# Improved WPM encoding for coalition structure generation under MC-nets

## Abstract

The Coalition Structure Generation (CSG) problem plays an important role in the domain of coalition games. Its goal is to create coalitions of agents so that the global welfare is maximized. To date, Weighted Partial MaxSAT (WPM) encoding has shown high efficiency in solving the CSG problem, which encodes a set of constraints into Boolean propositional logic and employs an off-the-shelf WPM solver to find out the optimal solution. However, in existing WPM encodings, a number of redundant encodings are asserted. This results in additional calculations and correspondingly incurs performance penalty. Against this background, this paper presents an Improved Rule Relation-based WPM (I-RWPM) encoding for the CSG problem, which is expressed by a set of weighted rules in a concise representation scheme called *Marginal Contribution net (MC-net)*. In order to effectively reduce the constraints imposed on encodings, we first identify a subset of rules in an MC-net, referred as a set of *freelance rules*. We prove that solving the problem made up of all freelance rules can be achieved with a straightforward means without any extra encodings. Thus the set of rules requiring to be encoded is downsized. Next, we improve the encoding of transitive relations among rules. To be specific, compared with the existing rule relation-based encoding that generates transitive relations universally among all rules, I-RWPM only considers the transitivity among rules with particular relationship. In this way, the number of constraints to be encoded can be further decreased. Experiments suggest that I-RWPM significantly outperforms other WPM encodings for solving the same set of problem instances.

## Keywords

Weighted partial MaxSAT Coalition structure generation Coalition games## Notes

### Acknowledgements

This work is partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Number 61806171), Ministry of Education in China Project of Humanities and Social Sciences (Grant Number 17YJCZH260), JSPS KAKENHI (Grant Numbers JP16K00304, JP17K00307, JP17H00761 and JP18H03299).

