# Distributed Lagrangian Relaxation Protocol for the Over-constrained Generalized Mutual Assignment Problem

## Abstract

*The Generalized Mutual Assignment Problem* (GMAP) is a distributed combinatorial optimization problem in which, with no centralized control, multiple agents search for an optimal assignment of goods that satisfies their individual knapsack constraints. Previously, in the GMAP protocol, problem instances were assumed to be feasible, meaning that the total capacities of the agents were large enough to assign the goods. However, this assumption may not be realistic in some situations. In this paper, we present two methods for dealing with such “over-constrained” GMAP instances. First, we introduce a *disposal agent* who has an unlimited capacity and is in charge of the unassigned goods. With this method, we can use any off-the-shelf GMAP protocol since the disposal agent can make the instances feasible. Second, we formulate the GMAP instances as an Integer Programming (IP) problem, in which the assignment constraints are described with inequalities. With this method, we need to devise a new protocol for such a formulation. We experimentally compared these two methods on the variants of *Generalized Assignment Problem* (GAP) benchmark instances. Our results indicate that the first method finds a solution faster for fewer over-constrained instances, and the second finds a better solution faster for more over-constrained instances.

## Keywords

generalized mutual assignment problem distributed optimization Lagrangian relaxation## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References

- 1.Bertsekas, D.P.: Nonlinear Programming, 2nd edn. Athena Scientific (1999)Google Scholar
- 2.Bhatti, S., Xu, J.: Survey of target tracking protocols using wireless sensor network. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Communications, pp. 110–115 (2009)Google Scholar
- 3.Dias, M.B., Zlot, R., Kalra, N., Stentz, A.: Market-based multirobot coordination: a survey and analysis. Proceedings of the IEEE 94(7), 1257–1270 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Frank, C., Römer, K.: Distributed Facility Location Algorithms for Flexible Configuration of Wireless Sensor Networks. In: Aspnes, J., Scheideler, C., Arora, A., Madden, S. (eds.) DCOSS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4549, pp. 124–141. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Guignard, M., Kim, S.: Lagrangean decomposition: A model yielding stronger Lagrangean bounds. Mathematical Programming 39, 215–228 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 6.Hirayama, K.: A new approach to distributed task assignment using Lagrangian decomposition and distributed constraint satisfaction. In: Proceedings of the 21st National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2006), pp. 660–665 (2006)Google Scholar
- 7.Hirayama, K.: An
*α*-approximation protocol for the generalized mutual assignment problem. In: Proceedings of the 22nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2007), pp. 744–749 (2007)Google Scholar - 8.Hirayama, K., Matsui, T., Yokoo, M.: Adaptive price update in distributed Lagrangian relaxation protocol. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS 2009), pp. 1033–1040 (2009)Google Scholar
- 9.
- 10.Modi, P.J., Shen, W.-M., Tambe, M., Yokoo, M.: An asynchronous complete method for distributed constraint optimization. In: Proceedings of the Second International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS 2003), pp. 161–168 (2003)Google Scholar
- 11.Nauss, R.M.: The generalized assignment problem. In: Karlof, J.K. (ed.) Integer Programming: Theory and Practice, pp. 39–55. CRC Press (2006)Google Scholar
- 12.
- 13.Smith, R.G.: The contract net protocol: high-level communication and control in a distributed problem solver. IEEE Transactions on Computers 29(2), 1104–1113 (1990)Google Scholar
- 14.Yagiura, M., Ibaraki, T.: Generalized assignment problem. In: Gonzalez, T.F. (ed.) Handbook of Approximation Algorithms and Metaheuristics. Computer Information Science Series. Chapman Hall/CRC (2006)Google Scholar