Advertisement

Neural Computing and Applications

, Volume 32, Issue 1, pp 261–277 | Cite as

Linear and nonlinear stochastic distribution for consensus problem in multi-agent systems

  • Rawad AbdulghaforEmail author
  • Shahrum Shah Abdullah
  • Sherzod Turaev
  • Akram Zeki
  • Imad Al-Shaikhli
Original Article

Abstract

This paper presents a linear and nonlinear stochastic distribution for the interactions in multi-agent systems (MAS). The interactions are considered for the agents to reach a consensus using hetero-homogeneous transition stochastic matrices. The states of the agents are presented as variables sharing information in the MAS dynamically. The paper studies the interaction among agents for the attainment of consensus by limit behavior from their initial states’ trajectories. The paper provides a linear distribution of DeGroot model compared with a nonlinear distribution of change stochastic quadratic operators (CSQOs), doubly stochastic quadratic operators (DSQOs) and extreme doubly stochastic quadratic operators (EDSQOs) for a consensus problem in MAS. The comparison study is considered for stochastic matrix (SM) and doubly stochastic matrix (DSM) cases of the hetero-homogeneous transition stochastic matrices. In the case of SM, the work’s results show that the DeGroot linear model converges to the same unknown limit while CSQOs, DSQOs and EDSQOs converge to the center. However, the results show that the linear of DeGroot and nonlinear distributions of CSQOs, DSQOs and EDSQOs converge to the center with DSM. Additionally, the case of DSM is observed to converge faster compared to that of SM in the case of nonlinear distribution of CSQOs, DSQOs and EDSQOs. In general, the novelty of this study is in showing that the nonlinear stochastic distribution reaches a consensus faster than all cases. In fact, the EDSQO is a very simple system compared to other nonlinear distributions.

Keywords

Consensus problem Multi-agent systems Linear stochastic distribution Nonlinear stochastic distribution 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Malaysia-Japan International Institute of Technology, University Technology Malaysia KL Campus, for the support. This work was funded by MJIIT UTM Research Grant Project R.K430000.7743.4J009.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

521_2018_3615_MOESM1_ESM.docx (327 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 327 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Li J, Ho DWC, Li J (2018) Adaptive consensus of multi-agent systems under quantized measurements via the edge Laplacian. Automatica 92:217–224MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wooldridge M (2009) An introduction to multiagent systems. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wen G, Zhang H, Yu W, Zuo Z, Zhao Y (2017) Coordination tracking of multi-agent dynamical systems with general linear node dynamics. Int J Robust Nonlinear Control 27(9):1526–1546MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lin Z, Francis B, Maggiore M (2007) State agreement for continuous-time coupled nonlinear systems. SIAM J Control Optim 46(1):288–307MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abdulghafor R, Turaev S, Zeki A, Al-Shaikhli I (2017) Reach a nonlinear consensus for MAS via doubly stochastic quadratic operators. Int J Control 91:1–29MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lovisari E, Zampieri S (2010) Performance metrics in the consensus problem: a survey? IFAC Proc 36(1):324–335Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dong J-G, Qiu L (2014) Complex Laplacians and applications in multi-agent systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1406.1862
  8. 8.
    Fagnani F (2014) Consensus dynamics over networks, (66)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vicsek T, Czirok A, Ben-Jacob E, Cohen I, Shochet O (1995) Novel type of phase transition in a system of self-riven particles. Phys Rev Lett 75(6):1226–1229MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Saulnier K, Saldana D, Prorok A, Pappas GJ, Kumar V (2017) Resilient flocking for mobile robot teams. IEEE Robot Autom Lett 2(2):1039–1046Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang X, Li J, Xing J, Wang R, Xie L, Chen Y (2017) A new finite-time average consensus protocol with boundedness of convergence time for multi-robot systems. Int J Adv Rob Syst 14(6):1729881417737699Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ge X, Yang F, Han Q-L (2017) Distributed networked control systems: a brief overview. Inf Sci 380:117–131Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yang Z, Xiang J, Li Y (2017) Distributed consensus based supply–demand balance algorithm for economic dispatch problem in a smart grid with switching graph. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 64(2):1600–1610Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Morais DC, de Almeida AT (2012) Group decision making on water resources based on analysis of individual rankings. Omega 40(1):42–52Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Barber B (2017) Toward a new view of the sociology of knowledge. In: Coser LA (ed) The idea of social structure, pp. 103–116. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Amelina N, Fradkov A, Jiang Y, Vergados DJ (2015) Approximate consensus in stochastic networks with application to load balancing. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 61(4):1739–1752MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    DeGroot MH (1974) Reaching a consensus. J Am Stat Assoc 69(345):118–121zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Berger RL (1981) A necessary and sufficient condition for reaching a consensus using DeGroot’s method. J Am Stat Assoc 76(374):415–418MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Borkar V, Varaiya P (1979) Adaptive Control of Markov Chains, I: Finite Parameter Set. IEEE Trans Autom Control 24(6):953–957MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tsitsiklis J (1984) Problems in decentralized decision-making and computation. Tech. Rep., DTIC DocumentGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tsitsiklis J, Bertsekas D, Athans M (1986) Distributed asynchronous deterministic and stochastic gradient optimization algorithms. IEEE Trans Autom Control 31(9):803–812MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jadbabaie A, Lin J, Morse AS (2003) Coordination of groups of mobile autonomous agents using nearest neighbor rules. IEEE Trans Autom Control 48(6):988–1001MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Olfati-Saber R, Murray RM (2004) Consensus problems in networks of agents with switching topology and time-delays. IEEE Trans Autom Control 49(9):1520–1533MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Olfati-Saber R, Fax JA, Murray RM (2007) Consensus and cooperation in networked multi-agent systems. Proc IEEE 95(1):215–233zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ren WRW, Beard RW, Atkins EM (2005) A survey of consensus problems in multi-agent coordination. In: Proceedings of the 2005, American control conference, pp 1859–1864Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nedić A, Ozdaglar A (2010) Convergence rate for consensus with delays. J Global Optim 47(3):437–456MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Alex O, Tsitsiklis JN (2006) Convergence speed in distributed consensus and control. SIAM Rev 53(4):747–772zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Abdulghafor R, Turaev S (2018) Consensus of fractional nonlinear dynamics stochastic operators for multi-agent systems. Inf Fusion 44:1–21Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Abdulghafor R, Turaev S, Zeki A, Tamrin M (2017) A high degree of nonlinear consensus for multi-agent systems. Inf Technol Control 1–20Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Abdulghafor R, Turaev S, Zeki A, Shahidi F (2015) The convergence consensus of multi-agent systems controlled via doubly stochastic quadratic operators. In: International symposium on agents, multi-agent systems and robotics (ISAMSR), pp 59–64Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Abdulghafor R, Turaev S, Abubaker A, Zeki A (2018) Nonlinear convergence algorithm: structural properties with doubly stochastic quadratic operators for multi-agent systems. J Artif Intell Soft Comput Res 8(1):49–61Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Abdulghafor R, Turaev S, Tamrin M (2016) Nonlinear consensus for multi-agent systems using positive intractions of doubly stochastic quadratic operators. Int J Percept Cognit Comput (IJPCC) 2(1):19–22Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Coban R (2010) Computational intelligence-based trajectory scheduling for control of nuclear research reactors. Prog Nucl Energy 52(4):415–424Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Coban R (2013) A context layered locally recurrent neural network for dynamic system identification. Eng Appl Artif Intell 26(1):241–250Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ercin Ö, Coban R (2012) Identification of linear dynamic systems using the artificial bee colony algorithm. Turk J Electr Eng Compu Sci 20(Sup. 1):1175–1188Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Coban R, Aksu IO (2018) Neuro-Controller Design by Using the Multifeedback Layer Neural Network and the Particle Swarm Optimization. Tehnički vjesnik 25(2):437–444Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bernstein S (1942) Solution of a mathematical problem connected with the theory of heredity. Ann Math Stat 13(1):53–61MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ulam SM (1960) A collection of mathematical problems, vol 8. Interscience PublishersGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Vallander SS (1972) On the limit behavior of iteration sequence of certain quadratic transformations. Soviet Math Doklady 13:123–126zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lyubich YI (1992) Mathematical structures in population genetics, Biomathematics, Vol 22. Berlin- Springer-Verlag, HeidebergGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ganikhodzhaev RN (1993) Quadratic stochastic operators, Lyapunov functions, and tournaments. Rus Acad Sci Sb Math 76(2):489MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ganikhodzhaev RN, Rozikov UA (2009) Quadratic stochastic operators: results and open problems. arXiv preprint arXiv:0902.4207
  43. 43.
    Abdulghafor R, Turaev S, Zeki A (2017) Necessary and sufficient conditions for complementary stochastic quadratic operators of finite-dimensional simplex. Sukkur IBA J Comput Math Sci 1(1):22–27Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Abdulghafor R, Turaev S, Abubakar A, Zeki A (2016) The extreme doubly stochastic quadratic operators on two dimensional simplex. In: Proceedings—2015 4th international conference on advanced computer science applications and technologies, ACSATGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Shahidi F, Ganikhodzhaev R, Abdulghafor R (2013) The dynamics of some extreme doubly stochastic quadratic operators. Middle East J Sci Res (MEJSR) 13:59–63Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Abdulghafor R, Shahidi F, Zeki A, Turaev S (2015) Dynamics classifications of extreme doubly stochastic quadratic operators on 2D simplex. Adv Comput Commun Eng Technol Proc ICOCOE 362:323Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Abdulghafor R, Turaev S, Zeki A, Abubakar A (2015) The extreme doubly stochastic quadratic operators on two dimensional simplex. In: 4th international conference on advanced computer science applications and technologies (ACSAT), pp 192–197Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Abdulghafor R, Shahidi F, Zeki A, Turaev S (2016) Dynamics of doubly stochastic quadratic operators on a finite-dimensional simplex. Open Math 14(1):509–519MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Abdulghafor R, Shahidi F, Zeki A, Turaev S (2016) Dynamics classifications of extreme doubly stochastic quadratic operators on 2D simplex. In: Advanced computer and communication engineering technology, Springer, Berlin, pp 323–335Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ganikhodzhaev RN (1993) On the definition of bistochastic quadratic operators. Rus Math Surv 48(4):244–246zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Shahidi F (2008) On the extreme points of the set of bistochastic operators. Math Notes 84(3–4):442–448MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Shahidi FA (2009) Doubly stochastic operators on a finite-dimensional simplex. Sib Math J 50(2):368–372MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Olkin I, Marshall AW (2016) Inequalities: theory of majorization and its applications. Academic Press, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Ganikhodzhaev R, Shahidi F (2010) Doubly stochastic quadratic operators and Birkhoff’s problem. Linear Algebra Appl 432(1):24–35MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Mukhamedov F, Embong AF (2015) On b-bistochastic quadratic stochastic operators. J Inequal Appl 2015(1):226MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Muirhead RF (1902) Some methods applicable to identities and inequalities of symmetric algebraic functions of n letters. Proc Edinb Math Soc 21:144Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Lorenz MO (1905) Methods of measuring the concentration of wealth. Pub Am Stat Assoc 9(70):209Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Dalton H (1920) The measurement of the inequality of incomes. Econ J 30(119):348Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Schur I (1923) \”Uber eine Klasse von Mittelbildungen mit Anwendungen auf die Determinantentheorie. Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Mathematischen Gesellschaft 22:9–20zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Hardy GH, Littlewood JE, Pólya G (1929) Some simple inequalities satisfied by convex functions. Messenger Math 58(145–152):145–152zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Ando T (1989) Majorization, doubly stochastic matrices, and comparison of eigenvalues. Linear Algebra Appl 118(1):163–248MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Parker P, Stott D, Ram P (1994) Greed and majorization (ABSTRACT). pp 1–11Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Parker DS, Ram P (1997) Greed and majorization pp 1–12Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Tsitsiklis JN (1984) Problems in decentralized decision making and computation. Massachusetts Inst of Tech Cambridge Lab for Information and Decision SystemsGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Olshevsky A, Tsitsiklis JN (2011) Convergence speed in distributed consensus and averaging. SIAM Rev 53(4):747–772MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Abdulghafor R, Turaev S (2017) Consensus of fractional nonlinear dynamics stochastic operators for multi-agent systems. Inf Fusion 44:1–21Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Lyubich YI, Vulis D, Karpov A, Akin E (1992) Mathematical structures in population genetics. Biomathematics (Berlin)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Li Y, Voos H, Darouach M, Hua C (2015) Nonlinear protocols for distributed consensus in directed networks of dynamic agents. J Franklin Inst 352(9):3645–3669MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Andreasson M, Dimarogonas DV, Johansson KH (2012) Undamped nonlinear consensus using integral Lyapunov functions. In: American control conference (ACC), pp 6644–6649Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Bauso D, Giarré L, Pesenti R (2006) Non-linear protocols for optimal distributed consensus in networks of dynamic agents. Syst Control Lett 55(11):918–928MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Li Z, Ren W, Liu X, Fu M (2013) Consensus of multi-agent systems with general linear and Lipschitz nonlinear dynamics using distributed adaptive protocols. IEEE Trans Autom Control 58(7):1786–1791MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Zhu Y-K, Guan X-P, Luo X-Y (2013) Finite-time consensus for multi-agent systems via nonlinear control protocols. Int J Autom Comput 10(5):455–462Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Zuo Z, Tie L (2014) A new class of finite-time nonlinear consensus protocols for multi-agent systems. Int J Control 87(2):363–370MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Li Y, Guan X, Hua C (2011) Nonlinear protocols for output performance value consensus of multi-agent systems. In: The 30th Chinese control conference, pp 4831–4834Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Tang Y, Gao H, Zou W, Kurths J (2013) Distributed synchronization in networks of agent systems with nonlinearities and random switchings. IEEE Trans Cybern 43(1):358–370Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Ren G, Yu Y, Zhang S (2015) Leader-following consensus of fractional nonlinear multiagent systems. Math Prob EngGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Zhang W, Tang Y, Wu X, Fang J-A (2014) Synchronization of nonlinear dynamical networks with heterogeneous impulses. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst I: Regular Papers 61(4):1220–1228Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Cao Y, Li Y, Ren W, Chen Y (2010) Distributed coordination of networked fractional-order systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B (Cybernetics) 40(2):362–370Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Feng Y, Xu S, Lewis FL, Zhang B (2015) Consensus of heterogeneous first- and second-order multi-agent systems with directed communication topologies. Int J Robust Nonlinear Control 25(3):362–375MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Goodwine B (2014) Fractional-order dynamics in a random, approximately scale-free network of agents. In: 13th international conference on control automation robotics and vision, ICARCV 2014, pp 1581–1586Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Li H, Chen G, Dong Z, Xia D (2016) Consensus analysis of multiagent systems with second-order nonlinear dynamics and general directed topology: an event-triggered scheme. Inf Sci 370–371:598–622zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Proskurnikov A (2013) _Consensus in switching networks with sectorial nonlinear couplings.pdf. Automatica 49(2):488–495MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Su H, Chen G, Wang X, Lin Z (2011) Adaptive second-order consensus of networked mobile agents with nonlinear dynamics. Automatica 47(2):368–375MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Yu S, Long X (2015) Finite-time consensus for second-order multi-agent systems with disturbances by integral sliding mode. Automatica 54:158–165MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Natural Computing Applications Forum 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rawad Abdulghafor
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Shahrum Shah Abdullah
    • 1
  • Sherzod Turaev
    • 2
  • Akram Zeki
    • 2
  • Imad Al-Shaikhli
    • 2
  1. 1.Malaysia–Japan International Institute of Technology (MJIIT)University Technology Malaysia KL CampusKuala LumpurMalaysia
  2. 2.Collage of Information and Communication TechnologyInternational Islamic University MalaysiaKuala LumpurMalaysia

Personalised recommendations