## References

- 1.Alviano, M., Dodaro, C., Ricca, F. (2015). A maxsat algorithm using cardinality constraints of bounded size. In
*IJCAI*(pp. 2677–2683).Google Scholar - 2.Argelich, J., Li, C.M., Many, F., Planes, J. (2016). Max-sat 2016: Eleventh max-sat evaluation. http://maxsat.ia.udl.cat/introduction/.
- 3.Biere, A., Heule, M., van Maaren, H. (2009).
*Handbook of satisfiability*Vol. 185. Amsterdam: IOS press.zbMATHGoogle Scholar - 4.Chalkiadakis, G., Elkind, E., Wooldridge, M. (2011). Computational aspects of cooperative game theory.
*Synthesis Lectures on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning*,*5*(6), 1–168.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 5.Conitzer, V., & Sandholm, T. (2006). Complexity of constructing solutions in the core based on synergies among coalitions.
*Artificial Intelligence*,*170*(6-7), 607–619.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 6.Cook, S.A. (1971). The complexity of theorem-proving procedures. In
*Proceedings of the third annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing*(pp. 151–158). New York : ACM.Google Scholar - 7.Cruz, F., Espinosa, A., Moure, J.C., Cerquides, J., Rodriguez-Aguilar, J.A., Svensson, K., Ramchurn, S.D. (2017). Coalition structure generation problems: optimization and parallelization of the idp algorithm in multicore systems.
*Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience*,*29*(5), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 8.Davies, J., & Bacchus, F. (2013). Exploiting the power of mip solvers in maxsat. In
*International conference on theory and applications of satisfiability testing*(pp. 166–181). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar - 9.Elkind, E., Goldberg, L.A., Goldberg, P.W., Wooldridge, M. (2009). A tractable and expressive class of marginal contribution nets and its applications.
*Mathematical Logic Quarterly*,*55*(4), 362–376.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 10.Han, Z., & Poor, H.V. (2009). Coalition games with cooperative transmission: a cure for the curse of boundary nodes in selfish packet-forwarding wireless networks.
*IEEE Transactions on Communications*,*57*(1), 203–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 11.Hussin, A., & Fatima, S. (2016). Heuristic methods for optimal coalition structure generation. In
*Multi-agent systems and agreement technologies*(pp. 124–139). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar - 12.Ieong, S., & Shoham, Y. (2005). Marginal contribution nets: a compact representation scheme for coalitional games. In
*Proceedings of the 6th ACM conference on electronic commerce*(pp. 193–202). New York: ACM.Google Scholar - 13.Koshimura, M., Zhang, T., Fujita, H., Hasegawa, R. (2012). Qmaxsat: a partial max-sat solver.
*Journal on Satisfiability, Boolean Modeling and Computation*,*8*, 95–100.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 14.Le Berre, D., & Parrain, A. (2010). The sat4j library, release 2.2, system description.
*Journal on Satisfiability, Boolean Modeling and Computation*,*7*, 59–64.Google Scholar - 15.Li, C., Sycara, K., Scheller-Wolf, A. (2010). Combinatorial coalition formation for multi-item group-buying with heterogeneous customers.
*Decision Support Systems*,*49*(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 16.Li, C.M., & Manyà, F. (2009). Maxsat, hard and soft constraints.
*Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence & Applications*,*185*(1), 613–631.Google Scholar - 17.Liao, X., Koshimura, M., Fujita, H., Hasegawa, R. (2012). Solving the coalition structure generation problem with maxsat. In
*2012 IEEE 24th international conference on Tools with artificial intelligence (ICTAI)*, (Vol. 1 pp. 910–915). Piscataway: IEEE.Google Scholar - 18.Liao, X., Koshimura, M., Fujita, H., Hasegawa, R. (2014). Extending maxsat to solve the coalition structure generation problem with externalities based on agent relations.
*IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems*,*97*(7), 1812–1821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 19.Liao, X., Koshimura, M., Fujita, H., Hasegawa, R. (2014). Maxsat encoding for mc-net-based coalition structure generation problem with externalities.
*IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems*,*97*(7), 1781–1789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 20.Liu, Y., Zhang, G.F., Su, Z.P., Yue, F., Jiang, J.G. (2016). Using computational intelligence algorithms to solve the coalition structure generation problem in coalitional skill games.
*Journal of Computer Science and Technology*,*31*(6), 1136–1150.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 21.Michalak, T., Marciniak, D., Szamotulski, M., Rahwan, T., Wooldridge, M., McBurney, P., Jennings, N.R. (2010). A logic-based representation for coalitional games with externalities. In
*Proceedings of the 9th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems: volume 1-Volume 1, International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems*(pp. 125–132).Google Scholar - 22.Michalak, T., Rahwan, T., Elkind, E., Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N.R. (2016). A hybrid exact algorithm for complete set partitioning.
*Artificial Intelligence*,*230*(C), 14–50.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 23.Moreno-Centeno, E., & Karp, R.M. (2013). The implicit hitting set approach to solve combinatorial optimization problems with an application to multigenome alignment.
*Operations Research*,*61*(2), 453–468.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 24.Ohta, N., Conitzer, V., Ichimura, R., Sakurai, Y., Iwasaki, A., Yokoo, M. (2009). Coalition structure generation utilizing compact characteristic function representations. In
*International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming*(pp. 623–638). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar - 25.Rahwan, T., & Jennings, N.R. (1417). An improved dynamic programming algorithm for coalition structure generation. In
*Proceedings of the 7th international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems-Volume 3, International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems*.Google Scholar - 26.Rahwan, T., Michalak, T.P., Elkind, E., Faliszewski, P., Sroka, J., Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N.R. (2011). Constrained coalition formation. In
*AAAI*, (Vol. 11 pp. 719–725).Google Scholar - 27.Rahwan, T., Michalak, T.P., Jennings, N.R. (2012). A hybrid algorithm for coalition structure generation. In
*AAAI*(pp. 1443–1449).Google Scholar - 28.Rahwan, T., Michalak, T.P., Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N.R. (2015). Coalition structure generation: a survey.
*Artificial Intelligence*,*229*, 139–174.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 29.Saikko, P., Berg, J., Järvisalo, M. (2016). Lmhs: a sat-ip hybrid maxsat solver. In
*International conference on theory and applications of satisfiability testing*(pp. 539–546). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar - 30.Saikko, P., Wallner, J.P., Järvisalo, M. (2016). Implicit hitting set algorithms for reasoning beyond np. In
*KR*(pp. 104–113).Google Scholar - 31.Sakai, M., & Nabeshima, H. (2015). Construction of an robdd for a pb-constraint in band form and related techniques for pb-solvers.
*IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems*,*98*(6), 1121–1127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 32.Shehory, O., & Kraus, S. (1998). Methods for task allocation via agent coalition formation.
*Artificial intelligence*,*101*(1-2), 165–200.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 33.Skibski, O., Michalewski, H., Nagórko, A., Michalak, T.P., Dowell, A.J., Rahwan, T., Wooldridge, M. (2016). Non-utilitarian coalition structure generation. In
*ECAI*(pp. 1738–1739).Google Scholar - 34.Ueda, S., Hasegawa, T., Hashimoto, N., Ohta, N., Iwasaki, A., Yokoo, M. (2012). Handling negative value rules in mc-net-based coalition structure generation. In
*Proceedings of the 11th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems-Volume 2, International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems*(pp. 795–804).Google Scholar - 35.Ueda, S., Iwasaki, A., Conitzer, V., Ohta, N., Sakurai, Y., Yokoo, M. (2018). Coalition structure generation in cooperative games with compact representations. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-018-9386-z.
- 36.Yang, G., Esmailpour, A., Cao, Y., Nasser, N. (2016). A novel coalitional structure generation algorithm for interference mitigation in small cell networks. In
*Global communications conference (GLOBECOM), 2016 IEEE*(pp. 1–4). Piscataway: IEEE.Google Scholar - 37.Yeh, D.Y. (1986). A dynamic programming approach to the complete set partitioning problem.
*BIT Numerical Mathematics*,*26*(4), 467–474.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar