Trust Communities: An Open, Self-Organised Social Infrastructure of Autonomous Agents

  • Sarah EdenhoferEmail author
  • Sven Tomforde
  • Jan Kantert
  • Lukas Klejnowski
  • Yvonne Bernard
  • Jörg Hähner
  • Christian Müller-Schloer
Part of the Autonomic Systems book series (ASYS)


Future technical systems will be increasingly characterised by openness and heterogeneity of participating elements. Based on exemplary application scenarios such as Desktop Computing Grids, Smart Power Grids, and Networked Camera Systems, this chapter develops a solution perspective to handle anomalies, disturbances, and malicious behaviour by making use of trust and reliability measures in self-organised systems. The overall goal is to increase the robustness of open distributed systems with low overhead. Therefore, a novel self-organised multi-agent organisation—the Trust Community—is introduced in two variants: as implicit and as explicit self-structuring society of autonomous agents. For the explicit variant, a life-cycle and management routines are described. For evaluation purposes, we simulate a Trusted Desktop Computing Grid and introduce different types of stereo-type agent behaviour, ranging from altruistic to egoistic and to cunning behaviour. In order to support efficiency and stabilise the process, we show the benefits of explicit Trust Communities, which results in significantly lower overhead and more reliable relations among agents compared to other forms of agent societies.


Trust communities Multi-agent systems Autonomous agents Self-organisation Trusted desktop grid 



This research is partly sponsored by the research unit OC-Trust (FOR 1085) of the German Research Foundation. Further, we want to thank Christopher Stifter for his work.


  1. 1.
    Prothmann, H., Branke, J., Schmeck, H., Tomforde, S., Rochner, F., Hähner, J., Müller-Schloer, C.: Organic traffic light control for urban road networks. Int. J. Auton. Adapt. Commun. Syst. 2, 203–225 (2009). ISSN:1754-8632Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fisch, D., Kastl, F., Sick, B.: Novelty-aware attack recognition—intrusion detection with organic computing techniques. In: Distributed, Parallel and Biologically Inspired Systems—7th IFIP TC 10 Working Conference, DIPES 2010 and 3rd IFIP TC 10 International Conference, BICC 2010, Held as Part of WCC 2010, Brisbane, 20–23 Sept 2010. Proceedings (2010), pp. 242–253Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Müller-Schloer, C.: Organic computing—on the feasibility of controlled emergence. In: 2nd International Conference on Hardware/Software Codesign and System Synthesis CODES + ISSS 2004, pp. 2–5 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ramchurn, S.D., Huynh, D., Jennings, N.R.: Trust in multi-agent systems. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 19, 1–25 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Klejnowski, L., Niemann, S., Bernard, Y., Müller-Schloer, C.: Using trusted communities to improve the speedup of agents in a desktop grid system. English. In: Zavoral, F., Jung, J.J., Badica, C. (eds.) Intelligent Distributed Computing VII, vol. 511, pp. 189–198. Springer (2014). ISBN:978-3-319-01570-5Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Foster, I.: The grid: computing without bounds. Sci. Am. 288, 78–85 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Griffiths, N.: Cooperative clans. Kybernetes 34, 1384–1403 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Karlins, M., Abelson, H.: Persuasion: How Opinions and Attitudes are Changed. Springer, New York (1959)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hume, D.: A Treatise of Human Nature. Oxford University Press, New York (1739)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Buskens, V.: The social structure of trust. Soc. Netw. 20, 265–289 (1998). ISSN:0378-8733Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mui, L.: Computational models of trust and reputation: agents, evolutionary games, and social networks. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Luhmann, N.: Trust and Power. Wiley, Chichester (1979)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hung, L.V.: High quality P2P service provisioning via decentralized trust management. PhD thesis, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aberer, K., Despotovic, Z., Galuba, W., Kellerer, W.: The complex facets of reputation and trust. In: Computational Intelligence, Theory and Applications, pp. 281–294. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sabater, J., Sierra, C.: Review on computational trust and reputation models. Artif. Intell. Rev. 24, 33–60 (2005). ISSN:0269-2821Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gutscher, A.: A trust model for an open, decentralized reputation system. In: Trust Management, pp. 285–300. Springer, Boston (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wooldridge, M.: An Introduction to MultiAgent Systems, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Casanova, H.: Distributed computing research issues in grid computing. SIGACT News 33, 50–70 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mui, L., Mohtashemi, M., Halberstadt, A.: A computational model of trust and reputation. In: Proceedings of 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2002), pp. 2431–2439 (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Choi, S., Kim, H., Byun, E., Baik, M., Kim, S., Park, C., Hwang, C.: Characterizing and classifying desktop grid. In: 7th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud and Grid Computing (CCGrid 2007), pp. 743–748 (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Anglano, C., Canonico, M., Guazzone, M., Botta, M., Rabellino, S., Arena, S., Girardi, G.: Peer-to-peer desktop grids in the real world: the ShareGrid project. In: 8th IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGrid 2008), pp. 609–614 (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chakravarti, A.J., Baumgartner, G., Lauria, M.: Application-specific scheduling for the organic grid. In: Proceedings of GRID 2004 Workshops, pp. 146–155. IEEE, Washington, DC (2004). ISBN:0-7695-2256-4Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wang, Y., Vassileva, J.: Trust-based community formation in peer-to-peer file sharing networks. In: IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence (WI 2004), pp. 341–348 (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Anderson, D., Fedak, G.: The computational and storage potential of volunteer computing. In: Proceedings of CCGRID 2006, pp. 73–80. IEEE (2006). ISBN:0-7695-2585-7Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fedak, G., Germain, C., Neri, V., Cappello, F.: XtremWeb: a generic global computing system. In: 1st IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud and Grid Computing (CCGrid 2001), pp. 582–587 (2001)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kantert, J. Edenhofer, S., Tomforde, S., Hähner, J., Müller-Schloer, C.: Normative control—controlling open distributed systems with autonomous entities. In: Reif, W., Anders, G., Seebach, H., Steghöfer, J.-P., André, E., Hähner, J., Müller-Schloer, C., Ungerer, T. (eds.) Autonomic Systems, vol. 7, pp. 87–123. Springer, Cham (2016)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Castelfranchi, C., Falcone, R.: Trust Theory: A Socio-Cognitive and Computational Model. Wiley (2010). ISBN:0470028750, 9780470028759Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Domingues, P., Sousa, B., Moura Silva, L.: Sabotage-tolerance and trustmanagement in desktop grid computing. In: Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 23 (7), 904–912 (2007)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Brooks, C.H., Durfee, E.H.: Congregation formation in multiagent systems. English. Auton. Agents Multi-Agent Syst. 7, 145–170 (2003). ISSN:1387-2532Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kantert, J., Spiegelberg, H., Tomforde, S., Hahner, J., Müller-Schloer, C.: Distributed rendering in an open self-organised trusted desktop grid. In: 12th IEEE International Conference on Autonomic Computing (ICAC 2015), pp. 267–272 (2015)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Goedegebure, S.: Big Buck Bunny. (2007). Online; Accessed 03 Sept 2015
