Team Cooperation for Plan Recovery in Multi-agent Systems

  • Roberto Micalizio
  • Pietro Torasso
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4687)


The paper addresses the problem of recovering the execution of a multi-agent plan when the occurrence of unexpected events (e.g. faults) may cause the failure of some actions. In our scenario actions are executed concurrently by a group of agents organized in teams and each agent performs a local control loop on the progress of the sub-plan it is responsible for. When an agent detects an action failure, the agent itself tries to repair (if possible) its own sub-plan and if this local recovery fails, a more powerful recovery strategy at team level is invoked. Such a strategy is based on the cooperation of agents within the same team: the agent in trouble asks another teammate, properly selected, to cooperate for recovering from a particular action failure. The cooperation is aimed at achieving the goal assigned to the agents’ team despite the action failure and to this end the agents exchange sub-goals and synthesize new plans.


Local Plan Plan Execution Plan Recovery Action Failure Team Level 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Muscettola, N., Nayak, P., Williams, B.: Remote agent: to boldly go where no AI system has gone before. Artificial Intelligence 103(1), 5–47 (1998)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Birnbaum, L., Collins, G., Freed, M., Krulwich, B.: Model-based diagnosis of planning failures. In: Proc. AAAI 1990, pp. 318–323. AAAI Press, Stanford (1990)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Witteveen, C., Roos, N., van der Krogt, R., de Weerdt, M.: Diagnosis of single and multi-agent plans. In: Proc. AAMAS 2005, pp. 805–812. ACM Press, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kalech, M., Kaminka, G.: Towards model-based diagnosis of coordination failures. In: Proc. AAAI 2005, pp. 102–107. AAAI Press, Stanford (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Micalizio, R., Torasso, P.: On-line monitoring of plan execution: A distributed approach. Knowledge-Based Systems 20(2), 134–142 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Micalizio, R., Torasso, P., Torta, G.: Intelligent supervision of plan execution in multi-agent systems. Internat. Transactions on Systems Science and Applications 1(3), 259–267 (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carver, N., Lesser, V.: Domain monotonicity and the performance of local solutions strategies for CDPS-based distributed sensor interpretation and distributed diagnosis. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 6(1), 35–76 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kambhampati, S.: Refinement planning as a unifying framework for plan synthesis. AI Magazine 18(2), 67–97 (1997)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boutilier, C., Brafman, R.I.: Partial-order planning with concurrent interacting actions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 14, 105–136 (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Micalizio, R., Torasso, P.: Diagnosis of multi-agent plans under partial observability. In: DX 2007. Proc. 18th Internat. Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis, pp. 346–353 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jensen, R.M., Veloso, M.M.: Obdd-based universal planning for synchronized agents in non-deterministic domains. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 13, 189–226 (2000)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roberto Micalizio
    • 1
  • Pietro Torasso
    • 1
  1. 1.Università di Torino, corso Svizzera 187, TorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations