skip to main content
research-article

Collective Adaptation through Multi-Agents Ensembles: The Case of Smart Urban Mobility

Published:17 October 2019Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Modern software systems are becoming more and more socio-technical systems composed of distributed and heterogeneous agents from a mixture of people, their environment, and software components. These systems operate under continuous perturbations due to the unpredicted behaviors of people and the occurrence of exogenous changes in the environment. In this article, we introduce a notion of ensembles for which, systems with collective adaptability can be built as an emergent aggregation of autonomous and self-adaptive agents. Building upon this notion of ensemble, we present a distributed adaptation approach for systems composed by ensembles: collections of agents with their respective roles and goals. In these systems, adaptation is triggered by the run-time occurrence of an extraordinary circumstance, called issue. It is handled by an issue resolution process that involves agents affected by the issue to collaboratively adapt with minimal impact on their own preferences. Central to our approach is the implementation of a collective adaptation engine (CAE) able to solve issues in a collective fashion. The approach is instantiated in the context of a smart mobility scenario through which its main features are illustrated. To demonstrate the approach in action and evaluate it, we exploit the DeMOCAS framework, simulating the operation of an urban mobility scenario. We have executed a set of experiments with the goal to show how the CAE performs in terms of feasibility and scalability. With this approach, we are able to demonstrate how collective adaptation opens up new possibilities for tackling urban mobility challenges making it more sustainable respect to selfish and competitive behaviours.

References

  1. FOCAS Partners. 2016. FoCAS Manifesto -- A roadmap to the future of Collective Adaptive Systems. (2016). http://www.focas.eu/focas-manifesto.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. F. Zambonelli, N. Bicocchi, G. Cabri, L. Leonardi, and M. Puviani. 2011. On self-adaptation, self-expression, and self-awareness in autonomic service component ensembles. In SASOW. IEEE Computer Society, 108--113.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. D. Weyns and J. Andersson. 2013. On the challenges of self-adaptation in systems of systems. In [email protected], 2013. ACM, 47--51.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. A. Bucchiarone, N. Dulay, A. Lavygina, A. Marconi, H. Raik, and A. Russo. 2015. An approach for collective adaptation in socio-technical systems. In IEEE SASO Workshops. IEEE Computer Society, 43--48.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. D. Bozhinoski, A. Bucchiarone, I. Malavolta, A. Marconi, and P. Pelliccione. 2016. Leveraging collective run-time adaptation for UAV-based systems. In SEAA’16. 214--221.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. A. Bucchiarone, M. De Sanctis, A. Marconi, and A. Martinelli. 2016. DeMOCAS: Domain objects for service-based collective adaptive systems. In Service-Oriented Computing - ICSOC 2016 Workshops - ASOCA, ISyCC, BSCI, and Satellite Events, Banff, AB, Canada, October 10-13, 2016. Revised Selected Papers. Springer, 174--178.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. I. Docherty, G. Marsden, and J. Anable. 2018. The governance of smart mobility. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 115, C (2018), 114--125.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. M. Holzl, A. Rauschmayer, and M. Wirsing. 2008. Engineering of software-intensive systems. In Software-Intensive Systems and New Computing Paradigms. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5380. Springer, 1--44.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Carlo Pinciroli, Vito Trianni, Rehan O’Grady, Giovanni Pini, Arne Brutschy, Manuele Brambilla, Nithin Mathews, Eliseo Ferrante, Gianni Di Caro, Frederick Ducatelle, Timothy S. Stirling, Álvaro Gutiérrez, Luca Maria Gambardella, and Marco Dorigo. 2011. ARGoS: A modular, multi-engine simulator for heterogeneous swarm robotics. In IROS. IEEE, 5027--5034.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. P. Levi and S. Kernbach. 2010. Symbiotic-Robot Organisms: Reliability, Adaptability, Evolution. Vol. 7. Springer-Verlag.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. B. Homayoun Far, T. Wanyama, and Sidi O. Soueina. 2006. A negotiation model for large scale multi-agent systems. In Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration, IRI - 2006: Heuristic Systems Engineering, September 16-18, 2006, Waikoloa, Hawaii. IEEE Computer Society, 589--594.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. IBM. 2006. An Architectural Blueprint for Autonomic Computing. Technical Report. IBM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. T. L Saaty. 1988. What is the Analytic Hierarchy Process? Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. A. Bucchiarone, C. Antares Mezzina, M. Pistore, H. Raik, and G. Valetto. 2014. Collective adaptation in process-based systems. In SASO’14. IEEE Computer Society, 151--156.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. A. Bucchiarone, M. De Sanctis, A. Marconi, M. Pistore, and P. Traverso. 2015. Design for adaptation of distributed service-based systems. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing, ICSOC 2015, Goa, India, November 16-19, 2015. Springer, 383--393.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. A. L. Murphy and G. Pietro Picco. 2002. Reliable communication for highly mobile agents. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 5, 1 (2002), 81--100.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. D. Richard Schäfer, S. Gómez Sáez, T. Bach, V. Andrikopoulos, and Muhammad A. Tariq. 2015. Towards ensuring high availability in collective adaptive systems. In Business Process Management Workshops. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 165--171.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. E. Akiyama and K. Kaneko. 2000. Dynamical Systems Game Theory II - A New Approach to the problem of Social Dilemma. (2000).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. B. Horling and V. R. Lesser. 2004. A survey of multi-agent organizational paradigms. Knowledge Eng. Review 19, 4 (2004), 281--316.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. J. Bonnet, M. P. Gleizes, E. Kaddoum, S. Rainjonneau, and G. Flandin. 2015. Multi-satellite mission planning using a self-adaptive multi-agent system. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 9th International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems, Cambridge, MA, USA, September 21--25, 2015. IEEE Computer Society, 11--20.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. D. Ye, M. Zhang, and D. Sutanto. 2013. Self-adaptation-based dynamic coalition formation in a distributed agent network: A mechanism and a brief survey. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 24, 5 (2013), 1042--1051.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. R. Mihailescu, M. Vasirani, and S. Ossowski. 2011. Dynamic coalition adaptation for efficient agent-based virtual power plants. In Multiagent System Technologies - 9th German Conference, MATES 2011, Berlin, Germany, October 6--7, 2011. Proceedings (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Vol. 6973. Springer, 101--112.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. T. Pinto, H. Morais, P. Oliveira, Z. Vale, I. Praça, and C. Ramos. 2011. A new approach for multi-agent coalition formation and management in the scope of electricity markets. Energy 36, 8 (2011), 5004--5015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. H. Jun Ahn, H. Lee, and S. Joo Park. 2003. A flexible agent system for change adaptation in supply chains. Expert Syst. Appl. 25, 4 (2003), 603--618.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. N. R. Jennings. 2001. An agent-based approach for building complex software systems. Commun. ACM 44, 4 (2001), 35--41.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Mila Dalla Preda, Maurizio Gabbrielli, Saverio Giallorenzo, Ivan Lanese, and Jacopo Mauro. 2015. Developing correct, distributed, adaptive software. Sci. Comput. Program. 97 (2015), 41--46.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. R. De Nicola, M. Loreti, R. Pugliese, and F. Tiezzi. 2014. A formal approach to autonomic systems programming: The SCEL language. TAAS 9, 2 (2014), 7.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. R. Hennicker and A. Klarl. 2014. Foundations for Ensemble Modeling -- The Helena Approach. Springer, Berlin, 359--381.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. G. Mathews, H. Durrant-Whyte, and M. Prokopenko. 2008. Decentralized decision making for multiagent systems. In Advances in Applied Self-organizing Systems (Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing), Mikhail Prokopenko (Ed.). Springer London, 77--104.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. C.-H. Yu and R. Nagpal. 2009. Self-adapting modular robotics: A generalized distributed consensus framework. In IEEE ICRA’09. IEEE, 1881--1888.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. D. Weyns, R. Haesevoets, and A. Helleboogh. 2010. The MACODO organization model for context-driven dynamic agent organizations. TAAS 5, 4 (2010), 16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. R. G. Smith. 1980. The contract net protocol: High-level communication and control in a distributed problem solver. IEEE Trans. Comput. 29, 12 (1980), 1104--1113.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. M. Sims, C. V. Goldman, and V. R. Lesser. 2003. Self-organization through bottom-up coalition formation. In AAMAS. ACM, New York, 867--874.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. S. Niemczyk and K. Geihs. 2015. Adaptive run-time models for groups of autonomous robots. In Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 10th International Symposium on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-Managing Systems (SEAMS’15). IEEE, 127--133.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. C. Zhong and S. A. DeLoach. 2011. Runtime models for automatic reorganization of multi-robot systems. In Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM SEAMS, 2011. ACM, 20--29.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. D. Weyns, S. Malek, and J. Andersson. 2010. On decentralized self-adaptation: Lessons from the trenches and challenges for the future. In Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM SEAMS, 2010. IEEE, 84--93.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. D. Weyns, S. Malek, and J. Andersson. 2012. FORMS: Unifying reference model for formal specification of distributed self-adaptive systems. TAAS 7, 1 (2012), 8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. L. Baresi, S. Guinea, and P. Saeedi. 2013. Achieving self-adaptation through dynamic group management. In Assurances for Self-Adaptive Systems - Principles, Models, and Techniques. Springer Berlin, Berlin, 214--239.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. R. Calinescu, S. Gerasimou, and A. Banks. 2015. Self-adaptive software with decentralised control loops. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, FASE 2015, Held as Part of the European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software, ETAPS 2015, London, UK, April 11-18, 2015. Springer, 235--251.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. M. Caporuscio, V. Grassi, M. Marzolla, and R. Mirandola. 2015. GoPrime: A fully decentralized middleware for utility-aware service assembly. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering PrePrints, 1 (2015), 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. G. Blair, N. Bencomo, and R. B. France. 2009. Models@ run. time. Computer 42, 10 (2009), 22--27.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. C. Yu, J. Werfel, and R. Nagpal. 2010. Collective decision-making in multi-agent systems by implicit leadership. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems: Volume 3 - Volume 3 (AAMAS’10). International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 1189--1196.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. G. Edwards, J. Garcia, H. Tajalli, D. Popescu, N. Medvidovic, G. Sukhatme, and B. Petrus. 2009. Architecture-driven self-adaptation and self-management in robotics systems. In Proceedings of the 2009 ICSE Workshop on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-Managing Systems (SEAMS’09). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, 142--151.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. D. Sykes, J. Magee, and J. Kramer. 2011. FlashMob: Distributed adaptive self-assembly. In Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-Managing Systems (SEAMS’11). ACM, 100--109.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. A. Bucchiarone, M. De Sanctis, A. Marconi, M. Pistore, and P. Traverso. 2015. Design for adaptation of distributed service-based systems. In ICSOC Proceedings. Springer, 383--393.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. S. Jiménez Celorrio, A. Jonsson, and H. Palacios. 2015. Temporal planning with required concurrency using classical planning. In ICAPS. AAAI Press, 129--137.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. A. Bucchiarone, A. Marconi, M. Pistore, and H. Raik. 2017. A context-aware framework for dynamic composition of process fragments in the internet of services. J. Internet Services and Applications 8, 1 (2017), 6:1--6:23.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. IPK International. 2016. ITB World Travel Trends Report. Messe Berlin GmbH.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. C. Wohlin, P. Runeson, M. Höst, M. C. Ohlsson, and B. Regnell. 2012. Experimentation in Software Engineering. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. A. Bucchiarone, A. Cicchetti, and M. De Sanctis. 2017. Towards a domain-specific language for engineering collective adaptive systems. In 2nd IEEE International Workshops on Foundations and Applications of Self* Systems, FAS*[email protected]/ICCAC 2017, Tucson, AZ, USA, September 18--22, 2017. IEEE Computer Society, 19--26.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. A. Bucchiarone, A. Cicchetti, and M. De Sanctis. 2017. CAStlE: A tool for collective adaptive systems engineering. In Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE International Workshops on Foundations and Applications of Self* Systems, FAS*[email protected]/ICCAC 2017, Tucson, AZ, September 18--22, 2017. IEEE Computer Society, 385--386.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Antonio Bucchiarone, Daniel Furelos-Blanco, Anders Jonsson, Fahmida Khandokar, and Monjur M. Mourshed. 2018. Collective adaptation through concurrent planning: The case of sustainable urban mobility. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems, AAMAS 2018, Stockholm, Sweden, July 10-15, 2018. International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems Richland, SC, USA / ACM, 1880--1882.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Daniel Furelos-Blanco, Antonio Bucchiarone, and Anders Jonsson. 2018. CARPooL: Collective adaptation using concuRrent PLanning. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems, AAMAS 2018, Stockholm, Sweden, July 10--15, 2018. International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems Richland, SC, USA / ACM, 1815--1817.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. V. Andrikopoulos, M. Bitsaki, A. Bucchiarone, S. Gomez Saez, D. Karastoyanova, F. Leymann, C. Nikolaou, and M. Pistore3. 2014. A game theoretic approach for managing multi-modal urban mobility systems. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics AHFE 2014, Krakow, Poland 19--23 July 2014 Edited by T. Ahram, W. Karwowski and T. Marek. 5716--5725.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. A. Bucchiarone, M. De Sanctis, A. Marconi, M. Pistore, and P. Traverso. 2016. Incremental composition for adaptive by-design service based systems. In Proceedings of the IEEE ICWS. IEEE Computer Society, 236--243.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Collective Adaptation through Multi-Agents Ensembles: The Case of Smart Urban Mobility

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format
        About Cookies On This Site

        We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

        Learn more

        Got it!