2003
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-45185-3_21
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

AgentAllocator: An Agent-Based Multi-criteria Decision Support System for Task Allocation

Abstract: Abstract. The multi-agent systems in Artificial Intelligence very often include task allocation problems. These problems are arduous to be modelled; therefore it is also difficult to end up with an optimal allocation plan. AgentAllocator is an easy to use, platform independent application, which implements a multicriteria method to support the decision of Task Allocation. The decision maker is able to model the problem (according to his policy) through its inputs dialogs and employ the final solution proposed … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…VM process will be facilitated by the implementation of an agent system and it will help to reduce cost and to improve value of building system decision in construction projects. It will also bridge the gap between automated design which were identified earlier by Anumba, et al (2002), Kim & Russel (2003), Halfawy (1998), Khedro (1994), Ugwu et al (1999) on the construction domain in relation to automated negotiation (Matsatsinis & Delias, 2003;Morge & Beaune, 2004;Wanyama, 2006;Wanyama & Far, 2007;Vo & Padgham, 2007) in Information Technology (IT) domain. This significance of the framework is illustrated in Figure 1.…”
Section: The Requirements Of Negotiation Support For Vmmentioning
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…VM process will be facilitated by the implementation of an agent system and it will help to reduce cost and to improve value of building system decision in construction projects. It will also bridge the gap between automated design which were identified earlier by Anumba, et al (2002), Kim & Russel (2003), Halfawy (1998), Khedro (1994), Ugwu et al (1999) on the construction domain in relation to automated negotiation (Matsatsinis & Delias, 2003;Morge & Beaune, 2004;Wanyama, 2006;Wanyama & Far, 2007;Vo & Padgham, 2007) in Information Technology (IT) domain. This significance of the framework is illustrated in Figure 1.…”
Section: The Requirements Of Negotiation Support For Vmmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…This research provides basic and conceptual algorithms to bridge automated design decision, and automated negotiation by applying a systematical design method in construction, that is, VM. Matsatsinis and Delias (2003), Morge and Baune (2004), Wanyama (2006), Wanyama and Far (2007) DESIGN Anumba et al (2002), Kim and Russel (2003), Halfawy (1998), Kedro (1994), Ugwu et al (1999) Limitation Alternatives Design…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The aggregation of the evaluation scores for all subcriteria in a particular criterion is based on a simple averaging calculation pro- (Matsatsinis & Delias, 2003). At the end, for a particular combination of product -user features, an average evaluation score in the interval [0, 1] is calculated for every one of the previous four main criteria.…”
Section: Formal Model Alternatives' Performance On Evaluation Criteriamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the minimizer of a CSP may not be a Pareto point. There also exist other scalarization methods, such as the ǫ-constraint method [1,37], the lexicographic method [7,22]. We refer to [6,10,36,38,51] for different scalarizations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%