In the multi-agent path finding problem (MAPF) we are given a set of agents each with respective start and goal positions. The task is to find paths for all agents while avoiding collisions aiming to minimize an objective function. Two such common objective functions is the sum-of-costs and the makespan. Many optimal solvers were introduced in the past decade - two prominent categories of solvers can be distinguished: search-based solvers and compilation-based solvers. Search-based solvers were developed and tested for the sum-of-costs objective while the most prominent compilation-based solvers that are built around Boolean satisfiability (SAT) were designed for the makespan objective. Very little was known on the performance and relevance of the compilation-based approach on the sum-of-costs objective. In this paper we show how to close the gap between these cost functions in the compilation-based approach. Moreover we study applicability of various techniques developed for search-based solvers in the compilation-based approach. A part of this paper introduces a SAT-solver that is directly aimed to solve the sum-of-costs objective function. Using both a lower bound on the sum-of-costs and an upper bound on the makespan, we are able to have a reasonable number of variables in our SAT encoding. We then further improve the encoding by borrowing ideas from ICTS, a search-based solver. Experimental evaluation on several domains show that there are many scenarios where our new SAT-based methods outperforms the best variants of previous sum-of-costs search solvers - the ICTS, CBS algorithms, and ICBS algorithms.
M* @cite_30 @cite_39 and its enhanced recursive variant () are important A*-based algorithms related to . M* dynamically changes the dimensionality and branching factor based on conflicts. The dimensionality is the number of agents that are not allowed to conflict. When a node is expanded, M* initially generates only one child in which each agent takes (one of) its individual optimal move towards the goal (dimensionality 1). This continues until a conflict occurs between @math agents at node @math . At this point, the dimensionality of all the nodes on the branch leading from the root to @math is increased to @math and all these nodes are placed back in OPEN list. When one of these nodes is re-expanded, it generates @math children where the @math conflicting agents make all possible moves and the @math non-conflicting agents make their individual optimal move. An enhanced variant of M* called @cite_32 builds on top of Standley's rather than plain A*.
@cite_30 @cite_32 @cite_39
2225272567 2087097376 2128634904 2949121341
We study the complexity of motivating time-inconsistent agents to complete long term projects in a graph-based planning model as proposed by Kleinberg and Oreni¾?[5]. Given a task graph G with n nodes, our objective is to guide an agent towards a target node t under certain budget constraints. The crux is that the agent may change its strategy over time due to its present-bias. We consider two strategies to guide the agent. First, a single reward is placed at t and arbitrary edges can be removed from G. Secondly, rewards can be placed at arbitrary nodes of G but no edges must be deleted. In both cases we show that it is NP-complete to decide if a given budget is sufficient to guide the agent. For the first setting, we give complementing upper and lower bounds on the approximability of the minimum required budget. In particular, we devise a @math 1+n-approximation algorithm and prove NP-hardness for ratios greater than @math n 3. Finally, we argue that the second setting does not permit any efficient approximation unless @math P=NP. Consider a team of mobile software agents deployed to capture a (possibly hostile) intruder in a network. All agents, including the intruder move along the network links; the intruder could be arbitrarily fast, and aware of the positions of all the agents. The problem is to design the agents' strategy for capturing the intruder. The main efficiency parameter is the size of the team. This is an instance of the well known graph-searching problem whose many variants have been extensively studied in the literature. In all existing solutions, and in all the variants of the problem, it is assumed that agents can be removed from their current location and placed in another network site arbitrarily and at any time. As a consequence, the existing optimal strategies cannot be employed in situations for which agents cannot access the network at any point, or cannot "jump" across the network, or cannot reach an arbitrary point of the network via an internal travel through insecure zones. This motivates the contiguous search problem in which agents cannot be removed from the network, and clear links must form a connected sub-network at any time, providing safety of movements. This new problem is NP-complete in general. We study it for tree networks, and we consider its more general version, the weighted case, which arises naturally when considering networks whose nodes and links are of different nature and thus require a different number of agents to be explored. We give a linear-time algorithm that computes, for any tree @math , the minimum number of agents to capture the intruder, and the corresponding search strategy. Beside its optimality in time, our algorithm is naturally distributed: if @math is a processor-network, then the minimal search strategy for @math can be computed by @math in a decentralized manner, using a linear number of messages. A team consisting of an unknown number of mobile agents, starting from different nodes of an unknown network, have to meet at the same node. Agents move in synchronous rounds. Each agent has a different label. Up to f of the agents are Byzantine. We consider two levels of Byzantine behavior. A strongly Byzantine agent can choose an arbitrary port when it moves and it can convey arbitrary information to other agents, while a weakly Byzantine agent can do the same, except changing its label. What is the minimum number of good agents that guarantees deterministic gathering of all of them, with terminationq We solve exactly this Byzantine gathering problem in arbitrary networks for weakly Byzantine agents and give approximate solutions for strongly Byzantine agents, both when the size of the network is known and when it is unknown. It turns out that both the strength versus the weakness of Byzantine behavior and the knowledge of network size significantly impact the results. For weakly Byzantine agents, we show that any number of good agents permits solving the problem for networks of known size. If the size is unknown, then this minimum number is fp2. More precisely, we show a deterministic polynomial algorithm that gathers all good agents in an arbitrary network, provided that there are at least fp2 of them. We also provide a matching lower bound: we prove that if the number of good agents is at most fp1, then they are not able to gather deterministically with termination in some networks. For strongly Byzantine agents, we give a lower bound of fp1, even when the graph is known: we show that f good agents cannot gather deterministically in the presence of f Byzantine agents even in a ring of known size. On the positive side, we give deterministic gathering algorithms for at least 2fp1 good agents when the size of the network is known and for at least 4fp2 good agents when it is unknown. We study the problem of fair allocation for indivisible goods. We use the the maxmin share paradigm introduced by Budish as a measure for fairness. Procacciafirst (EC'14) were first to investigate this fundamental problem in the additive setting. In contrast to what real-world experiments suggest, they show that a maxmin guarantee (1- @math allocation) is not always possible even when the number of agents is limited to 3. While the existence of an approximation solution (e.g. a @math - @math allocation) is quite straightforward, improving the guarantee becomes subtler for larger constants. Procaccia provide a proof for existence of a @math - @math allocation and leave the question open for better guarantees. Our main contribution is an answer to the above question. We improve the result of ! to a @math factor in the additive setting. The main idea for our @math - @math allocation method is clustering the agents. To this end, we introduce three notions and techniques, namely reducibility, matching allocation, and cycle-envy-freeness, and prove the approximation guarantee of our algorithm via non-trivial applications of these techniques. Our analysis involves coloring and double counting arguments that might be of independent interest. One major shortcoming of the current studies on fair allocation is the additivity assumption on the valuations. We alleviate this by extending our results to the case of submodular, fractionally subadditive, and subadditive settings. More precisely, we give constant approximation guarantees for submodular and XOS agents, and a logarithmic approximation for the case of subadditive agents. Furthermore, we complement our results by providing close upper bounds for each class of valuation functions. Finally, we present algorithms to find such allocations for additive, submodular, and XOS settings in polynomial time.