CENTRALISED VERSUS MARKET-BASED CONTROL UNDER ENVIRONMENT UNCERTAINTY: CASE OF THE MOBILE TASK ALLOCATION PROBLEM (MTAP)

Yıl 2011, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 1, 79 - 88, 01.06.2011

Karim Al-yafı Habin Lee Afshin Mansourı

https://izlik.org/JA47YA46BB

Öz

This paper aims at comparing the centralised versus the market-based approach.
This is done in the context of the mobile task allocation problem (MTAP) from the
perspective of environmental uncertainty. MTAP is defined as an optimization
problem for planning the assignment of service tasks to mobile workers.
Environmental uncertainty is introduced through the injection of stochastic tasks
and dynamic travel delays. A multi-agent simulator is employed to experiment the
behaviour of each approach in reaction to different uncertainty levels.
Preliminary results suggest a tentative conceptual model to evaluate the
suitability of each approach to address MTAP in function of uncertainty. It is
suggested that uncertainty’s effect on achieved performance is moderated by the
timeliness of decision making, workers’ degree of local knowledge, and problem’s
complexity and size.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Information system structures , operations management information systems , market-based computation , environment uncertainty , multi-agent simulation.

Kaynakça

• Al-Yafi, K., Lee, H. 2009. “Centralized versus Market-based Approaches to Mobile Task
• Allocation Problem: State-of-the-art”, EMCIS’09. European and Mideterranian Conference on Information Systems. Izmir, Turkey 2009.
• Al-Yafi, K., Lee, H., Mansouri, A. 2009. “MTAP-MaSim: A Multi-agent Simulator for the Mobile Task Allocation Problem”, wetice, pp.25-27. 18th IEEE International
• Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructures for Collaborative Enterprises. Groningen, Netherlands 2009.
• Chao, I-M., Golden, B., Wasil, E. 1996. ‘The team orienteering problem’. European journal of operational research. 88 (1): 464-474.
• Larsen, A., Madsen, O., Solomon, M. 2002. ‘Partially dynamic vehicle routing- models and algorithms’. Journal of the operational research society. 53 (6): 637-646.
• Mahr, T., Srour , J., de Weerdt, M.M., Zuidwijk, R.. 2010. ‘Can agents measure up? A comparative study of an agent-based and on-line optimization approach for a drayage problem with uncertainty’. Transportation Research: Part C. 18 (1): 99-119.
• Malone, T. W. Smith, A. S. 1987. ‘Modelling coordination in organizations and markets’.
• Management science. 33 (10): 1317-1332.
• Mes, M., van der Heijden, M., van Harten, A. 2007. ‘Comparison of agent-based scheduling to look-ahead heuristics for real-time transportation problems’. European
• Journal of Operational Research 181 (1): 59-75. Smith. R. G. (1980). The Contract Net Protocol: High-Level Communication and Control in a Distributed Problem Solver. IEEE Transactions on Computers. 29 (12), 1104-1113.
• Tan, J.C., Harker, P.T. 1999. ‘Designing workflow coordination: centralized versus market-based mechanisms’. Information systems research. 10 (4): 328-342.
• Toth, P., Vigo, D. 2002. Editors ‘The vehicle routing problem’. SIAM monographs on discrete mathematica and applications, Philadelphia.
• Vansteenwegen, P., Souffriau, W., Vanden Berghe, G., Van Oudheusden, D. 2009. ‘A guided local search metaheuristic for the team orienteering problem’. European journal of operational research 196(1): 118-127.
• Ygge, F., Akkermans, H. 1999. ‘Decentralized markets versus central control: A comparative study’. Journal of artificial intelligence research. 11:301-333.