Advertisement

Self-Organized Task Allocation for Service Tasks in Computing Systems with Reconfigurable Components

  • Daniel Merkle
  • Martin Middendorf
  • Alexander Scheidler
Article
  • 41 Downloads

Abstract

A self-organized scheme for the allocation service tasks in adaptive or organic computing systems is proposed. Such computing systems are highly self-organized and the components ideally adapt to the needs of users or the environment. Typically, the components of such systems need some service from time to time in order perform their work efficiently. Since the type of service tasks will often change in this systems it is attractive to use reconfigurable hardware to perform the service tasks. The studied system consists of normal worker components and the helper components which have reconfigurable hardware and can perform different service tasks. The speed with which a service task is executed by a helper depends on its actual configuration. Different strategies for the helpers to decide about service task acceptance and reconfiguration are proposed. These task acceptance strategies are inspired by stimulus-threshold models that are used to explain task allocation in social insects. Analytical results for a system with two reconfigurable helpers are presented together with simulation results for larger systems.

Keywords

Organic computing Self organization Reconfigurable hardware Task allocation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Agassounon, W., Martinoli, A.: Efficiency and robustness of threshold-based distributed allocation algorithms in multi-agent systems. In: Proc. of the First Int. Joint Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems AAMAS-02, pp. 1090–1097. ACM Press (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bonabeau, E., Theraulaz, G., Deneubourg, J.-L.: Fixed response thresholds and the regulation of division of labor in insect societies. Bull. Math. Biol. 60, 753–807 (1998)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bonabeau, E., Sobkowski, A., Theraulaz, G., Deneubourg, J.-L.: Adaptive task allocation inspired by a model of division of labor in social insects. In: Lundh, D. et al. (eds.) Biocomputing and Emergent Computation, pp. 36–45. World Scientific (1997)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bonabeau, E., Theraulaz, G., Deneubourg, J.-L.: Quantitative study of the fixed threshold model for the regulation of division of labour in insect societies. Proc. Roy. Soc. London B 263, 1565–1569 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cicirello, V.A., Smith, S.F.: Wasp-like agents for distributed factory coordination. Auton. Agentsand Multi-Agent Syst. 8(3), 237–266 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cicirello, V.A., Smith, S.F.: Distributed coordination of resources via wasp-like agents. Proc. First NASA GSFC/JPL Workshop on Radical Agent Concepts (WRAC), pp. 71–80 (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cicirello, V.A., Smith, S.F.: Wasp nests for self-configurable factories. Proc. Fifth Int. Conf. on Autonomous Agents, pp. 473–480 (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cicirello, V.A., Smith, S.F.: Insect Societies and Manufacturing IJCAI-01 Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Manufacturing (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ferreira, P.R., de Oliveira, D., Bazzan, A.L.C.: A swarmbased approach to adapt the structural dimension of agents’ organization. J. Braz. Comput. Soc. 11(1), 63–73 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gautrais, J., Theraulaz, G., Deneubourg, J.-L., Anderson, C.: Emergent polyethism as a consequence of increased colony size in insect societies. J. Theor. Biol. 215, 363–373 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    GI: Organic Computing / VDE, ITG, GI—Positionspapier. 2003, online: http://www.betriebssysteme.org/Betriebssysteme/FutureTrends/oc-positionspapier.pdf
  12. 12.
    Kephart, J.O., Chess, D.M.: The vision of autonomic computing. IEEE Comput. 36(1), 41–50 (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kittithreerapronchai, O., Anderson, C.: Do ants paint trucks better than chickens? Market versus response thresholds for distributed dynamic scheduling. Proc. IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Krieger, M.J.B., Billeter, J.-B.: The call of duty: selforganised task allocation in a population of up to twelve mobile robots. Robot. Autonom. Sys. 30, 65–84 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Merkle, D., Middendorf, M.: Dynamic polyethism and competition for tasks in threshold reinforcement models of social insects. Adapt. Behav. 12, 251–262 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Müller-Schloer, C., von der Malsburg, C., Würtz, R.P.: Organic computing. Informatik Spektrum 27(4), 332–336 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schmeck, H.: Organic computing—a new vision for distributed embedded systems. Proc. of the Eighth IEEE International Symposium on Object-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing (ISORC 2005), pp. 201–203 (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Price, R., Tino, P.: Evaluation of adaptive nature inspired task allocation against alternate decentralised multiagent strategies. Proc. Parallel Problem Solving from Nature—PPSN VIII, pp. 982–990. LNCS 3242, Springer (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Theraulaz, G., Bonabeau, E., Deneubourg, J.: Response threshold reinforcement and division of labour in insect societies. Proc. Roy. Soc. London B 265, 327–332 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel Merkle
    • 1
  • Martin Middendorf
    • 1
  • Alexander Scheidler
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of LeipzigLeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations