Interaction protocols are commonly used in agent-based systems. They ensure good coordination between agents by proposing a specific message exchange pattern. However, these interaction protocols are not perfect; they need more extensions to offer, among others, better performance and scalability, mainly when tight deadlines are involved. In this case, participants often fail to answer some requests before their deadlines due to overload, bottlenecks, slow network, or being busy or blocked. Designing agents without considering this issue may decrease their sociability, which wastes valuable chances to obtain the best goals. The proposed approach uses the participant's experience to train supervised learning models to predict if the replies will reach initiators before deadlines or not, thereby enabling a prioritization mechanism for handling interaction requests more effectively. The proposed approach has been evaluated using multiple Contract Net interaction scenarios of two case studies under the JADE platform. The promising results show a significant increase in agents’ sociability measured by a new metric that we have proposed called Sociability Degree via Interaction Protocols (SDIP) where it was maintained even when systems scale up in term of number of agents and initiated interactions.
ZambonelliFJenningsNRWooldridgeM. Developing multiagent systems: the gaia methodology. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol2003; 12: 317–370.
2.
DeLoachSA. Multiagent systems engineering: a methodology and language for designing agent systems. In: Agent-Oriented Information Systems (AOIS) 99, June 1999.
3.
Gómez-SanzJJGervaisM-PWeissG. A survey on agent-oriented oriented software engineering research. In: BergentiFGleizesM-PZambonelliF (eds) Methodologies and software engineering for agent systems: the agent-oriented software engineering handbook. Boston, MA: Springer US, 2004, pp.33–62.
4.
KraetzschmarGK. Distributed Reason Maintenance for Multiagent Systems. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Science & Business Media, 1997.
5.
IslamMKatiyarDV. Development of A software maintenance cost estimation model. 4th Gl Perspect2014; 2: 4.
6.
JarzabekS. Effective Software Maintenance and Evolution: A Reuse-Based Approach. Boston, MA, USA: Auerbach Publications, 2007.
7.
AlkhatibG. The maintenance problem of application software: an empirical analysis. J Software Maint1992; 4: 83–104.
8.
LientzBPSwansonEB. Problems in application software maintenance. Commun ACM1981; 24: 763–769.
9.
BoehmBW. Software engineering economics. In: BroyMDenertE (eds) Pioneers and Their Contributions to Software Engineering. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 1984, pp.641–686. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48354-7_5.
10.
LeeLCNwanaHSNdumuDT, et al.The stability, scalability and performance of multiagent systems. BT Technol J1998; 16: 94–103.
11.
DastaniMvan der TorreLYorke-SmithN. Commitments and interaction norms in organisations. Auton Agent Multiagent Syst2017; 31: 207–249.
12.
RensGMoodleyD. A hybrid POMDP-BDI agent architecture with online stochastic planning and plan caching. Cogn Syst Res2017; 43: 1–20.
13.
YaoYLoganB. Action-level intention selection for BDI agents. In: Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Autonomous Agents & Multiagent Systems, pp.1227–1236. Singapore: International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems.
14.
FaccinJNunesI. Bdi-agent plan selection based on prediction of plan outcomes. In: 2015 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (WI-IAT), pp.166–173. Singapore: IEEE.
15.
WangTLiLZhangS, et al.Memory mechanism enhances cooperation in Mobile multiagent system. In: 2016 8th International Conference on Intelligent Human-Machine Systems and Cybernetics (IHMSC), pp.476–479. Hangzhou, China: IEEE.
16.
ZerrouguiSMokhatiFBadriM, et al.A novel approach for scalability and performance enhancement in JADE. Multiagent Grid Syst2017; 13: 177–201.
17.
KaderaPNovákP. Performance modeling extension of directory facilitator for enhancing communication in FIPA-compliant multiagent systems. IEEE Trans Ind Inf2017; 13: 688–695.
18.
HudaibAQasemMHObeidN. FIPA-Based Semi-centralized protocol for negotiation. In: SilhavyRSilhavyPProkopovaZ (eds) Cybernetics approaches in intelligent systems. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018, pp.135–149.
19.
DamHKZhangTGhoseA. Improving the reactivity of BDI agent programs. In: International Conference on Principles and Practice of Multiagent Systems, 2013, pp.85–100. Dunedin, New Zealand: Springer.
20.
DuctorSGuessoumZ. A coordination mechanism to replicate large-scale multiagent systems. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-Managing Systems - SEAMS ‘18, 2018, pp.130–136. Gothenburg, Sweden: ACM Press.
21.
KarakostasB. A scalable architecture for concurrent online auctions: a scalable architecture for concurrent online auctions. Concurrency Comput Pract Exper2014; 26: 841–850.
22.
ScerriPVincentRMaillerR. (eds). Coordination of Large-Scale Multiagent Systems. New York: Springer-Verlag, Epub ahead of print 2006. DOI: 10.1007/0-387-27972-5.
23.
FarBWanyamaTSoueinaSO. A negotiation model for large scale multiagent systems. In: 2006 IEEE International Conference on Information Reuse Integration, 2006, pp.589–594.
24.
AknineSPinsonSShakunMF. An extended multiagent negotiation protocol. Auton Agents Multiagent Syst2004; 8: 5–45.
25.
BellifemineFPoggiARimassaG. Developing multiagent systems with JADE. In: International Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages. ATAL 2000, pp.89–103. Boston, MA, USA: Springer.
26.
AliAAslamMJanjuaJI, et al.Methodology for performance evaluation of distributed multi agent system. The Nucleus2017; 54: 75–82.
27.
van LonRRSHolvoetT. When do agents outperform centralized algorithms?: a systematic empirical evaluation in logistics. Auton Agents Multiagent Syst2017; 31: 1578–1609.
28.
NguyenPTSchauVRossakW. Performance comparison of some message transport protocol implementations for agent community communication. In: IICS, 2011, pp.193–204.
29.
LiKZhouTLiuB, et al.A multiagent system for sharing distributed manufacturing resources. Expert Syst Appl2018; 99: 32–43.
30.
Trejo-SánchezJALópez-MartínezJLGarcíaJOG, et al.A multiagent architecture for scheduling of high performance services in a GPU cluster. Int J Comb Optim Probl Inf2018; 9: 12–22.
31.
DuMSassiouiRVaristeasG, et al.Improving real-time bidding using a constrained markov decision process. In: International Conference on Advanced Data Mining and Applications, 2017, pp.711–726: Springer.
32.
HsiehF-S. A hybrid and scalable multiagent approach for patient scheduling based on Petri net models. Applied Intelligence2017; 47: 1068–1086.
33.
LiZGuoGChenB, et al.Optimization for accelerating large scale agent based simulation. In: ZhangLSongXWuY (eds) Theory, methodology, tools and applications for modeling and simulation of Complex systems. Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2016, pp.165–175.
34.
Al-YaseenWLOthmanZANazriMZA. Exchanging large data object in multiagent systems. 2016, pp.020018.
35.
KaderaP. Performance models preventing multiagent systems from overloading computational resources. Autom Control Intell Syst2014; 2: 105.
36.
KenslerJAAgahA. Neural networks-based adaptive bidding with the contract net protocol in multi-robot systems. Appl Intell2008; 31: 347–362.
37.
MaoHZhangZXiaoZ, et al.Learning multiagent communication with double attentional deep reinforcement learning. Auton Agent Multiagent Syst2020; 34: 32.
38.
NguyenTTNguyenNDNahavandiS. Deep Reinforcement Learning for Multiagent Systems: A Review of Challenges, Solutions and Applications. arXiv:181211794 [cs, stat], http://arxiv.org/abs/1812.11794 (2018, accessed 16 April 2024).
39.
LewenbergY. Machine learning techniques for MultiAgent systems. 2017, pp.5185–5186.
40.
KhalilKMAbdel-AzizMNazmyTT, et al.Machine learning algorithms for multiagent systems. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Information Processing, Security and Advanced Communication, 2015, pp.59:1–59:5. New York, NY, USA: ACM.
41.
KhalilKMAbdel-AzizMNazmyTT, et al.MLIMAS: a framework for machine learning in interactive multiagent systems. Procedia Comput Sci2015; 65: 827–835.
42.
TuylsKWeissG. Multiagent learning: basics, challenges, and prospects. AI Mag2012; 33: 41–52.
43.
KaurSKaurHSehraSK. Modification of contract net protocol (CNP): A rule-updation approach. arXiv preprint arXiv:13124259; 2013.
44.
YangJLiW-LHongC-Y. An improvement to CNCP in large-scale muti-agent system. In: Innovative Computing Information and Control, 2008. ICICIC’08. 3rd International Conference on. IEEE, 2008, pp.147–147.
45.
MahajanRGuptaA. Scalable contract net based resource allocation strategies for grids. In: IEEE, 2008, pp.25–32.
46.
DeshpandeUGuptaABasuA. Performance enhancement of a contract net protocol based system through instance-based learning. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B (Cybern)2005; 35: 345–358.
AlarabiatZAlarabeyyatAAlheyasatO. Development of FIPA English auction interaction protocol for multiagent systems. Contemp Eng Sci2014; 7: 1905–1917.
49.
GouYDamHKGhoseA. Towards semantic merging of versions of BDI agent systems. In: BoellaGElkindESavarimuthuBTR (eds) PRIMA 2013: principles and practice of multiagent systems. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013, pp.437–444.
50.
HolmesGDonkinAWittenIH. Weka: A machine learning workbench. 1994.
51.
FreundYSchapireRE. Large margin classification using the perceptron algorithm. Mach Learn1999; 37: 277–296.
52.
CessieLVan HouwelingenSCJ. Ridge estimators in logistic regression. J R Stat Soc Ser C (Appl Stat)1992; 41: 191–201.
53.
RuderS. An overview of gradient descent optimization algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:160904747, 2016.
54.
LandwehrNHallMFrankE. Logistic model trees. Mach Learn2005; 59: 161–205.
55.
SumnerMFrankEHallM. Speeding up logistic model tree induction. In: Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on European Conference on Machine Learning and Principles and Practice of Knowledge Discovery in Databases. Porto, Portugal: Springer-Verlag, 2005, pp.675–683.
56.
BreimanL. Random forests. Mach Learn2001; 45: 5–32.
57.
DrmotaM. Random Trees: An Interplay between Combinatorics and Probability. 1st ed. Vienna: Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated, 2009.
58.
PlattJC. Fast training of support vector machines using sequential minimal optimization. In: Advances in kernel methods: support vector learning. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press, 1999, pp.185–208.
59.
KeerthiSSShevadeSKBhattacharyyaC, et al.Improvements to Platt’s SMO algorithm for SVM classifier design. Neural Comput2001; 13: 637–649.
60.
JohnGHLangleyP. Estimating continuous distributions in Bayesian classifiers. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh conference on Uncertainty in artificial intelligence. Montréal, Qué, Canada: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., 1995, pp.338–345.
61.
BouckaertRR. Bayesian Network classifiers in Weka for version 3-5-7. Artificial Intelligence Tools2008; 11: 369–387.
