Our solution to the challenge of satisfying all three requirements is the following. Agents have finite-state automaton plans, which are adapted online via evolutionary learning (perturbation) operators. To ensure that critical behavioral constraints are always satisfied, agents' plans are first formally verified. They are then reverified after every adaptation. If reverification concludes that constraints are violated, the plans are repaired.
Decomposition is a technique to obtain complete solutions by assembling independently obtained partial solutions. In particular, constraint decomposition plays an important role in distributed databases, distributed scheduling and violation detection: It enables conflict-free local decision making, while avoiding communication overloading. One of the main issues in decomposition is the loss of flexibility due to decomposition. Here, flexibility roughly refers to the freedom in choosing suitable values for the variables in order to satisfy the constraints. In this paper, we concentrate on linear constraint systems and efficient decomposition techniques for them. Using a generalization of a flexibility metric developed for Simple Temporal Networks, we show how an efficient decomposition technique for linear constraint systems can be derived that minimizes the loss of flexibility. As a by-product of this decomposition technique, we propose an intuitively attractive flexibility metric for linear constraint systems where decomposition does not incur any loss of flexibility.
In this paper we describe an original computational model for solving different types of Distributed Constraint Satisfaction Problems (DCSP). The proposed model is called Controller-Agents for Constraints Solving (CACS). This model is intended to be used which is an emerged field from the integration between two paradigms of different nature: Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) and the Constraint Satisfaction Problem paradigm (CSP) where all constraints are treated in central manner as a black-box. This model allows grouping constraints to form a subset that will be treated together as a local problem inside the controller. Using this model allows also handling non-binary constraints easily and directly so that no translating of constraints into binary ones is needed. This paper presents the implementation outlines of a prototype of DCSP solver, its usage methodology and overview of the CACS application for timetabling problems.
In multi-agent path finding (MAPF) the task is to navigate agents from their starting positions to given individual goals. The problem takes place in an undirected graph whose vertices represent positions and edges define the topology. Agents can move to neighbor vertices across edges. In the standard MAPF, space occupation by agents is modeled by a capacity constraint that permits at most one agent per vertex. We suggest an extension of MAPF in this paper that permits more than one agent per vertex. Propositional satisfiability (SAT) models for these extensions of MAPF are studied. We focus on modeling capacity constraints in SAT-based formulations of MAPF and evaluation of performance of these models. We extend two existing SAT-based formulations with vertex capacity constraints: MDD-SAT and SMT-CBS where the former is an approach that builds the model in an eager way while the latter relies on lazy construction of the model.
Here we identify a type of privacy concern in Distributed Constraint Optimization (DCOPs) not previously addressed in literature, despite its importance and impact on the application field: the privacy of existence of secrets. Science only starts where metrics and assumptions are clearly defined. The area of Distributed Constraint Optimization has emerged at the intersection of the multi-agent system community and constraint programming. For the multi-agent community, the constraint optimization problems are an elegant way to express many of the problems occurring in trading and distributed robotics. For the theoretical constraint programming community the DCOPs are a natural extension of their main object of study, the constraint satisfaction problem. As such, the understanding of the DCOP framework has been refined with the needs of the two communities, but sometimes without spelling the new assumptions formally and therefore making it difficult to compare techniques. Here we give a direction to the efforts for structuring concepts in this area.