Proceedings of the Fourth International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems 2005
DOI: 10.1145/1082473.1082746
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A decentralized variable ordering method for distributed constraint optimization

Abstract: Many different multi-agent problems, such as distributed scheduling can be formalized as distributed constraint optimization. Ordering the constraint variables is an important preprocessing step of the ADOPT algorithm [1], the state of the art method of solving distributed constraint optimization problems (DCOP). Currently ADOPT uses depth-first search (DFS) trees for that purpose. For certain classes of tasks DFS ordering does not exploit the problem structure as compared to pseudo-tree ordering [2]. Also the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
(3 reference statements)
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Once, all information about the constraint graph is gathered by the system agent, it can perform a centralized algorithm to build the pseudo-tree ordering. A decentralized modification of the procedure for building the pseudo-tree was introduced by Chechetka and Sycara in [8]. This algorithm allows the distributed construction of pseudo-trees without needing to deliver any global information about the whole problem to a single agent.…”
Section: Level 1 Levelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Once, all information about the constraint graph is gathered by the system agent, it can perform a centralized algorithm to build the pseudo-tree ordering. A decentralized modification of the procedure for building the pseudo-tree was introduced by Chechetka and Sycara in [8]. This algorithm allows the distributed construction of pseudo-trees without needing to deliver any global information about the whole problem to a single agent.…”
Section: Level 1 Levelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The extension of ABT called ABTR (Silaghi, SamHaroud, & Faltings, 2001a;Silaghi, 2006) proposes a way to extend ABT-based algorithms to allow for dynamic ordering of the agents (Armstrong & Durfee, 1997). Work in the area consistent with this approach, but mainly favoring static ordering, appears in (Liu & Sycara, 1995;Chechetka & Sycara, 2005). Finding good heuristics was shown to be a difficult problem (Silaghi et al, 2001b;Zivan & Meisels, 2005) and here one will need to take into account the importance of the existence of a short DFS tree compatible to the current ordering.…”
Section: Possible Extensionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, note that these relaxations can be performed in a distributed manner. The priority tree can be created using a decentralized algorithm (Chechetka and Sycara 2005). Then, using only knowledge of their own priority and the priority of their neighbours, agents can remove the necessary inter-agent constraints.…”
Section: Relaxations In Adoptmentioning
confidence: 99%