unlikely. The thiner branches at the ends of the snow-flake-like
region, cause the pruning of the region by another agent to merely
"shave" off small fragments from the region, and are less likely to
cut out a large portion of its vertices. Moreover, if a greater portion
was cut out by pruning, it is highly likely that the lost portion is
connected by edges that were not pair trails, making it is easier for
the losing agent to regain its vertices.
Figure 4 depicts a chart showing a typically observed evolution
of 12 regions in a 50x50 square grid. The chart describes how the
sizes of the regions change with time. The images of Figure 3 are
two snapshots taken during the same evolution, the second snap-
shot being of the balanced partition that the agents reached. The
chart shows that some regions grew faster than others, then at some
point, the regions grew enough so that the graph was covered (or
close to being covered due to continuous pruning), and the smaller
regions began to grow at the expense of the larger regions until they
all reach a very similar size, albeit not yet balanced. For practical
purposes arriving to this state in the graph might suffice, especially
if the graph is constantly changing and a partition that is balanced
is not well defined. This process occurs quickly, then there is a much
29
longer phase towards convergence. The "turbulence" seen at about
t = 30, 000 are due to some mild "balloon explosions" followed by
recovery and convergence. The last plateau towards convergence is
short in this particular example, but in some other simulated exam-
ples it appeared much longer. This is especially noticeable in cases
which the evolution results in the system having two large regions
that are adjacent and have very similar sizes but are not yet bal-
anced, e.g. a size difference of 2 vertices. Such scenarios may increase
the time required for a double visit, which is a condition for conquest.
Fig. 4. A Typically Observed Partition Evolution , 12 agents on a 50x50 grid
30
Figure 5 is a chart depicting time to convergence for a system with
5 agents as a function of the graph size, overlaying results of multiple
simulation runs. It shows that the spread in the time to convergence
grows with size, but it also clear that the majority, depicted as dense
occurrences, are not highly spread in value, indicative of runs of
"typical evolution scenarios" on square grid, as was the environment
tested in these simulations. The dotted line is an interpolation of
average convergence time among the results achieved for each graph
size.
Fig. 5. Time to Convergence as a Function of Graph Size
31
5 Proof of Convergence
The above discussed experimental evidence showcases an evolution
of the system towards a balanced partition (when the topology of
the environment/graph remains stationary), an evolution which is
smooth without "dramatic" incidents, driven by the AntPaP algo-
rithm mimicking pressure equalization. However, AntPaP is a heuris-
tic process, and the experimentally observed smooth convergence is
by no means guaranteed. In the evolution towards balanced parti-
tions there are various events that may substantially alter the size
difference between regions, and lead the system to longer and chaotic
excursions. Chance dictates the way regions expand and, for exam-
ple, a region may build up with less thickness in some areas allow-
ing other agents to cut across it causing "major balloon explosions".
Furthermore, even a quite well-rounded region may be subject to
an "unfair" probabilistic attack, driven to cut through its width and
eventually succeeding to remove a large portion of its area. To make
things even worse, the portion of the split region that ceased to be
patrolled, becomes a readily available prey to neighboring agents.
Therefore, although the system is relentlessly progressing towards a
balanced partition due to the rules of "pressure equalization", such
"balloon explosions" are singular events that may significantly derail
the smooth evolution towards convergence, slowing the process con-
32
siderably. One may wonder if there are conditions were these events
occur repeatedly, making the convergence into a balanced partition
an elusive target, that may even never be reached.
Clearly, there are systems where a balanced partition cannot be
reached, simply because one does not exist. An evident example is a
graph having the shape of a star. Consider a graph of 7 vertices, one
at the center and three branches of two vertices each. A system with
7 vertices and 2 agents should be partitioned into two connected
components, one of 3 vertices and the other of 4. But such partition
does not exist, thus repeated balloon explosions will forever occur.
Interestingly, a balanced partition does exist for the same graph with
3 agents.
Therefore, our first step towards proof is to precisely define the
systems of interest, which are based on environment-graphs for which
a balanced partitions exist for any number of agents (up to a bound).
The most general set of such graphs is an interesting question in
itself. For our purposes, we shall limit our analysis to systems of the
following type:
(1) The environment is a graph G that has a Hamiltonian path, a
path that passes through every vertex in a graph exactly once,
with any number of agents n ≤ G patrolling it. Indeed, for any
graph G that has a Hamiltonian path, we can find multiple possi-
bilities for a balanced partition for any number of agents n ≤ G.
33
To name one, the partition where each region includes vertices
that are all adjacent one to another along the Hamiltonian path,
and the regions are chained one after another along the path.
Some of the regions can be of size
and the others of size
(cid:22)G
(cid:23)
n
(cid:22)G
(cid:23)
n
+ 1. Note that for our purposes, the path does not need to
be closed, so the existence of a Hamiltonian cycle is not required.
(2) The environment is a k-connected graph, a graph that stays con-
nected when any fewer than k of its vertices are removed, with
n ≤ k agents patrolling it. In [14], Gyori shows that a k-connected
graph can always be partitioned into k components, including k
different and arbitrarily selected vertices.
We shall analyze the evolution of the system as a stochastic process,
and base our proof of convergence on the theory of Markov chains.
The remainder of this section is organized as follows: we define a
"system configuration" by considering a simple evolution example
and show that there always exists a mapping from configurations to
well defined "states". We then look at more complex configurations
and realize that although the set of configurations is not bounded,
it can be divided into a finite set of equivalence classes, each class
representing a state. Hence, we conclude that the number of states
in the Markov chain is finite, and the evolution of the configurations
maps into corresponding transitions between the states of the chain.
34
Next we use the concept of consistency of a region, as presented in
Lemma 1, to conclude that if a balanced partition is attained, it may
persist indefinitely. This means that balanced partitions map to re-
current states in the Markov chain. We use this result to analyze the
structure of the stochastic matrix that describes the chain. Then we
turn to prove that it is only the balanced partitions that are mapped
to recurrent states. We first abstract the complexity of the problem
by classifying all possible graph partitions into mutually exclusive
classes: uncovered, covered but unbalanced, balanced but unstable,
balanced and stable. Then we proceed to analyze the changes that
may cause the system to shift from a configuration in one class to a
configuration in another. Finally we show that when the graph has a
Hamiltonian path or is k-connected, despite the possibility that the
system may repeatedly transition between these classes, it cannot do
so indefinitely and will inevitably have to sink into a recurrent state
that belongs to a set of states which are all assigned to the same
balanced partition, forming a so-called "recurrent class".
Definition 1. The vertices and edges of the graph with their respec-
tive pheromone markings, and the agent locations, will be called a
configuration of the system, and denoted by C. Recall that, as dis-
cussed in section 3 (sub-section "Agents"), more straightforward time
markings, (in which the current time, ϕ0 (v) = t, is marked), can be
35
used to emulate their equivalent pheromone markings with temporal
decay.
Fig. 6. Starting at configuration CA, the system must move to CB and then to CC.
Then it will stochastically transition to CD1, CD2, CD3, CD4 or CD5.
CC and CD5 are equivalent since both have the same pheromone decay levels. The values
shown are time markings (ϕ0, ϕ1).
The diagram of Figure 6 depicts an example of transitions be-
tween configurations of a system of a 4-vertex graph on which two
agents, the green and the cyan, are active. CA is the initial configura-
tion at t = 0 . Agents, shown as dots, are placed at some random ini-
tial vertices that are colored according to the agent patrolling them,
green at the top-left vertex and the cyan at the bottom-right vertex.
The pheromone markings on vertices are shown as ordered pairs of
time markings (ϕ0, ϕ1), where ϕ0 is the most recent time that a ver-
36
tex was marked with pheromone, and ϕ1 is the previous time that the
vertex was marked (so, generally, ϕ0 > ϕ1). When the two agents
wake up at time slot t = 1, the readings of pheromone marks around
are all zero, therefore the double visit condition ϕ1 (u) > ϕ0 (v), is
not met, and conquests are prohibited. Hence the only possible action
for the agents is reset, i.e. leaving a fresh pheromone mark ϕ0 (u) = 1
(the current time), and thus transitioning to the new configuration
CB. At t = 2, the double visit condition is again not met, and the
system transitions to CC (recall that according to the AntPaP al-
gorithm, at the time that a pheromone is marked on a vertex, the
previous mark is moved from ϕ0 to ϕ1). At t = 3, conquest condi-
tions are met for both agents, and the system may now transition
to any one of the configurations {CD1,CD2,CD3,CD4}, according to
whether one or more conquests succeed, or to CD5, with a probabil-
ity of (1 − ρc)3, if all 3 conquest attempts fail . It is important to
notice that CD5 is equivalent to CC (and in fact the configurations
are identical in terms of temporally decaying pheromone markings
since (3, 2)at t=3 ≡ (2, 1)at t=2 ≡ (t, t − 1)at t). In both we have a
ϕ0 pheromone that has been freshly marked, so (t − ϕ0) = 0 , and
a ϕ1 which has been marked on the immediately preceding time slot,
hence (t − ϕ1) = 1. We can, therefore, map each configuration of
Figure 6 to distinct "states", states 1, 2, . . . , 7, as depicted in Figure
7, and group CD5 and CC into an equivalence class of system con-
37
figurations, were configurations in such equivalence class map to the
same "state" (in this case the equivalence class that includes CD5 and
CC maps to state 3).
Fig. 7. States Matching the Configurations of Figure 6
Calculating transition probabilities between "states" is straight-
forward, but sometimes subtleties arise, for example:
P (State 1 → State 2) =P (State 2 → State 3) = 1,
P (State 3 → State 3) = (1 − ρc)3 (both agents attempt con-
quests, but fail), and
2 (ρc) (1− ρc) + 1
P (State 3 → State 7) = 1
2 (1 − ρc)2 ρc (due
to the strong asynchronous assumption, the cyan agent has a proba-
2 to move first within the time slot, and if so, its attempted
conquest has a probability ρc to succeed. The result is multiplied by
bility of 1
38
a probability (1−ρc) that the green agent fails in its conquest. If the
green moves first, there is a probability (1 − ρc)2 that it would fail
both attempts, and then a probability ρc that the cyan succeeds).
Definition 2. An edge (u, v) which is part of a pair-trail pattern
marking, so that ϕ (u, v) = ϕ (v, u) = ϕ (v), will be called a pair-
trail edge.
Definition 3. For a time interval in which no conquests or losses
of a vertex in a region occur, the region is considered "stable".
Lemma 2. A system comprising a graph G with time-invariant topol-
ogy, and k agents, in a configuration CN, satisfying
(1) The k regions marked by the agents are consistent
(2) Pheromone marks exist only on vertices and pair-trail edges in-
side the k-regions, and no pheromone markings exist elsewhere
on the graph,
will transition through a finite sequence of M of states, where M is
the least common multiple of the cover times of the k-regions (i.e.
M = lcm (∆t1, ∆t2, . . . , ∆tk)), prior arriving to a configuration
CM equivalent to CN (i.e. CM ∼ CN ), as long as the k regions are
stable (no conquests or losses occur).
Proof. A consistent region Gi is a region for which ϕ0 (v)− ϕ1 (v) =
∆ti, ∀v ∈ Gi, where ∆ti is the cover time of region Gi (see Lemma
39
1). Therefore, as long as the region is stable, all vertices and all
pair-trail edges of Gi, cyclically return to the exact same decay-
ing pheromone levels, i.e. exactly the same temporal differences t −
ϕ0 (v) (where t is the current time) every ∆ti steps. We can thereby
consider the k regions in the partition, each repeating its pheromone
level markings independently, as k cyclic processes each with its own
cycle time. Hence, all the processes complete an integer number of
cycles every M steps, where M is the least common multiple of the
cycle times, M = lcm (∆t1, ∆t2, . . . , ∆tk), which ensures that all
vertices of all the k regions in the configuration CM that was reached
have exactly the same temporal differences as in CN, and therefore
(cid:117)(cid:116)
CM ∼ CN.
In the above Lemma, we required to have no pheromones at all
on edges that are not pair-trail edges. But, if there were markings
on such edges, the patrolling agents would simply ignore them, ac-
cording to the AntPaP algorithm. Therefore such markings have no
influence on the possible future evolutions of the system. We shall
formally define states of the system by grouping together configura-
tions that have "the same future evolutions", i.e. same possible future
configuration transition sequences with the same probabilities. For
example, as seen above, configurations that differ only by levels of
pheromones on non pair-trail edges form such equivalence classes,
40
hence each class defines a distinct state. In systems theory, this is
the classical Nerode equivalence way of defining states.
Accordingly, two configurations that do not have the exact same
patrolling routes (either not having the same k regions, or the agents
have developed different patrolling paths within the regions) cannot
have the same future evolutions, since, even without any conquests
or loses, the future sequences of configurations that the systems go
through are different due to the different patrolling steps. Therefore
these two configurations can not belong to the same equivalence class
thus represent distinct states.
Next we turn to discuss pheromone markings that may exist on
vertices and edges that are not part of any current patrolling route,
hence outside of all the regions. Such scenarios may occur as result
of a successful conquest by an agent that disconnects the region
of a neighbor and hence prunes the spanning tree of that agent,
splitting it into two or more disjoint branches. Clearly, the latter
agent remains on one of these branches, while the others cease to be
part of its patrolling route and remain "isolated".
Definition 4. A segment of a spanning tree (i.e. a set of vertices
marked with pheromones and connected by pair trails) that is not part
of a patrolling route, thus not included in any of the regions, forms
what we shall call an isolated branch. For completeness, a single
41
such vertex that is not connected by a pair-trail is also considered an
isolated branch.
In our pheromone marking model we have not limited the pheromone
decay, thus, on an isolated branch, pheromones may decay indefi-
nitely. This means that there is no bound to the set of configura-
tions, and raises the question of whether there exists a bound to the
set of equivalence classes to which they can belong, hence a bound
on the number of states of the system. We shall, therefore, consider
configurations that include isolated branches, and analyze the effect
of pheromone decay in these branches on the evolution of the system,
or more precisely, how such decay influences "future" system states.
We have already seen that two configurations that do not have the
exact same patrolling routes must represent different states, thus we
shall verify that this distinction, by itself, does not produce an un-
bounded number of states. The number of permutations of possible
k stable regions is finite (in a finite graph), and for each such per-
mutation, the number of permutations of possible routes for the k
agents must be finite too (since each of the k regions have a finite
number of edges).
We are therefore left to show that starting at any arbitrary config-
uration with k agents patrolling k regions that also include isolated
branches, all future evolutions in an arbitrarily large interval in which
42
all k regions remain stable, can be grouped into a finite number of
equivalence classes.
Let us consider a setup of k regions and an isolated branch, where
the regions are stable in an arbitrarily large interval, and further as-
sume that a vertex v of the isolated branch is adjacent to a vertex u
in one of the regions (See figure 8). Since the regions are stable, every
patrolling cycle the value ϕ0 (u) is refreshed, thus its time-marking
increases with each cycle. On the other hand, the time marking
ϕ0 (v) of the vertex in the branch remains unchanged. When the
agent is on vertex u the following scenarios may arise:
Fig. 8. An agent (black dot) on a vertex u adjacent to a vertex v on an isolated
branch that is marked with the agent's pheromone. The solid line represents an edge,
the arrows represent pair-trail edges. Rejoining the lost vertex v on the isolated branch
results in pruning the isolated branch into disjoint parts. One with the upper two
vertices, another with the lower three.
43
(1) The vertex v on the branch might be marked with the same
agent's pheromone, and hence moving into the adjacent vertex
consists of the action of rejoining a vertex previously lost. Ac-
cording to AntPaP, agents check for a double visit condition, i.e.
ϕ1 (u) > ϕ0 (v), prior to this action. When traversing onto the
vertex, e.g. at time t, the agent marks there a fresh pheromone
ϕ0 (v) = t. This may result in splitting the isolated branch into
two or more disjoint branches. The agent will then follow the
pair-trails emanating from vertex v at which it is presently lo-
cated, oblivious to the fact that pheromone marks on pair-trails
and vertices of the branch are old. Thereafter the agent traverses
the section of the previously-isolated branch it is located on, thus
refreshing its marks, until all the section is visited (e.g., in the
example of Figure 8, the agent will visit all vertices on the lower
section), then it returns to the vertex u from which the conquest
was launched. The other disjoint branches (in the example of
Figure 8, the upper section) remain isolated.
(2) if the branch is marked with another agent's pheromone, and con-
quest conditions are met (e.g. double visit (ϕ1 (u) > ϕ0 (v)) and
the regions size difference is not exactly one vertex ( or equiva-
lently the difference in cover time is not 2 , i.e., (ϕ0 (u) − ϕ1 (u))+
2 (cid:54)= (ϕ0 (v) − ϕ1 (v)) ), the agent may attempt a conquest on
44
the vertex v and thereafter on all the vertices of the branch, one
by one.
(3) if the branch is marked with another agent's pheromone but
the double visit condition is not met (i.e. ϕ1 (u) ≯ ϕ0 (v)), it
may remain so only for at most two cycles of patrolling. Note
that ϕ1 (u) is growing with each agent's visit, while ϕ0 (v) re-
mains unchanged and as a result a double visit condition will
necessarily arise. Furthermore, meeting the double visit condi-
tion also ensures that all the additional conquest conditions are
met at the same time, since either the cover time encoded in
the vertex of the isolated branch indicates a region size con-
ducive to conquests, or the agent recognizes that the neighbor-
ing region is stagnated (not being patrolled for too long, i.e.,
(t − ϕ1 (v)) > (ϕ0 (v) − ϕ1 (v))). Therefore any further decay
of the pheromone mark on the isolated branch will not influence
the future behavior of the system.
A double visit is, therefore, a sufficient condition for an agent to
conquer or rejoin a vertex on an adjacent isolated branch, hence we
conclude the following:
Lemma 3. A system comprising a graph G with time-invariant topol-
ogy, and k agents, in a configuration C that includes exactly one
isolated branch will transition through a finite sequence of at most
N + M states, where N = 2 ∗ max (∆t1, ∆t2, . . . , ∆tk) and M =
45
lcm (∆t1, ∆t2, . . . , ∆tk), where ∆ti is the cover time of region Gi,
as long as all the regions are stable (no conquests or losses occur).
Proof. The completion of two patrolling cycles of a region by its
patrolling agent ensures that the double visit condition is met at
any vertex u of the region adjacent to a vertex v of the isolated
branch (see discussion above). Therefore, after an interval of N =
2 ∗ max (∆t1, ∆t2, . . . , ∆tk) (i.e. when the agent on the largest
region completed two patrolling cycles) it is certain that the double
visit condition is globally met (i.e. for any vertex u on any of the
regions adjacent to any vertex v in the isolated branch). Moreover,
it will be met on any time step that follows (as long as the regions
are stable). Hence any two configurations on which the double visit
condition is globally met, and have the same levels of pheromones
on vertices and pair-trail edges that are in the k regions (but may
differ in levels of pheromones on the isolated branch) are equivalent.
Since we also know, based on Lemma 2, that every
M = lcm (∆t1, ∆t2, . . . , ∆tk) time steps, all pheromones in ver-
tices and pair-trails included in the k regions cyclically return to the
exact same decaying pheromone levels (i.e. exactly the same tempo-
ral differences), we conclude that a system in a configuration C, will
transition at most N distinct states to a configuration CN (on which
the double visit condition is globally met) and then will cyclically
46
transition through M states reaching, at each cycle, a configuration
(cid:117)(cid:116)
CM ∼ CN.
Our next analysis is of the effect of multiple isolated branches
on future evolutions of a system with stable regions. Consider two
scenarios, both starting with the same configuration that has one
isolated branch. An arbitrary time later, a conquest creates another
isolated branch, the second branch being the same in both, only the
time of its creation is different. Hence, there can be an arbitrar-
ily large time difference between the creation of the second isolated
branch in the two scenarios. Contemplating the case of an arbitrary
number of isolated branches created each at an arbitrary time, the
complexity of such presented scenarios may substantially grow. Nev-
ertheless, in term of system states the above complexity does not
matter. Once the decay of pheromones on an isolated branch is such
that the double visit condition is globally met, the conquest or rejoin
threshold is triggered, and afterwards no amount of further decay
affects the future evolutions of the system. This insensitivity holds
regardless of the presence of other isolated branches, simply because
the double visit is a local condition, limited to the time difference en-
coded in pheromones a on a vertex in a region and an adjacent vertex
on the branch. Thus, any two configurations that differ only by level
of pheromones on isolated branches for which the double visit condi-
tion is globally met, are equivalent. Particularly, there must exist a
47
configuration such that the level of pheromones on isolated branches
is at its "highest level", i.e. the time marking on each vertex of each
isolated branch is the highest that allows the double visit condition
to be globally met. A branch with such "highest level" will have one
vertex v, where v = argmax (ϕ0 (w) , w ∈ isolated branch) with
a time-mark value ϕ0 (v) = t − (M + N ) where t is the current
time (i.e. a pheromone was left there M + N steps before the cur-
rent time), and all other vertices and edges with (lower) values that
agree with the ordered directions of pair-trails.
Hence we conclude, again, that any configuration C that includes
multiple isolated branches will transition at most M + N distinct
states as long as all the regions remain stable.
Theorem 1. For a system with a graph G of stationary topology,
and k agents, the set S of states is finite.
Proof. Based on the above analysis, we conclude:
(1) any configuration C is equivalent to a configuration CP identical
to C except for having no pheromone marking on edges that are
not pair trails.
(2) any configuration CP that includes isolated branches is equiva-
lent to a configuration CA identical to CP except by the levels
of pheromones on vertices and pair-trail edges in those isolated
branches that globally meet the double visit condition on both
48
configurations. Specifically, in CA, vertices and pair-trail edges on
each such isolated branch, will be of a "highest level", i.e. will have
one vertex v, where v = argmax (ϕ0 (w) , w ∈ isolated branch)
with a time-mark value ϕ0 (v) = t − (M + N ) where t is the
current time (i.e. a pheromone was left there M + N steps be-
fore the current time), N = 2 ∗ max (∆t1, ∆t2, . . . , ∆tk) and
M = lcm (∆t1, ∆t2, . . . , ∆tk) , and all other vertices and edges
with values that agree to the directions of pair-trails.
Therefore any configuration C is grouped in an equivalence class with
a correspondingly "representative" configuration CA. To find out how
many such classes exist, we observe that a CA includes the following
elements: k regions with k patrolling routes, isolated branches that
do not globally meet the double visit condition and isolated branches
of a highest level of time-markings that globally meet the double visit
condition.
However, we have that:
(a) The number of possible choices of k regions is finite (in a finite
graph).
(b) For any arbitrary set of k regions, the number of possible routes
in the k regions is finite.
(c) For any arbitrary set of k regions (with a particular selection of k
routes) the number of vertices not included in these is finite, thus
the number of possible isolated branches is finite (and their possi-
49
ble assignments to whether they meet the double visit condition
or not is also finite).
Therefore the set of possible representative configurations CA is fi-
nite, each defines an equivalence class corresponding to a distinct
state of the Markov chain, hence the set S of system states is finite.
(cid:117)(cid:116)
Concluding the above analysis we see that in spite of the infinite
number of configurations possible for a system, the number of system
states, though quite large, is finite. Let us denote the finite set of
states of a system by S.
Definition 5. (Gallager [15]), A Markov chain is an integer-time
process, {Xn, n > 0} for which the sample values for each random
variable Xn, n > 1 lie in a countable set S and depend on the past
only through the most recent random variable Xn−1.
Clearly, any state of the system at time n, formally represented by
Xn ∈ S, is dependent only on the previous state Xn−1 ∈ S, since
our agents have no memory, and their decisions are based solely on
readings from vertices and edges of the configuration, which are com-
pletely described by Xn−1. We can, therefore, analyze the evolution
of the system based on the theory of Markov chains. Our aim is to
prove that the Markov chain is not irreducible (i.e. given enough
time, the probability to reach some of its states tends to zero), and
50
that all its recurrent states represent balanced partitions. To proceed
with our analysis, we notice that the size of set S grows very fast
with the size of the graph. Calculations show that even the simple
example of Figure 7 develops to a surprisingly large chain. In order
to be able to describe the evolution of the system in a simple manner,
we also define a partition of the environment.
Definition 6. The coloring of each vertex of a configuration C by
its patrolling agent along with the set of unvisited vertices form a
partition P of the graph. Partitions are unconcerned about the levels
of pheromones on the vertices and indifferent to agent locations, thus
only exhibit the regions of C.
Many different configurations (and hence states too) correspond
to the same partition, therefore we can use the concept of a partition
as an abstraction referring to all those configurations.
Fig. 9. An example partition P of the graph
Figure 9 is an example of a partition of the environment graph
that the system we discussed above arrived to. From our previous
discussion we know that it represents a set of states of the underlying
Markov chain. One characteristic of that set of states is that it con-
tains a cyclic path. This reflects the fact that agents may cyclically
51
repeat their patrolling route for some period of time during which
conquests or losses do not occur, and the partition remains station-
ary. In fact, having a cyclic path in the underlying Markov chain is
characteristic of any reachable partition.
Eventually conquests or losses are stochastically enabled leading
to a different partition, and, as a result, to a different set of under-
lying states. In Figure 10, the system may remain in partition A for
a while, as the underlying chain cycles through the relevant states,
but eventually it will probabilistically transition to one of the par-
titions B,C,D,E. Note that the transition from A to D means that
both agents conquered one vertex each during the same time-slot.
Fig. 10. Transitions between partitions (note that these transitions may correspond to
many different transitions between possible configurations or states, see figure 7)
A recurrent class in a Markov chain is a set of states which are all
accessible from each other (possibly passing through other states),
and no state outside the set is accessible (Gallager [15]). The fol-
52
lowing Lemma shows that the set of states corresponding to any
balanced partition includes recurrent classes:
Lemma 4. If a system remains in a balanced partition for a period
of time equal to twice the cover time of its largest region, it will
remain so indefinitely.
Proof. We know from Lemma 1, that if a region remains unchanged
for a period of time which is twice its cover time, it becomes consis-
tent, so the pheromone levels in all of its vertices correctly indicate
its cover time, ϕ0 − ϕ1 = ∆t. Therefore if the system remains in
a balanced partition for a period twice the largest cover time (the
cover time of its largest region), it is guaranteed that all the regions
are consistent. Hence, we conclude that no conquest attempts are
subsequently possible, since the system is balanced and conquest
(cid:117)(cid:116)
conditions can not be satisfied across any border edge.
The conclusion of Lemma 4 is that a balanced partition with all
its regions consistent, must correspond to a recurrent (and periodic)
class in the Markov chain. The random process continuously re-
peats a series of states based on the individual agents' patrolling cy-
cles. Since agents may reach different patrolling routes for the same
region, a balanced partition may correspond to multiple recurring
classes. Additionally we can conclude the following:
53
Lemma 5. A system may enter a state in which the partition is
balanced, and then move into a state in which the partition is not
balanced.
Proof. Clearly, we see while the conditions for consistency are not
satisfied for one or more regions in the partition, a conquest or loss
may possibly happen, hence the partition may become unbalanced.
(cid:117)(cid:116)
Since recurrent classes exist, the stochastic transition matrix of the
Markov chain of the patrolling system must have the form:
T TR
M =
0 R
where T is a matrix of transitions between transient states (for exam-
ple those corresponding to non-balanced partitions), R is a matrix
of transitions between states in recurrent classes (for example those
corresponding to balanced partitions with consistent regions), and
TR describes the transitions from transient to recurrent states (for
example those corresponding to balanced partitions with inconsis-
tent regions as described in corollary 5). Note that we assume an
initial distribution given by a row vector ¯π0 and hence the future
distributions evolve according to ¯πk+1 = ¯πkM.
54
Each recurrent class representing one particular occurrence of k
routes in the k regions contributes a section Ci to R, of the form of
a shifted identity matrix,
1 0
0 1 0 ··· 0
...
...
··· 0 1 0
··· 0 1
··· 0
0
1 0
Ci =
The rank of Ci is M = lcm (∆t1, ∆t2, . . . , ∆tk) (i.e. the least com-
mon multiple of the cover times of the k regions), and is a function
of the sizes of the regions in the partition. The contribution of a
particular balanced partition would be a matrix Pj that comprises
of a set of Ci matrices on its diagonal,
C1 0 ···
0 C2
...
C3
0 ···
0
...
... 0
0 Cr
Pj =
where r here is the finite number of possible route combinations in
55
the regions that form the partition. Therefore our goal is to show
that the structure of R is
R =
P1 0 ···
0 P2
...
P3
0 ···
0
...
... 0
0 Pn
listing contributions from a finite number n of possible balanced
partitions. To achieve this we must prove that recurring classes that
are not representing balanced partitions do not exist. This is done
next.
To visualize the problem, we will classify all possible partitions
as shown in Table 1, recalling that a partition P represents a set of
states in the underlying Markov chain:
By construction of the classifications CL1,CL2,CL3,CL4 it is
clear that these are mutually exclusive as well as complete, hence
they divide the set of all possible partitions, so that any partition
P can belongs to one and only one of the four defined classes. It
also means that any state of the system X ∈ S can be classified to
one and only one of the above classes. CL4 includes the set of par-
titions that comply with Lemma 4, and CL3 includes the partitions
56
Partition Class Name
Not Covered
CL1
CL2
CL3
CL4
Table 1. Classification of Partitions
Covered,
Not Balanced
Description
Any partition P that includes at
least one vertex that is not part
of a patrolling cycle.
Any partition P /∈ CL1 that
includes two adjacent regions
with size difference greater than
one.
Balanced, Unstable Any partition P /∈ {CL1,CL2}
where one or more inconsistent
regions.
Any partition P /∈ {CL1,CL2}
where all regions are consistent.
Balanced, Stable
(Convergence)
of Lemma 5. Our goal is to show that from any initial state X ∈ S
the system will reach some state in CL4.
Figure 11, which we will soon justify, depicts the possible tran-
sitions between the classes, i.e. from a state in one class, exists a
transition sequence in the Markov chain to a state in another class
as depicted in the diagram.
We first observe that clearly, any state in CL1 or CL2 must be
transient, the system cannot remain in any one of them indefinitely.
In CL1 the partition includes free vertices (that are not part of any
region). For an agent that persist in visiting a neighboring vertex,
conquest conditions will be eventually met, and the agent will make
57
Fig. 11. Partition Class Transitions Diagram
repeated attempts to conquer it. Eventually all free vertices will be
conquered and the graph becomes covered. Similarly, on CL2, when
an agent visits a vertex bordering a larger region there is a chance it
will conquer the neighboring vertex. The conquest could cause the
pruning of the spanning tree and even a balloon explosion of the
larger region, and the system shifts to CL1, or maybe, by chance, it
will move to a balanced partition and end up in CL3.
In CL3 the system is balanced but inconsistent. We know from
Lemma 4 that it can become consistent, thus shift to CL4, since
there is always a chance that no conquests or losses will occur in
any finite period of time. If a conquest does occur, it may become
unbalanced, and then we are back to CL1 or CL2. So any state in
CL3 is transient and may sink to a state in CL4.
58
We are left to show that from any state in CL1 and CL2 there
exists a path to CL3. A sequence of states that switches the system
back and forth between CL1 and CL2 is the scenario were the sys-
tem repeatedly evolves to a covered graph only to retract by events
such as a balloon explosion. We will show now that from any con-
figuration there is a strictly positive probability to find a balanced
partition, hence move to CL3, and as result there is a strictly pos-
itive probability to get into CL4. This means that CL4, the set of
balanced partitions, are the only partitions that map to recurrent
classes. To do that we recall our restriction to Hamiltonian graphs
(or k-connected graphs) and invoke the property of vertex loss.
Lemma 6. Given a system with an environment graph G having
a Hamiltonian path (or a k-connected graph), and n agents, in an
arbitrary configuration C0, there is a strictly positive probability for
the system to evolve to a balanced partition.
Proof. Let us assume the contrary, that there exists a configura-
tion C0 representing a state s0 ∈ {CL1,CL2} such that the prob-
ability of any arbitrarily long step sequence starting at C0 to ar-
rive into a state in CL3 is strictly zero. We first note that there
is a strictly positive probability that the next change of a region is
the loss of a vertex. Namely, assume that for a sequence of con-
figurations {C0,C1, . . . ,CN}, where N is finite, at configurations
{C0,C1, . . . ,CN−1} there were no changes to any of the regions in the
59
partition of the environment, and at CN one or more of the regions
lost one vertex each, following failed conquest attempts. This could
repeat and consequently, there is a strictly positive (though very
small) probability for a sequence of configurations {C0,C1, . . . ,CM},
where M is finite, to arrive to a configuration CM where each of the
regions is of size 1. Now, we note that there is a strictly positive prob-
ability that the next change of a region is a conquest launched from
one vertex to a neighbor along a given Hamiltonian path. This could
repeat until the regions form one of the possible balanced partitions
along the Hamiltonian path and the system is now in CL3. This
evolution contradicts our assumption regarding C0, and we therefore
conclude that {CL1,CL2} is a transient set, thus from any arbi-
trary configuration there is a strictly positive probability to arrive
to a balanced partition.
Note that a similar argument can be made for a k-connected
(cid:117)(cid:116)
environment graph.
We therefore conclude:
Theorem 2. A system with a Hamiltonian or k-connected graph G
with stationary topology, and n agents implementing AntPaP con-
verges in finite expected time to a balanced and stable partition with
probability 1.
60
Proof. The conclusion from Lemma 6, is that any state s ∈ {CL1,CL2}
is transient. We also know that any state s ∈ CL3 is transient by
Lemma 4. This means that all recurrent classes included in the ma-
T TR
represent balanced
trix R of the stochastic matrix M =
and stable partitions, classified as CL4. A Markov chain described
by a stochastic matrix of this form, will eventually enter a recurrent
0 R
state, regardless of the initial state, and the probability that this
takes more than t steps approaches zero geometrically with t (see,
for example, Gallager [15]). We conclude that a system with a graph
G (of stationary topology) and n agents implementing AntPaP con-
verges with probability 1 and a finite expected time to a balanced
(cid:117)(cid:116)
and stable partition.
61
6 Experimental Results and Discussion
We presented and thoroughly analyzed the AntPaP algorithm for
continuously patrolling a graph-environment with simple finite state
automaton agents (or bots) using "pheromone traces". The simu-
lations presented so far were on an environment in the shape of a
square. On such an environment, we know that many balanced parti-
tions do indeed exist. Practical scenarios are seldom so simplistic. In
many important cases, the environment graph is, in fact, uncharted
and much more complex in its structure. Still, agents implementing
AntPaP will find a balanced partition with probability one (almost
surely), if such a partition exists, and will certainly divide their work
fairly even when such partitions do not exist.
The shape of the environment considerably affects the time to
convergence. The number of balanced partitions that the environ-
ment graph has is, naturally, one of the major factors. So is their
diversity, i.e. how different the balanced partitions are from each
other. If the balanced partitions are similar to one another, the de-
pendency of the time to convergence on the initial locations of the
agents tends to be higher than if the solutions are further apart.
Consider the system of Figure 12. The initial positions of 7 agents
are shown in the first snapshot at t = 1. Next, at t = 896, the lower
section becomes almost covered. At t = 5995, the upper section is
62
almost covered, and the two agents there clearly have larger regions
than the agents in the lower section. At t = 12993, the cyan agent
is trapped in the upper section, and we witness a competition be-
tween the agents from the lower section to grow their regions into
the prolonged section, that the cyan agent abandoned.
Fig. 12. Evolution of a system with 7 a(ge)nts
At t = 85896, the competition ends after the yellow agent tra-
versed into the upper section. Now we have 3 agents on each of the
upper and lower sections, and one on the prolonged section. Soon af-
63
ter, the system reaches a balanced partition. Clearly, there are many
balanced partitions for this system, but all of them have one agent on
the prolonged section, and 3 agents on each of the upper and lower
sections. Initial conditions with 3 agents on the upper and lower
sections each will ensure faster convergence to a balanced partition.
Following this experiment and discussion, it is interesting to consider
a system with the same environment graph and an even number of
agents.
We simulated a system with the same environment graph and 2
agents. This system has only one balanced partition, shown in Figure
13.
Fig. 13. The only balanced partition of a systen with 2 agents
Since only one balanced partition exists, it is reasonable to predict
that the required time for convergence might be substantial. Figure
14 shows snapshots of an evolution of this system. Both the violet
64
and yellow agents are initially located in the lower section. After a
while, the violet agent expands its region so that part of it extends
into the upper section. A while later, the violet region covers almost
all of the upper section as well as the prolonged section. Then, the
yellow agent begins to expand into the prolonged section, eventually
causing a "balloon explosion" of violet's region. Soon enough, the
violet agent responds, and causes a balloon explosion of the yellow's
region.
Fig. 14. Evolution of a system with 2 a(ge)nts
65
Due to the shape of the graph, this cycle may repeat over and over
again. It will stop only when the single possible balanced partition
is reached, and subsequently the regions "lock-in", and the system
remains stable. For that to happen, an agent must conquer the ap-
propriate half of the vertices of the prolonged section. We know that
this will eventually happen with probability 1, however the time it
will take can be very very long.
Fig. 15. A system with a "Cross" graph and 5 agents
Fig. 16. A system with the same "Cross" graph as in Figure 15, and 100 agents
66
The number of agents is also an important factor of conver-
gence time. Generally, more agents hasten the convergence. Figure
15 shows an evolution of a system with 5 agents on a different envi-
ronment. We shall call this environment graph the "Cross". Figure 16
shows a system with the same "Cross" graph and 100 agents. Here,
the "pressure" that an agent "feels" from other "balloons" quickly
accumulates around its region, and the convergence is swift. Figure
17 depicts results of multiple simulation runs, of systems with the
"Cross" graph of figure 15, exhibiting convergence time as a function
of the number of agents.
Fig. 17. Convergence time of a system with a "Cross" graph as function of the number
of agents
67
In some systems, particular numbers of agents may cause a sub-
stantially larger time to convergence. In Figure 18 we present a bal-
anced partition in a graph environment that we call "6 Rooms".
Fig. 18. Balanced partition reached on a "6 Rooms" graph
Systems with a "6 Rooms" graph and 6 agents sometimes require a
substantially longer convergence time, as shown in Figure 19. Ignor-
ing the outliers at 6 agents, Figure 20 shows that the chart exhibiting
convergence time as a function of the number of agents is similar in
shape to the one we have seen for the "Cross" graph, in Figure 17.
68
Fig. 19. Convergence time of a system with a "6 Rooms" graph as function of the
number of agents
Fig. 20. Zoom-In on the chart of Figure 19
69
Fig. 21. An evolution of a system of 10 agents and a "6 Rooms" graph of about 10,000
vertices. Convergence was achieved at approximately t = 4, 000, 000. But the system
became "close to balanced" rather quickly.
Fig. 22. An evolution that reached "close to balanced" quickly, and remain so for long.
In the simulations described above, we tested the evolution of
the multi-agent patrolling process until convergence to a stable and
balanced partition. However remarkably, the system evolves rather
70
quickly to close-to-balanced partitions due to the "balloon" forces
implicitly driving the agents' behavior. Therefore, for practical pur-
poses we see that the AntPaP algorithm balances the work of the
agents much earlier than its convergence time, and the partitioning
becomes reasonably good rather quickly. This property is crucial in
case of time varying topologies. Hence, AntPaP is a versatile and
adaptive process. Considering again the "6 Rooms" example with 10
agents, we see in Figure 21 a temporal evolution of AntPaP until a
stable and balanced partition is achieved. As is clear on the chart
displaying the time evolution of the sizes of the 10 regions, the sys-
tem reached convergence at approximately t = 4, 000, 000 steps.
However it is also clear that after approximately 400, 000 steps, the
difference between the largest and smallest regions in the partition of
the environment graph is already insignificant. In the chart, a system
is defined as "close to balanced" when more than 99% of the graph is
covered, and the difference between the largest and smallest regions
is less than 5% the ideally balanced size (i.e. the graph size divided
by the number of agents). Figure 22 exhibits a partition reached
when the system was "close to balanced". Both snapshots show the
same partition (at two different times). The snapshot at the right
also shows the borders between regions that "reached balance" (i.e.
their size difference is at most 1 vertex) depicted in purple. There
is only one border which is not yet balanced, between the magenta
71
region and the dark yellow region, located in the right "corridor".
These regions are close in their sizes, and as a result the double visit
condition does not occur very often. Despite the partition not being
balanced yet, the division of work between agents is already fair,
hence for practical purposes, a "close to balanced" condition is good
enough.
We note in summary that AntPaP does not produce k-cut parti-
tions [7], and generally assumes that there are no constraints on the
grouping of vertices. Some important real-world problems impose
such constraints, for example, the allocation of users in a social net-
work to hosting servers, according to their interconnections. Other
real-world problems, however, do not impose such constrains, for ex-
ample, the division of work patrolling the world-wide-web for content
analysis and classification. In view of the good properties discussed
above, we envision that AntPaP could become a building block for
distributed algorithms aiming to fairly divide between agents the
labor of patrolling an environment, using very simple agents con-
strained to local interactions based on tiny "pheromone" marks left
in the environment.
72
References
1. Y. Elor, A. M. Bruckstein, "Multi-a(ge)nt graph patrolling and partitioning". Pro-
ceedings of the 2009 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Joint Conference on Web In-
telligence and Intelligent Agent Technology-Volume 02. IEEE Computer Society,
2009.
2. I.A. Wagner, M. Lindenbaum, A. M. Bruckstein, "Efficiently searching a graph by
a smell-oriented vertex process". Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence,
24(1-4):211 -- 223, 1998.
3. S. Even, "Graph Algorithms". Rockville, MD: Comput. Sci. Press, 1979
4. P. Berkhin, "A survey of clustering data mining techniques." Grouping multidi-
mensional data. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 25-71, 2006.
5. C. J. Alpert, A. B. Kahng, "Recent directions in netlist partitioning: a survey",
Integration, the VLSI Journal , 19(1 -- 2):1-81,1995
6. K. Schloegel, G. Karypis, V. Kumar, "Parallel static and dynamic multi-constraint
graph partitioning", Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 14
(3):219 -- 240,2002
7. R. G. Downey, V. Estivill-Castro, M. R. Fellows, E. Prieto, F. A. Rosamond,
"Cutting Up Is Hard To Do: the Parameterized Complexity of k -Cut and Related
Problems", Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, 78():209 -- 222,2003
8. R. Tarjan, "Depth-First Search and Linear Graph Algorithms", SIAM, 1(2):146-
160, 1972
9. J. D. McCaffrey. "Graph Partitioning using a Simulated Bee Colony Algorithm",
IEEE Conference on Information Reuse and Integration (IRI) Las Vegas, USA, pp.
400-405, 2011
10. F. Comellas, E. Sapena, "A multiagent algorithm for graph partitioning". EvoWork-
shops, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3907:279 -- 285, 2006
11. Y. Chevaleyre, F. Sempe, G. Ramalho, "A theoretical analysis of multi-agent pa-
trolling strategies." Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on
Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems-Volume 3. IEEE Computer Society,
pp. 1524-1525, 2004.
73
12. F. Lauri, F. Charpillet, "Ant colony optimization applied to the multi-agent pa-
trolling problem." IEEE Swarm Intelligence Symposium, 2006.
13. M. Dorigo, V. M. Maniezzo, A. Colorni, "Ant system: optimization by a colony of
cooperating agents." IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part
B (Cybernetics) 26(1): 29-41, 1996.
14. E. Gyori, "On division of graphs to connected subgraphs." Combinatorics (Proc.
Fifth Hungarian Colloq., Keszthely). Vol. 1, 1976.
15. R. G. Gallager, Stochastic processes: theory for applications. Cambridge University
Press, 2013.
16. A. Nerode, "Linear automaton transformations." Proceedings of the American
Mathematical Society 9(4): 541-544, 1958
74
|
1911.09807 | 1 | 1911 | 2019-11-22T01:51:02 | Multi-Objective Multi-Agent Planning for Jointly Discovering and Tracking Mobile Object | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.RO",
"eess.SY",
"eess.SY"
] | We consider the challenging problem of online planning for a team of agents to autonomously search and track a time-varying number of mobile objects under the practical constraint of detection range limited onboard sensors. A standard POMDP with a value function that either encourages discovery or accurate tracking of mobile objects is inadequate to simultaneously meet the conflicting goals of searching for undiscovered mobile objects whilst keeping track of discovered objects. The planning problem is further complicated by misdetections or false detections of objects caused by range limited sensors and noise inherent to sensor measurements. We formulate a novel multi-objective POMDP based on information theoretic criteria, and an online multi-object tracking filter for the problem. Since controlling multi-agent is a well known combinatorial optimization problem, assigning control actions to agents necessitates a greedy algorithm. We prove that our proposed multi-objective value function is a monotone submodular set function; consequently, the greedy algorithm can achieve a (1-1/e) approximation for maximizing the submodular multi-objective function. | cs.MA | cs | Multi-Objective Multi-Agent Planning for Jointly Discovering and Tracking
Mobile Objects
Hoa Van Nguyen,1 Hamid Rezatofighi,1 Ba-Ngu Vo,2 Damith C. Ranasinghe1
1 The University of Adelaide
2 Curtin University
{hoavan.nguyen,hamid.rezatofighi,damith.ranasinghe}@adelaide.edu.au, [email protected]
9
1
0
2
v
o
N
2
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
7
0
8
9
0
.
1
1
9
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
Abstract
We consider the challenging problem of online planning for
a team of agents to autonomously search and track a time-
varying number of mobile objects under the practical con-
straint of detection range limited onboard sensors. A standard
POMDP with a value function that either encourages discov-
ery or accurate tracking of mobile objects is inadequate to
simultaneously meet the conflicting goals of searching for
undiscovered mobile objects whilst keeping track of discov-
ered objects. The planning problem is further complicated by
misdetections or false detections of objects caused by range
limited sensors and noise inherent to sensor measurements.
We formulate a novel multi-objective POMDP based on infor-
mation theoretic criteria, and an online multi-object tracking
filter for the problem. Since controlling multi-agent is a well
known combinatorial optimization problem, assigning control
actions to agents necessitates a greedy algorithm. We prove
that our proposed multi-objective value function is a monotone
submodular set function; consequently, the greedy algorithm
can achieve a (1 − 1/e) approximation for maximizing the
submodular multi-objective function.
Introduction
We study the problem of controlling a team of agents to
jointly track discovered mobile objects and explore the en-
vironment to search for undiscovered mobile objects of
interest. Such problems are ubiquitous in wildlife track-
ing (Cliff et al. 2015; Kays et al. 2011; Nguyen et al. 2019a;
Thomas, Holland, and Minot 2012), search and rescue mis-
sions (Gerasenko et al. 2001; Murphy et al. 2008). For in-
stance, a team of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) can be
deployed to monitor activities of endangered radio-tagged
wildlife in a survey scene, or to search for victims in a disaster
response (Beck et al. 2018). Hence, it is critical to not only
search for undiscovered objects but also track the movements
of discovered objects of interest. Consequently, the overall
team's objectives arise as a natural multi-objective optimiza-
tion problem, where several pertinent goals (i.e., tracking and
discovering) need to be simultaneously achieved.
Intrinsically, searching for undiscovered objects whilst si-
multaneously tracking visible objects are competing goals
Copyright c(cid:13) 2020, Association for the Advancement of Artificial
Intelligence (www.aaai.org). All rights reserved.
because, in practice, agent sensor systems, such as cameras,
have limited detection range. A single agent may only ob-
serve a small region of space and a decision to leave a visible
object to explore hitherto unseen regions will lead to los-
ing track of visible objects. Therefore, an agent observing
a small region of the search area needs to collaboratively
interact with other agents to plan its course of actions to col-
lectively maximize the overall team's objectives of tracking
and discovering multiple objects.
Multi-agent planning to achieve multiple competing objec-
tives remains a challenging problem because of the complex
interactions between agents leading to combinatorial opti-
mization problems (Wai et al. 2018). In practice, the problem
is further complicated because: i) the agent sensors are not
only limited in range but also sensitivity, and measurements
are always subjected to environmental noise. Consequently,
object detectors suffer from both missing detections of ob-
jects and false detections; and ii) the number of objects of
interest is often unknown, and varies with time since mobile
objects can enter and leave the scene anytime (Vo et al. 2012).
Most critically, the computation of optimal planning actions
must be timely for real-world applications.
We propose a framework for multiple agents to jointly
plan, search and track a time-varying number of objects us-
ing a novel multi-objective information-based value function
formulation. Our multi-objective value function captures the
competing objectives of planning for tracking and discovery.
We adopt the random finite set (RFS) model for the collection
of objects of interest to account for the random appearance
and disappearance of objects and their dynamics. Our pro-
posed multi-objective value function maximizes information
gain over a look-ahead horizon for both discovered and undis-
covered objects. Most importantly, our multi-objective value
function is proven to be a monotone submodular set function;
thus, we can cope with the intractability of the multi-objective
optimization problem (MOP) by employing a greedy algo-
rithm. Our ability to use a greedy algorithm facilitates the
computation of approximately optimal control actions with
linear complexity in the number of agents for realizing an
online planning method.
Related Work: Multi-agent path planning in partially ob-
servable environments is a difficult problem for which the
Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes (POMDP)
approach has recently gained significant interest (Silver and
Veness 2010; MacDermed and Isbell 2013; Messias, Spaan,
and Lima 2011). Although the cooperation problem can
be formulated as a decentralized POMDP (Dec-POMDP),
its exact solutions are NEXP-hard (Bernstein et al. 2002).
This is especially problematic for multi-agent POMDPs
since the action and observation space grows exponentially
with the number of agents (Amato and Oliehoek 2015).
To cope with this intractability, we adopt the MPOMDP
centralized approach (Messias, Spaan, and Lima 2011)
for controlling multiple agents (Dames and Kumar 2015;
Dames, Tokekar, and Kumar 2017; Wang et al. 2018).
POMDP has also been employed for sensor selection prob-
lems, e.g., (Spaan, Veiga, and Lima 2015; Satsangi et al.
2018) proposed using the ρPOMDP (Araya et al. 2010) for a
mobile agent to select K in N available sensors to search and
track multiple objects. In particular, (Spaan, Veiga, and Lima
2015) proposed a method that always assumes the existence
of one extra object in the scene to encourage discovery. How-
ever, biasing the cardinality estimate generates sub optimal
planing decisions at the cost of tracking performance.
Our study focuses on the problem of controlling a team of
agents for the task of tracking and discovering mobile targets.
The task requires a suitable tracking framework. Studies on
tracking objects have employed approaches such as Multiple
Hypotheses Tracking (MHT) (Reid 1979) or Joint Probabilis-
tic Data Association (JPDA) (Blackman and Popoli 1999).
The complex nature of our problem requires a framework that
has the notion of probability of a random collection due to a
time-varying and random number of objects where the states
of objects are random vectors. The random finite set (RFS)
(Mahler 2007) is the only framework that has the notion of
probability density of a random set. Hence, we adopt RFS as
our tracking framework.
Information-based path planning under the RFS framework
for a single agent has been studied in several works (Beard
et al. 2017; Hoang and Vo 2014; Ristic and Vo 2010). Most
studies on multi-agent path planning using an RFS frame-
work, is based on the Generalized Covariance Intersection
(GCI) methods with the assumption that agents have a con-
sensus view of all objects (Gostar, Hoseinnezhad, and Bab-
Hadiashar 2016; Wang et al. 2018) and using only a single
look-ahead horizon. (Dames, Tokekar, and Kumar 2017) pro-
posed to control multiple fixed-wing UAVs to localize mobile
taxis with a single objective value function. For localizing
and searching objects simultaneously, (Dames and Kumar
2015) and (Charrow, Michael, and Kumar 2015) considered
a similar scenario, but only for stationary objects. Planning
using multi-objective optimization (MOP) has not been ex-
plored yet, except for single sensor selection (Zhu, Wang, and
Liang 2019) or using the weighted sum method presented in
(Charrow, Michael, and Kumar 2015) where the weighting
parameters are difficult to define without prior knowledge.
In contrast, we focus on optimizing all value functions (i.e.,
tracking and discovering) simultaneously using MOP. In par-
ticular, our proposed tracking and discovering value functions
are based on information criteria. The tracking value func-
tion maximizes the mutual information between future mea-
surements and discovered object states under a multi-sensor
Bernoulli filter; the discovering value function maximizes
the mutual information between empty measurements and
undiscovered object states under a grid occupancy filter.
Our contributions: The main contributions of our work
are: (i) We formulate a multi-agent planning problem with
competing objectives and propose a planning algorithm for
searching and tracking multiple mobile objects; (ii) We unify
tracking and planning algorithms under a Bernoulli-based
model; (iii) We prove that our proposed multi-objective value
function is submodular; hence, the greedy algorithm can
be used to rapidly determine the approximately optimal
control actions with a bounded performance guarantee at
(1 − 1/e)OPT.
Problem Formulation
First, we introduce assumptions to help define our problem
and introduce the notations we adopt in our work. Second, we
provide a brief overview of the multi-sensor Bernoulli filter
which unifies the tracking and discovering formulation. Next,
we formulate our MPOMDP multi-agent planning approach
for controlling the multi-agent team.
Assumptions and Notations
Assumptions: We consider a team of S agents surveying a
large area to detect and track an unknown and time-varying
number of mobile objects using detection-based measure-
ments. We assume that each agent can localize itself (e.g.,
using an onboard GPS for UAVs) and that all agents can
communicate to a central node to enables us to adopt the
centralized approach for MPOMDP. Consequently, we as-
sume that all of the measurements are transferred to a central
node that analyzes received information and subsequently
sends control actions to all of the agents. Here, we em-
ploy a discrete control action space to reduce the compu-
tational load (Beard et al. 2017; Dames, Tokekar, and Kumar
2017). We further assume that the measurements from an
object collected by the agents are conditionally independent
given the object's state (Charrow, Michael, and Kumar 2015;
Thrun, Burgard, and Fox 2005).
Notations: We use the convention that lower-case letters
(e.g., x) represent single-object states, upper-case letters (e.g.,
X) represent multi-object (finite-set) states, and blackboard
bold letters (e.g., X, Z) represent spaces. We denote the inner
product(cid:82) f (x)g(x)dx = (cid:104)f, g(cid:105).
Multi-sensor Bernoulli filter (MS-BF)
In practice, an object can randomly enter and leave the surveil-
lance region, hence the number of objects of interest is un-
known and time-varying. Further, it is important to consider
the existence of objects of interest to allow the agents to dis-
cover new objects when they enter the scene and to prevent
agents following false-positives. This can be addressed by
the random finite sets (RFSs) approach, first proposed by
(Mahler 2007). RFSs are finite-set valued random variables.
We assume that each measurement is uniquely identified, e.g.,
transmit frequencies from radio beacons (Cliff et al. 2015;
Kays et al. 2011; Nguyen et al. 2019a; Nguyen et al. 2019b;
Thomas, Holland, and Minot 2012) or MAC address (Beck
et al. 2018; Charrow, Michael, and Kumar 2015), which is
typical for wildlife tracking or search and rescue missions.
Since each object is uniquely identified, we propose using
a the multi-sensor Bernoulli filter (MS-BF) (Vo et al. 2012),
where each object's state is a Bernoulli RFS, and run mul-
tiple MS-BF filters parallelly to track multiple objects. A
Bernoulli RFS X on X has at most one element with prob-
ability r for being singleton or 1 − r for being empty. Its
probability density π(·) = (r, p(·)) given by
X = ∅,
(cid:26)1 − r,
π(X) =
r · p(x), X = {x}.
k
Object tracking with MS-BF: We model each object's state
at time k by Xk as a Bernoulli RFS. The MS-BF propagates
the two quantities: the existence probability r and spatial den-
sity p(·). If the posterior density is πk−1 = (rk−1, pk−1),
then the predicted density πkk−1 = (rkk−1, pkk−1) is
also a Bernoulli RFS, with rkk−1 = rB,k(1 − rk−1) +
rk−1(cid:104)pS,k, pk−1(cid:105); pk−1(xk) = (cid:2)rB,k(1 − rk−1)bk(xk) +
rk−1(cid:104)fkk−1(xk·), pS,k(·)pk−1(·)(cid:105)(cid:3)/rkk−1. Here, rB,k and
◦ ··· ◦ Ψ(1)
pS,k are the probabilities of object birth and object survival,
bk(·) is the object birth density. Further, the updated density
πk is also a Bernoulli RFS, given by πk = (rk, pk) with rk =
Ψ(S)
k (pkk−1).
Here, ◦ denotes composition (of operators), Ψ(s)
is an update
operator for agent s, i.e.:
k (r)] =(cid:104)η(s)(Z (s)·), p(·)(cid:105)r/(cid:2)(1 − r)e−λ(s)
k (rkk−1); pk = Ψ(S)
◦ ··· ◦ Ψ(1)
+ r(cid:104)η(s)(Z (s)·), p(·)(cid:105)(cid:3),
k (p)](x) =η(s)(Z (s)x)p(x)/(cid:104)η(s)(Z (s)·), p(·)(cid:105)
(1)
(2)
where the superscript (s) denotes the parameters of agent
s, λ(s) is the clutter rate, and η(s)(Z (s)x) denotes the like-
lihood of measurement set Z (s) from agent s given the ob-
ject's state x. η(s)(Z (s)x) is also a Bernoulli RFS, given by
η(s)(Z (s)x) =
1 − p(s)
d (x)g(s)(zx), Z (s) = {z}.
p(s)
Z (s) = ∅,
d (x),
(cid:40)
[Ψ(s)
[Ψ(s)
k
k
Here, p(s)
d (x) is the probability that agent s detects object
x, and g(s)(zx) is the (conventional) likelihood function of
measurement z given object's state x.
Planning
At time k, the team of S agents needs to plan how they ma-
noeuvre over the time interval k + 1 : k + H to improve
its estimation of the states of multiple objects Xk, where
H denotes the look-ahead horizon length. Let A ⊆ RN be
all possible set of control actions for a given agent. When
k ∈ A is applied to an agent i, it fol-
the control action ai
lows a trajectory comprised of sequence of the discrete poses
k+H ]T with corresponding
ui
k+1, . . . , ui
k+1:k+H (ai
measurements Z i
k+H ]T (for
k) = [Z i
notational compactness, we omit the dependence on Xk
k ]T ∈ AS be the control ac-
here). Let Ak = [a1
tions where AS = A × ··· × A is the control action space
k+1, . . . , Z i
k+1:k+H (ai
k) = [ui
k, . . . , aS
for S agents, and the corresponding measurement set is
Zk+1:k+H (Ak) = [Z 1
The objective of path planning is to find the optimal action
k ∈ AS that maximizes the value function, i.e.,
A∗
k+1:k+H (aS
k+1:k+H (a1
k), . . . , Z S
k )]T .
V (Xk+1:k+H , Zk+1:k+H (Ak)).
(3)
A∗
k = arg max
Ak∈AS
(cid:104)(cid:80)H
(cid:105)
H(cid:88)
V (Xk+1:k+H , Zk+1:k+H (Ak))
j=1 R(Xk+j, Zk+j(Ak))
where
=
the value function
E
or the expected sum of immediate rewards R(·) over a finite
horizon H. Since an analytic solution does not exist for the
expected reward, we use the predicted ideal measurement
set (PIMS) (Mahler 2004) -- a computationally low-cost
approach. The value function is calculated:
is
V (Xk+1:k+H , Zk+1:k+H (Ak)) =
R(Xk+j, Zk+j(Ak))
j=1
where Zk+j(Ak) denotes the ideal measurement set of
Zk+j(Ak) calculated using the measurement model and
the estimated states of objects without measurement noise.
For notational compactness, we write the value function
V (Xk+1:k+H , Zk+1:k+H (Ak)) as V (Ak).
Planning for Tracking and Discovering
Multiple Objects
Planning for tracking discovered mobile objects
In this problem, we consider maximizing an information-
based reward function to reduce the overall uncertainty of the
discovered mobile objects because more information natu-
rally implies less uncertainty. In particular, we propose using
the mutual information I(X; Z) between the object's state X
and measurement state Z as the immediate reward function,
and the long-term sum of rewards over a finite horizon H, or
so-called the value function is given by
H(cid:88)
V1(Ak) =
I(Xk+j; Zk+j(Ak))
(4)
j=1
where I(X; Z) = h(X) − h(XZ), with h(X) is the gener-
alization of differential entropy for a finite set X ⊆ X with
X f (X) log f (X)δX;
X ·δX is the set integral (Mahler 2007). For Bernoulli
density f (X) defined as h(X) = −(cid:82)
here(cid:82)
RFS, this integration is simplified to h(X) = −(cid:2)f (X =
∅) log f (X = ∅) +(cid:82) f (X = x) log f (X = x)dx(cid:3). We have
the following theorem.
Theorem 1. The mutual information I(X; Z) between the
object state X and measurement state Z is a monotone sub-
modular set function of Z.
Proof. We want to prove that this mutual information
I(X; Z) is a monotone submodular set function, i.e., for
Z1 ⊆ Z2 ⊆ Z, and z ∈ Z \ Z2 independent of Z1 and Z2:
I(X; Z2,{z}) − I(X; Z2) ≤ I(X; Z1,{z}) − I(X; Z1).
Since Z1 ⊆ Z2 ⊆ Z, using mutual information inequalities
(Cover and Thomas 2012, p.50), we have:
I(Z2;{z}) ≥ I(Z1;{z}),
⇔ h(z) − h(zZ2) ≥ h(z) − h(zZ1),
⇔ h(zZ1) ≥ h(zZ2),
⇔ h(Z1,{z}) − h(Z1) ≥ h(Z2,{z}) − h(Z2).
(5)
Further, since I(Z2;{z}X) = I(Z1;{z}X) = 0 is due to
z is independent of Z1 and Z2 given X, we have:
h({z}X) = h({z}X, Z2) + I(Z2;{z}X) = h({z}X, Z2)
= h(X, Z2,{z}) − h(X, Z2),
h({z}X) = h({z}X, Z1) + I(Z1;{z}X)
= h(X, Z1,{z}) − h(X, Z1).
Hence,
h(X, Z2,{z}) − h(X, Z2) = h(X, Z1,{z}) − h(X, Z1).
(6)
Subtracting (5) from (6), we have:
[h(X, Z2,{z}) − h(X, Z2)] − [h(Z2,{z}) − h(Z2)]
≥ [h(X, Z1,{z}) − h(X, Z1)] − [h(Z1,{z}) − h(Z1)]
Using differential entropy chain rules (Cover and Thomas
2012, p.253), we have that h(XZ2,{z}) = h(X, Z2,{z})−
h(Z2,{z}) and h(XZ2) = h(X, Z2) − h(Z2), thus the
above equation is equivalent to
h(XZ2,{z}) − h(XZ2) ≥ h(XZ1,{z}) − h(XZ1)
⇔[h(X) − h(XZ2,{z})] − [h(X) − h(XZ2)]
≤ [h(X) − h(XZ1,{z}] − [h(X) − h(XZ1)],
⇔I(X; Z2,{z}) − I(X; Z2) ≤ I(X; Z1,{z}) − I(X; Z1).
Thus, I(X; Z) is a submodular set function. Further, using
the chain rule we have:
I(X; Z2,{z}) − I(X; Z2) = I(X; Z2{z}) ≥ 0
Therefore, I(X; Z) is a monotone submodular set function.
Remark: Our mutual information formulation is different to
that in (Krause, Singh, and Guestrin 2008) used for sensor
selection problems. Krause et al. showed that for Z ⊆ Z, the
mutual information I(Z; Z \ Z) is a submodular set function.
In other words, the mutual information I(Z1; Z2) is submod-
ular with the property that Z1 ∪ Z2 = Z and Z is fixed. In
contrast, we measure the mutual information between the
random set object state X and the random set measurement
state Z and prove I(X; Z) is also a submodular set function
of Z without the aforementioned property.
Corollary 2. The value function V1(Ak) in (4) is a monotone
submodular set function.
Proof. Since I(Xk; Zk+j(Ak)) is a monotone submodular
set function and V1(Ak) is a positive linear combination of it,
according to (Nemhauser, Wolsey, and Fisher 1978, p.272),
V1(Ak) is a monotone submodular set function.
.
j=1
i
m=1
m=1
m=1
i
i
(7)
w(m)
i
i
− ri
h(X) =
Ns(cid:80)
n(cid:88)
log(riw(m)
set of Ns particles, such that pi(x) ≈ Ns(cid:80)
Mutual Information Calculation based on MS-BF: As-
sume that each object i is associated with a Bernoulli dis-
tribution π(Xi) = (ri, pi). Let pi(x) be approximated by a
δ(x(m) − x)
i = 1 and δ(·) is the Kronecker delta function;
w(m)
with
X = X1 ∪ ··· ∪ Xn be the state of multiple objects. Since
each object is uniquely identified by its label and estimated
by an individual Bernoulli filter, we have
(cid:104) − (1 − ri) log(1 − ri)
)(cid:3)(cid:105)
Ns(cid:88)
(cid:2)w(m)
(cid:2)h(Xk+j) −
V1(Ak) can be calculated as V1(Ak) =(cid:80)H
h(Xk+j Zk+j(Ak))(cid:3), where h(Xk+1) is calculated directly
According to the definition of the mutual information
I(X; Z) = h(X)−h(XZ), thus the tracking value function
h(Xi) ≈ n(cid:88)
in (7). For h(Xk+j Zk+j(Ak)), it has the same form as in
(7); however, rk+j,i and w(m)
k+j,i are calculated by propagat-
ing rk,i and w(m)
from time k to k + j using (1) and (2)
k,i
respectively with the ideal measurements Zk+j(Ak).
Planning to search for undiscovered mobile objects
Occupancy Grid Filter: Since an agent is equipped with
a sensor with a limited detection range, we propose us-
ing an occupancy grid to represent the probability of any
undiscovered objects (Elfes 1989). We extend the static
grid approach in (Charrow, Michael, and Kumar 2015;
Thrun, Burgard, and Fox 2005) by incorporating the birth
probability into each occupancy cell to account for the pos-
sibilities of mobile objects entering and leaving the survey
area, anytime. The survey area is divided into an occupancy
grid G = {g1, . . . , gNg} ⊂ RN , where each cell gi ∈ G
associated with a Bernoulli random variable ri. Here, ri is
the probability that cell gi contains at least one undiscovered
object. For initialization, we set ri
0 = rB such that every
cell has the same prior. Each cell i is propagated through
MS-BF over time using the predict and update equations. In
particular, let ri
k−1 be the probability of cell gi containing
at least one undiscovered object, then its predict and update
probabilities at time k are (8) and (9). Note that since these
objects are yet to be discovered, we use empty measurements
for all agents (denoted as Z∅ to update).
k−1) + ri
◦ ··· ◦ Ψ(1)
k (ri
kk−1 = rB(1 − ri
ri
k = Ψ(S)
ri
k−1pS,
(8)
k
d (gi))(cid:3).
d (gi))ri/(cid:2)1 − ri + ri(1 −
kk−1),
(9)
k (ri)] = (1 − p(s)
where [Ψ(s)
p(s)
Searching for undiscovered objects: As before, we propose
using mutual information as the immediate reward function.
We want to maximize the mutual information between the
estimated occupancy grid G and the ideal empty future mea-
surement Z∅
k+1:k+H (Ak), i.e.,
I(Gk; Z∅
V2(Ak) =
k+j(Ak)),
k+j(Ak)) = H(Gk)−H(Gk Z∅
where I(Gk; Z∅
H(Gk) is the Shannon entropy of Gk:
j=1
k+j(Ak)) and
(10)
(11)
H(cid:88)
(cid:2)ri
Ng(cid:88)
i=1
H(Gk) = −
k log(ri
k)
k) log(1 − ri
+ (1 − ri
k)(cid:3),
and H(Gk+j Z∅
k+j(Ak)) has the same form as in (11) with
k+j from k to k + j using
k+j is calculated by propagating ri
ri
the update step in (9) with empty measurements Z∅
k+j(Ak).
Theorem 3. The value function V2 in (10) is a monotone
submodular set function.
Proof. We can apply a similar strategy as per Theorem 1 to
prove that I(Gk; Z∅
k+j(Ak)) is a monotone submodular set
function, note that H(·) is the Shannon entropy (a discrete
version of differential entropy h(·)). Further, since V2(Ak) is
a positive linear combination of I(Gk; Z∅
k+j(Ak)), according
to (Nemhauser, Wolsey, and Fisher 1978, p.272), V2(Ak) is
a monotone submodular set function.
Multi-objective value function for tracking and
discovering
In this problem, we want to control the team of agents to
perform both tracking and discovering; this naturally leads to
a multi-objective problem. Specifically, we want to maximize
V (Ak) = [V1(Ak), V2(Ak)]T
subject to Ak ∈ AS where V1 and V2 are defined in (4) and
(10), respectively. Multi-objective optimization provides a
meaningful notion of multi-objective optimality such as the
Pareto-set, which represents trade-offs between the objec-
tives such that there is no other solution that can improve one
objective without degrading any remaining objectives (White-
son and Roijers 2016). Online planning necessitates selecting
one compromised solution from the Pareto-set on-the-fly.
One approach is Robust Submodular Observation Selection
(RSOS) (Krause et al. 2008), which is robust against the
worst possible objective; however, even if each Vi is submod-
ular, Vmin = mini Vi is generally not submodular. Other
approaches include Weighted Sum (WS) and Global Crite-
rion Method (GCM); simplicity of these methods are not only
attractive for meeting the demands of online planning but
also result in a submodular value function. In this work, we
adopt GCM to select the compromised solution considering
the distance from the ideal solution. Inspired by (Koski 1993),
we define the value function Vmo (with Vmo(∅) = 0) as:
2(cid:88)
i=1
Vi(Ak) − min
Ak∈AS
Vi(Ak) − min
Ak∈AS
max
A∈AS
Vi(Ak)
.
(12)
Vi(Ak)
Vmo(Ak) =
The global criterion method admits a unique optimal so-
lution from the Pareto-set (Coello et al. 2007). Hence, the
multi-objective problem becomes
A∗
k = arg max
Ak∈AS
Vmo(Ak).
(13)
Since finding the optimal control action A∗ ∈ AS is a com-
binatorial optimization problem, we want to show that the
multi-objective value function Vmo(A) in (12) is also a mono-
tone submodular set function on Z. This enables us to use
the greedy algorithm to find the optimal action that approxi-
mately maximize this multi-objective value function.
Corollary 4. The multi-objective value function Vmo in (12)
is a monotone submodular set function.
Proof. Since Vi(Ak)) is a monotone submodular set function
and Vmo(Ak) is a positive linear combination of it, according
to (Nemhauser, Wolsey, and Fisher 1978, p.272), Vmo(Ak)
is a monotone submodular set function.
Greedy search algorithm
We proved our multi-objective value function Vmo(·) is a
monotone submodular set function -- see Corollary 4. For
submodular functions, (Nemhauser, Wolsey, and Fisher 1978)
proved the greedy search algorithm guarantees a performance
bound at (1−1/e)OPT, where OPT is the optimal value of the
submodular function. Therefore, if the optimal value of our
value function is Vmo(A∗), we can simply state the following
fundamental performance bound for our submodular value
function:
Theorem 5. From (Nemhauser, Wolsey, and Fisher 1978).
Let AG be the output greedy control action and A∗ be the
optimal control action evaluated using brute-force method of
(13). Then
Vmo(AG) ≥ (1 − 1/e)Vmo(A∗)
(14)
where e = 2.718 . . . is the base of the natural logarithm.
Hence, we propose using the greedy search algorithm by
simply adding agents sequentially and picking the next agent
which provides the maximum value function Vmo(·) as pre-
sented in Algorithm 1.
Experiments
We evaluate the proposed value function using a series of
comprehensive synthetic experiments since we can control
all of the parameters of the problem, especially with a time-
varying number of agents and objects. We compare three plan-
ning algorithm formulations: (i) using the single objective
value function V1(·) in (4) for tracking. (ii) using a single ob-
jective value function based on our new discovery value func-
tion V2(·) in (10). (iii) using our proposed multi-objective
value function Vmo(·).
We use optimal sub-pattern assignment (OSPA) (Schuh-
macher, Vo, and Vo 2008) to measure performance. We re-
port OSPA Dist as the main metric to evaluate the overall
team performance since it incorporates both tracking and
discovery indicators. For further insights into our planning
formulations, we also report: (i) OSPA Loc as a localization
Figure 1: Setup for four scenarios: (a) Scenario 1; (b) Scenario 2; (c) Scenario 3; (d) Scenario 4. Start/Stop locations for each
object are denoted by (cid:13)/(cid:3). Start locations for agents are denoted by (cid:63).
Algorithm 1 Greedy algorithm
1: Input: Vmo(·), A (cid:46) Value function and the action space
2: Output: AG ∈ AS
(cid:46) Greedy control actions for all
agents
3: AG ← ∅
4: P ← ∅
5: U ← {1, . . . , S}
6: while U (cid:54)= ∅ do
7:
8:
(cid:46) Initialize the greedy control action
(cid:46) Initialize the agent planned list
(cid:46) Initialize list of agents to plan
for each s ∈ U do
(cid:46) Find the best
As, V s
Vmo(A)
c = arg max
A∈AV ∪{s}
action and value function for each agent in U
end for
s∗ = arg max
s∈U
V s
c
(cid:46) Select the agent s∗ that
provides the best value function
action for agent s∗
AG ← AG ∪ {As∗}
(cid:46) Save the greedy control
P ← P ∪ {s∗} (cid:46) Add agent s∗ into the planned list
U ← U \ {s∗} (cid:46) Remove agent s∗ from the list of
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
agents to plan
14: end while
15: return AG
accuracy measure, (ii) OSPA Card as an object discovery
performance measure; and (iii) Search Area Entropy as
the average entropy of the occupancy grid to measure the
coverage area of the team. For demonstration, a team of
quad-copter UAVs flying at different altitudes is considered.
The detailed parameter settings are provided in the appendix,
while scenario setups are shown in Figure 1. Our experi-
ments considered four different scenarios and two different
detection-based sensors subject to noisy measurements.
Scenario 1 (FastMoving): Three fast moving objects in
two groups travelling in the same direction. A team of agents
starts at [500, 100]T m as depicted in Figure 1a.
Scenario 2 (LateBirth): Late birth objects. We investi-
gate a searching and tracking scenario in Figure 1b) with four
slow-moving mobile objects using a team of agents. Here, the
groups of objects D and C enter the scene when the agents
are out of their detection range -- late birth. This scenario
favours agent planning with the discovery value function en-
Figure 2: Multi-objective value function ratio between the
greedy V GD
mo algorithms with agents
(a) S = 2 and (b) S = 3 (20 MC runs, range and bearing
based sensor with rd = 200 m).
mo and brute-force V BF
couraging exploration and demonstrates the effectiveness of
our multi-objective value function with its competing track-
ing and discovery objectives.
Scenario 3 (Opposite): Four objects in two groups (A and
B) moving rapidly in opposing directions. Figure 1c illustrates
the scenario. We use this setting to confirm the effectiveness
of our multi-objective value function. Now, the possibility to
discover group B out of the sensor detection range must be
achieved through exploration while planning to track group
A in the vicinity of the agents is immediately rewarded by
the tracking objective.
Scenario 4 (Explosion): Multiple groups of fast moving
objects in opposing directions. Here, we consider a team of
agents to search and track 20 fast moving mobile objects as
shown in Figure 1d.
Detection-based sensors:
(i) We considered agents
equipped with a range and bearing based sensor -- common
in wildlife tracking (Cliff et al. 2015) for example. Let us =
z]T be the position of agent s, xp = [px, py, 1]T be
[ps
the position of object x, each detected object x leads to a
noisy measurement z of range and bearing given by: z =
+ v. Here,·
(cid:2) arctan [(py − ps
x)],xp− us(cid:3)T
y)/(px − ps
x, ps
y, ps
05001000x-coordinate (m)05001000y-coordinate (m)(a)05001000x-coordinate (m)05001000(b)05001000x-coordinate (m)05001000(c)010002000x-coordinate (m)010002000(d)ABABCDAgentsABABCDScenario 1Scenario 2Scenario 3Scenario 40.50.60.70.80.91.0(a)Scenario 1Scenario 2Scenario 3Scenario 40.50.60.70.80.91.0(b) Table 1: Comparing multi-agent planning for tracking mobile objects using our multi-objective value function Vmo across
Scenarios 1, 2, 3 and 4 with detection range rd = 200 m. V1 and V2 are baselines and the results are averaged over 20 MC trials.
Scenario 2 (LateBirth)
Tracking
OSPA
OSPA
Loc (m)
4.0
10.3
5.2
3.6
9.5
5.1
Card (m)
53.0
30.8
46.9
49.8
34.4
33.7
Scenario 4 (Explosion)
50.6
25.2
31.0
31.9
11.7
11.1
3.1
29.8
9.7
5.0
19.5
6.4
Discovery
Performance
Search Area
Entropy (nats)
0.22
0.12
0.17
0.17
0.09
0.11
0.32
0.28
0.32
0.30
0.25
0.29
Agents
S = 3
S = 5
S = 3
S = 5
Indicators
Value
Functions
V1
V2
Vmo
V1
V2
Vmo
V1
V2
Vmo
V1
V2
Vmo
Performance
Performance
Performance
Performance
Scenario 1 (FastMoving)
Tracking
Discovery
Performance
OSPA
Overall
OSPA
Dist (m)
OSPA
Loc (m)
4.4
9.7
6.1
5.1
9.2
5.7
Card (m)
29.5
11.5
11.6
20.3
11.1
11.1
Scenario 3 (Opposite)
48.7
5.5
5.2
48.3
3.6
4.1
3.0
12.8
5.9
2.9
6.9
5.9
33.9
21.2
17.7
25.4
20.3
16.8
51.7
18.3
11.1
51.2
10.5
10.5
Search Area
Entropy (nats)
0.23
0.12
0.17
0.2
0.09
0.13
Overall
OSPA
Dist (m)
57.0
41.1
52.1
53.4
43.9
38.8
0.24
0.12
0.18
0.24
0.09
0.15
53.7
55.0
40.7
36.9
31.2
17.4
is the Euclidean norm; v ∼ N (0, R) with R = diag(σ2
φ, σ2
ρ)
where σφ = σ0,φ + βφxp − us, σρ = σ0,ρ + βρxp − us.
(ii) To demonstrate the sensor-agnostic nature of our ap-
proach, we consider agents equipped with a vision-based
sensor. Each detected object x leads to a measurement z
v ∼ N (0, R) with R = diag(σ2
of noisy xy positions, given by: z = (cid:2)px, py]T + v. Here,
Experiment 1 Comparing greedy and brute force algo-
rithm results for our submodular multi-objective value func-
tion: Figure 2 depicts the ratio of our multi-objective value
function obtained from greedy and brute-force algorithms for
the four scenarios. The result obtained from 20 Monte-Carlo
(MC) runs for each scenario agrees with the performance
guarantee of the greedy algorithm to yield an approximately
optimal solution with a bounded performance guarantee at
(1 − 1/e) OPT.
x, σ2
y).
Experiment 2: Comparing multi-objective multi-agent
planning with single objective multi-agent planning. Table 1
compares results for scenario 1, 2, 3 and 4 collected from 20
MC runs for agents with range and bearing based sensors.
It is expected that the average search area entropy is small-
est for V2 since it encourages agents to explore the search
area. Consequently, V2 can also be seen to generate the best
performance in term so of OSPA cardinality -- OSPA Card.
In contrast, we can see that the multi-agent planning with
the single value function (to encourage only tracking accu-
racy) V1, achieves improved results for object localization
accuracy only (low OSPA Loc results) but at the expense of
missing objects often out of the range of the sensors (as seen
by significantly large OSPA Card results). Most importantly,
our results verify that Vmo performs best in term of overall
tracking and cardinality accuracy (reported by OSPA Dist)
since Vmo not only rewards agents for undertaking the dis-
covery of new objects but also rewards agents for accurately
tracking discovered objects.
Experiment 3: Explore the asymptotic behavior of track-
ing performance with an increasing number of agents for
our planning formulation. Figure 4 depicts the overall mean
tracking accuracy from 20 MC runs for agent teams with
each detection-based sensor. It confirms that planning with
Vmo consistently performs better than V1 or V2 alone. As
expected, when the number of agents increases, V1 and V2
tracking performances improve and approach that of Vmo.
Interestingly, multi-agent planning with a single exploration
objective closely approaches the tracking performance of the
multi-objective value function when the team of agents is
large enough to cover the survey area with its range limited
sensors and all objects become visible to the agents.
Conclusion
In this paper, we have formulated a multi-objective plan-
ning approach for multi-agent tracking and searching for
mobile objects. We have established that our formulation
results in a value function that is monotone and submodu-
lar. We presented a series of extensive experimental results
to demonstrate the effectiveness of our method and perfor-
mance guarantees when using the low-cost greedy algorithm
to determine control actions for the multi-agent.
We consider a centralized MPOMDP approach where scal-
ability can be a limitation. Factored-POMDP (Oliehoek et
al. 2008) can be employed to achieve further system scala-
bility. We require reliable and fast communications between
all agents and their centralized controller. If there are any
delays in communications, the problem can be formulated as
an MPOMDP with delayed communications. It is extremely
challenging to plan and track mobile objects in an online
manner without any communications among agents as in
Dec-POMDP, hence it is an open question for future work.
Acknowledgments
Figure 3 shows the grid occupancy probability and the tra-
jectories of the agents for scenario 3. The results demonstrate
the effectiveness of our proposed planning method, where
agents not only track but discover distant mobile objects.
This work was jointly supported by the Western Australia
Parks and Wildlife (WA Parks), the Australian Research
Council (LP160101177, DP160104662), the Defense Science
and Technology Group (DSTG), and The Shultz Foundation.
Figure 3: Scenario 3. Grid occupancy probability (top) and heat map (bottom) of trajectories for 3 agents over 20 MC runs with
rd = 200 m using (a) V1. Late birth group B never discovered, (b) V2. Extensive exploration, and (c) Vmo. Discovers the late
birth group B whilst tracking both groups.
ground plane to speed up the numerical experiments by track-
ing in 2D. Each object state x = (x, l) is uniquely identified
by its label l, while its motion state x = [px, px, py, py]T
comprises of object's position and velocity in Cartesian coor-
dinates. Each object moves in accordance with the constant
velocity (CV) model given by xk = F CV xk−1 + qCV
k−1. Here,
F CV = [1, T0; 0, T0] ⊗ I2, T0 is the sampling interval (T0 =
1 s for our experiments), ⊗ denotes for the Kronecker tensor
product; I2 is the 2×2 identity matrix; qCV
k−1 ∼ N (0, QCV ) is
a 4 × 1 zero mean Gaussian process noise, with co-variance
0 /2, T0] ⊗ I2. The detection
QCV = σ2
probability is pD(us, xp) =
0 /3, T 2
0 /2; T 2
CV [T 3
(cid:26)0.98
max(0, 0.98 − (xp − us − rd)) otherwise;
xp − us ≤ rd
Figure 4: Overall tracking performance over 20 MC runs
based on multi-agent planning with our multi-objective value
function Vmo compare with the single objective value func-
tions V1 and V2 when the number of agents are increased
from 2 to 10 for Scenario 4 (Explosion) with rd = 200 m
using (a) agents with range and bearing based sensors, (b)
agents with vision based sensors.
Appendix
Parameter settings for experiments
The search areas for the first three scenarios and scenario 4 are
1000 m ×1000 m and 2000 m ×2000 m, respectively. Each
agent is controlled to fly at a fixed and different altitude (i.e.,
5 m altitude gap between each agent) to prevent collisions
with other team members. The minimum altitude starts at
30 m for the first agent and increases 5 m for each additional
agent. Further, all objects are assumed exist on a horizontal
where rd is the sensor detection range and = 0.008 m−1.
The sensor reports false detections or false-alarm measure-
ments following a Poison RFS with a clutter rate λ = 0.2,
where each agent collects at most one measurement per time
step for each object, either from the real objects, clutters
(false detections) or the measurement is empty (missed de-
tections). For sensor noise, the range and bearing based
measurement is corrupted with a zero mean Gaussian pro-
cess noise that depends on the distance between objects and
agents, i.e., v ∼ N (0, R) with R = diag(σ2
ρ) where
σφ = σ0,φ + βφxp − us, σρ = σ0,ρ + βρxp − us;
σ0,φ = 2π/180 rad, βφ = 1.7 · 10−5 rad/m, σ0,ρ = 10 m,
and βρ = 5 · 10−3. Similarly, for vision-based sensor, each
detected object x leads to a measurement z of noisy x− y po-
y) where σx = σy = σ0,xy + βxyxp − us
R = diag(σ2
with σ0,xy = 10 m, and βxy = 1 · 10−2. The grid size is
100 × 100 across four scenarios. This corresponds to a grid
cell of 10 m ×10 m for scenario 1,2 and 3 and a grid cell of
sitions, given by: z =(cid:2)px, py]T +v. Here, v ∼ N (0, R) with
φ, σ2
x, σ2
2345678910Number of agents0204060OSPA Dist (m)(a)2345678910Number of agents204060OSPA Dist (m)(b) where
(cid:104)
S, H,F(X) × US, AS,F(Z)S,T ,R,O(cid:105)
20 m ×20 m for scenario 4. The total time is 200 s. The agent
does not have any prior knowledge about object's state, thus it
uses the initial birth probability rB = 0.005, and a Gaussian
density pB = N (x; mB, QB) with mB = [500, 0, 500, 0]T
and QB = diag([500, 10, 500, 10]).
Multi-agent POMDP (MPOMDP)
Multi-agent POMDP is a centralized control framework for
multiple agents wherein each agent shares its observations via
communications to a centralized controller. Let F(A) denote
the class of finite subsert of A. An MPOMDP is described by
a tuple
• S is the number of agents.
• H is the look-ahead horizon.
• F(X) × US is the space, wherein each element is an or-
dered pair (X, U ), with X is the object state and U =
[u1, . . . , uS]T ∈ US is states of S agents.
• AS = A × ··· × A is the control action space for S agents
resulting in the joint action A = [a1, . . . , aS]T ∈ AS
• F(Z)S = F(Z) × ··· × F(Z) is the space of joint
observations resulting in the joint observation Z =
[Z 1, . . . , Z S]T ∈ F(Z)S.
• T :(cid:2)F(X) × US(cid:3) ×(cid:2)F(X) × US(cid:3) × AS → [0, 1] defines
the transition probabilities Pr(cid:0)(X(cid:48), U(cid:48))(X, U ), A(cid:1).
• R : (cid:2)F(X) × US(cid:3) × AS → R defines the immediate
reward of performing action A in state(cid:2)F(X) × US(cid:3).
• O : F(Z)S ×(cid:2)F(X) × US(cid:3) × AS → [0, 1] defines the
joint observation probabilities Pr(cid:0)Z(X(cid:48), U(cid:48)), A(cid:1).
The Optimal Sub-Pattern Assignment (OSPA)
Let F(X) be the space of finite subsets of X. According
to (Schuhmacher, Vo, and Vo 2008), let ¯d(c)
p (X, Y ) be the
OSPA Dist between X, Y ∈ F(X) with order p and cutoff c.
Let m is the cardinality of X and n is cardinality of Y , with
m ≤ n, ¯d(c)
¯d(c)
p (X, Y )
p (X, Y ) is defined as
(cid:19)(cid:33)1/p
d(c)(xi, yπ(i))p + cp(n − m)
(cid:32)
(cid:18)
1
n
=
min
π∈Πn
m(cid:88)
i=1
(15)
where d(c)(x, y) = min(c, d(x, y)), in which d(·,·) is a
metric on the single object state space X. If m > n, then
p (X, Y ) (cid:44) ¯d(c)
¯d(c)
The OSPA Dist is comprised of two components: OSPA
Loc ¯d(c)
p,card to account for localization
and cardnality errors. These components are given by with
m ≤ n:
p,loc and OSPA Card ¯d(c)
p (Y, X).
(cid:18) 1
m(cid:88)
(cid:18) cp(n − m)
(cid:19)1/p
min
π∈Πn
i=1
n
n
¯d(c)
p,loc(X, Y ) =
¯d(c)
p,card(X, Y ) =
(cid:19)1/p
,
(16)
(17)
d(c)(xi, yπ(i))p
and if m > n,
p,card(X, Y ) (cid:44) ¯d(c)
¯d(c)
then ¯d(c)
p,card(Y, X).
p,loc(X, Y ) (cid:44) ¯d(c)
p,loc(Y, X),
References
[Amato and Oliehoek 2015] Amato, C., and Oliehoek, F.
2015.
Scalable planning and learning for Multiagent
POMDPs. In AAAI, 1995 -- 2002.
[Araya et al. 2010] Araya, M.; Buffet, O.; Thomas, V.; and
Charpillet, F. 2010. A POMDP extension with belief-
dependent rewards. In NeurIPS 23, 64 -- 72.
[Beard et al. 2017] Beard, M.; Vo, B.-T.; Vo, B.-N.; and Aru-
lampalam, S. 2017. Void probabilities and Cauchy-Schwarz
divergence for generalized labeled multi-Bernoulli models.
IEEE Trans. on Sig. Proc. 5047 -- 5061.
[Beck et al. 2018] Beck, Z.; Teacy, W. L.; Rogers, A.; and
Jennings, N. R. 2018. Collaborative online planning for
automated victim search in disaster response. RAS 100:251 --
266.
[Bernstein et al. 2002] Bernstein, D. S.; Givan, R.; Immer-
man, N.; and Zilberstein, S. 2002. The complexity of
decentralized control of Markov decision processes. MOS
27(4):819 -- 840.
[Blackman and Popoli 1999] Blackman, S., and Popoli, R.
1999. Design and analysis of modern tracking systems.
Artech House.
[Charrow, Michael, and Kumar 2015] Charrow, B.; Michael,
N.; and Kumar, V. 2015. Active control strategies for dis-
covering and localizing devices with range-only sensors. In
Algo. Found. of Rob., 55 -- 71. Springer.
[Cliff et al. 2015] Cliff, O. M.; Fitch, R.; Sukkarieh, S.; Saun-
ders, D.; and Heinsohn, R. 2015. Online localization of
radio-tagged wildlife with an autonomous aerial robot sys-
tem. In RSS.
[Coello et al. 2007] Coello, C. A. C.; Lamont, G. B.;
Van Veldhuizen, D. A.; et al. 2007. Evolutionary algorithms
for solving multi-objective problems, volume 5. Springer.
[Cover and Thomas 2012] Cover, T. M., and Thomas, J. A.
2012. Elements of information theory. John Wiley & Sons.
[Dames and Kumar 2015] Dames, P., and Kumar, V. 2015.
Autonomous localization of an unknown number of targets
without data association using teams of mobile sensors. IEEE
Trans. on Auto. Sci. and Eng. 12(3):850 -- 864.
[Dames, Tokekar, and Kumar 2017] Dames, P.; Tokekar, P.;
and Kumar, V. 2017. Detecting, localizing, and tracking an
unknown number of moving targets using a team of mobile
robots. IJRR 36(13-14):1540 -- 1553.
[Elfes 1989] Elfes, A. 1989. Using occupancy grids for mo-
bile robot perception and navigation. Computer 22(6):46 -- 57.
[Gerasenko et al. 2001] Gerasenko, S.; Joshi, A.; Rayaprolu,
S.; Ponnavaikko, K.; and Agrawal, D. P. 2001. Beacon
signals: what, why, how, and where? Computer 34(10):108 --
110.
[Gostar, Hoseinnezhad, and Bab-Hadiashar 2016] Gostar,
A. K.; Hoseinnezhad, R.; and Bab-Hadiashar, A. 2016.
Multi-Bernoulli sensor-selection for multi-target tracking
[Satsangi et al. 2018] Satsangi, Y.; Whiteson, S.; Oliehoek,
F. A.; and Spaan, M. T. 2018. Exploiting submodular
value functions for scaling up active perception. Autonomous
Robots 42(2):209 -- 233.
[Schuhmacher, Vo, and Vo 2008] Schuhmacher, D.; Vo, B.-
T.; and Vo, B.-N. 2008. A consistent metric for performance
evaluation of multi-object filters. IEEE Trans. on Sig. Proc.
56(8):3447 -- 3457.
[Silver and Veness 2010] Silver, D., and Veness, J. 2010.
In NeurIPS 23,
Monte-carlo planning in large POMDPs.
2164 -- 2172.
[Spaan, Veiga, and Lima 2015] Spaan, M. T.; Veiga, T. S.;
and Lima, P. U. 2015. Decision-theoretic planning under
uncertainty with information rewards for active cooperative
perception. AAMAS 1157 -- 1185.
[Thomas, Holland, and Minot 2012] Thomas, B.; Holland,
J. D.; and Minot, E. O. 2012. Wildlife tracking technology
options and cost considerations. Wildlife Research 38(8):653 --
663.
[Thrun, Burgard, and Fox 2005] Thrun, S.; Burgard, W.; and
Fox, D. 2005. Probabilistic robotics. MIT press.
[Vo et al. 2012] Vo, B. T.; See, C. M.; Ma, N.; and Ng, W. T.
2012. Multi-sensor joint detection and tracking with the
IEEE Trans. on Aero. and Elect. Syst.
Bernoulli filter.
48(2):1385 -- 1402.
[Wai et al. 2018] Wai, H.-T.; Yang, Z.; Wang, P. Z.; and Hong,
M. 2018. Multi-agent reinforcement learning via double
averaging primal-dual optimization. In NeurIPS 32, 9649 --
9660.
[Wang et al. 2018] Wang, X.; Hoseinnezhad, R.; Gostar,
A. K.; Rathnayake, T.; Xu, B.; and Bab-Hadiashar, A. 2018.
Multi-sensor control for multi-object Bayes filters. Signal
Processing 142:260 -- 270.
[Whiteson and Roijers 2016] Whiteson, S., and Roijers,
D. M. 2016. Tutorial: Multi-objective planning under uncer-
tainty. ICAPS.
[Zhu, Wang, and Liang 2019] Zhu, Y.; Wang, J.; and Liang,
S. 2019. Multi-objective optimization based multi-Bernoulli
sensor selection for multi-target tracking. Sensors 19(4):980.
Signal
with unknown clutter and detection profiles.
Processing 119:28 -- 42.
[Hoang and Vo 2014] Hoang, H. G., and Vo, B. T. 2014. Sen-
sor management for multi-target tracking via multi-Bernoulli
filtering. Automatica 50(4):1135 -- 1142.
[Kays et al. 2011] Kays, R.; Tilak, S.; Crofoot, M.; Fountain,
T.; Obando, D.; and et al. 2011. Tracking animal location
and activity with an automated radio telemetry system in a
tropical rainforest. The Computer Journal 1931 -- 1948.
[Koski 1993] Koski, J. 1993. Multicriterion Structural Opti-
mization. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. 793 -- 809.
[Krause et al. 2008] Krause, A.; McMahan, H. B.; Guestrin,
C.; and Gupta, A. 2008. Robust submodular observation
selection. JMLR 9(Dec):2761 -- 2801.
[Krause, Singh, and Guestrin 2008] Krause, A.; Singh, A.;
and Guestrin, C. 2008. Near-optimal sensor placements
in Gaussian processes: Theory, efficient algorithms and em-
pirical studies. JMLR 9(Feb):235 -- 284.
[MacDermed and Isbell 2013] MacDermed, L. C., and Isbell,
C. L. 2013. Point based value iteration with optimal belief
compression for Dec-POMDPs. In NeurIPS 26, 100 -- 108.
[Mahler 2004] Mahler, R. 2004. Multitarget sensor manage-
ment of dispersed mobile sensors. In Theory and algorithms
for cooperative systems, 239 -- 310. World Scientific.
[Mahler 2007] Mahler, R. P. 2007. Statistical Multisource-
Multitarget Inf. Fusion. Artech House, Inc.
[Messias, Spaan, and Lima 2011] Messias, J. V.; Spaan, M.;
and Lima, P. U. 2011. Efficient offline communication
policies for Factored Multiagent POMDPs. In NeurIPS 24,
1917 -- 1925.
[Murphy et al. 2008] Murphy, R. R.; Tadokoro, S.; Nardi, D.;
Jacoff, A.; Fiorini, P.; Choset, H.; and Erkmen, A. M. 2008.
Search and Rescue Robotics. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer
Berlin Heidelberg. 1151 -- 1173.
[Nemhauser, Wolsey, and Fisher 1978] Nemhauser, G. L.;
Wolsey, L. A.; and Fisher, M. L. 1978. An analysis of
approximations for maximizing submodular set functions -- i.
Mathematical programming 14(1):265 -- 294.
[Nguyen et al. 2019a] Nguyen, H. V.; Chesser, M.; Koh, L. P.;
Rezatofighi, H.; and Ranasinghe, D. C. 2019a. TrackerBots:
Autonomous unmanned aerial vehicle for real-time localiza-
tion and tracking of multiple radio-tagged animals. Journal
of Field Robotics 36(3):617 -- 635.
[Nguyen et al. 2019b] Nguyen, H. V.; Rezatofighi, H.; Vo, B.-
N.; and Ranasinghe, D. C. 2019b. Online UAV path planning
for joint detection and tracking of multiple radio-tagged ob-
jects. IEEE Trans. on Sig. Proc. 67(20):5365 -- 5379.
[Oliehoek et al. 2008] Oliehoek, F. A.; Spaan, M. T.; White-
son, S.; and Vlassis, N. 2008. Exploiting locality of interac-
tion in factored dec-pomdps. In AAMAS, 517 -- 524.
[Reid 1979] Reid, D. 1979. An algorithm for tracking multi-
ple targets. IEEE Trans, on Auto. Control 24(6):843 -- 854.
[Ristic and Vo 2010] Ristic, B., and Vo, B.-N. 2010. Sensor
control for multi-object state-space estimation using random
finite sets. Automatica 46(11):1812 -- 1818.
|
1909.11468 | 1 | 1909 | 2019-09-25T13:11:33 | Independent Generative Adversarial Self-Imitation Learning in Cooperative Multiagent Systems | [
"cs.MA"
] | Many tasks in practice require the collaboration of multiple agents through reinforcement learning. In general, cooperative multiagent reinforcement learning algorithms can be classified into two paradigms: Joint Action Learners (JALs) and Independent Learners (ILs). In many practical applications, agents are unable to observe other agents' actions and rewards, making JALs inapplicable. In this work, we focus on independent learning paradigm in which each agent makes decisions based on its local observations only. However, learning is challenging in independent settings due to the local viewpoints of all agents, which perceive the world as a non-stationary environment due to the concurrently exploring teammates. In this paper, we propose a novel framework called Independent Generative Adversarial Self-Imitation Learning (IGASIL) to address the coordination problems in fully cooperative multiagent environments. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to combine self-imitation learning with generative adversarial imitation learning (GAIL) and apply it to cooperative multiagent systems. Besides, we put forward a Sub-Curriculum Experience Replay mechanism to pick out the past beneficial experiences as much as possible and accelerate the self-imitation learning process. Evaluations conducted in the testbed of StarCraft unit micromanagement and a commonly adopted benchmark show that our IGASIL produces state-of-the-art results and even outperforms JALs in terms of both convergence speed and final performance. | cs.MA | cs | Independent Generative Adversarial Self-Imitation Learning in
Cooperative Multiagent Systems
Xiaotian Hao*, Weixun Wang*, Jianye Hao(cid:66), Yaodong Yang
College of Intelligence and Computing, Tianjin University
{xiaotianhao,wxwang,jianye.hao}@tju.edu.cn,[email protected]
Tianjin, China
9
1
0
2
p
e
S
5
2
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
1
v
8
6
4
1
1
.
9
0
9
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
ABSTRACT
Many tasks in practice require the collaboration of multiple agents
through reinforcement learning. In general, cooperative multia-
gent reinforcement learning algorithms can be classified into two
paradigms: Joint Action Learners (JALs) and Independent Learners
(ILs). In many practical applications, agents are unable to observe
other agents' actions and rewards, making JALs inapplicable. In
this work, we focus on independent learning paradigm in which
each agent makes decisions based on its local observations only.
However, learning is challenging in independent settings due to
the local viewpoints of all agents, which perceive the world as
a non-stationary environment due to the concurrently exploring
teammates. In this paper, we propose a novel framework called Inde-
pendent Generative Adversarial Self-Imitation Learning (IGASIL)
to address the coordination problems in fully cooperative multi-
agent environments. To the best of our knowledge, we are the
first to combine self-imitation learning with generative adversarial
imitation learning (GAIL) and apply it to cooperative multiagent
systems. Besides, we put forward a Sub-Curriculum Experience Re-
play mechanism to pick out the past beneficial experiences as much
as possible and accelerate the self-imitation learning process. Evalu-
ations conducted in the testbed of StarCraft unit micromanagement
and a commonly adopted benchmark show that our IGASIL pro-
duces state-of-the-art results and even outperforms JALs in terms
of both convergence speed and final performance.
KEYWORDS
Multiagent learning; Learning agent-to-agent interactions (coordi-
nation); Adversarial machine learning
ACM Reference Format:
Xiaotian Hao*, Weixun Wang*, Jianye Hao(cid:66), Yaodong Yang. 2019. Inde-
pendent Generative Adversarial Self-Imitation Learning in Cooperative
Multiagent Systems. In Proc. of the 18th International Conference on Au-
tonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2019), Montreal, Canada,
May 13 -- 17, 2019, IFAAMAS, 9 pages.
1 INTRODUCTION
With the advance of deep neural network [14, 22], Deep Reinforce-
ment Learning (DRL) approaches have made significant progress for
a number of applications including Atari games [30], Go [42], game
theory [23, 46] and robot locomotion and manipulation [24, 41].
* Equal contribution. (cid:66)Corresponding author.
Proc. of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems
(AAMAS 2019), N. Agmon, M. E. Taylor, E. Elkind, M. Veloso (eds.), May 13 -- 17, 2019,
Montreal, Canada. © 2019 International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and
Multiagent Systems (www.ifaamas.org). All rights reserved.
In practice, a large number of important applications can be natu-
rally modeled as cooperative multiagent systems. Examples include
coordination of robot swarms [18], coordination of autonomous
vehicles [7], network packet delivery [48], managing air traffic flow
[2] and energy distribution [47].
However, directly applying single-agent reinforcement learning
approaches such as Q-learning to cooperative multiagent environ-
ments behaves poorly. Thus, effective coordination mechanism
needs to be incorporated into agents' learning strategies to address
the cooperative multiagent problems. Multiagent reinforcement
learning (MARL) can be generally classified in to two paradigms
[8]: Joint Action Learners (JALs) and Independent Learners (ILs).
JALs observe the rewards and actions (policies) taken by all agents
whose information is explicitly considered during policy update,
whereas ILs make decisions based on their local observations, ac-
tions and rewards only. Under the JAL paradigm, MADDPG [27]
is a recently proposed approach for multiagent games with large
continuous state space and action space. By taking the other agents'
observations and policies directly into consideration, MADDPG
learns a centralized critic and uses the centralized critic to provide
a better guidance for the policy update. However, MADDPG does
not consider some specially designed mechanisms for handling the
multiagent cooperative challenges when dealing with difficult coop-
eration environments (e.g., sparse rewards, high miss-coordination
penalties, exploration-exploitation trade-off [29]). Besides, due to
the inaccessibility of all other agents' states and actions in practice
and the exponential growth of the state-action space in the number
of agents, JALs are difficult to be applied to practical applications.
Avoiding the above two restrictions, ILs are more universally
applicable and have been widely studied over the past years, e.g.,
Distributed Q-learning [21], Hysteretic Q-learning [28] and Lenient
Learners [37]. However, for ILs, one typical issue is that each agent's
policy is changing as training progresses, and the environment be-
comes non-stationary from the perspective of any individual agent
since other agents' policies are changing concurrently. Hysteretic
Q-learning [28] and Lenient Learners [37] are proposed to facilitate
multiple reinforcement learning agents to overcome the indepen-
dent learning problems (e.g., the non-stationary problem [29]). Very
recently, the idea of hysteretic Q-learning and lenient learners has
been successfully applied to deep multiagent reinforcement learn-
ing settings [35, 36]. However, all these approaches are Q-learning
based methods and are naturally suitable for settings with discrete
action space only. Therefore, it's difficult to apply these approaches
to solve the cooperative multiagent continuous control tasks.
In this work, we propose a novel framework under the indepen-
dent learning paradigm called independent generative adversarial
self imitation learning (IGASIL), which conducts both learning
and execution in a fully decentralized manner. In the framework,
there are n independent agents cooperatively solving a task without
knowing other agents' policies and making decisions based on their
own local observations. Initially, each agent maintains a positive
buffer and a normal buffer. At run time, each agent interacts with
the environment independently according to the current policy.
The resulting trajectory is stored twice in the positive buffer and
the normal buffer. The positive buffer is a specially designed sub-
curriculum experience replay which continuously helps to pick
out and reserve preferable experiences the agent has experienced.
Combining self-imitation learning with generative adversarial im-
itation learning, each agent trains a discriminator using samples
from these two buffers whose target is to capture the features of
the past good experiences. Besides the environment rewards, each
agent receives additional rewards from the discriminator, which
would guide the agents to imitate from the past good experiences
and do more exploration around these high-reward regions. Once
the agents find better policies, they will produce higher quality
trajectories. Thus, the learning will turn into a virtuous circle until
a good cooperation is achieved.
The main contributions of this paper can be summarized as
follows.
(1) To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to combine self im-
itation learning with generative adversarial imitation learning
and propose a novel framework called Independent Genera-
tive Adversarial Self Imitation Learning (IGASIL) to address the
multiagent coordination problems.
(2) We put forward a Sub-Curriculum Experience Replay mecha-
nism to accelerate the self-imitation learning process.
(3) IGASIL is well applicable to both discrete and continuous action
spaces and can be integrated with any Policy Gradient or Actor-
Critic algorithm in fully cooperative multiagent environments.
(4) Besides, our proposed method follows the decentralized training
pattern which does not require any communication among
agents during learning.
(5) Experimental results show that our method outperforms state-
of-the-art in cooperative multiagent continuous and discrete
control tasks in terms of both convergence speed and final
performance.
2 BACKGROUND
2.1 Markov Decision Process
We use the tuple (S, A, P, r , ρ0, γ) to define an infinite-horizon, dis-
counted Markov decision process (MDP), where S represents the
state space, A represents the action space, P : S × A × S → [0, 1]
denotes the transition probability distribution, r : S × A → R de-
notes the reward function, ρ0 → [0, 1] is the distribution of the
initial state s0, and γ ∈ (0, 1) is the discount factor. Let πθ denote
a stochastic policy π : S × A → [0, 1], where θ is the parameter
of the policy. The performance of a stochastic policy πθ is usually
evaluated by its expected cumulative discounted reward Jπθ :
= Eρ0,P,πθ [
Jπθ
γ t r(st , at)]
(1)
∞
t =0
Reinforcement Learning (RL) [44] is a set of algorithms trying
to infer a policy πθ , which maximizes the expected cumulative
discounted reward Jπθ when given access to a reward signal r(s, a).
2.2 Generative Adversarial Imitation Learning
Imitation learning is also known as learning from demonstrations
or apprenticeship learning, whose goal is to learn how to perform
a task directly from expert demonstrations, without any access to
the reward signal r(s, a). Recent main lines of researches within
imitation learning are behavioural cloning (BC) [6, 39], which per-
forms supervised learning from observations to actions when given
a number of expert demonstrations; inverse reinforcement learning
(IRL)[1], where a reward function is estimated that explains the
demonstrations as (near) optimal behavior; and generative adver-
sarial imitation learning (GAIL) [3, 4, 17, 43], which is inspired by
the generative adversarial networks (GAN) [15]. Let TE denote the
trajectories generated by the behind expert policy πE, each of which
consists of a sequence of state-action pairs. In the GAIL framework,
an agent mimics the behavior of the expert policy πE by matching
the generated state-action distribution ρπθ (s, a) with the expert's
distribution ρπE(s, a). The state-action visitation distribution (oc-
cupancy measure [17]) of a policy πθ is defined as:
γ t p(st = sπθ)
(2)
where p(st = sπθ) is the probability of being in state s at time t
when starting at state s0 ∼ ρ0 and following policy πθ . Thus, Jθ
can be written as:
ρπθ (s, a) = πθ(as)
∞
t =0
= Eρ0,P,πθ [
Jπθ
γ t r(st , at)]
∞
p(st = sπθ)
∞
t =0
a
πθ(as)
s
a
t =0
ρπθ (s, a)r(st , at)
=
∞
=
=
t =0
s
s,a
πθ(as)γ t r(st , at)
(3)
p(st = sπθ)γ t r(st , at)
which only depends on the discounted state-action visitation distri-
bution ρπθ (s, a). The optimum is achieved when the distance be-
tween these two distributions is minimized as measured by Jensen-
Shannon divergence. The formal GAIL objective is denoted as:
(4)
max
w
E(s,a)∼ρπE (s,a)[log(Dw(s, a))]+
min
θ
E(s,a)∼ρπθ (s,a)[log(1 − Dw(s, a))] − λH H(πθ)
generated by πθ and πE, H(πθ) ≜ Eρ0,P,πθ [∞
where Dw is a discriminative binary classifier parameterized by w
which tries to distinguish state-action pairs from the trajectories
t =0 γ t(− log πθ(as))]
is the γ−discounted causal entropy of policy πθ [5] and λH is the
coefficient. Unlike GANs, the original GAIL requires interactions
with the environment/simulator to generate state-action pairs, and
thus the objective (4) is not differentiable end-to-end with respect
to the policy parameter θ. Hence, optimization of the policy re-
quires RL techniques based on Monte-Carlo estimation of policy
gradients. The optimization over the GAIL objective is performed
by alternating between K gradient step to increase (4) with respect
to the discriminator parameters w, and a Trust Region Policy Op-
timization (TRPO) step to decrease (4) with respect to the policy
parameters θ (using log(Dw(s, a)) as the reward function).
2.3 Sample-Efficient GAIL
One of the most important advantages of GAIL is that it can obtain
a higher performance than behavioral cloning when given only a
small number of expert demonstrations. However, a large number
of policy interactions with the learning environment are required
for policy convergence. As illustrated in [20], while GAIL requires
as little as 200 expert frame transitions to learn a robust reward
function on most MuJoCo [45] tasks, the number of policy frame
transitions sampled from the environment can be as high as 25
million in order to reach convergence, which is intractable for real-
world applications. To this end, [20] address the sample inefficiency
issue via incorporating an off-policy RL algorithm and an off-policy
discriminator to dramatically decrease the sample complexity by
many orders of magnitude. Experimental results show that their
off-policy approach works well even without using the importance
sampling.
2.4 Self-Imitation Learning
In an environment with the very sparse reward, it's difficult to
learn the whole task at once. It is natural to master some basic skills
for solving easier tasks firstly. e.g., In Montezuma's Revenge (an
Atari game), the agent needs to pick up the key and then open the
door. Directly learning opening the door is hard due to the poor
exploration, but it is easier to master picking up the key at first.
Based on this idea, self-imitation learning (SIL) [34] is a very recent
approach proposed to solve the sparse reward problem by learning
to imitate the agent's own past good experiences. In brief, SIL stores
previous experiences in a replay buffer and learns to imitate the
experiences when the return is greater than the agent's expectation.
Experimental results show that this bootstrapping approach (learn
to imitate the agent's own past good decisions) is highly promising
on hard exploration tasks A proper level of exploitation of past
good experiences during learning can lead to a deeper exploration
(moving to the deeper region) of the learning environment. Similar
idea and results can also be found in [19].
3 PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
The setting we are considering is a fully cooperative partially ob-
servable Markov game [26], which is a multiagent extension of a
Markov decision process (MDPs). A Markov game for N agents is
defined by a set of states S describing the possible configurations of
all agents and environment, a set of actions A1, ..., AN and a set of
observations O1, ..., ON for each agent. Initial states are determined
by a distribution ρ0 : S → [0, 1]. State transitions are determined
by a function P : S × A1 × ... × AN × S → [0, 1]. For each agent i,
rewards are given by function ri : S × A1 × ... × AN → R, observa-
tions are given by function oi : S → Oi. To choose actions, each
: Oi × Ai → [0, 1]. The joint
agent i uses a stochastic policy πi
policy π of all agents is defined as π : ⟨π1, ..., πN ⟩. The joint action
is represented as a = ⟨a1, ..., an⟩. We consider a finite horizon set-
ting, with episode length T . If all agents receive the same rewards
(r1 = r2 = ... = rN ), the Markov game is fully cooperative, which
means a best-interest action of one agent is also a best-interest
action of all agents. Besides, we only consider the environments
with deterministic reward functions at present.
In the following of this paper, we are going to analyze and deal
with the coordination problems under the following two difficult co-
operative environments: (1) cooperative endangered wildlife rescue;
(2) decentralised StarCraft micromanagement from an independent
perspective. For example, in the cooperative endangered wildlife
rescue task, there are N slower independent rescue agents which
have to cooperatively chase and rescue one of the M faster wounded
animals in a randomly generated environment with continuous
state and action spaces. Each rescue agent makes decisions (go
north, south, east, or west to chase one of the M animals) based
on its local observation only and can't observe the others' policies
(local observation and continuous action space). Only when
the N rescue agents chase and capture the same wounded animal
simultaneously, will they get a reward based on the caught animal's
value. So, the reward is very sparse and it's hard for the independent
rescuers to explore (sparse rewards). Besides, the changing of the
other agents' policies (e.g. the other agents' move to different direc-
tions for exploration instead of cooperatively capturing the same
animal with the current agent) will influence the reward of current
agent's action. Therefore, the environment becomes non-stationary
from the perspective of each individual rescuer (non-stationary).
If a rescue agent changes its actions too quickly when perceiving
the changed reward (due to the others' explorations), the others
will change their policies in their turn (exploration-exploitation).
Moreover, different wounded animals has different rewards and
different penalties (the animal with the higher reward also has the
higher penalty for miss-coordination). So, to avoid punishment,
the rescuers prefer to capture the animals with the lowest reward
instead of the global optimal one (high penalty and shadowed
equilibrium). Detail settings of the game are shown in Section
5.1.1. Thus, it's hard to coordinate the independent learners to
achieve successful cooperation and converge to a better equilib-
rium. Thus, additional cooperation mechanisms are needed.
4 INDEPENDENT SELF-IMITATION
LEARNING FRAMEWORK
Figure 1: IGASIL framework for cooperative multiagent sys-
tems.
Environment𝝅𝝅𝟏𝟏oa𝐃𝐃𝟏𝟏𝐐𝐐𝟏𝟏𝑴𝑴𝑬𝑬𝟏𝟏𝐑𝐑𝟏𝟏1𝛑𝛑𝐍𝐍oa𝐃𝐃𝐍𝐍𝐐𝐐𝐍𝐍𝑴𝑴𝑬𝑬𝑵𝑵𝐑𝐑𝐍𝐍N……… 4.1 Independent Generative Adversarial
Self-Imitation Learning
Combining the idea of self-imitation learning with GAIL, we pro-
pose a novel independent generative adversarial self-imitation
learning (IGASIL) framework aiming at facilitating the coordination
procedure of the interactive agents, reducing the learning variance
and improving the sample efficiency. The learning procedure for
each independent learner i is summarized in Algorithm 1.
Algorithm 1 Independent Generative Adversarial Self-Imitation
Learning
1: Input: For each agent i, initial parameters of actor, critic, dis-
i , sub-curriculum experience replay Mi
E
i , w0
criminator θ0
i , ϕ0
and a normal replay buffer Ri.
E ← , Ri ← .
2: Initialize Mi
3: for n=0,1,2,... do
4:
5:
6:
7:
n ∼ πθi .
n in Ri.
n in Mi
Sample a trajectory T i
Store T i
Store T i
Sample state-action pairs Xn ∼ Ri and XE ∼ ME with the
same batch size.
Update wn
i
E according to Algorithm 2.
by ascending with gradients:
8:
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
i to wn+1
∆w n
i
=EXE[log(Dw n
EXn[log(1 − Dw n
n ∼ Ri.
(s, a))]+
(s, a))]
i
i
i
Sample (s,a,r,s',done) tuples X ′
Calculate the imitation reward for each (s, a) ∼ X ′
(s, a))
Calculate the reshaped reward for each (s, a) ∼ X ′
rimit(s, a) = log(Dw n
(s, a)) − log(1 − Dw n
′(s, a) = r + λimit ∗ rimit(s, a)
Replace r in X ′
n with r′(s, a).
Using samples X ′
n to update the policy parameter θn
and the critic parameter ϕn
(off-policy A2C [9])
i to ϕn+1
r
i
i
n by:
n by:
i to θn+1
according to DDPG [25]
i
(5)
(6)
(7)
14: end for
An illustration of our IGASIL is shown in Figure (1). Initially,
each agent i maintains a sub-curriculum experience replay buffer
E and a normal buffer Ri (Algorithm 1, Line 1-2). At run time,
Mi
each agent interacts with the environment independently according
to the current policy. The resulting trajectory is stored in Mi
E and
Ri respectively (stored twice) (Algorithm 1, Line 4-6). The normal
buffer Ri is used for off-policy training, which will be discussed
in Section 4.1.1. The sub-curriculum experience replay buffer Mi
E
of each agent preserves the past useful skills (demonstrations) for
future use, which will be detailed in Section 4.2. We consider these
useful demonstrations in Mi
E as self generated expert data and re-
gard the policy behind these self-generated demonstrations as π i
E
for each agent i. At the same time, each agent trains a discriminator
Di using samples from these two buffers whose target is to capture
the features of the past good experiences. (Algorithm 1, Line 7-8).
Then, each agent begins to update its policy based on two types
of rewards: (1) the imitation rewards given by the discriminator
Di (Algorithm 1, Line 9-10), which will be discussed in Section
4.1.2; (2) the original environment rewards, which are combined
according to Equation (7), in which λimit control the weight of the
imitation reward1 (Algorithm 1, Line 11-12). The final reshaped re-
ward r′(s, a) will encourage each agent to explore more around the
nearby region of the past good experience to check whether a better
coordination can be achieved or have been achieved. After that,
the policy of each agent is updated according to the corresponding
update rules (Algorithm 1, Line 13). Thus, under the guidance of
the discriminator, the past good experiences and skills are dynami-
cally reused. After that, each agent's policy is more likely updated
towards a better direction independently. Though we use the off-
policy actor-critic approaches (DDPG and off-policy A2C) in our
algorithm, our self-imitation framework can be integrated with any
policy gradient or actor-critic methods.
Since all independent agents receive exactly the same reward
and use the same learning approach (same parameters and settings),
the positive trajectories stored in Mi
E would be stored in a synchro-
nized way, which means the agents could cooperatively imitate the
"same" past good experience in a distributed way. Thus, all indepen-
dent agents would have the same behavioral intentions (e.g., jointly
imitating the same past good experience and doing deeper explo-
ration, which we call "the joint intention") during learning. As the
"joint" imitation learning progresses, the policy of each agent would
be induced to update towards the "same" direction. Consequently,
the non-stationary and learning issues can be alleviated.
4.1.1 Sample-efficient GASIL. One limitation of GAIL is that
it requires a significant number of interactions with the learning
environment in order to imitate an expert policy [20], which is
also the case of our settings. To address the sample inefficiency
of GASIL, we use off-policy RL algorithms (Here, we use DDPG
and off-policy A2C) and perform off-policy training of the GAIL
discriminator performed in such way: for each agent i, instead of
sampling trajectories from the current policy directly, we sample
transitions from the replay buffer Ri collected while performing
off-policy training:
max
w
E(s,a)∼π i
[log(Dwi(s, a))]+
min
θ
E(s,a)∼Ri[log(1 − Dwi(s, a))] − λH H(π i
θ)
E
(8)
Equation (8) tries to match the occupancy measures between the
expert and the distribution induced by the replay buffer Ri instead of
the latest policy πi.It has been found that the off-policy GAIL works
well in practice even without using importance sampling [20]. As
will be shown in Section 5.2, we also observe similar phenomenons
in our cooperative endangered wildlife rescue environment.
4.1.2 Unbiased imitation reward. Another problem of GAIL
is that either rimit(s, a) = −loд(1−D(s, a)) or rimit(s, a) = loд(D(s, a))
(which is often used as the reward function in GAIL approaches)
has reward biases that can either implicitly impose prior knowl-
edge about the true reward, or alternatively, prevent the policy
from imitating the optimal expert [20]. We summarize the reason
1In our settings, we grow the λimit exponentially as learning progresses (One intuition
is that as the training progresses, the trajectories produced by the agent becomes better
and better. Thus, the agent should pay more attention to these better ones).
of the two rewards' bias here: (1) −loд(1 − D(s, a)) is always pos-
itive and potentially provides a survival bonus which drives the
agent to survive longer in the environment to collect more rewards.
(2) loд(D(s, a)) is always negative and provides a per step penalty
which drives the agent to exit from the environment earlier. Thus,
to stabilize the training process of our IGASIL, we use a more stable
reward function as shown in Equation (9). Similar analysis can be
found in [13] and [20].
rimit(s, a) = loд(D(s, a)) − loд(1 − D(s, a))
(9)
4.2 Sub-Curriculum Experience Replay
In a complex cooperative game, a series of actions need to be taken
simultaneously by all agents to achieve a successful cooperation.
However, due to the independent learning agents (ILs) interacting
with the environment according to their own observations and poli-
cies without any communication, each agent might randomly take
different actions for exploration at the same state. But, to achieve a
perfect cooperation, each agent must exactly select the "right" ac-
tion at all states. This means the collected trajectories of successful
cooperation are very few during learning. So, it's difficult for the
independent agents to grasp all these series of actions simultane-
ously to achieve perfect cooperation at once. Therefore, additional
mechanisms are needed to induce the individual agents to gradually
pick the "right" actions at the same state.
Curriculum learning is an extension of transfer learning, where
the goal is to automatically design and choose a sequence of tasks
(i.e. a curriculum) T1,T2, ...Tt for an agent to train on, such that the
learning speed or performance on a target task Tt will be improved
[33]. Inspired by this idea, we want our independent learning agents
to follow the curriculum learning paradigm. For example, it's easier
for the agents to firstly learn to cooperate at some easier states.
And then, reusing the basic skills learned in the previous step, the
agents would gradually achieve deeper cooperation and finally are
able to solve the target task. The main idea is that the past useful
skills can be reused to facilitate the coordination procedure. Similar
ideas have been applied to a series of curriculum learning tasks [31],
[32]. In our settings, we consider a whole trajectory as an instance
of solving the target task. Our goal is to find and reuse the past use-
ful skills/experiences for each agent to accelerate the cooperation
process. An intuitive way is to pick out these useful experiences by
rewards. One example is that given two trajectories with rewards
[0, +1, +3, +1, 0, 0,−20] and [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,−15], though the total
rewards are both −15 (low), there is still some useful experience in-
cluded in the first trajectory (e.g.: the sub-trajectory [0, +1, +3, +1]
with a total reward +5 still demonstrates some good behaviors). By
imitating the behaviors from these good sub-trajectories, the agents
can still grasp some useful cooperation skills. Another example is
considering a trajectory with sparse rewards [0, 0, 0, ..., 0, 0, +1]
(only receiving +1 at the terminal state), imitating from the sub-
trajectories near the terminal state (e.g. [0, +1], [0, 0, +1]) would
drive the agent to quickly master skills around the terminal state,
reduce unnecessary explorations, and thus ease the reward back-
propagation problem when rewards are sparse, which is similar
to the idea of reverse curriculum generation for reinforcement
learning [10].
Algorithm 2 Sub-Curriculum Experience Replay
1: Given: A learning policy πθi for agent i.
2: Initialize the min-heap based positive trajectory buffer Mi
E.
3: for n=0,1,2,... do
4:
5:
6:
7:
8:
Sample a trajectory T i
Calculate the discounted Return of T i
Store (T i
n, RT i
n
for j=0,N do
n as RT i
▷ resorting by priority
Randomly sample a sub-trajectory subj(T i
out repetition.
Calculate the discounted Return of subj(T i
Store (subj(T i
n) from T i
n with-
n) as Rsubj(T i
n).
E. ▷ resorting by priority
n), Rsubj(T i
) in Mi
E.
n)) in Mi
n ∼ πθi .
.
n
9:
10:
11:
12:
13: end for
end for
Update the policy πθi according to Algorithm 1.
Given the above analysis, we build a min-heap based sub-curriculum
experience replay (SCER) Mi
E with a small buffer size k for each
agent i to continuously maintain the past beneficial experiences.
The formal description of our SCER is summarized in Algorithm
2. The priority of the min-heap is based on the return of each
trajectory/sub-trajectory. To pick out the beneficial (useful) ex-
periences as much as possible, we randomly sample some sub-
trajectories from a given trajectory without repetition (Algorithm
2, Line 8), calculate their discounted returns and feed them into Mi
E
(Algorithm 2, Line 9-10). The ranking and filtering of the trajectories
are processed within Mi
E is built based on a min-heap,
it can be viewed as a filter which keeps the latest top-k-return
trajectories/sub-trajectories (Algorithm 2, Line 10). The positive
buffer Mi
E usually starts by storing suboptimal trajectories (e.g.,
killing only few enmies in StarCraft micromanagement games),
and our sub-curriculum ER with IGASIL allows each agent to learn
better sub-policies in the subspaces. Based on the pre-learned skills,
the agents are easier to explore to the deeper regions and the posi-
tive buffer will receive trajectories with higher quality. This leads
to agents learning better coordinated policies in return.
E. Since Mi
5 EXPERIMENTS
In the following experiments, we evaluate the effectiveness of our
IGASIL framework in two cooperative multiagent benchmarks: (1)
cooperative endangered wildlife rescue, which has the very sparse
reward and high miss-coordination penalty [27]; (2) decentralised
StarCraft micromanagement, which has multi types of units, strong
stochasticity and uncertainty [11, 38, 40].
5.1 Effectiveness of our Approach
Architecture & Training. In this paper, all of our policies, critics
and discriminators are parameterized by a two-layer ReLU MLP
(Multilayer Perceptron) followed by a fully connected layer acti-
vated by tanh functions for DDPG's policy nets(DDPG is used only
for the animal rescue game), softmax functions for AC's policy nets
and sigmoid functions for all discriminators. Only in decentralised
StarCraft micromanagement task , we share the parameters among
the homogeneous agents (units with the same type) to accelerate
the training process. The code has been published on GitHub 2.
5.1.1 Cooperative Endangered Wildlife Rescue.
Game Settings. Cooperative endangered wildlife rescue is a
more tough version (sparse rewards and high penalty of miss-
coordination) of the "predator-prey" task illustrated in MADDPG
[27], which requires more accurate cooperation. There are N slower
cooperating rescue agents which cooperatively chase and rescue
one of the M faster wounded animals in a randomly generated
environment. Each time if all the cooperative rescuers capture a
wounded animal simultaneously, the agents will be rewarded by
some rewards based on the wounded animal they saved. Different
wounded animals (e.g., Lion, wildebeest and Deer) correspond to
different rewards and different risks. Different risks means that the
penalties for miss-coordination on different animals are different
(e.g., hurt by the lion). The target for each rescue agent is learning to
rescue the same wounded animal independently without knowing
each other's policy. Besides, in our settings, we stipulate a rescue
agent can hold a wounded animal without suffering any penalty for
some game steps Thold before the other partners' arrival. So, the
difficulty level of the task can be modulated by the value of Thold.
The larger, the easier. In the following experiments, we set N to
2, M to 3 and Thold to 8. An typical illustration of the cooperative
endangered wildlife rescue task is shown in Figure (2).
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Figure 2: (a) Two rescue agents are in red (translucent red
represents the grasper of each agent) and three wounded an-
imals are in blue (deeper blue represents higher value and
higher risk); (b), (c) The animal in dark blue turns to green,
which means it has been hold by a rescue agent (can't move
anymore); (d) The animal in dark blue turns to red, which
means it has been captured and saved by the two rescue
agents and the episode finished.
States and Actions. All rescue agents and wounded animals
can observe the relative positions of others. Besides, each rescue
agent can observe the relative velocities of wounded animals (can't
observe the other rescuers' velocities). Actions are accelerations in
4 directions (controlled by 2 actions actually: north or south, east
or west). The acceleration of a direction is controlled by the force
applied. To sum up, the action space is continuous with a valid
range of [-1, 1].
Reward Function. The environmental rewards are sparse and
only depend on the terminal state of each episode. The payoff ma-
trix of the terminal state is defined in Table (1). At each state sT , if
both agents capture and save the same target a, b or c simultane-
ously, they will both receive 11, 7 or 5. Else, if one agent captures i
while the other captures j, they will both receive r(i, j). Finally, if
2https://github.com/tjuHaoXiaotian/GASIL
Table 1: The payoff matrix of the rescue agents at the ter-
minal state of each episode. Both agents receive the same
payoff written in the corresponding cell.
Agent 2
catch b
catch a
catch c
Agent 1
catch a
catch b
catch c
on the
road
11
-30
0
-30
-30
7
6
-10
0
6
5
0
on the
road
-30
-10
0
0
Figure 3: The 1000-episode averaged return of IGASIL ver-
sus maddpg and ddpg during training in cooperative endan-
gered wildlife rescue task from the viewpoint of the two res-
cue agents.
one agent holds i and the other doesn't come over in Thold steps,
they will both be punished by r(i, 3). According to Table (1), the
theoretical-optimal action is "catch a", but the action "catch c" can
be easily mistaken for having the highest reward due to the lowest
penalty for exploration. The game can be seen as a Markov exten-
sion of the climbing game [8] with continuous state and action
spaces.
Experimental Results To make the different algorithms com-
parable, we pre-train both the rescue agents and wounded animal
agents with DDPG and save the animal models during training.
Then, we reuse the same pre-trained animal models as the default
policies for the wounded animals in all experiments. The learning
curves of IGASIL versus MADDPG and DDPG are plotted in Figure
(3) under five random seeds (1,2,3,4,5). To show a smoother learn-
ing procedure, the reward value is averaged every 1000 episodes.
Apparently, our IGASIL outperforms MADDPG and DDPG by a
significant margin in terms of both convergence rate and final per-
formance. To obviously express the different equilibrium the three
algorithms converged to, we show the average number of touches
of the three wounded animals by the two rescue agents during
training with different algorithms in Figure (5). As illustrated in
Table (1), "animal a" has the highest reward +11 and the highest
miss-coordination penalty -30. In Figure (5), we can easily observe
that only our IGASIL succeeds in converging to the optimal Nash
equilibrium (a, a) (learned to rescue "animal a") while MADDPG and
DDPG converge to the worst equilibrium (c, c) (learned to rescue
"animal c"). This result shows that only our IGASIL overcame the
risk of being punished by miss-coordination and achieved a better
cooperation result (which need more accurate collaborations).
(a) 5m
(b) 2d3z
Figure 4: Win rates for IGASIL, IAC and IAC+PER on two different scenarios.
Actor-Critic. The actor and critic parameters are also shared among
the homogeneous agents. IAC+PER means we add a positive replay
buffer Mi
E to each IAC but each agent only stores the original entire
trajectory into Mi
E instead of additionally sampling and storing
some sub-trajectories (sub-skills). IGASIL is our approach, which
equals to IAC+SCER.
Table 2: Mean win percentage across final 1000 evaluation
episodes for the different scenarios. The highest mean per-
formances are in bold. The results of COMA are extracted
from the published paper [11].
Map
5 M
2d3z
Heur.
66
63
IAC
45
23
IAC+PER
85
76
COMA
81
47
IGASIL
96
87
The results show that our IGASIL is superior to the IAC base-
lines in all scenarios. For the parameters sharing among the homo-
geneous agents (which has been shown to be useful in facilitate
training [16]), IAC also learned some coordination on the simpler
m5v5 scenario. However, it's hard for IAC to achieve cooperation
on the more complicated 2d3z scenario, due to the different types of
units, local observations and the resulting dynamics. On 2d3z, our
IGASIL still achieves a 82% win rate during training and achieves a
87% win rate in evaluation. In Table (2), we summarize the averaged
evaluation win rates of different approaches under multiple combat
scenarios (The results of COMA are extracted from the published
paper [11].). The winning rate of the built-in AI (Heur.) is also
provided as an indicator of the level of difficulty of the combats.
The best result for a given map is in bold. The results show that
our independent IGASIL outperforms all approaches in the perfor-
mance of evaluation win rate and even outperforms the centralized
trained COMA. Besides, our IGASIL converges faster than COMA
according to Figure (4) and Figure (3) of [11].
5.2 Sample Efficiency of IGASIL
To show the sample efficiency of our off-policy IGASIL in coop-
erative multiagent systems, we compare the performance of the
on-policy (on-policy AC+SCER) and off-policy versions (based on
off-policy AC+SCER) of IGASIL in the animal rescue task. To clearly
Figure 5: The average number of touches of different
wounded animals by the two rescues during training with
different algorithms.
5.1.2 Decentralised StarCraft Micromanagement.
Game Settings. In this section, we focus on the problem of mi-
cromanagement in StarCraft, which refers to the low-level control
of individual units' positioning and attack commands as they fight
with enemies. This task is naturally represented as a multiagent
system, where each StarCraft unit is controlled by a decentralized
independent controller (agent). We consider two scenarios with
symmetric teams formed of: 5 marines (5m) and 2 dragoons with
3 zealots (2d_3z). The enemy team is controlled by the built-in
StarCraft AI, which uses reasonable but suboptimal hand-crafted
heuristics. Since the game is easily obtained and is fair for compari-
son, micromanagement of StarCraft has become a standard testbed
for multagent learning algorithms (for both independent learners
and joint learners), which has been widely studied in recent years
such as COMA [11], BiCNet [38], QMIX [40]. Different from their
approaches which are all joint learners, we focus on fully indepen-
dent learning paradigm (independent learning and independent
execution). Similar settings can be found in [12]. The settings of
action space, state features and reward function are similar to that
in COMA [11].
Experimental Results. Figure (4) shows the average training
win rates as a function of episode for each method and for each Star-
Craft scenario. For each method, we conduct 5 independent trials
and calculate the win rate every 200 training episodes and average
them across all trials. In Figure (4), IAC represents the independent
IAC IAC+PER IGASIL 5000 1 0000 15000 20000 25000 30000 # Episodes (cid:68)(cid:81)(cid:76)(cid:80)(cid:68)(cid:79)(cid:86) see the influence of the on-policy and off-policy only, we initialize
Mi
E for each agent i with the same 32 demonstrations (demonstrated
by the pre-trained DDPG agent in Section 5.1.1, which will coopera-
tively catch "animal c", resulting an average return +5). We perform
learning under 5 random seeds (1,2,3,4,5). The imitation learning
results are shown in Figure (6). The x-axis represents the number
of episodes interacting with the environment during training. From
the figure, we see both the on-policy and off-policy IGASILs fi-
nally achieved cooperation (learned to "catch c" simultaneously).
However, the off-policy IGASIL is able to recover the expert policy
given a significantly smaller number of samples than the on-policy
version (about 10 times less). Thus, the sample-efficiency was sig-
nificantly improved.
Figure 6: The 100-episode training average returns of on-
policy and off-policy IGASIL respectively.
Figure 7: The curves of the maximum and average return val-
ues of the trajectories/sub-trajectories stored in Mi
E during
training on the 2d3z scenario.
Figure 8: The curve of the number of enemies killed per
episode during training on the 2d3z scenario (5 enemies in
total).
5.3 Contributions of Sub-Curriculum
Experience Replay
We analyze the roles and contributions of the sub-curriculum ex-
perience replay here. In Figure (4), we see IAC+PER outperforms
the IAC baseline in both scenarios, which means adding a positive
buffer Mi
E to store the good trajectories and doing self-imitation
learning could help the independent agents reach a cooperation.
Besides, IGASIL (IAC+SCER) outperforms IAC+PER in both scenar-
ios, which indicates that adding additional sub-trajectories sampled
from the original one (useful sub-skills) to Mi
E could further accel-
erate the self-imitation procedure and achieve better cooperation.
Besides, from Figure (7), we see that as the self-imitation learning
progresses, better experiences are stored in Mi
E. Then, the agents
would grasp these beneficial skills stored in Mi
E via self-imitation
learning. Using the learned new skills, the agents are more likely
to reach a better cooperation and learn better policies. As shown
in Figure (8), as the stored experiences in Mi
E gets better and bet-
ter, the number of enemies killed per episode (which indicates the
performance of the current policies) grows. All these analysis il-
lustrates that our sub-curriculum experience replay does help the
independent agents to achieve better cooperation. However, in our
settings, we limit the size of the normal buffers and positive buffers.
The techniques proposed in [12] might be incorporated into our
framework to allow us to use larger buffer size and further improve
the sample efficiency. We will consider it as future work.
6 CONCLUSION & FUTURE WORK
In this paper, we presented a novel framework called indepen-
dent generative adversarial self-imitation learning (IGASIL) to ad-
dress the coordination problems in some difficult fully cooperative
Markov Games. Combining self-imitation learning with generative
adversarial imitation learning, IGASIL address the challenges (e.g.,
non-stationary and exploration-exploitation) by guiding all agents
to frequently explore more around the nearby regions of the past
good experiences and learn better policy. Besides, we put forward a
sub-curriculum experience replay mechanism to accelerate the self-
imitation learning process. Evaluations conducted in the testbed
of StarCraft unit micromanagement and cooperative endangered
wildlife rescue show that our IGASIL produces state-of-the-art re-
sults in terms of both convergence speed and final performance.
In order to obviously see whether our IGASIL can significantly
facilitate the coordination procedure of the interactive agents, we
only consider the environments with deterministic reward func-
tions at present. In our future work, we are going to deal with more
challenging cooperative tasks (e.g., environments with stochastic
rewards).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The work is supported by the National Natural Science Founda-
tion of China (Grant Nos.: 61702362, U1836214), Special Program
of Artificial Intelligence, Tianjin Research Program of Application
Foundation and Advanced Technology (No.: 16JCQNJC00100), and
Special Program of Artificial Intelligence of Tianjin Municipal Sci-
ence and Technology Commission (No.: 569 17ZXRGGX00150).
REFERENCES
[1] Pieter Abbeel and Andrew Y Ng. 2004. Apprenticeship learning via inverse
reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the twenty-first international conference
on Machine learning. ACM, 1.
[2] Adrian K Agogino and Kagan Tumer. 2012. A multiagent approach to managing
air traffic flow. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 24, 1 (2012), 1 -- 25.
[3] Feryal Behbahani, Kyriacos Shiarlis, Xi Chen, Vitaly Kurin, Sudhanshu Kasewa,
Ciprian Stirbu, João Gomes, Supratik Paul, Frans A Oliehoek, João Messias, et al.
2018. Learning from Demonstration in the Wild. arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.03516
(2018).
[4] Raunak P Bhattacharyya, Derek J Phillips, Blake Wulfe, Jeremy Morton, Alex
Kuefler, and Mykel J Kochenderfer. 2018. Multi-agent imitation learning for
driving simulation. In 2018 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots
and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 1534 -- 1539.
[5] Michael Bloem and Nicholas Bambos. 2014.
Infinite time horizon maximum
causal entropy inverse reinforcement learning. In Decision and Control (CDC),
2014 IEEE 53rd Annual Conference on. IEEE, 4911 -- 4916.
[6] Mariusz Bojarski, Davide Del Testa, Daniel Dworakowski, Bernhard Firner, Beat
Flepp, Prasoon Goyal, Lawrence D Jackel, Mathew Monfort, Urs Muller, Jiakai
Zhang, et al. 2016. End to end learning for self-driving cars. arXiv preprint
arXiv:1604.07316 (2016).
[7] Yongcan Cao, Wenwu Yu, Wei Ren, and Guanrong Chen. 2013. An overview
of recent progress in the study of distributed multi-agent coordination. IEEE
Transactions on Industrial informatics 9, 1 (2013), 427 -- 438.
[8] Caroline Claus and Craig Boutilier. 1998. The dynamics of reinforcement learning
in cooperative multiagent systems. AAAI/IAAI 1998 (1998), 746 -- 752.
[9] Thomas Degris, Martha White, and Richard S Sutton. 2012. Off-policy actor-critic.
arXiv preprint arXiv:1205.4839 (2012).
[10] Carlos Florensa, David Held, Markus Wulfmeier, Michael Zhang, and Pieter
Abbeel. 2017. Reverse curriculum generation for reinforcement learning. arXiv
preprint arXiv:1707.05300 (2017).
[11] Jakob Foerster, Gregory Farquhar, Triantafyllos Afouras, Nantas Nardelli, and
Shimon Whiteson. 2017. Counterfactual multi-agent policy gradients. arXiv
preprint arXiv:1705.08926 (2017).
[12] Jakob Foerster, Nantas Nardelli, Gregory Farquhar, Triantafyllos Afouras,
Philip HS Torr, Pushmeet Kohli, and Shimon Whiteson. 2017. Stabilising ex-
perience replay for deep multi-agent reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of
the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning-Volume 70. JMLR. org,
1146 -- 1155.
[13] Justin Fu, Katie Luo, and Sergey Levine. 2017. Learning Robust Rewards with
Adversarial Inverse Reinforcement Learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.11248
(2017).
[14] Ian Goodfellow, Yoshua Bengio, Aaron Courville, and Yoshua Bengio. 2016. Deep
learning. Vol. 1. MIT press Cambridge.
[15] Ian Goodfellow, Jean Pouget-Abadie, Mehdi Mirza, Bing Xu, David Warde-Farley,
Sherjil Ozair, Aaron Courville, and Yoshua Bengio. 2014. Generative adversarial
nets. In Advances in neural information processing systems. 2672 -- 2680.
[16] Jayesh K Gupta, Maxim Egorov, and Mykel Kochenderfer. 2017. Cooperative multi-
agent control using deep reinforcement learning. In International Conference on
Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. Springer, 66 -- 83.
[17] Jonathan Ho and Stefano Ermon. 2016. Generative adversarial imitation learning.
In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 4565 -- 4573.
[18] Maximilian Hüttenrauch, Adrian Šošić, and Gerhard Neumann. 2017. Guided
deep reinforcement learning for swarm systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.06011
(2017).
[19] Bingyi Kang, Zequn Jie, and Jiashi Feng. 2018. Policy Optimization with Demon-
strations. In International Conference on Machine Learning. 2474 -- 2483.
[20] I. Kostrikov, K. Krishna Agrawal, D. Dwibedi, S. Levine, and J. Tompson. 2018.
Discriminator-Actor-Critic: Addressing Sample Inefficiency and Reward Bias in
Adversarial Imitation Learning. ArXiv e-prints (Sept. 2018). arXiv:1809.02925
[21] Martin Lauer and Martin Riedmiller. 2000. An algorithm for distributed rein-
forcement learning in cooperative multi-agent systems. In In Proceedings of the
Seventeenth International Conference on Machine Learning. Citeseer.
[22] Yann LeCun, Yoshua Bengio, and Geoffrey Hinton. 2015. Deep learning. nature
521, 7553 (2015), 436.
[23] Joel Z Leibo, Vinicius Zambaldi, Marc Lanctot, Janusz Marecki, and Thore Graepel.
2017. Multi-agent reinforcement learning in sequential social dilemmas. In
Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems.
International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 464 --
473.
[24] Sergey Levine, Chelsea Finn, Trevor Darrell, and Pieter Abbeel. 2016. End-to-end
training of deep visuomotor policies. The Journal of Machine Learning Research
17, 1 (2016), 1334 -- 1373.
[25] Timothy P Lillicrap, Jonathan J Hunt, Alexander Pritzel, Nicolas Heess, Tom Erez,
Yuval Tassa, David Silver, and Daan Wierstra. 2015. Continuous control with
deep reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1509.02971 (2015).
[26] Michael L Littman. 1994. Markov games as a framework for multi-agent rein-
forcement learning. In Machine Learning Proceedings 1994. Elsevier, 157 -- 163.
[27] Ryan Lowe, Yi Wu, Aviv Tamar, Jean Harb, OpenAI Pieter Abbeel, and Igor
Mordatch. 2017. Multi-agent actor-critic for mixed cooperative-competitive
environments. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 6379 -- 6390.
[28] Laëtitia Matignon, Guillaume Laurent, and Nadine Le Fort-Piat. 2007. Hysteretic
Q-Learning: an algorithm for decentralized reinforcement learning in cooperative
multi-agent teams.. In IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and
Systems, IROS'07. 64 -- 69.
[29] Laetitia Matignon, Guillaume J Laurent, and Nadine Le Fort-Piat. 2012. Indepen-
dent reinforcement learners in cooperative markov games: a survey regarding
coordination problems. The Knowledge Engineering Review 27, 1 (2012), 1 -- 31.
[30] Volodymyr Mnih, Koray Kavukcuoglu, David Silver, Andrei A Rusu, Joel Veness,
Marc G Bellemare, Alex Graves, Martin Riedmiller, Andreas K Fidjeland, Georg
Ostrovski, et al. 2015. Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning.
Nature 518, 7540 (2015), 529.
[31] Sanmit Narvekar. 2016.
Curriculum Learning in Reinforcement Learn-
ing:(Doctoral Consortium). In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference
on Autonomous Agents & Multiagent Systems. International Foundation for Au-
tonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 1528 -- 1529.
[32] Sanmit Narvekar, Jivko Sinapov, Matteo Leonetti, and Peter Stone. 2016. Source
task creation for curriculum learning. In Proceedings of the 2016 International
Conference on Autonomous Agents & Multiagent Systems. International Foundation
for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 566 -- 574.
[33] Sanmit Narvekar, Jivko Sinapov, and Peter Stone. 2017. Autonomous task sequenc-
ing for customized curriculum design in reinforcement learning. In Proceedings
of the 26th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), Vol. 147.
149.
[34] Junhyuk Oh, Yijie Guo, Satinder Singh, and Honglak Lee. 2018. Self-Imitation
Learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.05635 (2018).
[35] Shayegan Omidshafiei, Jason Pazis, Christopher Amato, Jonathan P How, and
John Vian. 2017. Deep decentralized multi-task multi-agent reinforcement learn-
ing under partial observability. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.06182 (2017).
[36] Gregory Palmer, Karl Tuyls, Daan Bloembergen, and Rahul Savani. 2018. Lenient
multi-agent deep reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 17th International
Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems. International Founda-
tion for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 443 -- 451.
[37] Liviu Panait, Keith Sullivan, and Sean Luke. 2006. Lenient learners in cooperative
multiagent systems. In Proceedings of the fifth international joint conference on
Autonomous agents and multiagent systems. ACM, 801 -- 803.
[38] Peng Peng, Quan Yuan, Ying Wen, Yaodong Yang, Zhenkun Tang, Haitao Long,
and Jun Wang. 2017. Multiagent bidirectionally-coordinated nets for learning to
play starcraft combat games. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.10069 (2017).
[39] Dean A Pomerleau. 1991. Efficient training of artificial neural networks for
autonomous navigation. Neural Computation 3, 1 (1991), 88 -- 97.
[40] Tabish Rashid, Mikayel Samvelyan, Christian Schroeder de Witt, Gregory Far-
quhar, Jakob Foerster, and Shimon Whiteson. 2018. QMIX: Monotonic Value
Function Factorisation for Deep Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning. arXiv
preprint arXiv:1803.11485 (2018).
[41] John Schulman, Philipp Moritz, Sergey Levine, Michael Jordan, and Pieter Abbeel.
2015. High-dimensional continuous control using generalized advantage estima-
tion. arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.02438 (2015).
[42] David Silver, Aja Huang, Chris J Maddison, Arthur Guez, Laurent Sifre, George
Van Den Driessche, Julian Schrittwieser, Ioannis Antonoglou, Veda Panneershel-
vam, Marc Lanctot, et al. 2016. Mastering the game of Go with deep neural
networks and tree search. nature 529, 7587 (2016), 484.
[43] Jiaming Song, Hongyu Ren, Dorsa Sadigh, and Stefano Ermon. 2018. Multi-agent
generative adversarial imitation learning. In Advances in Neural Information
Processing Systems. 7472 -- 7483.
[44] Richard S Sutton, Andrew G Barto, et al. 1998. Reinforcement learning: An intro-
duction. MIT press.
[45] Emanuel Todorov, Tom Erez, and Yuval Tassa. 2012. Mujoco: A physics engine
for model-based control. In Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2012 IEEE/RSJ
International Conference on. IEEE, 5026 -- 5033.
[46] Weixun Wang, Jianye Hao, Yixi Wang, and Matthew Taylor. 2018. Towards Co-
operation in Sequential Prisoner's Dilemmas: a Deep Multiagent Reinforcement
Learning Approach. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.00162 (2018).
[47] Yaodong Yang, Jianye Hao, Mingyang Sun, Zan Wang, Changjie Fan, and Goran
Strbac. 2018. Recurrent Deep Multiagent Q-Learning for Autonomous Brokers
in Smart Grid.. In IJCAI. 569 -- 575.
[48] Dayong Ye, Minjie Zhang, and Yun Yang. 2015. A multi-agent framework for
packet routing in wireless sensor networks. sensors 15, 5 (2015), 10026 -- 10047.
|
1604.02704 | 1 | 1604 | 2016-04-10T15:25:23 | Modeling and Simulation of Passenger Traffic in a National Airport | [
"cs.MA"
] | Optimal operation of a country's air transport infrastructure plays a major role in the economic development of nations. Due to the increasing use of air transportation in today's world, flights' boarding times have become a concern for both airlines and airports, thus the importance of knowing beforehand how changes in flights demand parameters and physical airport layout will affect passengers flow and boarding times. This paper presents a pedestrian modeling study in which a national airport passenger flow was analyzed. The study was conducted at Vanguardia National Airport in Villavicencio, Meta, Colombia. Different effects of structural changes are shown and provide judging elements for decision makers regarding passenger traffic in airport design. | cs.MA | cs | Modeling and Simulation of Passenger Traffic in a
National Airport
1Universidad de los Llanos, Colombia, [email protected], [email protected],
J. Enciso, M.Sc.1, J. Vargas, Ing.(c)1, and P. Martinez, Ing.1
[email protected]
Abstract– Optimal operation of a country's air transport
infrastructure plays a major role in the economic development of
nations. Due to the increasing use of air transportation in today's
world, flights' boarding times have become a concern for both
airlines and airports, thus the importance of knowing beforehand
how changes in flights demand parameters and physical airport
layout will affect passengers flow and boarding times. This paper
presents a pedestrian modeling study in which a national airport
passenger flow was analyzed. The study was conducted at
Vanguardia National Airport in Villavicencio, Meta, Colombia.
Different effects of structural changes are shown and provide
judging elements for decision makers regarding passenger traffic in
airport design.
Keywords-- Passenger traffic flow, airport model, pedestrian
model.
I. INTRODUCTION
The aim of this research project is to understand the
passenger flow in a national airport using a pedestrian model
with emphasis on boarding time (the time it takes for a
passenger to go from the airport's entrance door to the
airplane, going trough check-in and control points, and
waiting halls) in order to provide insights for decision makers
regarding the capacity usage and passenger satisfaction trough
diminishing waiting times.
Technological advancements have made flights safer, faster,
and cheaper, making air transportation an each time more
popular option for passengers. Passenger satisfaction, in
accordance with cost and operational efficiency,
is
increasingly difficult to manage due to growing demand,
thereby, increasing demand becomes a double-edged sword:
while it may seems like a perfect opportunity to increase
profits for airports and airlines, it can also become a problem
as the rising demand makes the boarding and landing times
longer,
in
consequence, a smaller number of flights gets done daily.
Today, one of the bottlenecks of analysis for terminal and
operational planners consists in realistically modeling and
analyzing passenger operations, constrained by the terminal's
physical design.
Air transport is one of the most influential services in
Colombian economy. The country's topography and the
consequent difficult access to the most remote regions make it
really important. In addition, air transportation presents to
Colombia, a developing country, as a gate to global economy,
is, each flight needs more
time and
that
include:
supporting
the previous claim
more convenient than other transportation options after the
cost/ benefit analysis.
There has been a notable growth of air transportation system
in Colombia in the last years. Between 1990 and 1999, air
transportation's contribution to the Gross Domestic Product
(GDP) grew to an annual average rate of 2, 7% and went down
to 1, 3% in the financial crisis period between 1999 and 2002.
After the crisis period, from 2003 to 2009 it grew around 4,1%
similar to that of the country's economy, that tells that the
demand for air transportation services is directly proportional
to the Colombian economy growth [1].
"La
Studies
infraestructura de transporte en Colombia" by Cardenas et al.
[2], "El impacto del transporte aéreo en la economía
colombiana y las políticas públicas" by Olivera et al. [1], "La
infraestructura aeroportuaria del Caribe colombiano" by
Otero [3] and "A Study of Cargo Receipt Logistics for Flower
Exportation at El Dorado International Airport in Bogotá
D.C." by Gutierrez et al. [4].
Research on this topic is uncommon in Latin American
countries, let alone, research using modeling and simulation
techniques, that and the importance of an optimal functioning
air-transport infrastructure for a developing country like
Colombia gives relevance to these kind of studies and
encourages further research in this field.
After the implementation of the computational model was
done, scenarios were constructed using
the Simulation
experiment from the Experiment Framework provided by
AnyLogic. The results of the research were presented on a
public lecture that reunited entrepreneurs, merchandisers, and
civil authorities from the city council.
The remainder of this article is structured as follows. Section 2
presents a review of previous work on the use of modeling and
improve airport
simulation
performance. Section 3 presents
the agent-based and
pedestrian modeling theory. Section 4 presents the research
project's methodology. Section 5 demonstrates the scenarios
generated and results analysis and, finally, in Section 6
conclusions are presented.
study and
techniques
to
14th LACCEI International Multi-Conference for Engineering, Education, and Technology: "Engineering Innovations for
Global Sustainability", 20-22 July 2016, San José, Costa Rica.
1
II. PREVIOUS WORK
tool
to
Simulation has been used as a
improve
performance in many fields. Regarding air transport terminal
design, there are some examples like the one presented by
Thomet & Mostoufi in a chapter of the book "Transportation
and Development, Innovative Best Practices" [5] where they
show the application of simulation techniques in the design of
an air terminal in Curaçao. Simulation was done with a
dynamic, object-oriented, pedestrian model fed by a realistic
flight itinerary for a 24-hour day, with the aim of knowing the
amount of passengers arriving and departing the airport along
one day. Curcio presents another example in "Passengers'
flow analysis and security issues in airport terminals using
modeling & simulation" [6] where the International airport of
Lamezia Terme in Calabria, Italy, is studied. The objective of
the study was to analyze system performance under different
scenarios
in
AnyLogic. The passengers average wait time for reaching the
gate area was the measure of system performance.
through a simulation model
implemented
It has also been used on a more 'micro' level for addressing
things like optimization of check-in points location in
"Optimizing
the Airport Check-In Counter Allocation
Problem" by Araujo & Repolho [7], and reducing its number
in "A network model for airport common use check-in counter
assignments" by Tang [8].
Software tools for this kind of problems have been created,
although they are still few, one of them is GPenSIM by
Davidrajuh & Lin written in 2011[9] and designed to model
and simulate Harstad/Narvik airport in Norway using a
discrete-event system with emphasis on the flow capacity,
defined as the number of passengers using the airport per time
unit, and the average time required to board the plane once the
passenger is inside the airport. Another one, popular within the
research community, and with a more generic approach, is
SimWalk Airport described by its authors as a "specialized
passenger simulation and analysis solution for airports that
offers realistic modeling and evaluation of passenger
operations", it allows to optimize airport design, passenger
flows and terminal operations, by modeling airport objects
(e.g., check-in and security control points) and integrating
flight schedules and airport processes.
Another tool is Space Syntax by Raford & Ragland a
pedestrian volume-modeling
tool specially designed for
pedestrian safety purposes [10].
Future applications of modeling and simulation techniques to
improve air transport terminals' performance are endless.
Generic and little-thought construction and design guidelines
for public buildings –often inadequately– are provided for the
complexities of physical reality, in particular under emergency
scenarios. Experience has shown that application of simplistic
physical standards to densely occupied public buildings like
airports, stadiums and shopping malls most of the time fails to
provide the safety of crowds in an emergency situation.
Moreover, the world today is facing an increasing danger from
the dynamic and unpredictable threat of terrorism. One of the
most effective ways to protect pedestrians in these public-
places emergency scenarios lies in the attention given to their
behavior within the building in these cases [11]. As stated by
Smedresman, "The increased frequency of natural and man-
made disasters makes it important to assess and optimize
evacuation plans. Emergency event modeling can help
emergency management agencies develop effective evacuation
plans that save lives." [12].
III. AGENT BASED AND PEDESTRIAN MODELING
THEORY
System modeling is a tool for solving real world
problems [13]. Most of the time, solutions for these problems
cannot be found by experimental means, because modifying
system's components can result too expensive, dangerous, or
literally impossible [14]. In these cases, the best option is to
build a computational model of the real-world system. The
modeling process implies a certain level of abstraction, where
only the most relevant features of the system are included. A
model is always less complex than the original system.
AnyLogic is a tool that provides three simulation methods:
system dynamics, discrete event and agent-based simulation;
these methods can be used individually or at the same time
[12]. AnyLogic is one of the most popular tools in the market
and has been used in many research fields and for different
purposes, such as the distributed simulation of hybrid systems
[15], spread of epidemics
[16] and massive product
consumption [17]. AnyLogic is the simulation tool chosen for
this research project.
Agent-based modeling is a tool for the study of systems from
the complex adaptive system perspective. This approach tries
to explain macro phenomena as a result of micro level
behavior among a heterogeneous set of interacting agents.
Agent-based modeling allows for testing in a systematic way
different hypotheses related to agent attributes, behavioral
rules, and interaction types and their effect on macro level
facts of the system [18].
their objects (agents) and determining
Agent-based modeling allows building a system's model by
identifying
their
behaviors, even if the whole system behavior, their key
variables, and their dependencies are unknown. Once agent
behavior is defined, agents can be created and put in an
environment where they are allowed to interact. The system's
global behavior is a result of lots of concurrent individual
behaviors [12].
14th LACCEI International Multi-Conference for Engineering, Education, and Technology: "Engineering Innovations for
Global Sustainability", 20-22 July 2016, San José, Costa Rica.
2
Agents determine their interactions with other agents and with
their environment, on the basis of internalized social norms
and mental models, internal behavioral rules and cognitive
abilities, and formal and informal institutional rules among
other factors [18]. In Agent-based modeling, agents do not
have perfect knowledge of the system and make their
decisions based on the perceptions they have on their
environment; these perceptions do not have to include correct
representations of reality and may vary among agents.
An agent is defined by its characteristics: activity, autonomy,
and heterogeneity. Each agent has an activity; it acts according
to the rules of the system and its own pre-programmed
behavior. The agent's behavior can also be defined according
to its features: goal direction, sensitivity, bounded reality,
interactivity, mobility and adaptation [19]. Although agents
may have a defined goal, and its behavior be 'ruled' by the
system rules they can still make their own decisions, so they
are autonomous. By the way, although each agent may begin
as a member of a limited set of common templates, it can
develop individuality through autonomous activity in the sense
described previously [19].
The inherent complexity of agent-based modeling may make it
seem like a technique with difficult or little application, and in
fact, in many domains, agent-based modeling competes with
traditional equation based approaches based on
the
identification of system variables and its evaluation through
integrated sets of equations relating these variables. Both
approaches simulate the system by constructing a model and
executing it on a computer. The differences are in the form of
the model and how it is executed [20].
In agent-based modeling, the model consists of a set of agents
that encapsulate the behaviors of the various individuals that
make up the system, and execution consists of emulating these
behaviors. In equation-based modeling, the model is a set of
equations, and execution consists of evaluating them.
Thus "simulation" is the general term that applies to both
methods, which are distinguished as (agent-based) emulation
and (equation-based) evaluation [20]. Understanding the
relative capabilities of these two approaches is of great ethical
and practical interest to system modelers and simulators.
Choosing the wrong approach for a problem could lead to
incorrect results and it may translate to emergency situations
in the real world.
Traditional modeling methods such as discrete-event and
queuing may not work well in areas with high amounts of
pedestrian movement
[12]. Traditional discrete-event
simulation looks down on a system from above, designing
process flows and creating entities to travel through the
system. Agent-based modeling changes the perspective of the
simulation from the high-level processes to that of the system
entities, called agents. Instead of the processes evaluating and
manipulating the agents, the agents themselves are able to
gather information about their environment and react based on
what they individually perceive.
The power of agent-based modeling lies in its ability to allow
the agents to have some level of intelligence and to control
their own decisions, thus resulting in behavior and outcomes
that are more authentic in real-world systems dependent on
individual actions. Pedestrians move in continuous space
while they react to obstacles and one another [12]. Because of
this unique perspective, agent-based simulation techniques are
well suited for modeling pedestrian flows
through an
environment. The techniques are able to address some of the
difficulties from which pedestrian modeling has suffered when
trying to obtain complexity on a microscopic level [21].
An early example of the use of agent-based modeling to
simulate pedestrian movement can be found in STREETS, a
model developed by Schelhorn et al. in 1999 [22], under the
idea of the importance of people movement for defining the
'vibrancy' of a town. The study outlined the possible uses of
this kind of simulation and served as a beginning for such
predictive models.
Life in cities is becoming increasingly crowded with people.
Mass gatherings are more frequent in nowadays world than
they were in past years, this can be attributed to the increase in
world population and to air transportation becoming more
cost-effective. This fact creates the need to find solutions to
make those crowded places safer, and more efficient in terms
of travel time. Pedestrian modeling can help to assess and
optimize locations where pedestrian crowds move around
[23]. Modeling allows collecting data about a given areas
pedestrian density, ensure acceptable performance levels for
service points with a hypothetical load, estimate how long
pedestrians will stay in specific areas, and detect potential
problems that interior changes such as adding or removing
obstacles, or service points, may cause. Pedestrian traffic
simulation plays an important role in nowadays construction,
expansion, and other design-related projects for public
buildings like airports, shopping centers and stadiums [12].
These studies can help architects improve building designs,
facility owners review potential structural and organizational
changes, engineers evaluate scenarios for improving capacity
usage and civil authorities simulate possible evacuation routes
in emergency scenarios. Since pedestrian flows can be
complex, they require a full-blown simulation.
Pedestrians' behavior follows basic rules that have been
determined by theoretical studies: they move at predetermined
rates, they avoid physical obstacles such as walls, furniture
and other people, and they use information about the crowds
that surround them to adjust their movements (word-of-mouth
14th LACCEI International Multi-Conference for Engineering, Education, and Technology: "Engineering Innovations for
Global Sustainability", 20-22 July 2016, San José, Costa Rica.
3
effect). The results have been proven many times in field
studies and customer applications [12].
PEDESTRIAN MODELING APPROACHES CLASSIFICATION
TABLE 1
In the design of a building that will have many high-traffic
areas, like a supermarket, a subway station, a museum, a
stadium or an airport it should be a goal to create a physical
layout that minimizes travel time and ensures pedestrian flows
don't interfere with each other. Simulation can test for normal,
special, or peak pedestrian volume conditions, and it can also
be used to understand how changes in the physical layout like
the establishment of a new kiosk, new furniture or the
relocation of existing items like advertising panels, flowerpots,
pictures etc. will affect their operations, pedestrian travel
times, and the general customer experience.
Different approaches to pedestrian modeling can be classified
according to their level of abstraction, detail of description and
model's
[23], a
classification of pedestrian modeling approaches is shown in
Table 1.
(discrete or continuous)
time
type
IV. METHODOLOGY
The aim of this project is to model the Vanguardia
National Airport's passenger flow in order to obtain qualitative
information that can be useful for improving airport's capacity
usage, and passenger satisfaction.
Modeling and simulation are the quantitative research methods
used in this project; qualitative research is done through
previous work review and data collection. Data for developing
the model were collected by means of observation, interviews
to airport's employees and information requests made to the
airport's administration. Airport's security policies limited the
data collection process, as much information could not be
made publicly available.
ICAO: SKVV)
The study object is the Vanguardia National Airport (IATA:
in Villavicencio, Meta,
VVC,
Colombia.
flights
for commercial
passenger, Chárter, cargo, and private airlines.
located
It serves domestic
to 18:00 COT. According
The airport works seven days a week, every week of the year,
from 06:00
to airport's
administration, the airport handles a total daily operation
volume of about a hundred flights (this includes, all types of
flights: passenger, Chárter, private and cargo flights) and a
monthly total volume of around 3.400 flights. The number of
passengers received for the year 2014 was 107.551, there were
108.121 passengers shipped that same year [24]. Only
departing passengers are modeled in this project, incoming
passengers are not within the scope of this study.
Abstraction level
Microscopic
models
Macroscopic
models
Mesoscopic
models
Describe
each
pedestrian as a unique
entity with
its own
properties.
Determine the average
pedestrian dynamics by
densities,
flows and
velocities as functions
of space and time.
These models are in
between the other two,
taking into account the
velocity
distribution.
Mesoscopic models
often
include
individual entities but
model
interactions
between the m with
common fields.
Description detail
Discrete-space models
Continuous models
Sub-divide the environment into a
lattice, and the spatial resolution of
the model is limited by the cell size.
Describe the spatial resolution down
to an arbitrary level of detail.
Time
Discrete time
Continuous time
If time is advanced only until next
event occurs, system time is discrete.
If there is no fixed time step in the
model, system time is continuous.
Villavicencio is the capital city of Meta department, and it is
situated in the northern part of it, 85 km to the south of
Bogotá, the country's capital.
It is considered the most-important commercial center of the
Orinoquía region, and it has an approximate population of
495,200 inhabitants and a population density of 370.1
inhabitants per square kilometer. It is still a small city and its
population is about one sixteenth of the Colombia's capital
city, Bogotá population [25].
Lack of concise and relevant airport's operation historical data
hindered the development of the model, the research team had
to do the best it could with what it had. Model parameters
were estimated based on data provided by the airport
administration, interviews to airport and airlines employees,
and in-site observation.
A. BOARDING LOGIC
Vanguardia is still a small national airport. Although
there are more airlines working there, only local
airlines –Avianca and Satena– have enough demand
14th LACCEI International Multi-Conference for Engineering, Education, and Technology: "Engineering Innovations for
Global Sustainability", 20-22 July 2016, San José, Costa Rica.
4
leave
to need check-in point queues, therefore these are the
only check-in points modeled.
Passengers can buy their tickets through a travel
agency, call-center, web page, or at the airport
facilities. Passenger check-in can be done on-line, by
mobile app, or at the airport facilities. In-site check-
in takes about one minute according to the airlines'
employees
interviewed. There are not different
boarding types in the studied airlines, although there
are Chárter flights, an exclusive type of flight that is
not marketed through the usual sales channels, and
that due to its characteristic is not within the scope of
this study.
After checking-in, passengers must
their
luggage in the corresponding airline warehouse,
where it is scanned. The airport police agents call
passengers if abnormalities are found during the
scanning process. The Airport has two security-check
rooms; passengers go to the one working at the
moment their boarding starts. Security check-in staff
members check the passengers boarding pass and
ticket, and made them pass through a metal detector.
The entire security check-in process lasts no more
than five minutes for each passenger, according to
security check-in staff members.
Inside the airport there is a police office for migration
control and prevention. At the moment of this
research, control is for foreign passengers only.
Police officer must check if the foreign passengers
have criminal records after they have made their
check-in, and before they go to the security check-in.
Next step involves one of the two local airlines.
Satena (acronym for Servicio Aéreo a Territorios
Nacionales) is a Colombian government owned
airline that operates domestic routes, it is based in
Bogotá, Colombia, and it was founded in 1962.
Satena has direct flights from Villavicencio to
Bogotá, Puerto Inírida, Puerto Carreño, and Mitú.
These flights depart on different days of the week,
and there is only one of each per day: Bogotá and
Mitú on Mondays, Puerto Inírida on Tuesdays and
Saturdays, and Puerto Carreño on Thursdays.
Avianca (acronym for Aerovías del continente
americano S.A.) is Colombia's national airline and
flag carrier, since December 5, 1919.
is
headquartered in Bogotá it is the largest airline in
Colombia, and the world's second oldest airline. It
offers direct flights from Villavicencio to Bogotá
only, and these flights depart twice every day.
It
B. COMPUTATIONAL MODEL DEVELOPMENT
Summarizing, the airport's boarding logic goes as
follows: a passenger buys his ticket through a travel
agency, call-center, web page, or at the airport
facilities (in the day previous to the flight's date).
Once the flight's date comes the passenger goes to the
airport and makes his/her check-in, and goes to sit at
the waiting hall until the flight's boarding starts, once
that happens, the passenger goes through the security
check-in, if the passenger is a foreigner he/she must
have gone to the migration police office before, after
the passenger goes through all this, he/she goes to the
gate, shows the ticket to an airport's employee and
then, boards the plane.
The computational model was developed using
AnyLogic 7 University 7.2.0. Model describes the
pedestrian flow at the airport by simulating the
services
like security checkpoints and check-in
facilities and its queues, the boarding logic and the
different kinds of routes each passenger could follow
from the entrance to the gate, and a realistic flight
schedule saved in a Microsoft Excel sheet. Finally,
qualitative information is obtained through the model
execution animation and the pedestrian density map
included.
The model development was carried out in five
phases.
In the first phase, a simplified pedestrian flow was
defined. Passengers appear at the airport's entrance
line and go to the gate in order to board their plane.
In this path, passengers will have to stop and wait at
some points. From the data given by the airport
administration the research team concluded that the
average passenger arrival rate is approximately 25
passengers per hour. From statistical work carried
over direct observation data it was found that the
average passenger comfortable walking speed lies in
the interval between 0,61493 and 0,88841 meters per
second with a mean of 0,75167 and a standard
deviation of 0,13674 .
On the second phase, the airport's service point and
waiting areas were defined, that is, the points that
passengers have to stop at, previously mentioned.
Avianca had two check-in points and Satena, one.
The airport had two security check points, passengers
go to the one with the shortest queue as both points
are modeled as if they were always working; there
was only one waiting area for passengers. The airport
police office for migration control and prevention is
modeled as an airport service as well. The delay
14th LACCEI International Multi-Conference for Engineering, Education, and Technology: "Engineering Innovations for
Global Sustainability", 20-22 July 2016, San José, Costa Rica.
5
in
is defined
times was
these delay
computational model
(service) times for each service point are entered in
the
through probability
distributions (stochastic). The distribution chosen to
model
the Triangular
probability distribution, based on the knowledge of
the minimum, maximum and a "guess" of the mean
time. This limited sample data was obtained through
interviews to the operating staff of the mentioned
services.
On the third phase, types of passengers were
differentiated. As there are no different kinds of
boarding for commercial passenger flights in this
airport, passengers are differentiated by
their
nationality. Colombian passengers get to the airport,
check-in, and wait for their flight's boarding start, go
through the security check-in and then go to the gate.
Foreign passengers have to go to the airport's police
office, to check their criminal records, before they
pass through the airport's security check. The flight's
schedule
the fourth phase. The
simulation has a duration of 12 hours following the
airport's schedule, from 06:00 to 18:00 COT. The
schedule implemented is based on the real destinies
served by the airport, so it is a realistic schedule, but
not a real one. Each flight has a departure and a
destination times, this information is recorded in the
spreadsheet
flight has a passenger
collection as well; this collection stores the list of
passengers that has bought tickets for the flight. At
this point, passengers have two attributes, nationality
and flight.
On the last phase, the functions and events that tie the
whole model together are defined, functions represent
complex processes that connect the model's pieces
and allow defining a simulation flow for it, events
allow
information-
dependent events happening at the same time, for this
model the events were the boarding and the departure
events (EventoAbordaje and EventoSalida in the
model). Functions defined for this model were
comenzarAbordaje,
configurarPasajero,
planearAbordaje
configurarVuelos.
The Simulation experiment from the AnyLogic's
Experiment Framework was chosen as the tool for
the debugging, validation and visual demonstration of
the model. The computer-generated animation
allowed the diagnosis of some programming errors,
especially related to airport services parameters
configuration.
file. Each
similar
scheduling
several
and
C. SCENARIOS GENERATED AND RESULT
ANALYSIS
The result analysis stage deals with the development
of scenarios for
the verification of productive
bottlenecks and proposal of process improvements
[26]. The flight schedule used for the scenarios
generated is shown in Table 2.
TABLE 2
FLIGHT SCHEDULE
Destination
Mitú – Satena
Bogotá – Avianca 1
Puerto Inírida – Satena
Bogotá – Satena
Puerto Carreño – Satena
Bogotá – Avianca 2
Departure Date
23/01/2016 6:30
23/01/2016 7:00
23/01/2016 8:30
23/01/2016 10:00
23/01/2016 15:30
23/01/2016 16:30
to
information request
The first scenario represents reality, which was simulated
using the computational model using data obtained from
interviews, specific
the airport
administration and observations, and trying to emulate the
airport service layout as close as possible.
The areas with highest pedestrian density were the waiting
hall –that tends to get crowded very easily– and the area near
the police office –that gets easily crowded as the number of
foreign passengers grow– when there is only one officer in
service. Check-in service works well as long queues are not
common. When there is only one officer in service, this area
gets really crowded. Around 4:00 p.m. the airport services
start to work at full-capacity, all areas get crowded and the
number of security check points shows insufficient as there are
really long queues on both points.
Pedestrian density map and queue sizes in each service point
are the main performance indicators for each scenario.
Parameters like passenger arrival rate, number of check-in
points, number of security check points and number of police
officers in service are varied to generate the next three
scenarios.
A total of four scenarios were generated. Table 3 shows a
description of each scenario.
14th LACCEI International Multi-Conference for Engineering, Education, and Technology: "Engineering Innovations for
Global Sustainability", 20-22 July 2016, San José, Costa Rica.
6
TABLE 3.
SIMULATION SCENARIOS
Passenger
arrival rate
per hour
25
Check
in point
number
3
Security
point
number
2
Police
officer
number
1
25
50
25
4
3
3
3
2
3
1
1
3
Scenario
1
2
3
4
Annotation
Services
collapse
after 4 p.m.
Better
performance.
Services still
collapse
after 4 p.m.
The airport
is in chaos.
Best
performance
scenario.
For the second scenario the number of check-in and security
checkpoints is increased by 1, other parameters were left
equal. Performance in general, is much better than in scenario
1, the waiting areas have less pedestrian density, especially in
the morning. Pedestrian traffic around 4:00 p.m. is still heavy;
queues become long, but not so much as in Scenario 1. The
police office is just as crowded as it was in Scenario 1.
What would happen if the number of passengers coming to the
airport doubled? Would the current layout be enough? In the
third scenario the passenger arrival rate is doubled, but the
airport service desk layout remains untouched. By 8:00 a.m.
the waiting hall is near full, but the rest of the airport remains
empty. At 10:00 a.m. a first collapse occurs, security check
queues get long and only empty themselves until 12:00 m. By
2:00 p.m. the waiting hall is full again. By 4:00 p.m., the
airport gets really crowded, all airport service points are full
and have really long queues, and pedestrian density is high in
almost every point of the airport surface. The airport is in
chaos.
The fourth scenario seems to be the one with the best
performance; passenger flow remains nice all day long,
although the waiting area gets crowded from noon onwards.
Around 4:00 p.m., after an initial congestion, queues move
faster than in the previous scenarios and the pedestrian density
is much more evenly distributed. Despite the increase in police
officers, the police office waiting area remains as the most
crowded in the model.
V. CONCLUSIONS
This research project aim was to study the pedestrian
flow in the Vanguardia National Airport by means of
computational modeling and simulation. By means of the
simulation experiment potential effects of structural changes
in the model's sources of delay –the airport's service points– in
the airport's performance and found useful information for
improving it.
The scenario generation done allowed finding that, first, the
current airport service points layout would not be enough to
face significant increases in the number of passengers; second,
the security check points are the main bottlenecks in the
airport's pedestrian flow, an increase in the number of these
immediately improves the airport's performance. And third,
the police officer for migration control and prevention is the
next most important bottleneck in the flow, the process of
checking the foreign passengers' criminal records can take so
much time that not even tripling the number of officers is
enough to avoid forming crowds at that point as the number of
foreign passengers grow.
Generalization of the developments made in this study would
open up possibilities for the application of these techniques in
the design of functional spaces for other types of buildings
with high levels of pedestrian traffic. Although is still
somewhat challenging to create an airport's service point
organization from scratch using simulation, a model could be
used effectively to work on an already existing organization
and suggest modifications for more efficient capacity usage
and a better passenger flow [11].
Finally, this study enable decision makers to improve their
understanding regarding pedestrian flows in public buildings
in Villavicencio and offers the first and most detailed look yet
at the Vanguardia National Airport processes, as well as
suggestions for improving its performance. However, this
should not be the concluding study for these topics, but one
that inspires further research in this field.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to express their gratitude to the
University of the Llanos for supporting the efforts of the
research team trough the study-group Advanced Simulation
Concepts
the Vanguardia National Airport
administration staff, for their kind help and appreciation for
the project, and finally, to IngenTIC, the IT solutions
company, that helped fund their efforts.
(ASC),
to
REFERENCES
[1] M. Olivera, P. Cabrera, W. Bermúdez, and A. Hernández, "El impacto del
transporte aéreo en la economía colombiana y las políticas públicas",
Cuadernos de Fedesarrollo, Apr. 2011.
[2] M. Cárdenas, A. Gaviria, and M. Meléndez, "La infraestructura de
transporte en Colombia," Infraestructura, Transporte, Comunicaciones y
Servicios Públicos, Aug. 2005.
[3] A. Otero, "La infraestructura aeroportuaria del Caribe colombiano,"
Documentos de trabajo sobre economía regional, Feb. 2012.
14th LACCEI International Multi-Conference for Engineering, Education, and Technology: "Engineering Innovations for
Global Sustainability", 20-22 July 2016, San José, Costa Rica.
7
[4] E. Gutierrez, F. Ballesteros, and J. Torres, "A study of cargo receipt
logistics for flower exportation at el dorado international airport in Bogotá
in Production Systems and Supply Chain Management in
D.C.,"
Emerging Countries: Best Practices (G. Mejia and N. Velasco, eds.), pp.
61{79, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2012.
[5] M. A. Thomet and F. Mostoufi, "Simulation-Aided airport terminal
design," in Transportation and Development Innovative Best Practices
2008, pp. 118 - 123, American Society of Civil Engineers, Apr. 2008.
[6] F. L. Duilio Curcio, "Passengers' flow analysis and security issues in
airport terminals using modeling & simulation".
[7] G. E. Araujo and H. M. Repolho, \Optimizing the airport Check-In
counter allocation problem," Journal of Transport Literature, vol. 9, pp.
15-19, Dec. 2015.
[8] C.-H. Tang, "A network model for airport common use check-in counter
assignments," Journal of the Operational Research Society, vol. 61, pp.
1607-1618, Oct. 2009.
[9] R. Davidrajuh and B. Lin, "Exploring airport trafficc capability using
petri net based model,"Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 38, pp.
10923 - 10931, Sept. 2011.
[10] N. Raford and D. Ragland, "Space syntax: Innovative pedestrian volume
modeling tool for pedestrian safety," Transportation Research Record:
Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 1878, pp. 66 - 74,
Jan. 2004
[11] G. Smedresman, "Crowd simulations and evolutionary algorithms in floor
[12] I. Grigoryev, AnyLogic in three days - A quick course in simulation
plan design," May 2006.
modeling. 2015.
2005.
[13] J. Banks, J. S. Carson, B. L. Nelson, and D. M. Nicol, Discrete-Event
System Simulation (5th Edition). Prentice Hall, 5 ed., July 2009.
[14] Applied Simulation and Optimization: In Logistics, Industrial and
Aeronautical Practice. Springer, 2015 ed., Apr. 2015.
[15] A. Borshchev, Y. Karpov, and V. Kharitonov, \Distributed simulation of
hybrid systems with AnyLogic and HLA," Future Generation Computer
Systems, vol. 18, pp. 829 - 839, May 2002.
[16] Eurosim, B. Zupancic, R. Karba, S. Blazic, S. S. for Simulation,
Modelling, University., and F. od Electrical Engineering, "EUROSIM
2007 proceedings of the 6th EUROSIM congress on modeling and
simulation, 9-13 September 2007, Ljubljana, Slovenia," 2007.
[17] M. Garifullin, A. Borshchev, and T. Popkov, "Using AnyLogic and agent-
based approach to model consumer market".
[18] M. A. Janssen, Agent-Based Modelling. Arizona State University, Mar.
[19] A. Getchell, \Agent-based modeling," June 2008.
[20] H. Van Dyke Parunak, R. Savit, and R. Riolo, "Agent-Based modeling vs.
Equation Based modeling: A case study and users' guide," in Multi-Agent
Systems and Agent-Based Simulation (J. a. Sichman, R. Conte, and N.
Gilbert, eds.), vol. 1534 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science , ch. 2, pp.
10 - 25, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1998.
[21] M. Barker, "A survey on Agent-Based modeling of pedestrian
movement," tech.rep., University of Central Florida, 2006.
[22] T. Schelhorn, D. O'Sullivan, M. Haklay, and M. Thurstain-Goodwin,
"STREETS: An agent-based pedestrian model," Apr. 1999.
[23] A. Johansson and T. Kretz, "Applied pedestrian modeling," in Agent-
Based Models of Geographical Systems (A. J. Heppenstall, A. T. Crooks,
L. M. See, and M. Batty, eds.), pp. 451 - 462, Springer Netherlands, 2012.
[24] L. M. S. Rodríguez, "Respuesta solicitud de información", Aeropuerto
Vanguardia, Aeronáutica Civil Colombiana, Jan. 2016.
[25] DANE, "Resultados y proyecciones (2005-2020) del censo 2005," tech.
rep., 2005.
[26] J. P. Lima, K. C. D. Lobato, F. Leal, and R. D. S. Lima, "Urban solid
waste management by process mapping and simulation," Pesquisa
Operacional, 2015.
14th LACCEI International Multi-Conference for Engineering, Education, and Technology: "Engineering Innovations for
Global Sustainability", 20-22 July 2016, San José, Costa Rica.
8
|
1310.6342 | 1 | 1310 | 2013-10-23T19:46:45 | Cultural Evolution as Distributed Computation | [
"cs.MA",
"nlin.AO"
] | The speed and transformative power of human cultural evolution is evident from the change it has wrought on our planet. This chapter proposes a human computation program aimed at (1) distinguishing algorithmic from non-algorithmic components of cultural evolution, (2) computationally modeling the algorithmic components, and amassing human solutions to the non-algorithmic (generally, creative) components, and (3) combining them to develop human-machine hybrids with previously unforeseen computational power that can be used to solve real problems. Drawing on recent insights into the origins of evolutionary processes from biology and complexity theory, human minds are modeled as self-organizing, interacting, autopoietic networks that evolve through a Lamarckian (non-Darwinian) process of communal exchange. Existing computational models as well as directions for future research are discussed. | cs.MA | cs | LIANE GABORA
University of British Columbia
Abstract
The speed and transformative power of human cultural evolution is evident from the
change it has wrought on our planet. This chapter proposes a human computation
program aimed at (1) distinguishing algorithmic from non-algorithmic components of
cultural evolution, (2) computationally modeling the algorithmic components, and
amassing human solutions to the non-algorithmic (generally, creative) components,
and (3) combining them to develop human-machine hybrids with previously
unforeseen computational power that can be used to solve real problems. Drawing on
recent insights into the origins of evolutionary processes from biology and complexity
theory, human minds are modeled as self-organizing, interacting, autopoietic networks
that evolve through a Lamarckian (non-Darwinian) process of communal exchange.
Existing computational models as well as directions for future research are discussed.
Reference
Gabora, L. (2013). Cultural evolution as distributed human computation. In P. Michelucci
(Ed.) Handbook of Human Computation. Berlin: Springer.
Cultural Evolution as Distributed Computation
Introduction
The origin of life brought about unprecedented change to our planet; new forms emerged creating
niches that paved the way for more complex forms, completely transforming the lands, skies, and
oceans. But if biological evolution is effective at bringing about adaptive change, human cultural
evolution is arguably even more effective, and faster. Cultural change doesn’t take generations; it
works at the speed of thought, capitalizing on the strategic, intuitive creative abilities of the
human mind.
This chapter outlines current and potential future steps toward the development of a human
computation program inspired by the speed and effectiveness of how culture evolves. The
overarching goal of the kind of research program outlined in this chapter is to develop a scientific
framework for cultural evolution by abstracting its algorithmic structure, use this algorithmic
structure to develop human-machine hybrid structures with previously unforeseen computational
power, and to apply it to solving real problems. The proposed approach can be thought of as a
"repeatable method" or “design pattern” for fostering cultural emergence, defined by specific
computational methods for modeling interactions at the conceptual level, the individual level, and
the social level, and their application to the accumulation of adaptive, open-ended cultural
novelty.
Two Approaches to a Scientific Framework for Culture
Cultural evolution entails the generation and transmission of novel behavior and artifacts within a
social group, both vertically from one generation to another, and horizontally amongst members
of a generation. Like biological evolution, it relies on mechanisms for both introducing variation
Gabora - Cultural Evolution as Distributed Computation 2
and preserving fit variants. Elements of culture adapt, diversify, and become more complex over
time, and exhibit phenomena observed in biological evolution, such as niches, drift, epistasis, and
punctuated equilibrium (Bentley, Hahn & Shennan, 2004; Durham, 1991; Gabora, 1995).
However, we lack a precise understanding of how culture evolves.
We begin by summarizing two approaches that have been taken to developing a formal
understanding of the process by which culture evolves: Darwinian approaches, and Communal
Exchange approaches.
Darwinian Approaches
Dawkins’ (1975) proposal that culture evolves through reiterated variation and selection inspired
formal Darwinian models of cultural evolution (Boyd & Richerson, 1985, 2005; O’Brien, M.J., &
Lyman Cavalli-Sforza & Feldman, 1981; Henrich & Boyd, 1998, 2002). It also inspired some
archaeologists to apply methods designed for documenting the evolution of biological organisms
to chart the historical evolution of artifacts (e.g., O’Brien, & Lyman, 2000; Shennan, 2008).
Aside from the questionable assumptions underlying this approach (Atran, 2001; Fracchia &
Lewontin, 1999; Gabora, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2004, 2006a, 2008, 2011; Skoyles, 2008;
Temkin & Eldredge, 2007), it aims to model how cultural variants spread, not how they come
into existence, strategically building on and opening up new niches for one another.
Holland (1975) elucidated the algorithmic structure of natural selection, resulting in the
genetic algorithm (GA), and subsequently genetic programming (GP) (Koza, 1993), optimization
tools with diverse applications to everything from scheduling tasks (Hou, Ansari, & Ren, 1994)
to pipeline design (Goldberg, Kuo, 1987) to music and art (Bentley & Corne, 2002; DiPaola &
Gabora, 2009). The term cultural algorithm has referred to a GA that includes a ‘belief space’
used to prune the search space (Reynolds, 1994), not an algorithm inspired by how culture itself
evolves. GAs are effective for multi-constraint problems with complex fitness landscapes, but
would not do well on problems that require reformulating or restructuring the problem from
another perspective. GAs are breadth-first (generate many solutions randomly, and some by
chance may be effective), whereas cultural evolution, which relies on cognitive processes such as
learning, is depth-first (generate few solutions making use of strategic analysis or spontaneous
associations, either intentional or unintentional).
Communal Exchange
Mounting evidence suggests that a non-Darwinian framework is appropriate for, not just cultural
evolution, but the earliest stages of organic life itself (Gabora, 2006; Kauffman, 1993; Vetsigian,
Woese, & Goldenfeld, 2006; Williams & Frausto da Silva, 2003), and aspects of modern
microbial life (Woese 2002). There is widespread support for the hypothesis that the earliest
protocells were self-organized autocatalytic networks that evolved (albeit haphazardly) through a
non-Darwinian process involving horizontal transfer of innovation protocols, referred to as
communal exchange (Vetsigian, Woese, & Goldenfeld, 2006). Communal exchange differs
substantially from natural selection. Acquired change is retained, and information is transmitted
communally, not by way of a self-assembly code from parent to offspring. Formal methods for
modeling reaction networks can be used to investigate the feasibility of the emergence of the kind
of self-sustaining structure that could evolve through communal exchange.
It has been suggested that the basic unit of cultural evolution is, not an autocatalytic
network per se, but an associative network that is (like an autocatalytic network) autopoietic, i.e.,
the whole emerges through interactions amongst the parts (Gabora, 1999, 2004). A communal
exchange based computational model of cultural evolution has been developed (Gabora, 1995,
Gabora - Cultural Evolution as Distributed Computation 3
2008a,b). EVOC (for EVOlution of Culture) consists of neural network based agents that invent
new actions and imitate actions performed by neighbors. The assemblage of ideas changes over
time not because some replicate at the expense of others, as in natural selection, but because they
transform through inventive and social processes. Agents can make generalizations concerning
what kinds of actions are fittest, and use this acquired knowledge to modify ideas for actions
between transmission events. EVOC exhibits typical evolutionary patterns, e.g., cumulative
increase in fitness and complexity of cultural elements over time, and an increase in diversity as
the space of possibilities is explored, followed by a decrease as agents find and converge on the
fittest possibilities. EVOC has been used to model how the mean fitness and diversity of cultural
elements is affected by factors such as leadership, population size and density, borders that affect
transmission between populations, and the proportion and distribution of creators (who acquire
new ideas primarily by inventing them) versus imitators (who acquire new ideas primarily by
copying their neighbors) (Gabora, 1995, 2008a,b; Gabora, & Firouzi, 2012; Gabora & Leijnen,
2009; Leijnen & Gabora, 2010).
A communal exchange inspired method for organizing artifacts into historical lineages has
also been developed. Worldview Evolution, or WE for short, uses both superficial (e.g., ‘beveled
edge’) and abstract (e.g., ‘object is thrown’) attributes, as well as analogical transfer (e.g., of
‘handle’ from knife to cup) and complementarity (e.g., bow and arrow) (Gabora, Leijnen, Veloz,
& Lipo, 2011). It represents objects not in terms of a convenient list of discrete measurable
attributes, but in terms of how they are actually conceptualized, as a network of interrelated
properties, using a perspective parameter that can be weighted differently according to their
relative importance. Preliminary analyses show that the conceptual network approach can recover
previously unacknowledged patterns of historical relationship that are more congruent with
geographical distribution and temporal data than is obtained with an alternative cladistic
approach that is based on the assumption that cultural evolution, like biological evolution, is
Darwinian.
These two computational models, EVOC and WE, show that a communal exchange
approach to cultural evolution is computationally tractable. However such models will not begin
to approach the open-ended ingenuity and complexity of human cultural evolution until they
incorporate certain features of the cognitive process by which cultural novelty is generated.
The Generation of Cultural Novelty
We said that cultural evolution is a depth-first evolution strategy. A depth-first evolution strategy
entails processes that adaptively bias the generation of novelty. A number of key, interrelated
processes have been identified that, in addition to learning, accomplish this in cultural evolution.
We now look briefly at some of these processes, as well as efforts to model them.
Recursive Recall and Restorative Restructuring
Recursive recall (RR) is the capacity for one thought to trigger another, enabling progressive
modification of an idea. Donald’s (1991) hypothesis that cultural evolution was made possible by
onset of the capacity for RR has been tested using EVOC (Gabora & Saberi, 2011; Gabora &
DiPaola, 2012). A comparison was made of runs in which agents were limited to single-step
actions to runs in which they could recursively operate on ideas, and chain them together,
resulting in more complex actions. While RR and no-RR runs both converged on optimal actions,
without RR this set was static, but with RR it was in constant flux as ever-fitter actions were
found. In RR runs there was no ceiling on mean fitness of actions, and RR enhanced the benefits
of learning.
Gabora - Cultural Evolution as Distributed Computation 4
Although these findings support Donald’s hypothesis, the novel actions generated with RR
were predictable. They did not open up new cultural niches in the sense that, for example, the
invention of cars created niches for the invention of things like seatbelts and stoplights. EVOC in
its current form could not solve insight problems, which require restructuring the solution space
(Boden, 1990; Kaplan & Simon, 1990, Ohlsson, 1992). Restructuring can be viewed as a form of
RR that entails looking at the problem from a new context or perspective, and that this is driven
by the mind’s self-organizing, restorative capacity.
Contextual Focus (CF) and Divergent versus Associative Thought
It has been proposed that restorative restructuring is aided by contextual focus (CF): the capacity
to spontaneously and temporarily shift to a more divergent mode of thought (Gabora, 2003).
Divergent thought entails an increase in activation of the associates of a given item (Runco,
2010). Thus for example, given the item TABLE, in a convergent mode of thought you might call
to mind accessible associates such as CHAIR, but in a divergent mode of thought you might also
call to mind more unusual associates such as PICNIC or MULTIPLICATION TABLE. CF has
been implemented in EVOC (the computational model of cultural evolution). Low fitness of
ideas induces a temporary shift to a more divergent processing mode by increasing the
‘reactivity’, α, which determines the degree to which a newly invented idea can differ from the
idea on which it was based.
Current research on the architecture of memory suggests that creative thought is actually
not divergent but associative, as illustrated in Figure 1 (Gabora, 2010; Gabora & Ranjan, 2013).
While divergent thought refers to an increase in activation of all associates, associative thought
increases only activation of those relevant to the context. Because memory is distributed and
content-addressable, associations are forged by way of shared structure. In associative thought,
items come together that, though perhaps seemingly different, share properties or relations, and
are thus more likely than chance to be relevant to one another, perhaps in a previously unnoticed
but useful way.
Figure 1. Convergent thought (left) activates key properties only, represented by black dots.
Divergent thought (centre) activates not just key properties but also peripheral (less salient)
properties, represented by both grey dots and black triangles. The grey dots represent peripheral
properties that are relevant to the current context (goal or situation); the black triangles represent
peripheral properties that are irrelevant to the current context. Associative thought (right)
activates key properties and context-relevant peripheral properties.
A processing mode that is not just divergent but associative could be simulated in a model
such as EVOC capitalizing on the ability to learn generalizations (e.g., symmetrical movements
tend to be fit) to constrain changes in α. It would also be interesting to investigate the topological
and dynamical properties of fitness landscapes for which divergent versus associative forms of
Gabora - Cultural Evolution as Distributed Computation 5
CF is effective. CF is expected to be most beneficial for fitness landscapes that are rugged and
subject to infrequent, abrupt change, with associative CF outperforming divergent CF.
Concept Interaction
Since creative processes such as restructuring involve putting concepts together in new contexts,
a model of cultural evolution should be built upon a solid theory of concepts and how they
interact. However, people use conjunctions and disjunctions of concepts in ways that violate the
rules of classical logic; i.e., concepts interact in ways that are non-compositional (Osherson &
Smith, 1981; Hampton, 1987; Aerts, 2009; Aerts, Aerts, & Gabora, 2009; Aerts, Broekaert &
Gabora, 2010; Kitto, Ram, Sitbon, & Bruza, 2011). This is true both with respect to properties
(e.g., although people do not rate ‘talks’ as a characteristic property of PET or BIRD, they rate it
as characteristic of PET BIRD), and exemplar typicalities (e.g., although people do not rate
‘guppy’ as a typical PET, nor a typical FISH, they rate it as a highly typical PET FISH). Because
of this, concepts have been resistant to mathematical description.
This non-compositionality can be modeled using a generalization of the formalisms of
quantum mechanics (QM) (Aerts & Gabora, 2005; Gabora & Aerts, 2002a,b; Kitto, Ramm,
Sitbon, & Bruza, 2011). The reason for using the quantum formalism is that it allows us to
describe the chameleon-like way in which concepts interact, spontaneously shifting their
meanings depending on what other concepts are nearby or activated. The following formal
exposition, though not essential for grasping the underlying concepts, is provided for the
mathematically inclined reader. In QM, the state÷yñ of an entity is written as a linear
superposition of a set of basis states {÷fiñ} of a complex Hilbert space H. Hence ÷yñ = Sici÷fiñ
where each complex number coefficient ci of the linear superposition represents the contribution
of each component state ÷fiñ to the state ÷yñ. The square of the absolute value of each coefficient
equals the weight of its component basis state with respect to the global state. The choice of basis
states is determined by the observable to be measured. The basis states corresponding to this
observable are called eigenstates. Upon measurement, the state of the entity collapses to one of
the eigenstates. In the quantum inspired State COntext Property (SCOP) theory of concepts, the
basis states represent states (instances or exemplars) of a concept, and the measurement is the
context that causes a particular state to be evoked. SCOP is consistent with experimental concept
data on concept combination (Aerts, 2009; Aerts, Aerts, & Gabora, 2009; Aerts, Broekaert,
Gabora, & Veloz, 2012; Aerts, Gabora, & Sozzo, submitted; Hampton, 1987), and with findings
that a compound’s constituents are not just conjointly activated but bound together in a context-
specific manner that takes relational structure into account (Gagné & Spalding, 2009). The model
is being expanding to incorporate larger conceptual structures (Gabora & Aerts, 2009), and
different modes of thought (Veloz, Gabora, Eyjolfson, & Aerts, 2011). This theoretical work is
complemented by empirical studies aimed at establishing that (i) some concept combinations
involve interference and entangled states, and (ii) creative products are external evidence of an
internal self-organization process aimed at resolving dissonance and restoring equilibrium
through the recursive actualization of potentiality (Gabora, 2011; Gabora, O’Connor, & Ranjan,
2012; Gabora & Saab, 2011).
Harnessing the Computational Power of Cultural Evolution
We have looked at some of the key milestones that have been crossed in the development of a
scientific framework for how culture evolves. These milestones include a crude but functional
computational model of cultural evolution, research into the cognitive mechanisms underlying
the generation of cultural novelty, and preliminary efforts to computationally model these
Gabora - Cultural Evolution as Distributed Computation 6
mechanisms. The rest of this chapter presents new, untested, yet-to-be-implemented ideas for
how to go about harnessing the speed and power of cultural evolution in the development of a
human computation research program.
Computational Model of Restorative Restructuring
A first step is to develop a model of problem restructuring using a “reaction network” inspired
model that has as its basic unit, not catalytic molecules, but interacting concepts. There are
various methods for going about this, for example using Concat, or Holographic Reduced
Representations to computationally model the convolution or ‘twisting together’ of mental
representation (Aerts, Czachor, & De Moor, 2009; Eliasmith & Thagard, 2001; Thagard &
Stewart, 2011). Another promising route is to use a quantum-inspired theory of concepts such as
SCOP that incorporates the notion of context-driven actualization of potential (Aerts & Gabora,
2005a,b; Gabora & Aerts, 2002a,b). A concept is defined in terms of (1) its set of states or
exemplars S, each of which consists of a set L of relevant properties, (2) set M of contexts in
which it may be relevant, (3) a function n that describes the applicability or weight of a certain
property for a specific state and context, and (4) a function µ that describes the transition
probability from one state to another under the influence of a particular context.
The procedure is best explained using an example, such as the idea of using a tire to make a
swing, i.e., the invention of a tire swing (from Gabora, Scott, & Kauffman, in press). The concept
TIRE consists of the set S of states of TIRE, and in the context ‘winter’, TIRE might collapse to
SNOW TIRE. Suppose that the network’s initial conception of TIRE, represented by vector pñ
of length equal to 1, is a superposition of only two possibilities (Fig. 2). The possibility that the
tire has sufficient tread to be useful is denote by unit vector uñ. The possibility that it should be
discarded as waste is denoted by unit vector, wñ. Their relationship is given by the equation pñ =
a0uñ + a1wñ, where a0 and a1 are the amplitudes of uñ and wñ respectively. If a tire us useful
only for transportation, denoted tñ then, uñ = tñ. States are represented by unit vectors and all
vectors of a decomposition such as uñ and wñ have unit length, are mutually orthogonal and
generate the whole vector space, thus a02 + a12 = 1.
Figure 2. Graphical depiction of a vector pñ representing particular state of TIRE, specifically, a state in which the
tread is worn away. In the default context, the state of tire is more likely to collapse to the projection vector wñ
which represents wasteful than to its orthogonal projection vector uñ which represents useful. This can be seen by
the fact that subspace a0 is smaller than subspace a1. Under the influence of the context playground equipment, the
opposite is the case, as shown by the fact that b0 is larger than b1. Also shown is the projection vector after
renormalization.
The conception of TIRE changes when activation of the set L of properties of TIRE, e.g.
Gabora - Cultural Evolution as Distributed Computation 7
‘weather resistant’, spreads to other concepts in the network for which these properties are
relevant. Contexts such as playground equipment that share properties with TIRE become
candidate members of the set M of relevant contexts for TIRE. The context playground
equipment, denoted e, consists of the concepts SWING, denoted señ, and SLIDE, denoted leñ.
The restructured conception of TIRE in the context of playground equipment, denoted peñ, is
given by b0ueñ + b1weñ, where ueñ = b2teñ + b3teseñ + b4teleñ, and where teseñ stands for the
possibility that a tire functions as a swing, and teleñ stands for the possibility that a tire functions
as a slide. The amplitude of weñ, b1, is less than a1, the amplitude of wñ. This is because b0 >
a0, since b0 consists of the possibility of a tire being used not just as a tire, but as a swing or
slide. Because certain strongly weighted properties of SLIDE, such as ‘long’ and ‘flat’, are not
properties of TIRE, b4 is small. That is not the case for SWING, so b3 is large. Therefore, in the
context playground equipment, the concept TIRE has a high probability of collapsing to TIRE
SWING, an entangled state of the concepts TIRE and SWING. Entanglement introduces
interference of a quantum nature, and hence the amplitudes are complex numbers (Aerts, 2009).
If this collapse takes place, TIRE SWING is thereafter a new state of both concepts TIRE and
SWING.
This example shows that a formal approach to concept interactions that is consistent with
human data (Aerts, 2009; Aerts, Aerts, & Gabora, 2009; Aerts, Broekaert, Gabora, & Veloz,
2012; Aerts, Gabora, & Sozzo, submitted; Hampton, 1987) can model the restructuring of
information (e.g., TIRE) under a new context (e.g., playground equipment). Note how in the
quantum representation, probability is treated as arising not from a lack of information per se, but
from the limitations of any particular context (even a ‘default’ context).
The limitations of this approach are as interesting as its strengths. It is not possible to list,
or even develop an algorithm that will list, all possible uses or contexts for any item such as a tire
or screwdriver (Longo, Montevil, & Kaufman, 2012). This is what has been referred to as the
frame problem. As a consequence, human input is particularly welcome at this juncture to define
the relevant contexts, e.g., the possible uses of a tire. Studies would be run using data collected
from real humans to determine the extent to which the model matches typicality ratings and
generation frequencies of exemplars of concepts in particular contexts by human participants, as
per (Veloz, Gabora, Eyjolfson, & Aerts, 2011). SCOP models of individual concepts can be
embedded into an associative “reaction network”. Concept interactions are then modeled as
reactions that generate products. Chemical Organization Theory (Dittrich & Speroni di Fenizio,
2008; Dittrich & Winter, 2007; Dittrich, Ziegler, & Banzhaf, 2001), which provides an algebraic
means of solving nonlinear, coupled differential equations in reaction networks, or some other
such theory, can be used to model the associative structure of interrelated sets of concepts a
whole, and study the conditions under which it restores equilibrium in response to the
introduction of new states of concepts that results from placing them in new contexts.
Using this SCOP-based cognitive “reaction network” it would be possible to test the
hypothesis that contextual focus (the ability to shift between different modes of thought
depending on the context− increases cognitive efficiency. If the amplitude associated with wñ for
any concept becomes high—such as for TIRE if the weight of the property ‘tread’ is low—this
signals that the potentiality to re-conceptualize the concept is high. This causes a shift to a more
associative mode by increasing α, causing activation of other concepts that share properties with
this concept, as described previously.
Enhanced Computational Model of Cultural Evolution
Gabora - Cultural Evolution as Distributed Computation 8
Let us now examine how a model of restorative restructuring such as the SCOP-based one we
just looked at could be used to develop a cognitively sophisticated computational model of
cultural evolution. We will refer to this ‘new and improved’ model as EVOC2.
So that the EVOC2 agents have something to make artifacts from, their world would
contain resource bases from which objects are extracted and wastes are generated. Extracted
objects can be joined (lego-style) to construct other objects. Agents have mental representations
of resources and objects made from resources. Objects derived from the same resource are
modeled in their conceptual networks as states of a concept. Newly extracted or constructed
objects have a fitness that defines how useful or wasteful they are with respect to the other
objects an agent has encountered. Thus existing objects provide contexts that affect the utility of
new objects, and an agent’s knowledge of existing objects defines its perspective.
The artificial culture can now evolve as follows:
Invent. Agents invent as in EVOC, except that they invent not actions but objects, using
resources in adjacent cells. Extracting an object from a resource creates waste objects.
Detect and Actualize Potential for Adaptive Change. If a waste object p is accumulating
adjacent to A1, A1 recursively modifies p by considering it from A1’s perspective. This continues
until p is in a new less wasteful state pA1* which is an eigenstate with respect to A1’s perspective.
This process may modify not just p, but A1’s perspective. Perspectives change in response to the
ideas and objects an agent interacts with; thus a perspective can encompass more than one
context.
Contextual focus. The previous step may involve temporarily assuming a more associative
processing mode in response to the magnitude of potential for adaptive change.
Transmission. Modified object, pA1*, becomes input to the associative networks of adjacent
agents.
Context-dependent Restructuring. If p A1* is wasteful (has potential to change) with respect
to the perspective of another agent, A2, then A2 recursively modifies pA1* until it is an eigenstate
with respect to A2’s perspective, at which point it is referred to as pA1*A2*. Since A1’s perspective
is reflected in pA1*, assimilation of pA1* modifies A2’s perspective in a way that reflects exposure
to (though not necessarily incorporation of or agreement with) A1’s perspective. This continues
until p settles on stable or cyclic attractor, or we terminate after a set number of iterations (since a
chaotic attractor or limit cycle may be hard to distinguish from a non-stable transient).
Evaluate. The user assesses the usefulness of the culturally evolved objects for the agents,
as well as object diversity, and wastefulness.
EVOC2 will be deemed a success if it not only evolves cultural novelty that is cumulative,
adaptive, and open-ended (as in EVOC with RR), but also (a) restructures conceptions of objects
by viewing them from different perspectives (new contexts), (b) generates inventions that open
up niches for other inventions, and (c) exhibits contextual focus, i.e., shifts to an associative
mode to restructure and shifts back to fine-tune. It is hypothesized that these features will
increase the complexity of economic webs of objects and recycled wastes.
Elucidating the Algorithmic Structure of Biological versus Cultural Evolution
The design features that made EVOC2 specific to the problem of waste recycling can eventually
be replaced by general-purpose counterparts, resulting in a cultural algorithm (CAL1). It will be
interesting to compare the performance of a CAL with a GA on standard problems (e.g., the
Rosenbrock function) as well as on insight tasks such as real-world waste recycling webs that
1 Cultural algorithm is abbreviated CAL because CA customarily refers to cellular automaton.
Gabora - Cultural Evolution as Distributed Computation 9
require restructuring. Waste recycling is a particularly appropriate application because it
explicitly requires considering how the same item offers a different set of constraints and
affordances when considered with respect to a different goal, a different demographic, or a
different aesthetic sensibility (one person’s trash is another person’s treasure). In general the CAL
is expected to outperform the GA on problems that involve not just multiple constraints but
multiple perspectives, e.g., economic and environmental.
A long-term objective is to develop an integrated framework for evolutionary processes
that encompasses natural selection, cultural evolution, and communal exchange theories of early
life. Finally, it can advance knowledge of how systems evolve. Early efforts toward a general
cross-disciplinary framework for evolution Processes were modeled as context-dependent
actualization of potential: an entity has potential to change various ways, and how it does change
depends on the contexts it interacts with (Gabora & Aerts, 2005, 2007). These efforts focused on
distinguishing processes according to the degree of non-determinism they entail, and the extent to
which they are sensitive to, internalize, and depend upon a particular context. With the sorts of
tools outlined here, it will be possible to compare the effectiveness of communal exchange,
Darwinian, and mixed strategies in different environments (simple versus complex, static versus
fluctuating, and so forth. This will result in a more precise understanding of the similarities and
differences between biological and cultural evolution, and help us recognize other evolutionary
processes that we may discover as science penetrates ever deeper into the mysteries of our
universe.
Summary and Conclusions
Culture evolves with breathtaking speed and efficiency. We are crossing the threshold to an
exciting frontier: a scientific understanding of the process by which cultural change occurs, as
well as the means to capitalize on this understanding. The cultural evolution inspired human
computation program of research described in this chapter is ambitious and interdisciplinary, but
it builds solidly on previous accomplishments.
We examined evidence that culture evolves through a non-Darwinian communal exchange
process, and discussed a plan for modeling the autopoietic structures that evolve through
biological and cultural processes—i.e., metabolic reaction networks and associative networks.
This will make it possible to undertake a comparative investigation of the dynamics of
communally exchanging groups of these two kinds of networks. This research is necessary to
achieve a unification of the social and behavioral sciences comparable to Darwin’s unification of
the life sciences.
Efforts are underway toward the development of a computational model of cultural
evolution that incorporates the kind of sophisticated cognitive machinery by which cultural
novelty evolves. These include the combining of concepts to give rise to new concepts sometimes
with emergent properties, and the capacity to shift between different modes of thought depending
on the situation. An important step is to embed formal models of concepts in a modified “reaction
network” architecture, in order to computationally model how clusters of interrelated concepts
modify one another to achieve a more stable lower energy state, through a process we referred to
as context-driven restorative restructuring. Efforts are also underway toward the development of
a computer program for identifying patterns of historical relationship amongst sets of artifacts.
Human input is used to define contexts—perspectives or situations that define which features or
attributes are potentially relevant. One long-term objective of this kind of research program is to
develop a cultural algorithm: an optimization and problem-solving tool inspired by cultural
evolution. This will allow us to investigate how strategies for recursively re-processing and
Gabora - Cultural Evolution as Distributed Computation 10
restructuring information, or shifting between different processing modes, affect the capacity to
evolve cumulative, adaptive, open-ended novelty.
The ideas presented in this chapter are speculative, ambitious, and innovative both
conceptually and methodologically, but they have far-reaching implications and potentially
diverse applications. The human computation program proposed here could promote a scientific
understanding of the current accelerated pace of cultural change and its transformative effects on
humans and our planet. It may foster cultural developments that are healthy and productive in the
long term as well as the short term, and help us find solutions to complex crises we now face.
Acknowledgements
This research was conducted with the assistance of grants from the National Science and
Engineering Research Council of Canada, and the Fund for Scientific Research of Flanders,
Belgium.
References
Aerts, D. (2009). Quantum structure in cognition. Journal of Mathematical Psychol, 53, 314−348.
Aerts, D., Aerts, S., & Gabora, L. (2009). Experimental evidence for quantum structure in
cognition. In: P. Bruza, W. Lawless, K. van Rijsbergen, & D. Sofge (Eds.) Proc Int Conf
Quantum Interaction, (pp. 59-70). German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence,
Saarbruken, Germany.
Aerts, D., Broekaert, J. Gabora, L., & Veloz, T. (2012). The guppy effect as interference.
Proceedings Sixth International Symposium on Quantum Interaction. June 27-29, Paris.
Aerts, D., Czachor, M., & De Moor, B. (2009). Geometric analogue of holographic reduced
representation. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 53, 389−398.
Aerts, D., & Gabora, L. (2005). A state-context-property model of concepts and their
combinations I: The structure of the sets of contexts and properties. Kybernetes, 34(1&2),
151–175.
Aerts, D., & Gabora, L. (2005). A state-context-property model of concepts and their
combinations II: A Hilbert space representation. Kybernetes, 34(1&2), 176–205.
Aerts, D., Gabora, L., & Sozzo, S. (2013). Concepts and their dynamics: A quantum theoretical
model. Topics in Cognitive Science. [http://arxiv.org/abs/1206.1069]
Atran, S. (2001). The trouble with memes: Inference versus imitation in cultural creation. Human
Nature, 12, 351–381.
Bentley, P. D. & Corne D., Eds. (2002). Creative Evolutionary Systems, San Francisco: Morgan
Kaufmann.
Bentley, R. A., M. W. Hahn, & Shennan, S. J. (2004). Random drift and cultural change.
Proceedings of the Royal Society of British Biological Sciences, 271, 1143–1450.
Boden, M. A. (1990/2004). The creative mind: Myths and mechanisms. London: Routledge.
Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. (1985). Culture and the evolutionary process. Chicago: Univ. Chicago
Press.
Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. (2005). The origin and evolution of cultures. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., & Feldman, M. W. (1981). Cultural transmission and evolution: A
quantitative approach. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Dantzing, S. V., Raffone, A., & Hommel, B. (2011). Acquiring contextualized concepts: A
connectionist approach. Cognitive Science, 25, 1162−1189.
Gabora - Cultural Evolution as Distributed Computation 11
Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
DiPaola, S., & Gabora, L. (2009). Incorporating characteristics of human creativity into an
evolutionary art algorithm. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines, 10(2), 97-110.
Dittrich, P., & Speroni di Fenizio, P. (2008). Chemical organization theory. Bulletin of
Mathematical Biology, 69, 1199–1231.
Dittrich, P, & Winter, L. 2007. Chemical organizations in a toy model of the political system.
Advances in Complex Systems, 1(4), 609– 627.
Dittrich, P., Ziegler, J., & Banzhaf, W. 2001. Artificial chemistries – a review. Artificial Life,
7(3), 225–275.
Donald, M. (1991). Origins of the modern mind, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
Durham, W. (1991). Coevolution: Genes, culture, and human diversity. Stanford: Stanford Univ.
Press.
Eliasmith, C., & Thagard, P. (2001). Integrating structure and meaning: A distributed model of
analogical mapping. Cognitive Science, 25, 245–286.
Fracchia J. & Lewontin, R. C. (1999). Does culture evolve? History & Theory, 38, 52–78.
Gabora, L. (1995). Meme and variations: A computer model of cultural evolution. In (L. Nadel &
D. Stein, Eds.) 1993 Lectures in complex systems (pp. 471–486). Boston: Addison-Wesley.
Gabora, L. (1996). A day in the life of a meme. Philosophica, 57, 901-938.
Gabora, L. (1997). The origin and evolution of culture and creativity. Journal of Memetics:
Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission, 1(1).
Gabora, L. (1998). Autocatalytic closure in a cognitive system: A tentative scenario for the origin
of culture. Psycoloquy, 9(67). [adap-org/9901002]
Gabora, L. (2003). Contextual focus: A cognitive explanation for the cultural transition of the
Middle/Upper Paleolithic. In (R. Alterman & D. Hirsch, Eds.) Proc Annual Meeting of the
Cognitive Science Society (432-437), Boston MA, 31 July - 2 August. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gabora, L. (2006a). The fate of evolutionary archaeology: Survival or extinction? World
Archaeology, 38(4), 690–696.
Gabora, L. (2006b). Self-other organization: Why early life did not evolve through natural
selection. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 241(3), 443–250.
Gabora, L. (2008). The cultural evolution of socially situated cognition. Cognitive Systems
Research, 9(1), 104-113.
Gabora, L. (2011). Five clarifications about cultural evolution. J Cognition and Culture, 11, 61-
83.
Gabora, L., & Aerts, D. (2002). Contextualizing concepts. Proc 15th Int FLAIRS Conference
(Special Track 'Categorization and Concept Representation: Models and Implications') (pp.
148-152), Pensacola FL, May 14-17, American Association for Artificial Intelligence.
Gabora, L., & Aerts, D. (2002b). Contextualizing concepts using a mathematical generalization
of the quantum formalism. J Exp and Theor Artificial Intelligence, 14(4), 327–358.
Gabora, L., & Aerts, D. (2005). Evolution as context-driven actualization of potential: Toward an
interdisciplinary theory of change of state. Interdisc Science Reviews, 30(1), 69–88.
Gabora, L., & DiPaola, S. (2012). How did humans become so creative? Proceedings of the
International Conf on Computational Creativity (pp. 203-210). May 31 - June 1, Dublin.
Gabora, L., Leijnen, S., Veloz, T., & Lipo, C. (2011). A non-phylogenetic conceptual network
architecture for organizing classes of material artifacts into cultural lineages. Proc Ann Mtng
Cog Sci Soc. July 20-23, 2011, Boston MA.
Gabora, L., O’Connor, B., & Ranjan, A. (2012). The recognizability of individual creative styles
within and across domains. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6(4), 351-360.
Gabora - Cultural Evolution as Distributed Computation 12
Gabora, L., & Ranjan, A. (2013). How insight emerges in distributed, content-addressable
memory. In A. Bristol, O. Vartanian, & J. Kaufman (Eds.) The neuroscience of creativity.
New York: MIT Press.
Gabora, L., & Saberi, M. (2011). How did human creativity arise? An agent-based model of the
origin of cumulative open-ended cultural evolution. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on
Cognition & Creativity. Nov 3-6, 2011, Atlanta, GA.
Gagné, C. L., & Spalding, T. L. (2009). Constituent integration during the processing of
compound words: Does it involve the use of relational structures? Journal of Memory and
Language, 60, 20–35.
Goldberg, D, E., and Kuo, C. H. (1987). Genetic algorithms in pipeline optimization. Journal of
Computing in Civil Engineering ASCE, 1(2), 128-141.
Hampton, J. (1987). Inheritance of attributes in natural concept conjunctions. Memory &
Cognition, 15, 55–71.
Henrich, J., & Boyd R. (1998). The evolution of conformist transmission and the emergence of
between-group differences. Evolution and Human Behavior, 19, 215−242.
Henrich, J., & Boyd, R. (2002). On modeling cognition and culture: Why replicators are not
necessary for cultural evolution. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 2, 87−112.
Holland, J. (1975). Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hou, E. S. H., Ansari, N., & Ren, H. (1994). A genetic algorithm for multiprocessor scheduling.
IEEE Transactions in Parallel Distributed Systems 5(2), 113–120.
Kaplan, C. A,. & Simon, H. A. (1990). In search of insight. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 374−419.
Kauffman, S. (1993). Origins of order. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kitto, K., Ramm, B., Sitbon, L., & Bruza, P. D. (2011). Quantum theory beyond the physical:
Information in context. Axiomathes, 12(2), 331−345.
Koza, J. (1993). Genetic Programming. MIT Press, London.
Leijnen, S., & Gabora, L. (2010). An agent-based simulation of the effectiveness of creative
leadership. Proc Ann Mtng Cognitive Science Soc (pp. 955-960). Aug 11-14, Portland OR.
Longo, G., Montevil, M., & Kaufman, S., (2012). No entailing laws, but enablement in the
evolution of the biosphere. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on
Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, pp. 1379-1392.
O’Brien, M. J., & Lyman, R. L. (2000). Applying evolutionary archaeology: A systematic
approach. Norwell: Kluwer.
Ohlsson, S. (1992). Information-processing explanations of insight and related phenomena. In M.
T. Keane & K. J. Gilhooly (Eds.) Advances in the psychology of thinking (Vol. 1, pp. 1–44).
New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Osherson, D., & Smith, E. (1981). On the adequacy of prototype theory as a theory of concepts.
Cognition, 9, 35−58.
Reynolds, R. G. (1994). An introduction to cultural algorithms. Proceedings of the 3rd annual
conference of evolutionary programming (pp. 131-139). River Edge, NJ: World Scientific.
Runco, M. (2010). Divergent thinking, creativity, and ideation. In (J. Kaufman & R. Sternberg,
Eds.) The Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 414–446). Cambridge UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Shennan, S. (2008). Evolution in archaeology, Annual Review of Anthropology, 37, 75–91.
Skoyles, J. R. (2008). Natural selection does not explain cultural rates of change. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Science, 105(22), E27−E27.
Gabora - Cultural Evolution as Distributed Computation 13
Tëmkin, I., & Eldredge, N. (2007). Phylogenetics and material cultural evolution. Current
Anthropology, 48, 146−153.
Thagard, P., & Stewart, T. C. (2011). The AHA! experience: Creativity through emergent
binding in neural networks. Cognitive Science, 35, 1−33.
Veloz, T., Gabora, L., Eyjolfson, M., & Aerts, D. (2011). A model of the shifting relationship
between concepts and contexts in different modes of thought. Proceedings of the Fifth
International Symposium on Quantum Interaction. June 27, 2011, Aberdeen UK.
Veloz, T., Tëmkin, I., & Gabora, L., A conceptual network-based approach to inferring cultural
phylogenies. Proceedings Annual Meeting Cognitive Science Society. Sapporo Japan, 2012.
Vetsigian, K., Woese, C., & Goldenfeld, N. (2006). Collective evolution and the genetic code.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 103, 10696–10701.
Williams, R. J. P., & Frausto da Silva, J. J. R. (2003). Evolution was chemically constrained.
Journal of Theoretical Biology, 220, 323–343.
Woese, C. R. (2002). On the evolution of cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science,
99, 8742–8747.
|
1702.08736 | 2 | 1702 | 2017-03-30T12:10:35 | Analysing Congestion Problems in Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.AI"
] | Congestion problems are omnipresent in today's complex networks and represent a challenge in many research domains. In the context of Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL), approaches like difference rewards and resource abstraction have shown promising results in tackling such problems. Resource abstraction was shown to be an ideal candidate for solving large-scale resource allocation problems in a fully decentralized manner. However, its performance and applicability strongly depends on some, until now, undocumented assumptions. Two of the main congestion benchmark problems considered in the literature are: the Beach Problem Domain and the Traffic Lane Domain. In both settings the highest system utility is achieved when overcrowding one resource and keeping the rest at optimum capacity. We analyse how abstract grouping can promote this behaviour and how feasible it is to apply this approach in a real-world domain (i.e., what assumptions need to be satisfied and what knowledge is necessary). We introduce a new test problem, the Road Network Domain (RND), where the resources are no longer independent, but rather part of a network (e.g., road network), thus choosing one path will also impact the load on other paths having common road segments. We demonstrate the application of state-of-the-art MARL methods for this new congestion model and analyse their performance. RND allows us to highlight an important limitation of resource abstraction and show that the difference rewards approach manages to better capture and inform the agents about the dynamics of the environment. | cs.MA | cs | Analysing Congestion Problems in Multi-agent
Reinforcement Learning ∗
Roxana Radulescu
Artificial Intelligence Lab
Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Belgium
[email protected]
[email protected]
Peter Vrancx
Artificial Intelligence Lab
Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Belgium
Ann Nowé
Artificial Intelligence Lab
Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Belgium
[email protected]
7
1
0
2
r
a
M
0
3
]
A
M
.
s
c
[
2
v
6
3
7
8
0
.
2
0
7
1
:
v
i
X
r
a
ABSTRACT
Congestion problems are omnipresent in today's complex net-
works and represent a challenge in many research domains. In
the context of Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL),
approaches like difference rewards and resource abstraction
have shown promising results in tackling such problems. Re-
source abstraction was shown to be an ideal candidate for
solving large-scale resource allocation problems in a fully
decentralized manner. However, its performance and appli-
cability strongly depends on some, until now, undocumented
assumptions. Two of the main congestion benchmark prob-
lems considered in the literature are: the Beach Problem
Domain and the Traffic Lane Domain. In both settings the
highest system utility is achieved when overcrowding one re-
source and keeping the rest at optimum capacity. We analyse
how abstract grouping can promote this behaviour and how
feasible it is to apply this approach in a real-world domain
(i.e., what assumptions need to be satisfied and what knowl-
edge is necessary). We introduce a new test problem, the
Road Network Domain (RND), where the resources are no
longer independent, but rather part of a network (e.g., road
network), thus choosing one path will also impact the load on
other paths having common road segments. We demonstrate
the application of state-of-the-art MARL methods for this
new congestion model and analyse their performance. RND
allows us to highlight an important limitation of resource
abstraction and show that the difference rewards approach
manages to better capture and inform the agents about the
dynamics of the environment.
CCS Concepts
•Computing methodologies → Multi-agent systems;
Multi-agent reinforcement learning;
Keywords
Multi-agent reinforcement learning; Congestion problems;
Resource abstraction
1.
INTRODUCTION
Solving congestion problems is an important research area,
as they are present in a wide variety of domains such as
traffic control [16], air traffic management [2], data routing
∗This paper expands our AAMAS 2017 extended abstract [9]
with a detailed description of the RND problem domain,
extensive analysis of the resource abstraction method, and
additional analysis of the experimental results.
[14] and sensor networks [15]. Multi-agent reinforcement
learning (MARL) has proven to be a suitable framework for
such problems [13, 5, 8, 3], as it allows autonomous agents
to learn in a decentralized manner, by interacting within a
common environment.
We are interested here in MARL scenarios of independent
learners, where no direct communication takes place between
the agents. As the task at hand is a resource selection
problem where the number of agents exceeds the available
capacity, the agents should coordinate in order to achieve a
high system utility. We consider here two main approaches
designed to achieve this goal: difference rewards [17] and
resource abstraction [8].
Difference rewards is a reward shaping approach that aims
to align the interests of agents and the system, as well as to
tackle the credit assignment problem in MARL, by informing
each agent of its own contribution to the performance of the
system. Resource abstraction is a recent approach designed to
offer a more informative reward signal that improves learning
speed, coordination between agents, as well as the final
solution quality. In [8] the authors have shown to outperform
difference rewards, however as we show in Section 5, we
cannot confirm this conclusion. Our first contribution is that
we provide clear insights on how resource abstraction guides
the collective behaviour of the agents and we highlight the
method's limitations, assumptions and application guidelines.
Current benchmark congestion problems present in the
literature often make unrealistic assumptions regarding the
independence between the available resources. In complex
network management domains, such as smart grids and traffic
networks, resources are connected and interdependent, such
that using one resource impacts the load of others as well.
For this purpose we introduce the Road Network Domain
(RND), a problem that models the resources as a system of
interconnected roads. We proceed to demonstrate the appli-
cation of state-of-the-art MARL methods on this problem
and analyse their capacity of capturing the newly introduced
dynamics in the environment.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2
presents an overview of the theoretical concepts concerning
the congestion problem and describes the two main consid-
ered resource selection tasks, Section 3 offers an in depth
explanation of the recently introduced resource abstraction
method, Section 4 introduces a new congestion problem
and how to apply existing methods for solving it, Section 5
presents and discusses the performed experiments and results,
and finally Section 6 offers some concluding remarks and
future possible directions.
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 Reinforcement Learning
Reinforcement Learning (RL) [10] is a machine learning
approach which allows an agent to learn how to solve a task
by interacting with the environment, given feedback in the
form of a reward signal. The solution consists in finding
a policy, i.e., a mapping between states and actions that
maximizes the received rewards. Q-learning is a common RL
value-based method, in which a value function is iteratively
updated to optimize the expected long-term reward. After a
transition from environment state s to s(cid:48), through action a,
Q-learning performs the following update on its estimated
state-action value function Q, which represents the quality
of actions in given states:
Q(s, a) = Q(s, a) + α[r + γ max
(cid:48)
a(cid:48) Q(s
(cid:48)
) − Q(s, a)]
, a
where α is the learning rate, γ is the discount factor and
r is the immediate reward received from the environment.
In order to address the exploration-exploitation trade-off
challenge in RL, one can use the -greedy action selection
method, which allows the agent to choose exploratory random
actions with a probability .
When transitioning to the multi-agent case, we consider
the scenario of independent learners interacting in the same
environment. Solving a congestion problem can then be
viewed from two perspectives – agent-centred and system-
centred – that are often in conflict. Allowing selfish entities
to act in their own interest in a resource-sharing system can
lead to a tragedy of the commons situation [6], which is a
detrimental outcome for both the system and the agents.
In multi-agent reinforcement learning a central concern
is thus providing a reward signal that will offer a beneficial
collective behaviour at the system level. A first approach
is providing a local reward (L) which reflects information
about the parts of the system the agent is involved in. L is
individually received by each agent and encourages a selfish
behaviour, as agents try to optimize their own reward. An
alternative approach is the global reward (G) which reflects
the global system utility and should stimulate agents to
perform actions beneficial for the system. The global reward
signal can incorporate a significant amount of noise, as the
individual effect of an agent on the system's utility can be
overshadowed by other learners' effect, i.e., credit assignment
problem. Additionally, in large systems, aggregating at each
time-step over all the components can be more costly than
relying on local information for the reward computation.
2.2 Resource Selection Congestion Problems
A congestion problem from a multi-agent learning per-
spective is defined by a set of n available resources Ψ =
{ψ1, ..., ψn}. Each resource ψ is defined by three properties:
ψ = (cid:104)wψ, cψ, xψ,t(cid:105), where wψ ≥ 0 represents the weighting of
the resource, cψ > 0 is the capacity of ψ and finally xψ,t ≥ 0
is the consumption of ψ at time t. A resource ψ is congested
when xψ,t > cψ. The local utility of a resource ψ is defined
in terms of its properties:
L(ψ, t) = f (xψ,t, cψ, wψ)
(1)
In this paper we consider two resource selection problems
that have become benchmark problems for studying resource
allocation in RL. They mainly differ with respect to their
local utility schemes. The first problem is defined as the
beach problem domain (BPD) [12], where all the available
resources are considered beach sections with the same weight
equal to 1 and the same capacity c:
L(ψ, t) = xψ,te
−xψ,t
c
(2)
The second type of problem is the traffic lane domain (TLD)
[11], where the agents have to select between several available
lanes, each having a different capacity and weight (reflecting
the importance or desirability of the lane):
L(ψ, t) =
, xψ,t ≤ cψ
, xψ,t > cψ
(3)
wψe−1
(cid:88)
wψe
−xψ,t
cψ
For both problems the global utility is defined as the sum
over all the local utilities at time t:
G(t) =
L(ψ, t)
(4)
ψ∈Ψ
At each time step the agents choose to move to a certain
beach section or traffic lane and receive a reinforcement in
accordance to the effect of their joint action on the imple-
mented reward scheme. The main difference between the
two described local utility functions is represented by the
segment before the congestion point is reached. For BPD
(Figure 1a) the maximum utility for a resource is achieved
at optimum capacity (xψ,t = cψ), while for TLD (Figure 1b)
this condition is less strict, only requiring the lanes to be
under the congestion point (xψ,t ≤ cψ).
If the number of agents exceeds the total capacity, the
configuration achieving the highest global utility for these
benchmark problems is one that overcrowds one of the re-
sources and leaves the rest at optimum capacity. For the
BPD the congested resource can be any of the available beach
sections, while for the TLD it should be the lane with the
lowest weight and highest capacity combination [5].
2.3 Difference Rewards
Driven by the idea that the reward signals should allow
the agents to deduce their individual contribution to the
system, a reward signal we consider here is difference rewards
(D) [17]. Under a global system utility G, the difference
rewards for agent i is defined as:
Di(z) = G(z) − G(z−i)
(5)
where z denotes a general term for either state, action or state-
action pair, according to the considered domain, and G(z−i)
is the global utility of a system from which the contribution
of agent i is removed. The difference rewards signal was
constructed following two main guidelines: (i) aligning the
reward received by the agent with the global system utility –
factoredness, while (ii) lowering the impact of other agents
on the reward signal – learnability, thus addressing the credit
assignment problem in a multi-agent setting [1, 12]. These
characteristics have proven to significantly improve learning
performance [11, 7, 13], even in domains where G(z−i) cannot
be directly computed and should be estimated [2, 4, 3].
We now take a look at how the presented credit assignment
approach can be defined for these congestion models. By
combining Equations 2, 4 and 5 we obtain the following
formulation of the difference rewards for the BPD case:
Di(t) = L(ψ, t) − (xψ,t − 1)e
−(xψ,t−1)
c
(6)
(a) Local reward BPD, Equation 2
(b) Local reward TLD, Equation 3
(c) Abstract reward BPD, Equation 7
Figure 1: Local reward (TLD and BDP) and abstract reward (BDP) received by the agents selecting section 1 from 5 available
sections, each with capacity 6 and weight 1. After the congestion point of the resource is reached, the abstract reward approach
reflects the reward function over the x-axis, giving agents a high initial penalty for starting to overcrowd a section.
as the impact of agent i is solely limited to the chosen
resource ψ, thus all the other terms in the sum composing
the global reward cancel out. The same approach can be
used for Equations 3 and 5 for the TLD case.
2.4 Resource Abstraction
Resource abstraction [8] is an approach that aims to im-
prove learning speed, solution quality and scalability in large
MARL congestion problems. Resource abstraction provides
the agents with a more informative reward, facilitating coor-
dination in systems with up to 1000 agents [8].
Resource abstraction entails grouping a set of resources
into disjoint subsets, and modifying the local reward function
after the congestion point of a resource is reached, such that
agents using it will get a higher penalty for overcrowding the
resource.
sumption Xb,t = (cid:80)
(cid:80)
ψ∈b xψ,t, capacity Cb = (cid:80)
An abstract group is defined by aggregating the properties
of the composing resources. In the congestion model defined
above, an abstract group b has the following properties: con-
ψ∈b cψ and
weight Wb = 1b
ψ∈b wψ. In other words, resource abstrac-
tion creates virtual resources which are agglomerations of
resources. Given a resource ψ and the abstract group b to
which it belongs to, the abstract reward for an agents using
resource ψ at time t for the BPD is defined as:
xψ,t ≤ cψ
, xψ,t > cψ
(cid:40)L(ψ, t),
(7)
A(b, ψ, t) =
−Xb,te
−Xb,t
Cb
The same approach can be used for the TLD case.
3. ANALYSING RESOURCE ABSTRACTION
Notice that, in order to apply resource abstraction, in-
formation is required regarding the weight, capacity and
consumption of the resources as well as the system utility
function, limiting the straightforward applicability on a real-
world domain, where such information might not be available.
Even though the work [8] presents a few guidelines and re-
marks on how the resource abstraction should be applied,
clear insights and explanations on how to create the group
abstractions are not present. We consider that a more thor-
ough understanding of the method is beneficial to extend its
usability and applicability.
For a better understanding of how the resource abstraction
impacts the collective behaviour of the agents, we turn to
Figure 1c. We plot the abstract reward function of various
groups in the BPD, differing in the number of composing
resources (ranging from size 1 to size 5). There are 5 available
beach sections, each with weight equal to 1 and capacity equal
to 6, giving a total capacity of 30 for the entire beach. We fill
the resources uniformly until we reach the maximum capacity,
after which we proceed to overcrowd each of the abstract
groups (by overcrowding one of the composing resources).
We first remark that after the congestion point of a resource
is reached, the abstract reward mirrors the reward function
over the x-axis (this is due to the second case of the function
presented in Equation 7). This causes the initial penalty
for starting to overcrowd a section to be more severe (i.e.,
a negative reward) compared to the local reward presented
in Figure 1a. However, continuing to overcrowd a section
results in smaller and smaller penalties and given enough
agents it will eventually converge to 0.
A second remark can be made on the effect of the group
size. The initial penalty for congesting a resource is correlated
with the size of the group, thus we expect agents to prefer
overcrowding resources that are part of the smallest abstract
groups (e.g., in the case presented in Figure 1c starting to
overcrowd a group of size 1 returns a reward of -2, while
for a group of size 5 the reward is around -11). The same
reasoning can be applied for the TLD.
Lastly, we note that in order to determine the best con-
figuration for the abstract groups, one should also have
knowledge on the final desired collective behaviour of the
agents (e.g., for the BDP having a group of size 1 should
lead to the desired "overcrowd one" behaviour). For more
complex domains, finding the optimal abstracts grouping can
prove to be impossible, as we show in Section 5, due to the
fact that the resource abstraction approach can no longer
capture the required collective behaviour.
4. ROAD NETWORK DOMAIN
We propose the Road Network Domain (RND), a problem
that introduces a scenario in which the resources are not
independent, as using one path introduces additional load for
others as well. We model this problem as a network of roads
(e.g., Figure 2), where the agents have to choose between
paths of the network. Figure 2 presents an example of a
0102030405060Consumption0.00.51.01.52.02.5Local rewardw = 1, c = 60102030405060Consumption0.000.050.100.150.200.250.300.350.40Local rewardw = 1, c = 6050100150200250300Consumption12108642024Abstract reward (Beach 1)Group size = 1Group size = 2Group size = 3Group size = 4Group size = 5 small network topology that can be explored, but that already
serves the points we want to make. Each road segment is
modelled as a resource, corresponding to the description
presented in Section 2.2. The RND can be used with the
utility functions of both BPD and TLD, with the former
creating a more challenging task, as the maximum value of
the utility is only achieved at optimum capacity. The local
reward of a path P is then simply the sum over all the local
rewards of the composing road segments ψ (e.g., roads AB
and BD for the path ABD):
Lpath(P, t) =
L(ψ, t)
(8)
(cid:88)
ψ∈P
We compute the global system utility by summing over all the
local rewards of the roads segments present in the network
(see Equation 4).1
Figure 2: Topology example for the RND problem. The
agents have to travel from point A to point D and have 3
possible paths: ABD, ABCD, or ACD.
We consider that the RND introduces a challenge that is
often present in real-world domains (e.g., electricity grids,
traffic networks). Additionally, one can always increase the
difficulty of the problem by creating more complex network
structures and can easily translate in this model any real-
world situation of interest.
4.1 Difference Rewards
As the impact of agent i on the system is limited to the
composing road segments of his chosen path P , we can define
the difference rewards for the RND as follows, where f is a
local reward function (see Equation 1):
Di(t) = Lpath(P, t) − Lpath(P−i, t)
= Lpath(P, t) −(cid:88)
f (xψ,t − 1, cψ, wψ)
(9)
ψ∈P
4.2 Resource Abstraction
We consider here two approaches for defining the abstract
group construction for the resource abstraction method: over
road segments or over paths of the network. As a road seg-
ment is a resource, the properties of an abstract group over a
set of segments coincide with the ones defined in section 2.4.
The abstract reward for each road segment ψ and its corre-
sponding group b is defined as:
A(b, ψ, t) =
xψ,t ≤ cψ
L(ψ, t),
−f (Xb,t, Cb, Wb), xψ,t > cψ
(10)
(cid:40)
1We sum over road segments rather than over paths in
order to avoid having segments that belong to multiple path
contributing more than once to the global utility value.
(cid:88)
ψ∈P
with f a local reward function (see Equation 1). Finally,
the abstract reward for choosing a path P at time t then
becomes the sum over the abstract reward of each composing
road segment:
Apath(P, t) =
A(b, ψ, t)
(11)
P∈b cP and weight Wb = 1b
a set of paths: consumption Xb,t = (cid:80)
(cid:80)
Cb =(cid:80)
We also extend the definition for an abstract group b over
P∈b xP,t, capacity
P∈b wP , where xP,t is
the number of agents that choose path P , cP = minψ∈P (cψ)
and wP = 1P
ψ∈P wψ. We consider a path to be congested
if any of its composing roads is congested. We can now define
the abstract reward for a selected path P at time t as:
∀ψ ∈ P : xψ,t ≤ cψ
Lpath(P, t),
−f (Xb,t, Cb, Wb), ∃ψ ∈ P : xψ,t > cψ
(cid:80)
(cid:40)
A(b, P, t) =
(12)
where b is the corresponding abstract group of P .
Next, we present a series of experiments designed to demon-
strate how to best use the resource abstraction method, but
also its limitations. Additionally, we test all the presented
approaches (local and global rewards, difference rewards
and resource abstraction) on the RND, and evaluate which
method can best model the underlying dynamics of the envi-
ronment in the reward signal.
5. EXPERIMENTS
Each agent uses the Q-learning algorithm with an explo-
ration parameter = 0.05 and an exploration decay rate of
0.9999. As an important aspect of work is to understand
and explore resource abstraction, the parameters for the
experiment in Section 5.1 were chosen to match the setting
used in the original work [8]: learning rate α = 0.1, decay
rate for α is 0.9999 and the discount factor γ = 1.0. As
for the RND experiments (Section 5.2), after several tests,
the parameters chosen for the local reward L, global reward
G and difference rewards D are: learning rate α = 0.1, no
decay, and the discount factor γ = 0.9.
5.1 Beach Problem Domain
Our first experiment is performed on the BPD and it aims
to explain and demonstrate the use of resource abstraction.
We borrow the original setting from [8], with 6 beach sec-
tions, each with capacity 6, thus a total system capacity of
36. There are 100 agents (creating a congestion scenario)
and the maximum system utility is 11.04, achieved when
overcrowding one of the sections with 70 agents, while keep-
ing the other five at the optimum capacity of 6 agents. Each
agent has three available actions: shift to the resource on
the left, shift to the one on the right and maintain position
and has 5 time-steps to finalize his action sequence for an
episode. We run the scenario for 4 000 episodes and plot the
global utility averaged over 50 trials, together with error bars
representing the standard deviation at every 500 episodes.
Recall that the local reward function for the BPD is the one
plotted in Figure 1a.
Figure 3 presents the results obtained for the BPD for the
following reward schemes: local reward L, global reward G,
difference rewards D and resource abstraction RA. There
are seven different resource abstraction configurations, just
InanimateAnimateConcreteUncountableCountableICU: hout steen rijstIAC: kleur cijfer dagAbstractICC: dak sleutel flesACC: hond vis hertIAU: weer geluk hulpABCD Figure 4: BPD, distribution of agents over the 6 beach
sections for the RA 4 + 2 setting. The agents choose to
overcrowd the group with the smallest size, meaning resources
5 and 6.
Figure 5: BPD, distribution of agents over the 6 beach sec-
tions for the RA 5+1 setting. The agents choose to overcrowd
the group with the smallest size, meaning resource 6. This
distribution is one of the possible optimum configurations.
Figure 3: BPD, 100 agents, 6 sections each with capacity
6. D together with all the RA configurations containing an
abstract group of size 1 achieve the highest performance.
like in [8], composed of either two or three abstract groups.
For example RA 3 + 2 + 1 denotes that the first 3 sections
form one abstract group, the next 2 another one and the last
section represents an abstract group on its own.
Given the insights presented in the previous section on
how the grouping of the resources influences the collective
behaviour and knowing that the maximum utility is achieved
under the 'overcrowd one' behaviour, we expect that the RA
with abstract groups containing only one resource should
attain the best performances. The results presented in Fig-
ure 3 confirm our expectations and provide the following
ranking of the RA configurations: all the variations contain-
ing a group of one resource achieve the best performance,
RA configurations where 2 is the smallest group size come
in second, while the grouping RA 3 + 3 comes in last, but
still above the G and L reward schemes schemes.
An important remark we make here concerns the perfor-
mance of the difference rewards D. In our experiment D
ranks among the best performing methods, in contrast to the
results obtained in [8], where D plateaued around the value
of 8. We also note that the difference rewards application to
the BPD described in Equation 14 of the work [8] does not
correspond to the equation we consider to be the correct one
(Equation 6). 2
Figures 4, 5, and 6 present the final distributions of agents
over the resources for the configurations RA 4 + 2, RA 5 + 1,
and RA 2 + 1 + 3. The results are averaged over 50 trials and
each bar plot is accompanied by the standard deviation error.
Notice that in each case the agents overcrowd the resources
corresponding to the smallest abstract group. RA 5 + 1
and RA 2 + 1 + 3 present two examples of how the optimal
configuration can look like. We note that we did not include
the representations for RA 3 + 2 + 1 and RA 1 + 3 + 2 as they
are similar to RA 2 + 1 + 3. Visualizing the distribution for
configurations like RA 2 + 2 + 2 or RA 3 + 3 is not possible,
as the agents can end up overcrowding any of the abstract
groups.
2Di(t) = L(ψ, t) − xψ,te
term should be a function of (xψ,t − 1).
[8], whereas the second
−(xψ,t−1)
c
Figure 6: BPD, distribution of agents over the 6 beach
sections for the RA 2 + 1 + 3 setting. The agents choose
to overcrowd the group with the smallest size, meaning
resource 3. This distribution is one of the possible optimum
configurations.
05001000150020002500300035004000Episodes6789101112Global utilityLGDRA_3+3RA_4+2RA_5+1RA_2+2+2RA_3+2+1RA_1+3+2RA_2+1+3123456Resources0102030405060ConsumptionRA_4+2123456Resources01020304050607080ConsumptionRA_5+1123456Resources01020304050607080ConsumptionRA_2+1+3 5.2 Road Network Domain
For our next experiments we test how the considered re-
ward schemes perform on the newly introduced Road Net-
work Domain. As previously mentioned, RND is designed
to work with any of the local utility functions presented
in Section 2.2. We create two types experiments, one us-
ing the local utility of BPD and another with TLD. For all
the experiments we use the network topology presented in
Figure 2. There are 50 agents, all starting at point A and
having to reach point D. They can choose between three
paths: ABD, ACD, or ABCD. Each RA configuration is
expressed using a bracket notation depicting the abstract
groups over either paths or road segments. For example, in
the setting [ABD, ACD], [ABCD] there are two groups: one
of size 2 (ABD and ACD) and one of size 1 (ABCD).
For the BPD utility case all roads have a capacity of 5
and weight 1. We run the first experiment, using RA over
the paths of the network, for 20 000 episodes and plot the
global utility averaged over 30 trials, together with error bars
representing the standard deviation at every 1 000 episodes.
Figure 7 exemplifies one of the possible optimum configura-
tions. The maximum global utility for this scenario is 5.22.
Figure 7: Example of the optimum distribution of 50 agents
over the network under the BPD local utility, where each
road segment has capacity 5 and weight 1. The colors encode
the best performing abstract group configuration over road
segments found for this case: [AB], [AC], [CD], [BC, BD].
The results are presented in Figure 8. We remark that
none of the RA settings is able to capture the underlying
optimal configuration, as this can no longer be expressed in
terms of a pure 'overcrowd one' behaviour, due to the de-
pendencies among the resources and the shape of the utility
function. This is a situation for which there does not exist an
abstract grouping to guide the agents towards the optimal
performance, [ABD, ACD], [ABCD] even performs worse
than L or G, as this setting drives agents to overcrowd the
path ABCD, contributing to the congestion of the other two
paths as well. On the other hand, D manages to achieve the
optimal performance in this scenario, demonstrating its ca-
pacity to allow agents to adapt to more difficult environment
dynamics.
We perform a second experiment using the BPD local util-
ity scheme, defining the RA over road segments this time, in
order to verify whether at this resource granularity level we
can achieve an optimum group abstraction. Notice that, in
this case, the number of possible RA settings is much higher,
making the decision about the abstract group creation even
harder. The L, G, and D results are the same as in Fig-
ure 8. We note that additional smoothing was performed,
to improve the visibility of the results obtained for the RA
and each plot is accompanied by the standard error. The
Figure 8: RND with BPD local utility, RA defined over paths,
50 agents. RA can no longer capture the optimal required
behaviour, due to the dependencies between resources and
shape of the utility function. D manages to reach optimal
performance.
Figure 9: RND with BPD local utility, RA defined over
road segments, 50 agents. Even at segment level RA is
unable to capture the optimal required behaviour, due to
the dependencies between resources and shape of the utility
function. D manages again to reach optimal performance.
results of this experiment are presented in Figure 9. We
remark again that none of the RA settings manage to reach
the optimum solution, with the best performing one being
[AB], [AC], [CD], [BC, BD]. A visual representation of this
best performing grouping can be found in Figure 7: the
two segments that need to be kept under the congestion
point (BC, BD) form the largest group, while all the others
form their own abstract group. Thus, the RND problem
has allowed us to demonstrate that having disjoint abstract
groupings is not a sufficient condition for being able to reach
05000100001500020000Episodes−10123456Global utilityLGD[ABD,ACD],[ABCD][ABD],[ABCD,ACD][ABD],[ABCD],[ACD][ABD,ABCD],[ACD]05000100001500020000Episodes1.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.05.5Global utilityLGD[AC],[AB,CD],[BC,BD][AC,BD],[AB,CD,BC][BC],[AB,BD],[AC,CD][AB],[AC],[CD],[BC,BD][AC],[CD],[AB,BC,BD][AC,CD],[AB,BC,BD] an optimum solution and that the necessity of having indepen-
dent resources goes beyond having segments not belonging
to the same abstract group.
To better understand these results, we can turn again to
Figure 7. Notice that even though the capacity of the road
segments is 5, the optimum configuration does not include
any segments having reached this value. We conclude that
we cannot express the solution as 'overcrowd these segments
and keep the rest at optimum capacity', thus being unable to
properly express the desired solution using the RA approach.
For the TLD utility case we use the network scenario
described in Figure 10. Increasing the weights for AC and BD
determines the maximum global utility to be achieved when
avoiding to overcrowd these segments and their corresponding
paths. Additionally, because the condition for receiving the
highest utility for a road segment is less strict compared to the
BPD utility scheme (maintaining the consumption under the
congestion point versus reaching the optimum capacity), the
maximum global utility is achieved when overcrowding the
path ABCD. An example of such a configuration is presented
in Figure 11. We thus expect RA over paths to display a
good performance in this scenario, as it should be able to
capture the desired behaviour. We run this experiment for
2 000 episodes and plot the global utility averaged over 30
trials, together with error bars representing the standard
deviation at every 100 episodes. The highest global utility is
3.68.
Figure 10: Weights and capacities for each road segment in
the RND scenario considered under the TLD local utility.
Figure 11: Example of the optimum distribution of 50 agents
over the considered RND under the TLD local utility
Figure 12 presents the obtained results. We notice that
in all cases the convergence takes place very fast, however
the quality of the solutions vary from one setting to an-
other. The difference rewards approach, D, manages again
to achieve optimum performance. As expected, the RA con-
figuration [ABD, ACD], [ABCD] also performs optimally, as
it explicitly encourages the congestion of the path ABCD.
[ABD], [ABCD], [ACD] comes close to the optimum per-
formance, however the agents will not always overcrowd
path ABCD in this case. The next two configurations,
Figure 12: RND with TLD local utility, 50 agents.
[ABD, ABCD], [ACD] and [ABD], [ABCD, ACD], still per-
form better than L and G, although they encourage a sub-
optimal behaviour (overcrowd path ACD or ABD respec-
tively). Notice that in comparison to the results in Figure 8,
[ABD, ACD], [ABCD] goes from being the worst performing
setting to one of the best. This emphasizes how important it
is to have insights on what the desired collective behaviour
of the agents is, in order to provide well performing abstract
groupings.
6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
The contribution of this work is two-fold. Firstly, we
introduce a new congestion problem, the Road Network
Domain, in which the resources are no longer independent,
and the selection of one path influences the load in other parts
of the network. Secondly, we provide a thorough analysis
of the resource abstraction approach for resource selection
congestion problems, together with its limitations and clear
guidelines on how to best create the abstract groups according
to the desired outcome.
The Road Network Domain presents a novel challenge
for resource selection congestion problems, introducing the
realistic aspect of interconnected resources as we often find
in real-word application such as: electricity grids or traffic
networks. We note that the network topology used here is a
small one, yet sufficient to illustrate the additional challenge,
and that more research is necessary in order to evaluate
scenarios that closely model real-world situations. A next
possible step would be to investigate the scalability of all
the methods, when dealing with a larger and more complex
network, especially when considering the challenge of tuning
the resource abstraction approach.
While resource abstraction seems to provide a strong
method of guiding agents towards an 'overcrowd one' be-
haviour (namely the smallest sized group), it fails when the
optimal configuration can no longer be expressed in these
terms. Additionally, we consider this method to have a
limited applicability in real-world domains, as it requires
information regarding each composing resource (capacity,
InanimateAnimateConcreteUncountableCountableICU: hout steen rijstIAC: kleur cijfer dagAbstractICC: dak sleutel flesACC: hond vis hertIAU: weer geluk hulpABCDc = 3, w = 1c = 7, w = 5c = 5, w = 1c = 7, w = 5c = 3, w = 1InanimateAnimateConcreteUncountableCountableICU: hout steen rijstIAC: kleur cijfer dagAbstractICC: dak sleutel flesACC: hond vis hertIAU: weer geluk hulpABCD5465414450500100015002000Episodes0.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.0Global utilityLGD[ABD,ACD],[ABCD][ABD],[ABCD,ACD][ABD],[ABCD],[ACD][ABD,ABCD],[ACD] Systems. International Foundation for Autonomous
Agents and Multiagent Systems, 2017. In press.
[10] R. S. Sutton and A. G. Barto. Reinforcement learning:
An introduction. MIT press Cambridge, 1998.
[11] K. Tumer, A. Agogino, Z. Welch, A. Bazzan, and
F. Kluegl. Traffic congestion management as a learning
agent coordination problem. Multiagent Architectures
for Traffic and Transportation Engineering, pages
261–279, 2009.
[12] K. Tumer and S. Proper. Coordinating actions in
congestion games: impact of top–down and bottom–up
utilities. Autonomous agents and multi-agent systems,
27(3):419–443, 2013.
[13] K. Tumer, Z. T. Welch, and A. Agogino. Aligning
social welfare and agent preferences to alleviate traffic
congestion. In Proceedings of the 7th international joint
conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent
systems-Volume 2, pages 655–662. International
Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent
Systems, 2008.
[14] L. Vicisano, J. Crowcroft, and L. Rizzo. TCP-like
congestion control for layered multicast data transfer.
In INFOCOM'98. Seventeenth Annual Joint
Conference of the IEEE Computer and
Communications Societies. Proceedings. IEEE,
volume 3, pages 996–1003. IEEE, 1998.
[15] C.-Y. Wan, S. B. Eisenman, and A. T. Campbell. Coda:
Congestion detection and avoidance in sensor networks.
In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on
Embedded Networked Sensor Systems, SenSys '03, pages
266–279, New York, NY, USA, 2003. ACM.
[16] M. Wiering. Multi-agent reinforcement learning for
traffic light control. In P. Langley, editor, Proceedings of
the Seventeenth International Conference on Machine
Learning (ICML'2000), pages 1151–1158, 2000.
[17] D. H. Wolpert and K. Tumer. Optimal payoff functions
for members of collectives. Advances in Complex
Systems, 4(2/3):265–279, 2001.
weight, consumption), as well as some intuition on the prob-
lem's utility function.
We have also shown that the difference rewards approach
achieves a high performance in all the tested scenarios, manag-
ing to capture in the reward signal the necessary information
to allow the agents to coordinate indirectly, even in more
complex scenarios as the RND.
Acknowledgments
This work is supported by Flanders Innovation & Entrepreneur-
ship (VLAIO), SBO project 140047: Stable MultI-agent
LEarnIng for neTworks (SMILE-IT). We are grateful for all
the helpful comments and discussions with our VUB AI Lab
colleagues at each stage of this work.
REFERENCES
[1] A. K. Agogino and K. Tumer. Analyzing and
visualizing multiagent rewards in dynamic and
stochastic domains. Autonomous Agents and
Multi-Agent Systems, 17(2):320–338, 2008.
[2] A. K. Agogino and K. Tumer. A multiagent approach
to managing air traffic flow. Autonomous Agents and
Multi-Agent Systems, 24(1):1–25, 2012.
[3] M. Colby, T. Duchow-Pressley, J. J. Chung, and
K. Tumer. Local Approximation of Difference
Evaluation Functions. In Proceedings of the 2016
International Conference on Autonomous Agents &
Multiagent Systems, pages 521–529. International
Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent
Systems, 2016.
[4] M. Colby and K. Tumer. Multiagent reinforcement
learning in a distributed sensor network with indirect
feedback. In Proceedings of the 2013 International
Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent
Systems, AAMAS '13, pages 941–948, Richland, SC,
2013. International Foundation for Autonomous Agents
and Multiagent Systems.
[5] S. Devlin, L. Yliniemi, D. Kudenko, and K. Tumer.
Potential-based difference rewards for multiagent
reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 2014
international conference on Autonomous agents and
multi-agent systems, pages 165–172. International
Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent
Systems, 2014.
[6] G. Hardin. The tragedy of the commons. Science,
162(3859):1243–1248, 1968.
[7] K. Malialis, S. Devlin, and D. Kudenko. Intrusion
response using difference rewards for scalability and
online learning. In Workshop on Adaptive and Learning
Agents at AAMAS (ALA-14), 2014.
[8] K. Malialis, S. Devlin, and D. Kudenko. Resource
abstraction for reinforcement learning in multiagent
congestion problems. In Proceedings of the 2016
International Conference on Autonomous Agents &
Multiagent Systems, pages 503–511. International
Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent
Systems, 2016.
[9] R. Radulescu, P. Vrancx, and A. Now´e. Analysing
Congestion Problems in Multi-agent Reinforcement
Learning. In Proceedings of the 2017 International
Conference on Autonomous Agents & Multiagent
|
0805.1787 | 1 | 0805 | 2008-05-13T06:51:35 | A Network Protection Framework through Artificial Immunity | [
"cs.MA",
"cs.CR"
] | Current network protection systems use a collection of intelligent components - e.g. classifiers or rule-based firewall systems to detect intrusions and anomalies and to secure a network against viruses, worms, or trojans. However, these network systems rely on individuality and support an architecture with less collaborative work of the protection components. They give less administration support for maintenance, but offer a large number of individual single points of failures - an ideal situation for network attacks to succeed. In this work, we discuss the required features, the performance, and the problems of a distributed protection system called {\it SANA}. It consists of a cooperative architecture, it is motivated by the human immune system, where the components correspond to artificial immune cells that are connected for their collaborative work. SANA promises a better protection against intruders than common known protection systems through an adaptive self-management while keeping the resources efficiently by an intelligent reduction of redundancies. We introduce a library of several novel and common used protection components and evaluate the performance of SANA by a proof-of-concept implementation. | cs.MA | cs |
A Network Protection Framework
through Artificial Immunity
Michael Hilker & Christoph Schommer
University of Luxembourg
6, Rue Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, L-1359 Luxembourg
Faculty of Science, Technology, and Communications
{michael.hilker, christoph.schommer}@uni.lu
Abstract. Current network protection systems use a collection of in-
telligent components - e.g. classifiers or rule-based firewall systems to
detect intrusions and anomalies and to secure a network against viruses,
worms, or trojans. However, these network systems rely on individu-
ality and support an architecture with less collaborative work of the
protection components. They give less administration support for main-
tenance, but offer a large number of individual single points of failures
- an ideal situation for network attacks to succeed. In this work, we
discuss the required features, the performance, and the problems of a
distributed protection system called SANA. It consists of a cooperative
architecture, it is motivated by the human immune system, where the
components correspond to artificial immune cells that are connected for
their collaborative work. SANA promises a better protection against in-
truders than common known protection systems through an adaptive
self-management while keeping the resources efficiently by an intelligent
reduction of redundancies. We introduce a library of several novel and
common used protection components and evaluate the performance of
SANA by a proof-of-concept implementation.
Keywords: Network Protection, Artificial Immune Systems, Bio-Inspired Com-
puting, Distributed Architectures, Information Management, Network Simulation.
1
Introduction
The attacks towards computer networks is increasing and the costs as well. In
crime towards the computer networks does 88% belong to the infections by
viruses and worms but the attacks by humans is increasing. In addition, more
and more attacks aim to receive information, which are afterwards sold to earn
money; this thread generates a cost of about 70, 000, 000$ [1]. The costs of intru-
sions towards computer networks is measured to 150, 000, 000$ [2]. An emerging
problem are the attacks performed by internal users, e.g. by unsatisfied employes
of a company trying to get access to confident information.
A network protection system is a system that tries to protect the network
and its nodes against intrusions and attacks [3]. It consists of several components
of different granularity [4], ranging from parameter changes in sub-components,
nodes, or packet filters to powerful antivirus software, firewalls, and intrusion
detection systems in important network nodes [5]. Each protection component
contains the workflow and the knowledge in order to perform the tasks so that
the protection system converges to its goals. The protection system holds the
cooperation between the different protection components and the maintenance-
and update workflows. The performance of the protection system is an indication
how secure the network is against intrusions; the performance originates out of
the performance of all protection components.
There exist different characteristics in order to evaluate and compare different
protection systems [6]:
-- The system has to be complete; i.e. the system protects all nodes against
intrusions.
-- The provided resources has to be used efficiently.
-- The protection system has to secure the network and all nodes. It should
also not influence the user and the normal workflows in the network.
-- The installation, maintenance, and update workflows have to be easy and
fast to perform. The system has to ensure that the different protection com-
ponents work properly and are up-to-date.
-- The system has to adapt to the current situation in the network and it has
to be adaptive in order to identify modified, mutated, and/or novel attacks.
An important characteristics of computer network protection systems is that
they should be extendable and cope with upcoming - more and more complex
as well as intelligent - intrusions. For example, the ZMIST virus remains hid-
den in host programs [7]; common-used detection techniques performing pattern
matching have serious problems to identify it. The EVOL virus hides itself through
swapping instructions in existing programs [8]. Thus, we demand for a protection
system to use an adaptive information management having protection compo-
nents collaborated; we demand for protection systems to be easily extendable
towards and permanent protection update.
A recent approach is to model the biological systems for computer science
where the artificial immune systems is one example. In this article, we intro-
duce first a novel framework for protection systems as artificial immune system
[9,10,11,12], which is motivated by the human immune system [13]. We then
suggest a computer network protection system called SANA, present its archi-
tecture, performance and some implementation aspects. An important aspect is
that SANA is a complex - but easy to understandable - system that does not use
a centralised system [14]. It provides the features and characteristics explained
above and provides a dynamic, efficient, and adaptive security environment in
which common used and novel approaches for network security are combined
[15]. These approaches are both motivated by the Biology as well as Computer
Science approaches.
2 Current Situation
Current promising protection solutions and systems contain an architecture of
different components. In each node, antivirus software [16] and firewall [17] are
installed; they observe file access, active processes, and the network packet head-
ers for possible attacks. Additionally, some nodes facilitate other protection com-
ponents like e.g. spam filters for identifying unsolicited and undesired messages.
On the network side, on hubs, switches, and routers header checking packet
filters run in order to define a network policy describing which routings, proto-
cols, and ports are allowed [18]. Important nodes like e.g. internet gateways and
email servers are secured using intrusion detection systems [5], which check each
packet completely and observe the whole node in order to identify intrusions. A
novel approach are intrusion prevention systems [19], which extend the antivirus
software and firewall to a system observing the file access and system calls as
well as checking the whole packets for intrusions. However, these systems mostly
combine only antivirus and firewalls extended by some statistical approaches in
order to detect unknown intrusions; however they are significantly different to
intrusion detection systems.
Currently, these components must be installed and configured in each node
manually where the configuration is more and more done through a centralised
management server. The updates of each protection component - antivirus or
intrusion detection system - works as follows: each component asks regularly a
central management if there exists an update; if yes, then it downloads it. The
antivirus software and the firewall ask then the user when a suspicious event
occurs; the user takes over the decision and proceeds. This is often a risk since
the user is mostly not an expert. Additionally, the antivirus software, firewalls,
packet filters, and intrusion detection systems use a log system in order to inform
the administrators about different event. The administrator analyses such, but
due to the enormous number of messages is it not possible for him to analyse
each message properly; the intrusions may stay undetected.
The different protection components are not connected. Thus, each compo-
nent works on its own and collaborative work does not exist. This leads pri-
marily to redundant checks: for example, the firewall and intrusion detection
system in a node check the packet for similar characteristics; resources are con-
sequently wasted. However, more important is that the different information
gathered through the different protection components are not combined in or-
der to identify intrusions or even to identify abnormal or suspicious behaviour.
Lastly, the protection system does not check itself whether each component is
up-to-date and works properly, which leads to the situation that different protec-
tion components work with limited performance. An example for this problem
is that the update system of an antivirus software does not work properly and
e.g. the antivirus software is no longer updated and does not identify the newest
intrusions; this is a problem because this node is a risk for the whole network.
For facilitating the required resources, distributed installations provide sev-
eral advantages compared to the classical client server architecture. In the client
server architecture, the client software - protection components - perform the
tasks and demand different updates and services from the central management
server. Some approaches for a distributed protection system exist [20], e.g. an ar-
tificial immune system for network security [9,10,11,12]. However, these systems
mostly do not use a fully distributed approach, i.e. there are some centralised
components that are critical for the overall performance of the system, the sys-
tem is mostly not adaptive, and the system does not use small entities as artificial
cells and more the multi-agent system approach [21] using heavy agents with few
mobility, lots of internal information, and lots of knowledge about the current
situation. A system is adaptive when it reconfigures itself so that it copes with
the current and future situation; also learning, self-checking, and -repairing is a
part of adaptive workflows. Furthermore, common used systems do not use an
approach where many artificial cells have to communicate and collaborate. Fur-
thermore, these systems are far away from production; this framework intends to
narrow the gap between the distributed protection systems of academic research
and production.
In the next section, a novel framework for a distributed, integrated, and
dynamic protection system is introduced in which common used and novel ap-
proaches for network security are combined and which tries to solve the limita-
tions of existing protection systems.
3 SANA: A Network Protection Framework through
Artificial Immunity
The protection system SANA [15] is a library of different network protection
components using a subsymbolic organisation and information management.
SANA copes with upcoming attacks that increase continuously adaption and in-
telligence. The administration and maintenance is simplified, it works mainly au-
tonomously. The system does not use centralised protection components, which
are single points of failure. Different components and workflows of SANA are
motivated by workflows and architectures from the Biology. An overview is visu-
alised in figure 1; the system is explained in the next sections according to this
figure.
3.1 Security Environment
Distributed systems with moving entities require an environment in which the
entities work. Therefore, the security environment is installed in each node and
provides an environment that is used by all protection components. The envi-
ronment ensures the access to resources as storage, memory, CPU, and network
as well as ensures that each protection component is recognised when a certain
event occurs. Therefore, each protection component is installed in the security
environment and registered for certain events, e.g. arriving of a packet or access
to a file. Thus, the protection components are independent from the underlying
hardware platform as well as network protocols and configurations, which leads
to a faster deployment of protection components. The security environments is
a middleware between the resources of the node and the protection components.
The security environment also provides checks testing the protection compo-
nents if they are allowed to access the resources and if they intend to perform
properly. This ensures that not properly working components are removed from
the network; they cannot access resources anymore. Additionally, the adminis-
trators can connect to the security environment in order to administrate these
as well as to access the protection components working in this node. The ad-
ministrators can quickly add novel components facilitating novel approaches of
network security.
3.2 Protection Components
The protection system consists of several protection components, which per-
form the tasks required for securing the network. These protection components
are both common used protection components like antivirus software, firewall,
packet filter, and intrusion detection systems in order to benefit from their per-
formance as well as novel approaches of protection components, e.g. the artificial
cells. The common used protection components are installed in the security en-
vironment and perform their tasks.
SANA is an artificial immune system that facilitates common protection
components; SANA is an evolution of common used protection systems. The
common used protection components are designed and implemented for a spe-
cific operating system. Thus, the platform independent system SANA provides
an environment in order to install the protection component in the security en-
vironment. The security environment provides everything for checking, e.g. the
network packets, the system calls, and the file accesses - middleware between
the protection components and the resources. The protection components check
these and the response is transfered to the real resources through the security
environment. For other protection components, an operating systems using hard-
ware virtualisation is provided wherein the protection components runs (see 3.7)
[22].
With this implementation, common used protection components as e.g. an-
tivirus software, firewall, packet filter, and intrusion detection system are imple-
mented and reused without internal changes in the components so that SANA
is a framework for a distributed distribution system. Also, non standard ap-
proaches as e.g. virus throttle [23,24] for slowing down the propagation of intru-
sions and Malfor [25] for automatically generating signatures of intrusions are
implemented.
The artificial cells are dynamic, highly specialised, lightweighted, and mobile
so that the system is dynamic and hard to attack. The cells are highly specialised
and lightweighted because they have only limited knowledge about the situation
in the network and the various tasks required for network security are distributed
over several nodes. The cells are dynamic and mobile through moving around
Fig. 1. Overview about SANA
and changing of the behaviour. The number of different types of artificial cells
is enormous - at least several thousands of cells - because the tasks required for
network security are split in small pieces so that a breakdown of one artificial
cell does not break down the whole system. Furthermore, each type of artificial
cell is several times present in the network so that redundancies occur. Examples
for artificial cells are introduced in [26,27]. Different types of artificial cells:
File Access Accessing a file can install intrusions like viruses. Thus, these cells
check each file that is accessed on the node.
Node Observation Artificial cells observe the whole node including the anal-
yse of the system calls and the control flow graphs of executed programs in
order to identify and prevent installation of intrusions.
Network Traffic Analysis This type of artificial cells evaluates each network
packet whether it contains an intrusion or not. If it contains an intrusion,
the artificial cells also know how to proceed with the packet, e.g. packet drop
or disinfection. An example is the approach ANIMA for Intrusion Detection
wherein the signatures of intrusions are stored in a network like architecture
[28].
Identification of Abnormality In the network, different examples of abnor-
mality exist. E.g. the infected nodes or not proper working protection com-
ponents must be identified and removed. AGNOSCO is an artificial cell using
the information from the distributed network traffic analysis in order to iden-
tify infected nodes using the artificial ant colonies approach [15]. Another
approach is ANIMA for Anomaly Detection, which stores a current view
of normal network traffic in order to identify and report abnormal network
traffic [29].
Regular Checks Abnormality can also be recognised using regular checks. E.g.
viruses and worms have a significant signature - e.g. files, running processes,
and registry entries -, backdoors have an significant open port with service
connected to this port, and not proper working or outdated protection com-
ponents can be identified using some checks. Thus, these cells move through
the network, perform the check, and identify the problems. When a problem
is recognised, they inform other cells in order to solve the problem.
Data Collection These cells collect information from the network, which are
used in order to monitor the network and afterwards for self-improvement
and -learning.
Other Types It is possible to implement nearly all types of artificial cells where
the limitations are that the cells should be small and lightweighted as well
as the cells can only use the resources provided by the security environment.
Using the artificial cells, it is possible to quickly introduce novel approaches;
tasks as described before can be defined and performed using some artificial
cells. For this, the artificial cells shutdown over time where the time is defined
by the administration; values for this parameter are between some minutes and
up to some hours. The systems in the network generate continuously new cells
in order to keep the population up-to-date; these systems are explained in the
next section. With this workflow, novel approaches and techniques for network
security are quickly introduced and the newest information is included.
3.3 Important Nodes
SANA contains the normal network nodes with the security environment and
the protection components installed in this environment. For helping the admin-
istrators to maintain SANA, two specialised nodes are required.These are two
types of nodes with more functionality, which are motivated by the human body.
These specialised nodes are required in order to collect more information and to
organise the system.
Artificial Lymph Nodes The artificial lymph nodes are a meeting point and
response center for artificial cells. The artificial lymph nodes are an extension
to the normal network nodes. A set of artificial lymph nodes manage a small
network part - sub-sub-network called. They have additionally the following
features:
-- Collect status information about the supplied network part.
-- Manage the communication in the sub-sub-network; see also the section 3.4.
-- Respond to the messages from the artificial cells. Examples of the response
are to release novel artificial cells solving a problem (disinfection a node or
updating a protection component) and to inform the administrators.
-- Supply the artificial cells with additional information, e.g. whether a network
packet contains an intrusion or not.
The artificial lymph nodes are redundant installed where several artificial
lymph nodes manage a sub-sub-network so that a breakdown of a few interferes
less the performance of the overall system.
CNTS - Central Nativity and Training Stations The artificial cells shut-
down over time and must be replaced by new ones, which include the newest
information as well as novel approaches of network security. The CNTS produce
novel artificial cells and release these continuously in order to keep the number
of artificial cells approximately constant. Thus, the CNTS are an extension of
the artificial lymph nodes and have the same features as artificial lymph nodes
as well as the generation of artificial cells. A set of CNTS manages a part of
the network with several sub-sub-networks included - sub-network called. The
CNTS model the bone marrow and thymus of the human immune system.
3.4 Artificial Cell Communication
The artificial cells are specialised and perform only a small task. Thus, several
cells have to collaborate in order to identify and prevent attacks. Therefore, the
artificial cell communication is introduced, which is a distributed fault-tolerant
communication protocol for point to multi-point communication. The artificial
cell communication models the cell communication of the human body provid-
ing a communication and collaboration protocol for the artificial cells and other
protection components. Therefore, we introduce the term artificial substance,
which is used for message exchanges. It models the behaviour of different sub-
stances of the human body, e.g. the cytokines and hormones [13]. Each artificial
substance contains the message and a header with the parameters hops-to-go
and time-to-live describing the distribution area of the artificial substance.
Each node manages the routing of the substances where each node has a set of
nodes; each substance is sent to these nodes when the distribution area is not
reached; this set is adapted to the current situation in the network.
The artificial cell communication works as follows: one component sends a
message, packs this message in an artificial substance, defines the distribution
area, and gives it to the network. In each node, the substance is presented to all
protection components and the right components receive the message. The iden-
tification of the right receivers is done using artificial receptors. These receptors
are a public/private key pair describing the type and status of the artificial cells,
protection components, and artificial substances. All artificial cells, protection
components, and artificial substances contain several artificial receptors describ-
ing their type and status. Only when an artificial cell or protection component
can authorise itself using the right keys of the artificial receptors, it will receive
the message stored in the artificial substance. The protection components receiv-
ing the message respond to it, and the node sends the substance to all next nodes
and the process repeats until the distribution area of the substance is reached.
The next nodes are defined by administrator and adapted by the system so that
the communication is configured to the current situation in the network. The
artificial receptors are additionally used in order to secure the access to resources
using authentication processes.
The advantages of the artificial cell communication are a distributed, efficient,
and fail-safe protocol without a single point of failure. Furthermore, the protocol
works fine for point to multi-point communication as used in network security
where a component sends a message to all nearby components of a certain type.
3.5 Self Management
The numerous artificial cells require where their tasks are most needed. There-
fore, the artificial immune cells organise as follows: each protection component
knows how much security it provides (security value). Each node calculates -
basing on the security values of each component in the node - the security level
of the node; when this level falls below a certain threshold - the threshold is
defined by the administrator and defines how much security this node requires
-, it starts a notification process. This notification process attracts other nearby
artificial cells in order to move to this node so that the security value is increased
and the artificial cells in this node are more affine to stay than to move. However,
the artificial cells still work autonomously.
For the artificial cells, performing regular tasks on the nodes, exist another
workflow; we decided to use the artificial ant colonies approach during the de-
signing of this workflow. Briefly, the artificial ants lay pheromone on the ground
when carrying an artificial prey; these pheromones are afterwards used in order
to find other nearby preys. Here, the preys are unchecked nodes and the artifi-
cial ants are the artificial cells. Thus, in each node ni exist a storage for values
for these cells where each value vni,ni+1,tj is for a connection ni, ni+1 and for
a specific type tj of artificial cell, which is identified by the artificial receptors.
When a cell performs the check in node ni and moves afterwards to node ni+1,
it increases the value for the connection (ni, ni+1) and for the specific cell type
tj in the node ni. Furthermore, the node decreases these values over time. When
a cell wants to move from node ni to another node, it can use these values in
order to identify the node, which waits the longest time for a check. The value
describes the number of pheromones released by the artificial ants - artificial
cells - where the pheromones disappear over time.
The self management increases the performance enormously because the ar-
tificial cells are properly distributed over all nodes and enough artificial cells can
still keep moving in order to provide a dynamic protection system. In addition,
the artificial cells performing regular tasks are lead to the nodes where this task
is required; this reduces the required resources because redundant tasks are re-
duced and all nodes are checked regularly, which increases the security in the
network.
3.6 Information Management
Compared to common used protection systems, the information management of
SANA is enhanced: the artificial cells analyse not only the information from one
single node, they use the information from several nodes for a combined anal-
ysis. This is e.g. used for finding abnormal behaviour or multi-step/multi-stage
attacks. Furthermore, the different artificial cells exchange information so that
results from different analysing systems are combined evaluated and used for
finding more intelligent and adaptive intrusions. Furthermore, the self-checking
performed by the checking artificial cells is done distributed so that lots of infor-
mation are gathered. The warnings and alerts are semi-automatically analysed
and processed - common warnings and alerts are automatically processed and
only novel are directly sent to the administration; They are also sent to the ad-
ministrators as summary status information when required or demanded. The
administrators can always demand a status report or snapshot from the system
in order to receive an overview about the current situation.
3.7 Implementation
A platform-independent proof-of-concept implementation is done so that SANA
can be compared with other protection systems. The simulation runs on a net-
work simulator implementing a packet oriented network - e.g. TCP/IP - where
Fig. 2. Implementation layers in a network node
an adversarial stresses the network and the protection system using many pack-
ets with and without intrusions. Furthermore, the implementation can be easily
extended and also common used protection components as antivirus software,
intrusion detection systems, and firewalls are implemented in order to evaluate
and compare the performance of SANA.
Implementation of Security Environment The implementation of the se-
curity environment is crucial. It should provide the features required to run the
protection components efficiently but it should be impossible that the attackers
use the security environment for the intrusion process. For this, the computer is
divided in four layers:
1. The first layer is the hardware layer containing all hardware like CPU, mem-
ory, and storage.
2. The operating system layer 1 contains only the core parts of the operating
system in order to access the resources. Mostly, these are the kernel and
some drivers.
3. The operating system layer 2 contains the rest of the operating system as
well as separated the SANA security environment.
4. The software layer contains in the operating system the application soft-
ware installed by the users and in the security environment the protection
components.
The different layers are visualised in figure 2. As it can be seen in the figure,
the operating system and the SANA security environment are separated. This
is achieved through hardware virtualisation. In the operating system layer 1 is
a software installed, which enables the features to run several different oper-
ating systems - guest operating systems called - at the same time. Then, one
guest operating system has the operating system running and one the SANA
security environment. Furthermore, the operating system cannot see the secu-
rity environment but vice versa, which is ensured through the implementation.
Furthermore, operating system layer 1 is so installed that it only changes when
the hardware changes.
The advantages of this installation:
When an intruder installs an intrusion into the operating system or the software
space, it cannot access the security environment through the hardware virtuali-
sation. If an intruder installs an intrusion into the operating system layer 1, the
runtime environment recognises the change immediately, quarantines the node
through a message to the neighbours, and removes itself from the node; then, the
attacker does not receive internal information from the protection system but the
administrators have to add the node to the network again. When the intruder
tries to install itself in the security environment, a change is prohibited because
this part does not change. Lastly, if the intruder installs an intrusive protection
component - either artificial cells or local protection component - it requires the
right keys from the artificial receptors in order to access the resources; without
the keys, the intrusive component cannot perform intrusive tasks in order to
interfere the network. Thus, the intrusion can itself only install in the software
part as before and has no access to the protection system SANA.
An important advantage is that the working operating system and the protec-
tion system runs in distinguished virtual machines. Thus, the protection system
checks the operating systems and software from outside and the intrusion has
more problems to hide itself from the checking because code armoring and stealth
techniques often fail when the scan comes from outside. Furthermore, the vir-
tual machines can be moved to other machines so that a user works always with
its system on all machines. In addition, the protection system is implemented
in a service oriented architecture (SOA) [30] so that more complex tasks can
be demanded from the artificial lymph nodes and CNTS using different virtual
machines. E.g. a not proper working security environment with protection com-
ponents or a virtual machine with infected operating system can be moved to
the administration computers and checked for repairing and afterwards moved
back. Another example is that complex tasks are done using an additional virtual
computer running the protection components performing the tasks.
The disadvantages of the approach are an increased overhead. However, when
e.g. OpenVZ is used, the overhead is about 1% − 2% [22]. Additionally, novel
CPUs already contain visualization techniques implemented in hardware so that
the overhead is even more reduced.
3.8 Maintenance
The maintenance is important for the administrators. The administrators de-
mand for an easy-to-use and mostly autonomous administration and update
interface where also the enhancements should be done quickly and smoothly.
Therefore, SANA provides different workflows:
Administration The administrators can connect to each security environment
in order to check the current status and administrate the distributed system. The
artificial lymph nodes and CNTS provide summary status information about the
system and artificial cells can be released in order to collect specific information,
which can be afterwards used for further analysis.
Updates The updates are done differently compared to common used systems
where a management server provides the updates and the client softwares down-
load it. The disadvantage is that the client software have to ask regularly for
new updates and outdated software is not identified. Thus, SANA provides two
different ways of updates:
1. The artificial cells are either updated through new information from the arti-
ficial lymph nodes, which are visited regularly. Otherwise, the most common
update workflow for artificial cells is the shutdown of the cells and release of
new cells with the newest updates and information.
2. The protection components are updated using updating artificial cells. These
cells are released when a new update is available. They visit all protection
components of this type and update these. The update is reported in order
to identify unsuccessful updates or outdated components. This workflow is
mostly used for not moving components.
In addition, the administrators can always connect to all security environ-
ments in order to access the protection components and update these.
Enhancements Enhancements can be either released through a new popula-
tion of artificial cells or an installation in the security environments. For the
new population, the information about the enhancement must be added to the
CNTS, which generates and releases the new artificial cells. An installation in
the security environments can be either done manually through connecting to
each security environment or through an automated process updating a set of
security environments. With this, the enhancements are quickly deployed to the
system.
3.9 Configuration of SANA
After the introduction of the different parts and workflows of SANA, this section
provides a short overview about a possible configuration of SANA on a real
network. Each network node, which are the computers in the network as well as
the network equipment, contain a security environment in order to install the
protection components. Each node contains an antivirus software and a firewall
as in a common used protection system. The network equipment have packet
filters in order to define the network policy and to close unused ports. The
artificial cells move through the network and provide a distributed protection
subsystem on all nodes. Important nodes, e.g. the Internet gateway and the email
server but also important productive servers, run additionally to the artificial
cells intrusion detection systems. The artificial lymph nodes are installed in the
network equipment so that the number of hops from the nodes to the next
artificial lymph nodes is small. There are two to three CNTS in the network
releasing continuously novel artificial cells. The self management organises the
artificial cells and guarantees a certain amount of security in each node. The
artificial cell communication enables the cooperation between the different cells.
All other parts are implemented as described above.
4 Performance and Results
The performance of SANA is more than acceptable. It performs mostly bet-
ter than common used protection systems, which are a collection of protection
components, because SANA also uses the same protection components. Addi-
tionally, it contains the artificial cells providing a dynamic and adaptive part.
Furthermore, SANA provides using the security environment an easy to admin-
istrate protection system that has many autonomous workflows. The warnings
and alerts of each protection component are analysed and processed automati-
cally by other protection components in order to adapt the behaviour - a more
sophisticated information management. Therefore, different workflows are used:
first, the information from the protection components are combined in order to
identify infected nodes and abnormal behaviour; second, the infected nodes are
disinfected and abnormal behaviour is observed; third, the warnings and alerts
are sent to the nearby artificial cells which adapt their internal thresholds accord-
ingly - implementation of the danger model; the danger model is an biological
motivated approach where the cells exchange continuously summary status in-
formation in order to adapt their internal thresholds [31,32]. Furthermore, the
protection system is highly dynamic: the artificial cells move continuously and
provide a hard to predict and to attack protection system. Furthermore, the
system can be quickly extended with novel approaches for network security.
In the simulations, real network attacks are modelled where e.g. different
worms use the network to propagate and the aim of the worm is to infect as
many nodes as possible. Two simulations are performed: the first with a common
used protection system consisting of antivirus software, firewall, packet filter, and
intrusion detection system, and a second with SANA. In all of our simulations
SANA is more secure than the common used protection system. Furthermore,
SANA adapts to the current situation because identification of infected nodes,
not proper working components, and suspicious behaviour is detected and the
problems are fixed automatically.
Especially, when an intrusion uses the network for propagation and an intru-
sion detection system checks the traffic between the network and the internet,
the worm can easily infect the whole network because there is not an internal
protection system that stops it. In this case, SANA's artificial cells protect the
nodes through distributed intrusion detection and disinfection of infected nodes.
In the introduction, different criteria are introduced and SANA meets these:
-- Due to the installation in all nodes SANA secures the whole network. The
configuration and the self management ensures that each node is properly
secured. All intrusions are not identified, which is the ideal performance of
a protection system. However, SANA identifies almost all intrusions.
-- The system uses the resources efficiently from all nodes. Thus, the required
resources on a single node is reduced when SANA is used.
-- For the third criteria, the system should secure all nodes as well as it should
not influence the normal production. These two criteria are met because
SANA is installed on each node and uses only limited resources so that the
normal production is not influenced. Furthermore due to its autonomous
workflows SANA asks only rarely the user for critical security issues.
-- The CNTS release regularly artificial cells, which check, repair, and update
the different protection components for proper working - self-checking and
-repairing. Furthermore, the installation is simplified because in each node
must only the security environment installed and the protection components
find a common infrastructure. Due to the enormous number of artificial cells
is a breakdown of one cell less important for the overall performance.
-- SANA adapts to the current situation in the network. Therefore, a sophisti-
cated information management is used and the protection components, i.e.
artificial cells, identify abnormal behaviour, infected nodes, and adapt their
behaviour to the current situation in the network.
After the practical implementation and analysis of the system, distributed pro-
tection systems are analysed more theoretically. Therefore, different attack sce-
narios are discussed where several attacks are nearly always successful when
current protection systems are used. Examples are that a user wants to attack
a node, shuts it therefore down, and boots from an external storage device, e.g.
Linux on an USB-stick. The protection components in this system are inac-
tive and the user can install all intrusions and other protection components of
current protection system does not identify it. SANA identifies infected nodes
quickly, quarantines the node, and informs the administrator. Other attacks are
that novel intrusions can infect a whole network because only centralised systems
identify it. In the next section, SANA is compared with common used protection
systems.
4.1 Comparing SANA with common used Protection Systems
As described in the section 2 is a common used protection system a collection of
different protection components where each component is directly installed on
the node. Mostly, all nodes contain an antivirus software and a firewall, all net-
work equipments contain packet filters, as well as important nodes are secured
using intrusion detection systems. In contrast, SANA facilitates the same con-
figuration of protection components enhanced with the artificial cells, artificial
lymph nodes, and CNTS. These enable collaborative, dynamic, and adaptive
workflows so that SANA identifies infected nodes, weak points, and suspicious
behaviour. Due to the installation of the security environment are the protection
components distinguished from the operating system. Hence, the components
check the system and consequently also the intrusions from outside so that it
is harder for the intrusion to stealth or armour itself from the analysis. Addi-
tionally, SANA can produce a static copy of an virtual machine containing the
user's operating system so that the components check this halted system. This
static copy is also used to save evidences of an intrusions in order to find the
adversaries, which is an important legal aspect.
Other important network protection systems and components are distributed
and host-based intrusion detection systems. Distributed intrusion detection sys-
tems install in each node an intrusion detection system or install capturing parts
in each node and some centralised analysing and response centers. The second
approach has the disadvantage that a lot of traffic is required in order to send
all traffic to the analysing centers. The first approach installing in each node
an intrusion detection system has the disadvantages that a lot of resources are
required. In addition, each intrusion detection system requires lots of administra-
tion and produces several warnings and alerts, which must be analysed. Thus, the
administrators cannot analyse these and, consequently, intrusions found but only
reported to the log file are often not identifies. Furthermore, these approaches
do not identify infected nodes, weak points in the network, and suspicious be-
haviour.
Widely used in big productive and academic networks are honeypots and
honeynets. A honeypot behaves like a normal computer, which pretends to con-
tain important information and processes. Furthermore, the honeypot is nor-
mally weak secured and, thus, an aim for attacks. However, the honeypot tries
to attract the intrusion in order to trap or to delay intrusions. In addition, hon-
eypots are used in order to identify novel intrusions and generate a signature
for these. Honeynets are a network of honeypots in order to simulate a whole
network and to analyse the behaviour of intrusions in a network. Honeypots and
honeynets are not implemented by SANA. However, it is possible to implement
these protection systems in a network secured by SANA.
When a small network is used in a company and there is only few inter-
network communication, the protection system is so installed that all network
traffic is routed over a centralised node, which analyses all network traffic - some-
times this is implemented using a broadcast network or using adapted routing
tables. Then, all other nodes must not check the network traffic and the installa-
tion of protection components is simplified. Unfortunately, this approach has the
disadvantage that a lot of bandwidth is required for routing all traffic over this
center as well as the center needs lots of computational power in order to check
the traffic. Furthermore, when an adversarial has control over some nodes, the
routing tables can be easily changed as well as the encrypted traffic can be only
checked at the destination node. In addition, this configuration is static and does
hardly identify suspicious behaviour and not proper working components where
infected nodes can be identified through analysing the information gathered at
the centralised checking node.
The differences to current protection system are the workflows implemented
through the artificial cells. With these workflows, a distributed, dynamic, and
adaptive protection system is implemented, which facilitates quick and easy-
to-use maintenance workflows. In addition, the information management is in-
creased so that information from different nodes are combined analysed in order
to identify and solve problems in the system. The distributed intrusion detection
system deployed by the artificial cells differs SANA from common used protec-
tion systems; this distributed intrusion detection is analysed in section 4.5.
4.2 Simulation Results
Before different attack scenarios are discussed in detail, some simulation results
comparing SANA with common used protection system are introduced. The
simulations of this section focus on network based attacks where network packets
containing intrusions try to infect a node. Infected nodes send packets with
intrusions in order to propagate the attack. Adversaries start the attack from
outside the network but infected nodes are inside. The network is always a big
network with at least 1000 nodes.
First Simulation: A random network with 1110 nodes. Three different pro-
tection systems where SANA is the implementation of SANA using only artifi-
cial cells, NIDS is the implementation of an IDS in the internet gateway, and
NIDS&SANA is combination of both. Performance:
Percent identified intrusive packets NIDS SANA NIDS&SANA
First Simulation
48.67% 79.35%
85.13%
After analysing the simulation, the results emerges out of the design. NIDS lack
from the infected nodes sending lots of intrusive packets. SANA lack from the
bad securing of the Internet gateway. NIDS&SANA has the problem of infected
nodes, which are not removed from the network.
Second Simulation: The network is a model of a switched company network
with 1110 nodes. The configuration is similar to the first simulation. Two simu-
lations are run: the first with 75% of the traffic is external to the Internet and
the second with 25% external.
Percent identified intrusive packets NIDS SANA NIDS&SANA
Traffic 25% internal
Traffic 75% internal
90.64% 71.23%
37.78% 74.71%
94.12%
81.74%
After analysing the simulation, the results emerges again out of the design. NIDS
lack from the infected nodes sending lots of intrusive packets, which is mostly
a problem in the simulation with lots of internal traffic due to no checking of
this traffic. SANA lack from the bad securing of the Internet gateway where the
most attacks come through. NIDS&SANA has the problem of infected nodes,
which are not identified. However, it can be seen that the combination of SANA
with an IDS in the Internet gateway secures the network properly.
Third Simulation: This simulation uses the same configuration as the second
simulation but SANA uses the workflows to identify and disinfect infected nodes.
Thus, the performance of the NIDS is the same.
Percent identified intrusive packets NIDS SANA NIDS&SANA
Traffic 25% internal
Traffic 75% internal
90.64% 94.19%
37.78% 90.68%
99.20%
95.81%
It can be seen that the infected nodes release lots of intrusive packets and, thus,
the identification of infected nodes increases the performance of the protection
systems enormously.
4.3 Performance in Attack Scenarios
The performance of SANA is analysed through several different attack scenarios.
These scenarios are very common in real life. Furthermore, most attacks can be
reduced to these classes.
Worm Attack A worm is a small software, which tries to infect a node. There-
fore, it uses the network as propagation medium and exploits some security holes
on the operating system and its application softwares. These security holes are
mostly a badly implementation that can e.g. lead to a buffer overflow where the
intrusions receive root- or superuser-rights on the node. The worm has after the
infection control over the node and can collect information, erase data, and in-
terfere the usage of the node. In addition, most worms try to propagate through
sending lots of network packets containing itself or a mutated version of itself.
A famous example is the "ILOVEYOU" worm.
In order to identify worm attacks, SANA facilitates different workflows. The
network packets are checked through the distributed intrusion detection sys-
tem with lots of artificial cells as well as through centralised intrusion detection
systems in important nodes. When the worm is known by the protection sys-
tem, it will remove the packets. The check is performed from outside so that
armoring and stealth techniques of intrusions have more problems to hide it-
self. Furthermore, the information gathered through the distributed analysis is
analysed in order to identify infected nodes using e.g. the artificial cells of the
type AGNOSCO. Identified infected nodes are reported and checked by checking
cells or by the administrators. When an infection is proved, the node is isolated
and disinfected. The infection is analysed for generating signatures, which are
included in the next updates. Commonly worms install e.g. backdoors, files, pro-
cesses, which are characteristic for the worm. The nodes are regularly checked
for different characteristics of intrusions and, when a characteristic is identified,
it is reported to the administrators.
The simulations show that SANA keeps a network clean from worm infec-
tions. Especially the identification of infected nodes and abnormal characteristics
increase the performance compared to common used protection systems. The
AGNOSCO approach identifies quickly infected nodes and other cells located in
the nearby artificial lymph nodes start immediately a disinfection workflow.
Virus and Trojan Horse Attack A virus and a trojan horse attack is similar
to a worm attack. The difference is that the virus requires a host program wherein
it is included. When the host program is copied the virus is copied as well as when
the host program is executed is the virus executed. A trojan horse is a software
that primarily looks and behaves like a normal program but when it is executed
it installs an intrusions. The trojan normally does not exploit a security hole, it
facilitates the approach of social engineering where the user is manipulated in
order to perform actions. The goal of a trojan is to install a backdoor, which is
used by the adversarial in order to access and control the node. In contrast to
worms and viruses does a trojan not always propagate.
The difference between the worm and the virus and trojan horse attack are
the propagation and infection workflows. The viruses and trojan horses do not
always arrive using the network where mainly all data exchanges are facilitated.
The nodes are observed for intrusive processes, file access, and network pack-
ets through the different protection components as e.g. artificial cells, antivirus
software, and intrusion detection systems. When an infected file is identified,
not the user is contacted as in common used protection systems, the systems
analyses the warning autonomously and processes this. Only when the system
does not know how to proceed, it contacts the administrators for further steps.
The workflows to identify and disinfect infected nodes are the same as used in
the worm attack scenario.
The simulations substantiate the performance because SANA identifies and
prevents known attacks as well as SANA identifies infected nodes through the
tasks performed by different artificial cells. E.g. backdoors or running processes
are reported and removed by the system.
Multi-Stage Attack Multi-stage attacks try to infect nodes or try to gather
information while attacking using various steps. Each step is a sub-attack and
can facilitates different attack techniques. These attacks are used in order to
adapt an attack towards the protection system in the network as well as to
collect information about the deployed protection system.
The problem of these attacks is that each stage is only a small tasks, which is
normally not identified as intrusive or the task is normal behaviour of programs
- mimicry of normal behaviour. In the process of multiple stages, the attack
can both collect information as well as find a weak point in the network in
order to attack and infect the node. In order to identify the attack, the different
stages must be detected and this information must be merged. Therefore, the
artificial cells and other protection components observe the node and identify the
different stages. This is logged and the other cells and components can read the
centralised log in a node. Furthermore using the artificial cell communication, the
cells exchange continuously summary status information where the appearance
of these stages are included. Thus, the nearby cells - within some hops distance
- receive the information about the stages and can include this into further
workflows. Identification and disinfection of successful attacks is similar to the
two previous attack scenarios.
The simulations show that SANA identifies and prevents known multi-stage
attacks. Unknown/novel multi-stage attacks are identified when the stages are
similar to known attacks or the infection is found using the checking workflows.
Hacker Attack When a human attacks a network is this hacker attack called.
Also the emerging class of attacks performed by humans with internal informa-
tion belongs to this class.
Attacks performed by humans are harder to identify because the humans
behave in each situation different as well as unpredictable and adapt the at-
tack to the current situation in the network. However, different tasks are always
present when an intrusion is installed and SANA tries to find these characteris-
tics. Therefore SANA observes the node as well as the network traffic in order to
identify intrusive behaviour. Additionally to common used protection systems,
SANA combines using the artificial cell communication and the movement of
cells information from different nodes.
The simulations show that especially backdoors e.g. installed by hackers are
quickly found by checking cells as well as intrusive behaviour is identified on
several nodes and reported to the administration.
Attacks using encrypted VPN Traffic Current networks facilitate virtual
private networks (VPNs) in order to include external nodes into the system or to
safely connect external services into the network. Normally, the VPNs build up a
tunnel between two nodes where the traffic over the tunnel is mostly encrypted
e.g. with IPsec. The problem for the protection system is that the traffic is
encrypted and can be only checked on the two nodes of the tunnel where one
node is mostly external. Thus, centralised protection components present in the
network - e.g. the intrusion detection system at the internet gateway - cannot
check the network traffic due to its encryption.
SANA protects the network against the attacks using the encrypted VPN
tunnel because it checks the network traffic with the distributed intrusion de-
tection system from the artificial cells at least at the internal node of the VPN
tunnel. When both nodes use SANA as protection system, both nodes check
the traffic using the artificial cells. In addition, the node is observed so that the
installation of an intrusion is detected as well as prevented. Additionally, regular
checks are performed so that the nodes are checked for infections.
Our simulations show that SANA identifies the attacks, which use the VPN
for attacks. In addition, the self management makes it feasible to increase the
concentration of cells in these nodes because a VPN tunnel is also a risk for the
network.
4.4 Dynamic and Adaptive Behaviour
The dynamic behaviour featured by the artificial cells is crucial for the perfor-
mance of SANA. The artificial cells move and the self management ensures that
each node is properly secured. Thus, an attacker does not always find the same
configuration of the protection system and cannot be sure to use a backdoor
for further attacks. The system additionally adapts to the current situation.
Hotspots of attacks are identified and the concentration of artificial cells in this
area is increased in order to provide more security. The collaboration between
the artificial cells enables the combination of information gathered in different
protection processes. SANA also adapts through analysing infections and au-
tonomous generation of signatures in order to identify the intrusion afterwards.
These points increase the performance and are not available in most common
used protection components.
4.5 Distributed Intrusion Detection System
The artificial cells for checking network packets implement a distributed intru-
sion detection system. These cells run on all nodes and evaluate the packets
whether they contain an intrusion or not. The generated warnings and alerts are
both sent to the administrations and processed automatically. With the right
configuration, which is guaranteed through the self management, each packet is
checked against all known intrusions. E.g. in all networks each packet travels at
least three hops: sender, network equipment, and receiver. Thus, each hop must
only check the packet against 33% of all known intrusions. When the network
traffic is analysed, it can be seen that in most networks the packets traverse
mostly about ten hops and the configuration can be adapted to this. Also, the
self management can configure the system according to the normal routing paths
as well as to the routing in the network.
The distributed intrusion detection system installed through the artificial
cells works in the simulations well and identifies reliably the intrusions. Further-
more, the problem of packet loss [33] of current centralised approaches is solved
because the dataset of known intrusions in a node is significantly reduced.
4.6 Security in SANA
The distributed protection system SANA can be a risk for the network. When
SANA is not properly secured, adversaries can use the system in order to run
attacks, e.g. through propagating intrusions as artificial cells. Also, the artificial
cells can access critical resources, which are also of special interest for an attacker.
This must be prevented through a proper securing of the protection system and
its components.
Section 3.4 introduces the artificial receptors as a public private key pair
describing the type and status of all components in SANA, especially from the
artificial cells. These keys are extended to a distributed public key infrastructure:
each resource is secured using some keys and the artificial cells have to authorise
with the right keys in order to receive access. Thus, unauthorised cells cannot
access the important resources. Artificial cells introduced by attackers - so called
bad artificial cells - receive no access to the resources because they lack from
having the right receptors.
This approach leads to the next problem that the attackers cannot receive
access to the keys of the artificial receptors. Therefore, the implementation of
the security environment is important, which is introduced in section 3.7 and
visualised in figure 2. The system is organised in three parts: the hardware and
the core parts of the operating system (operating system layer 1), the SANA
security environment with the protection components, and the operating system
with the applications software. The question is, which information can be read
by the adversarial when occupying the node:
-- When an intrusion installs something in the operating system layer 1, SANA
uninstalls itself immediately from this node and quarantines the node through
informing the neighbours. Thus, the intrusion has no change to receive in-
formation about the keys. Afterwards, the administrators have to check the
node and bring it back to production through inserting it in the network.
-- Most intrusion attack the Windows operating system, which is only available
in the operating system part of the security environment. Using the hardware
virtualisation, it is impossible to access the security environment and to
access the keys. When the intrusion tries to break out, it has to change the
operating system layer 1, which is discussed in the last point.
-- The most critical problem is an installation of an intrusion in the security
environment. An arriving intrusive protection component is identified and re-
moved. When an intrusion installs itself in the environment, integrity checks
recognise this and the intrusion is identified and prevented. Due to the small
size and limited features can the environment safely installed so that intru-
sions cannot attack it. Different techniques are e.g. formal verification and
integrity checks.
To sum up, it is hard for an adversarial to use SANA for running attacks. In
addition, self checking by other protection components and especially artificial
cells identify not proper working components quickly and remove them from
production.
5 Next Steps
There are lots of open problems and next steps in the SANA project. One im-
portant next step is to intensive the research in the cooperation between the
different artificial cells. Therefore, the goal is to use the danger theory for the
collaboration between different protection components in SANA.
In the implementation, the idea of using hardware virtualisation for imple-
menting is not enough researched. Here, the next step is to analyse the required
overhead as well as to introduce the service oriented architecture in detail in
order to analyse the novel features emerging out of this architecture.
Furthermore, to extend the library of implemented protection components
e.g. with honeyports is a next step in order to include more approaches of network
security. With the extensions, SANA is tested against more intrusions and a
testbed is built up where SANA protects a real network against real attacks.
6 Conclusion
As it was described, the protection system SANA outperforms current protection
systems. An intelligent administration and a distributed architecture with a
standardised protection environment increases its performance. The distributed
and dynamic framework makes it hard to attack and to break it completely
down. The system is easily update and extendable where also the administration
is simplified so that the system is quickly adapted to the current situation in the
network.
Acknowledgments
SANA is currently implemented at the University of Luxembourg in the Faculty
of Science, Technology, and Communication. We thank Ulrich Sorger, Zdzislaw
Suchanecki, and Foued Melakessou from the University of Luxembourg for help-
ful discussions and the Ministre Luxembourgeois de l'education et de la recherche
for additional financial support.
References
1. CSI, FBI: 2004 computer crime and security survey (2004)
2. Scalet, S.D.:
on e-crime.
threads
Pullig
cso-magazine,
july
2005.
http://www.csoonline.com/info/ecrimesurvey05.pdf (05.06.2007)
3. Sean Convery, C.S.: Network Security Architectures. (Networking Technology).
Second edn. Macmillan Technical Publishing (2004)
4. Dhanjani, N., Clarke, J.: Network Security Tools. First edn. O'Reilly Media (2005)
5. Roesch, M.: Snort - lightweight intrusion detection for networks. LISA 13 (1999)
229 -- 238
6. Debar, H., Dacier, M., Wespi, A.: Towards a taxonomy of intrusion-detection
systems. Comput. Networks 31(9) (1999) 805 -- 822
7. Ferrie,
P.,
Szor,
P.:
Zmist
opportunities,
virus
bulletin,
http://pferrie.tripod.com/papers/zmist.pdf (March 2001)
8. Szor, P., Ferrie, P.: Hunting for metamorphic, symantec security response white pa-
per, http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/reference/hunting.for.metamorphic.pdf
(July 2000)
9. Aickelin, U., Greensmith, J., Twycross, J.: Immune system approaches to intrusion
detection - a review. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Artificial
Immune Systems (ICARIS 2004) (2004)
10. DeCastro, L.N., Timmis, J.: Artificial Immune Systems: A New Computational
Intelligence Approach. First edn. Springer (2002)
11. Hofmeyr, S.A., Forrest, S.:
Immunity by design: An artificial immune system.
Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference 2 (1999)
1289 -- 1296
12. Hofmeyr, S.A., Forrest, S.: Architecture for an artificial immune system. Evolu-
tionary Computation 8(4) (2000) 443 -- 473
13. Janeway, C.A., Travers, P., Walport, M., Shlomchik, M.:
Immunobiology: the
Immune System in Health and Disease. Sixth edn. Garland Publishing (2004)
14. Vargas, P.A., de Castro, L., von Zuben, F.: Artificial immune systems as complex
adaptive systems. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Artificial
Immune Systems (ICARIS). Volume 1. (2002) 115 -- 123
15. Hilker, M., Schommer, C.: Sana - security analysis in internet traffic through
artificial immune systems. Proceedings of the Trustworthy Software Workshop,
Saarbruecken, Germany (2006)
16. Mikusi, J.:
Open source anti-virus
for
the whole network: Clamav.
http://www.samag.com/documents/s=9464/sam0501a/0501a.htm (2005)
17. Ranum, M.J.: A network firewall. In: Proceedings of the First World Conference
on System Administration and Security, 5401 Westbard Ave. Suite 1501, Bethesda,
MD 20816, SANS Institute (1992)
18. McCanne, S., Jacobson, V.: The BSD packet filter: A new architecture for user-
level packet capture. In: USENIX Winter. (1993) 259 -- 270
19. Xinidis, K., Anagnostakis, K.G., Markatos, E.P.: Design and implementation of a
high-performance network intrusion prevention system. In: SEC, Springer (2005)
20. Duane DeCapite, C.S.: Self-Defending Networks. The Next Generation of Network
Security. First edn. Macmillan Technical Publishing (2006)
21. Bellifemine, F., Poggi, A., Rimassa, G.: JADE - a FIPA-compliant agent frame-
work. In: Proceedings of the Practical Applications of Intelligent Agents. (1999)
22. SWsoft:
Openvz
user's
guide,
version,
2.7.0-8,
link:
http://download.openvz.org/doc/openvz-users-guide.pdf. (23.05.2007)
23. Williamson, M.M.: Throttling viruses: Restricting propagation to defeat malicious
mobile code. In: ACSAC '02: Proceedings of the 18th Annual Computer Security
Applications Conference, Washington, DC, USA, IEEE Computer Society (2002)
24. Williamson, M.M.: Design, implementation and test of an email virus throttle.
In: ACSAC '03: Proceedings of the 19th Annual Computer Security Applications
Conference, Washington, DC, USA, IEEE Computer Society (2003) 76
25. Neuhaus, S., Zeller, A.: Isolating intrusions by automatic experiments. In: Pro-
ceedings of the 13th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium,
Reston, VA, USA, Internet Society (2006) 71 -- 80
26. Greensmith, J., Aickelin, U., Cayzer, S.:
Introducing dendritic cells as a novel
immune-inspired algorithm for anomaly detection. Proceedings of the 4th Inter-
national Conference on Artificial Immune Systems (ICARIS 2005) (2005)
27. Hilker, M., Schommer, C.: Agnosco - identification of infected nodes with artificial
ant colonies. Proceedings of RASC (2006)
28. Hilker, M., Schommer, C.: Description of bad-signatures for network intrusion
detection. AISW-NetSec 2006 during ACSW 2006, CRPIT 54 (2006)
29. Schroeder, B., Hilker, M., Weires, R.: Dynamic association networks in information
In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Machine
management.
Learning and Data Analysis (MLDA 2007). (2007)
30. Aalst, W.M.P.v.d., Beisiegel, M., Hee, K.M.v., Konig, D., Stahl, C.: A SOA-
Based Architecture Framework. In Leymann, F., Reisig, W., Thatte, S.R., Aalst,
W.M.P.v.d., eds.: The Role of Business Processes in Service Oriented Architectures.
Number 06291 in Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings (2006)
31. Aickelin, U., Bentley, P., Cayzer, S., Kim, J., McLeod, J.: Danger theory: The link
between ais and ids? In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on
Artificial Immune Systems (ICARIS 2003). LNCS 2787, pp. 147-155, Edinburgh,
UK (2003)
32. Matzinger, P.: The danger model a renewed sense of self. Science 296(5566) (2002)
301 -- 305
33. Schaelicke, L., Freeland, J.C.: Characterizing sources and remedies for packet
In: Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE
loss in network intrusion detection systems.
International Symposium on Workload Characterization, IEEE CS Press (2005)
188 -- 196
|
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.