Broad Path Decision in Vehicle System

  • S. Misbah Deen
  • Satoshi Hamada
  • Makoto Takizawa
Conference paper


This paper discusses how to decide a path for a vehicle to move to the destination. A space where vehicles move around is composed of space objects. The objects are structured in a hierarchical tree named a space tree. Objects at a higher level denote broader area than ones at a lower level in the space tree. In this paper, we present a method for each vehicle to decide a path whose part nearer to the vehicle is more detailed, and whose part which is farther from the vehicle is broader. A broader path means that it includes objects at higher level. Also, we model movement of the vehicle as an open nested transaction. Each vehicle locks objects in a decided path before passing through them at a level depending on the distance from the vehicle. The vehicle locks more strongly the object nearer to it. The strongness of the lock on the object represents how surely the vehicle can pass through the object. Also, we discuss the deadlock problem among multiple vehicles.


Vehicle Space Space Tree Component Path Deadlock Detection Internal Path 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Beeri, C., Bernstein, P. A., and Goodman, N., “A Model for Concurrency in Nested Transaction Systems,” JACM, Vol. 36, No. 2, 1989, pp. 230–269.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Bernstein, P. A., Hadzilacos, V., and Goodman, N., “Concurrency Control and Recovery in Database Systems,” Addison Wesley, 1987.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Chandy, K. M., Misra, J., and Haas, L. M., “Distributed Deadlock Detection,” ACM TODS, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1983, pp. 144–156.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Deen, S. M., “Cooperating Agents — A Database Perspective,” Proc. of International Working Conf. on Cooperating Knowledge Based Systems, 1990, pp. 3-29.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Eswaren, K. P., Gray, J., Lorie, R. A., and Traiger, I. L., “The Notion of Consistency and Predicate Locks in Database Systems,” CACM, Vol. 19, No. 11, 1976, pp. 624–637.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Garcia-Molina, H. and Salem, K., “Sagas,” Proc. of the ACM SIGMOD, 1987, pp. 249-259.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Garza, J. F. and Kim, W., “Transaction Management in an Object-Oriented Database System,” Proc. of the ACM SIGMOD Conf, 1988, pp. 37-45.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Gray, J., “The Transaction Concept: Virtues and Limitations,” Proc. of the 7th VLDB, 1981.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Haerder, T. and Reuter, A., “Principles of Transaction-Oriented Database Recovery,” ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 5, No. 4, 1983.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Holt, R. C., “Some Deadlock Properties on Computer Systems,” ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 14, No. 3, 1972, pp. 179–196.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Knapp, E., “Deadlock Detection in Distributed Databases,” ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 19, No. 4, 1987, pp. 303–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Korth, H. F., “Locking Primitives in a Database System,” JACM, Vol. 30, No. 1, 1983, pp. 55–79.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Korth, H. F., Levy, E., and Silberschalz, A., “A Formal Approach to Recovery by Compensating transactions,” Proc. of the VLDB, 1990, pp. 95-106.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Liskov, B. and Zilles, S. N., “Specification Techniques for Data Abstractions,” IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, Vol. 1, 1975, pp. 294–306.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Lynch, N. and Merritt, M., “Introduction to the Theory of Nested Transactions,” MIT/LCS/TR 867, 1986.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Moss, J. E., “Nested Transactions: An Approach to Reliable Distributed Computing,” The MIT Press Series in Information Systems, 1985.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Moss, J. E., Griffeth, N. D., and Graham, M. H., “Abstraction in Concurrency Control and Recovery Man-agement(revised),” TR COINS 86–20, Univ. of Massachusetts, 1986.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Singhai, M., “Deadlock Detection in Distributed Database Systems,” IEEE Computer, No. 11, 1989, pp. 37–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Takizawa, M. and Deen, S. M., “Lock Mode Based Resolution of Uncompensatable Deadlock,” Proc. of the Far-east Workshop on Future Database Systems, 1992, pp. 168-175.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Traiger, I. L., “Trends in System Aspects of Database Management,” Proc. of the 2nd International Conf. on Database (ICOD-2), 1983, pp. 1-21.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Weihl, W. E., “Local Atomicity Properties: Modular Concurrency Control for Abstract Data Types,” ACM Trans. on Programming Language and Systems, Vol. 11, No. 2, 1989, pp. 249–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Weikum, G., “Principles and Realization Strategies of Multilevel Transaction Management,” ACM TODS, Vol. 16, No. 1, 1991, pp. 132–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag/Wien 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Misbah Deen
    • 1
  • Satoshi Hamada
    • 2
  • Makoto Takizawa
    • 2
  1. 1.Dept. of Computer ScienceUniv. of KeeleKeele, StaffsEngland
  2. 2.Dept. of Computers and Systems EngineeringTokyo Denki UniversityIshizaka, Hatoyama, Hiki-gun SaitamaJapan

Personalised recommendations