  32. 32.
    Terdiman, D.: New Technology Revs up Pixar’s ‘Cars 2’. (2011). Online; Accessed 24 Sept 2015
  33. 33.
    Edenhofer, S., Kantert, J., Klejnowski, L., Tomforde, S., Hähner, J., Müller-Schloer, C.: Advanced attacks to trusted communities in multi-agent systems. In: 8th IEEE International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems (SASO 2014), pp. 186–191 (2014)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Edenhofer, S., Stifter, C., Jänen, U., Kantert, J., Tomforde, S., Hähner, J., Müller-Schloer, C.: An accusation-based strategy to handle undesirable behaviour in multi-agent Systems. In: 8th IEEE International Conference on Autonomic Computing (ICAC 2015), (2015)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tomforde, S., Prothmann, H., Branke, J., Hähner, J., Mnif, M., Müller-Schloer, C., Richter, U., Schmeck, H.: Observation and control of organic systems. In: Organic Computing—A Paradigm Shift for Complex Systems, pp. 325–338. Birkhäuser, Basel (2011)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Klejnowski, L.: Trusted community: a novel multiagent organisation for open distributed systems. PhD thesis, Leibniz Universität Hannover (2014)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Klejnowski, L., Bernard, Y., Anders, G., Müller-Schloer, C., Reif, W.: Trusted community—a trust-based multi-agent organisation for open systems. In: Filipe, J., Fred, A.L.N. (eds.) 5th International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence (ICAART 2013) (1), pp. 312–317 (2013)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Steghöfer, J.-P., Nafz, F., Reif, W., Bernard, Y., Klejnowski, L., Hähner, J., Müller-Schloer, C.: Formal specification and analysis of trusted communities. In: 4th IEEE International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems (SASO 2010), pp. 190–195 (2010)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kantert, J., Edenhofer, S., Tomforde, S., Müller-Schloer, C.: Representation of trust and reputation in self-managed computing systems. In: IEEE 13th International Conference on Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing, DASC 2015, pp. 1827–1834. IEEE, Liverpool (2015)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lynch, N.A.: Distributed Algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1996). ISBN:1558603484zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Jadaan, O.A., Rajamani, L., Rao, C.R.: Improved selection operator for GA. J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol. (JATIT) (2008)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Koestler, A.: The Ghost in the Machine. Penguin Group, Hutchinson/Macmillan (1967)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Simon, H.A.: The architecture of complexity. Proc. Am. Philos. Soc. 106, 467–482 (1962). ISSN:0003049XGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Negeri, E., Baken, N., Popov, M.: Holonic architecture of the smart grid. Smart Grid Renew. Energy 4, 202–212 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Van Brussel, H., Wyns, J., Valckenaers, P., Bongaerts, L., Peeters, P.: Reference architecture for holonic manufacturing systems: {PROSA}. Comput. Ind. 37, 255–274 (1998). ISSN:0166-3615Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Moghadam, M., Mozayani, N.: A street lighting control system based on holonic structures and traffic system. In: 3rd International Conference on Computer Research and Development (ICCRD 2011), vol. 1, pp. 92–96 (2011)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ye, Y., Hilaire, V., Koukam, A., Wandong, C.: A holonic model in wireless sensor networks. In: 4th International Conference on Intelligent Information Hiding and Multimedia Signal Processing (IIHMSP 2008), pp. 491–495 (2008)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Diaconescu, A., Pitt, J.: Holonic institutions for multi-scale polycentric self-governance. English. In: Ghose, A., Oren, N., Telang, P., Thangarajah, J. (eds.) Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, and Norms in Agent Systems X, vol. 9372, pp. 19–35. Springer (2015). ISBN:978-3-319-25419-7Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Müller-Schloer, C.: The holonic agent—a building block for systems of systems. In: Keynote in Workshop on Self-Improving System Integration (SISSY), ICAC, Grenoble (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sarah Edenhofer
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sven Tomforde
    • 1
  • Jan Kantert
    • 2
  • Lukas Klejnowski
    • 2
  • Yvonne Bernard
    • 2
  • Jörg Hähner
    • 3
  • Christian Müller-Schloer
    • 4
  1. 1.Organic Computing GroupAugsburg UniversityAugsburgGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Systems EngineeringLeibniz Universität HannoverHannoverGermany
  3. 3.Organic Computing GroupUniversity of AugsburgAugsburgGermany
  4. 4.Institute of Systems EngineeringUniversity of HannoverHannoverGermany

Personalised recommendations