Community-Based Load Balancing for Massively Multi-Agent Systems
- 422 Downloads
Recently, large-scale distributed multiagent systems consisting of one million of agents have been developed. When agents are distributed among multiple servers, both the computational and interaction cost of servers must be considered when optimizing the performance of the entire system. Multiagent systems reflect the structure of social communities and artificial networks such as the Internet. Since the networks possess characteristics common to the ‘small world’ phenomenon, networks of agents on the systems can be considered as small worlds. In that case, communities, which are the sets of agents that frequently interact with each other, exist in the network. Most previous works evaluate agents one by one to select the most appropriate agent to be moved to a different server. If the networks of agents are highly clustered, previous works divide the communities when moving agents. Since agents in the same community often interact with each other, this division of communities increases the interaction cost among servers. We propose community-based load balancing (CLB), which evaluates the communities to select the most appropriate set of agents to be moved. We conducted simulations to evaluate our proposed method according to the network of agents. Our simulations show that when the clustering coefficient is close to 1.0, the interaction cost with CLB can be approximately 30% lower than that with previous works.
Keywordsmobile agents scalability and performance issues: robustness fault tolerance and dependability
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Ishida, T., Gasser, L., Nakashima, H. (eds.): MMAS 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3446. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
- 3.Koyanagi, T., Kobayashi, Y., Miyagi, S., Yamamoto, G.: Agent server for a location-aware personalized notification service. In: , pp. 224–238Google Scholar
- 4.Balmer, M., Cetin, N., Nagel, K., Raney, B.: Towards truly agent-based traffic and mobility simulations. In: AAMAS 2004: Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 60–67. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2004)Google Scholar
- 5.Yamamoto, G., Tai, H., Mizuta, H.: A platform for massive agent-based simulation and its evaluation. In: AAMAS 2007: Proceedings of the sixth international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems, pp. 900–902. ACM Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
- 8.Chia, T.H., Kannapan, S.: Strategically mobile agents. In: Rothermel, K., Popescu-Zeletin, R. (eds.) MA 1997. LNCS, vol. 1219, pp. 149–161. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)Google Scholar
- 9.Kawamura, T., Joseph, S., Ohsuya, A., Honiden, S.: Quantitative evaluation of pairwise interactions between agents. In: Kotz, D., Mattern, F. (eds.) MA 2000, ASA/MA 2000, and ASA 2000. LNCS, vol. 1882, pp. 192–205. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)Google Scholar
- 11.Endo, H., Noto, M., Toyoshima, H.: Quantitative evaluation of communication traffic of mobile agents in distributed constraint satisfaction model. In: SMC (4), pp. 3852–3857. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2004)Google Scholar
- 13.Jang, M.W., Agha, G.: Agent framework services to reduce agent communication overhead in large-scale agent-based simulations. In: Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory (October, 2005)Google Scholar