Journal of Scheduling

, Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 267–277 | Cite as

Optimal scheduling of contract algorithms with soft deadlines

  • Spyros Angelopoulos
  • Alejandro López-Ortiz
  • Angèle Hamel
Article
  • 169 Downloads

Abstract

A contract algorithm is an algorithm which is given, as part of its input, a specified amount of allowable computation time, and may not return useful results if interrupted prior to that time. In contrast, an interruptible algorithm will always output some meaningful (albeit suboptimal) solution, even if interrupted during its execution. Simulating interruptible algorithms by means of schedules of executions of contract algorithms in parallel processors is a well-studied problem with significant applications in AI. In the standard model, the interruptions are hard deadlines in which a solution must be reported immediately at the time the interruption occurs. In this paper, we study the more general setting of scheduling contract algorithms in the presence of soft deadlines. In particular, we address the setting in which if an interruption occurs at time t, then the system is given an additional window of time \(w(t)\le c \cdot t\), for constant c, within which the simulation must be completed. We formulate extensions to performance measures of schedules under this setting and derive schedules of optimal performance for all concave functions w.

Keywords

Anytime computation Contract algorithms Interruptible algorithms Acceleration ratio Scheduling problems in Artificial Intelligence 

References

  1. Angelopoulos, S. (2015). Further connections between contract-scheduling and ray-searching problems. In Proceedings of the 24th International Joint Conference in Artificial Intelligence (JCAI) (pp. 1516–1522).Google Scholar
  2. Angelopoulos, S., & López-Ortiz, A. (2009). Interruptible algorithms for multi-problem solving. In Proceedings of the 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI) (pp. 380–386).Google Scholar
  3. Angelopoulos, S., López-Ortiz, A., & Hamel, A. (2008). Optimal scheduling of contract algorithms with soft deadlines. In Proceedings of the 23rd National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) (pp. 868–873).Google Scholar
  4. Bernstein, D.S., Finkelstein, L., & Zilberstein, S. (2003). Contract algorithms and robots on rays: Unifying two scheduling problems. In Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI) (pp. 1211–1217).Google Scholar
  5. Bernstein, D.S., Perkins, T.J., Zilberstein, S., & Finkelstein, L. (2002). Scheduling contract algorithms on multiple processors. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) (pp. 702–706).Google Scholar
  6. Dean, T., & Boddy, M.S. (1998). An analysis of time-dependent planning. In Proceedings of the 15th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 49–54).Google Scholar
  7. Gal, S. (1980). Search games. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  8. Horvitz, E. (1987). Reasoning about beliefs and actions under computational resource constraints. In Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (pp. 301–324).Google Scholar
  9. Horvitz, E. (1998). Reasoning under varying and uncertain resource constraints. In Proceedings of the 15th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 111–116).Google Scholar
  10. López-Ortiz, A., Angelopoulos, S., & Hamel, A. M. (2014). Optimal scheduling of contract algorithms for anytime problems. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 51, 533–554.Google Scholar
  11. Manolache, S.n, Eles, P., & Peng, Z. (2004). Optimization of soft real-time systems with deadline miss ratio constraints. In Proceedings of 10th IEEE Real-Time and Embedded Technology and Applications Symposium (RTAS’04) (p. 562).Google Scholar
  12. Russell, S.J., & Zilberstein, S. (1991). Composing real-time systems. In Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI) (pp. 212–217).Google Scholar
  13. Schuierer, S. (2001). Lower bounds in online geometric searching. Computational Geometry: Theory and Applications, 18(1), 37–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Zilberstein, S. (1996). Using anytime algorithms in intelligent systems. AI Magazine, 17(3), 73–83.Google Scholar
  15. Zilberstein, S., Charpillet, F., & Chassaing, P. (2003). Real-time problem-solving with contract algorithms. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 39(1–2), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Zilberstein, S., Charpillet, F., & Chassaing, P. (2003). Optimal sequencing of contract algorithms. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 39(1–2), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Spyros Angelopoulos
    • 1
    • 2
  • Alejandro López-Ortiz
    • 3
  • Angèle Hamel
    • 4
  1. 1.Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, UMR 7606, LIP6ParisFrance
  2. 2.CNRS, UMR 7606, LIP6ParisFrance
  3. 3.School of Computer ScienceUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  4. 4.Department of Physics and Computer ScienceWilfrid Laurier UniversityWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations