Skip to main content
Log in

Coalition formation for task allocation: theory and algorithms

  • Published:
Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper focuses on coalition formation for task allocation in both multi-agent and multi-robot domains. Two different problem formalizations are considered, one for multi-agent domains where agent resources are transferable and one for multi-robot domains. We demonstrate complexity theoretic differences between both models and show that, under both, the coalition formation problem, with m tasks, is NP-hard to both solve exactly and to approximate within a factor of \({O(m^{1-\epsilon})}\) for all \({\epsilon > 0}\). Two natural restrictions of the coalition formation problem are considered. In the first situation agents are drawn from a set of j types. Agents of each type are indistinguishable from one another. For this situation a dynamic programming based approach is presented, which, for fixed j finds the optimal coalition structure in polynomial time and is applicable in both multi-agent and multi-robot domains. We then consider situations where coalitions are restricted to k or fewer agents. We present two different algorithms. Each guarantees the generated solution to be within a constant factor, for fixed k, of the optimal in terms of utility. Our algorithms complement Shehory and Kraus’ algorithm (Artif Intell 101(1–2):165–200, 1998), which provides guarantee’s on solution cost, as ours provides guarantees on utility. Our algorithm for general multi-agent domains is a modification of and has the same running time as Shehory and Kraus’ algorithm, while our approach for multi-robot domains runs in time \({O(n^{\frac{3}{2}}m)}\), much faster than Vig and Adams (J Intell Robot Syst 50(1):85–118, 2007) modifications to Shehory and Kraus’ algorithm for multi-robot domains, which ran in time O(n k m), for n agents and m tasks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abdallah, S., & Lesser, V. (2004). Organization-based cooperative coalition formation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/ACM international conference on intelligent agent techonology (pp. 162–168), IAT.

  2. Baliyarasimhuni, S. P., & Beard, R. W. (2008). Multiple UAV coalition formation. In American control conference (pp. 2010–2015).

  3. Berman P. (2000) A d/2 approximation for maximum weight independent set in d-Claw free graphs. Nordic Journal of Computing 7(3): 178–184

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Campbell, A., Wu, A. S., & Shumaker, R. (2002). Multi-agent task allocation: Learning when to say No. In GECCO ’08: Proceedings of the 10th annual conference on genetic and evolutionary computation (pp. 201–208), New York, NY, USA, ACM.

  5. Fanelli, L., Farinelli, A., Iocchi, L., Nardi, D., & Settembre, G. P. (2006). Ontology-based coalition formation in heterogeneous MRS. In Proceedings of the 2006 international symposium on practical cognitive agents and robots (pp. 105–116).

  6. Halldórsson, M. M. (1998). Approximations of independent sets in graphs. In APPROX ’98: Proceedings of the international workshop on approximation algorithms for combinatorial optimization (pp. 1–13). London, UK: Springer.

  7. Halldórsson M. M., Chandra B. (2001) Greedy local improvement and weighted set packing approximation. Journal of Algorithms 39(2): 223–240

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Hazan E., Safra S., Schwartz O. (2006) On the complexity of approximating k-set packing. Computational Complexity 15(1): 20–39

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Hopcroft J. E., Karp R. M. (1973) An n 5/2 algorithm for maximum matching in bipartite graphs. SIAM Journal of Computing 2(4): 225–231

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Kuhn H. (1955) The Hungarian method for the assignment problem. Naval Research Logistic Quarterly 2: 83–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lau, H. C., & Zhang, L. (2003). Task allocation via multi-agent coalition formation: Taxonomy, algorithms and complexity. In ICTAI ’03: Proceedings of the 15th IEEE international conference on tools with artificial intelligence (p. 346). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society USA.

  12. Rahwan T., Ramchurn S., Jennings N., Giovannucci A. (2003) An anytime algorithm for optimal coalition structure generation. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 34: 521–567

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Sandholm T. (2002) An algorithm for optimal winner determination in combinatorial auctions. Artificial Intelligence 135(1–2): 1–54

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Sandholm Y., Larson K., Anderson M., Shehory O., Tohmé F. (1999) Coalition structure generation with worst case guarantees. Artificial Intelligence 111(1–2): 209–238

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Sariel, S. (2007). An integrated planning, scheduling and execution framework for multi-robot cooperation and coordination. PhD thesis, Istanbul Technical University.

  16. Shehory O., Kraus S. (1998) Methods for task allocation via agent coalition formation. Artificial Intelligence 101(1–2): 165–200

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Tang, F., & Parker, L. E. (2005). ASyMTRe: Automated synthesis of multi-robot task solutions through software reconfiguration. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (pp. 1770–1777).

  18. Tosić P., Agha G. (2005) Maximal clique based distributed coalition formation for task allocation in large-scale multi-agent systems. Massively Multi-Agent Systems I 3446: 104–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Vig L., Adams J. A. (2006) Multi-robot coalition formation. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 22(4): 637–649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Vig L., Adams J. A. (2007) Coalition formation: From software agents to robots. Journal of Intelligent Robotics Systems 50(1): 85–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Zuckerman, D. (2006). Linear degree extractors and the inapproximability of max clique and chromatic number. In STOC ’06: Proceedings of the thirty-eighth annual ACM symposium on theory of computing (pp. 681–690). New York, NY, USA.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Travis C. Service.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Service, T.C., Adams, J.A. Coalition formation for task allocation: theory and algorithms. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst 22, 225–248 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-010-9123-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-010-9123-8

Keywords

Navigation