Two Innovative Coalition Formation Models for Dynamic Task Allocation in Disaster Rescues

  • Xing Su
  • Yuechen Wang
  • Xibin Jia
  • Limin Guo
  • Zhiming Ding


This paper addresses the problem of multi-objective coalition formation for task allocation. In disaster rescue, due to the dynamics of environments, heterogeneity and complexity of tasks as well as limited available agents, it is hard for the single-objective and single (task)-to-single (agent) task allocation approaches to handle task allocation in such circumstances. To this end, two multi-objective coalition formation for task allocation models are proposed for disaster rescues in this paper. First, through coalition formation, the proposed models enable agents to cooperatively perform complex tasks that cannot be completed by single agent. In addition, through adjusting the weights of multiple task allocation objectives, the proposed models can employ the linear programming to generate more adaptive task allocation plans, which can satisfy different task allocation requirements in disaster rescue. Finally, through employing the multi-stage task allocation mechanism of the dynamic programming, the proposed models can handle the dynamics of tasks and agents in disaster environments. Experimental results indicate that the proposed models have good performance on coalition formation for task allocation in disaster environments, which can generate suitable task allocation plans according to various objectives of task allocation.


Disaster rescues multi-objective linear programming cooperative agents multi-stage task allocation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



The work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grants No. 61402449, 91546111, 91646201, 61703013), and the Key Project of Beijing Municipal Education Commission (Grants No. KZ201610005009).


  1. [1]
    Akter, S. & Wamba, S. F. (2017). Big data and disaster management: a systematic review and agenda for future research. Annals of Operations Research (9), 1–21.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Athukorala, P. & Resosudarmo, B. P. (2005). The indian ocean tsunami: economic impact, disaster management and lessons. Departmental Working Papers (1).Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Banipal, K. S. (2005). Framework for strategic disaster management: lessons learned from hurricane katrina. Social Science Electronic Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Chapman, A. C., Micillo, R. A., Kota, R., & Jennings, N. R. (2009). Decentralised dynamic task allocation: a practical game: theoretic approach. International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (Vol.2, pp.915-922). International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Davare, A., Chong, J., Zhu, Q. & Densmore, D. M. (2006). Classification, customization, and characterization: using milp for task allocation and scheduling.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Farinelli, A., Rogers, A. & Jennings, N. R. (2014) Agent-based decentralised coordination for sensor networks using the max-sum algorithm. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 28(3), 337–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Farinelli, A., Rogers, A., Petcu, A. & Jennings, N. R. (2008). Decentralised coordination of low-power embedded devices using the max-sum algorithm. International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (Vol.2, pp.639-646). IFAAMASGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Gerkey, B. P. & Mataric, M. J. (2004). A formal analysis and taxonomy of task allocation in multi-robot systems. International Journal of Robotics Research, 23(9), 939–954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Guerriero, F., Surace, R., Loscrí, V. & Natalizio, E. (2014). A multi-objective approach for unmanned aerial vehicle routing problem with soft time windows constraints. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 38(3), 839–852.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Hooshangi, N. & Alesheikh, A. A. (2017). Agent-based task allocation under uncertainties in disaster environments: an approach to interval uncertainty. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 24, 160–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Jalil, A. M. & Hamouda, W. (2016). Optimal solution for a joint power allocation and relay assignment problem. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 65(8), 6497–6507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Koes, M., Nourbakhsh, I. & Sycara, K. (2005). Heterogeneous multirobot coordination with spatial and temporal constraints. National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp.1292-1297). AAAI Press.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Li, J. (2009). National disaster management system and its function in emergency response and disaster relief of "5.12" sichuan earthquake. Environment & disaster Mitigation, 8–10.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Mulcaire, C. & Overington, B. (2013). Federal disaster recovery funding: minimizing roadblocks to maximize resources. International Economic Development council.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Nie, Y. & Zhang, H. M. (2010). Solving the dynamic user optimal assignment problem considering queue spillback. Networks & Spatial Economics, 10(1), 49–71.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Predrag T. Tošić, & Agha, G. A. (2004). Maximal Clique Based Distributed Coalition Formation for Task Allocation in Large-Scale Multi-agent Systems. International Conference on Massively Multi-Agent Systems (Vol.3446, pp.104-120). Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Ramamritham, K., Stankovic, J. A. & Zhao, W. (1989). Distributed scheduling of tasks with deadlines and resource requirements. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 38(8), 1110–1123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Ramchurn, S. D., Farinelli, A., Macarthur, K. S. & Jennings, N. R. (2010). Decentralized coordination in robocup rescue. Computer Journal, 53(9), 1447–1461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Ramchurn, S. D., Polukarov, M., Farinelli, A., Truong, C., & Jennings, N. R. (2010). Coalition Formation with Spatial and Temporal Constraints. International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (Vol.3, pp.1181-1188). DBLP.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Rogers, A., Farinelli, A., Stranders, R. & Jennings, N. R. (2011). Bounded approximate decentralised coordination via the max-sum algorithm. Artificial Intelligence, 175(2), 730–759.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Rueda-Medina, A. C., Franco, J. F., Rider, M. J., Padilha-Feltrin, A. & Romero, R. (2013). A mixed-integer linear programming approach for optimal type, size and allocation of distributed generation in radial distribution systems. Electric Power Systems Research, 97(1), 133–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Shehory, O. & Kraus, S. (1998). Methods for task allocation via agent coalition formation. Artificial Intelligence, 101(1–2), 165–200.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Smith, S. F., Gallagher, A. & Zimmerman, T. (2007). Distributed management of flexible times schedules. International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (pp.74). ACM.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Su, X., Zhang, M. & Bai, Q. (2014). Decentralised Task Allocation Under Space, Time and Communication Constraints in Disaster Domains. Smart Modeling and Simulation for Complex Systems. Springer Japan.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    Su, X., Zhang, M. & Bai, Q. (2015). Dynamic task allocation for heterogeneous agents in disaster environments under time, space and communication constraints. Computer Journal, 58(8).Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    Su, X., Zhang, M. & Bai, Q. (2016). Coordination for dynamic weighted task allocation in disaster environments with time, space and communication constraints. Journal of Parallel & Distributed Computing, 97, 47–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    Su, X., Zhang, M., Ye, D. & Bai, Q. (2014). A dynamic coordination approach for task allocation in disaster environments under spatial and communicational constraints. In AAAI2014 workshop.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    Szabo, C. & Kroeger, T. (2012). Evolving multi-objective strategies for task allocation of scientific workflows on public clouds. Evolutionary Computation (Vol.425, pp.1-8). IEEE.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    Tanzi, T. J., Sebastien, O. & Harivelo, F. (2017). Towards a collaborative approach for disaster management using radio science technologies. Ursi Radio Science Bulletin, 87(1), 25–36.Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    Tsarouchi, P., Michalos, G., Makris, S., Athanasatos, T., Dimoulas, K. & Chryssolouris, G. (2017). On a human–robot workplace design and task allocation system. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 1–8.Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    Yin, P. Y., Yu, S. S., Wang, P. P., & Wang, Y. T. (2007). Multi-objective task allocation in distributed computing systems by hybrid particl`e swarm optimization. Applied Mathematics & Computation, 184(2), 407–420.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    Zhang, B. & Peng, J. (2013). Uncertain programming model for uncertain optimal assignment problem. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 37(9), 6458–6468.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Systems Engineering Society of China and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xing Su
    • 1
  • Yuechen Wang
    • 1
  • Xibin Jia
    • 1
  • Limin Guo
    • 1
  • Zhiming Ding
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of InformationBeijing University of TechnologyBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations