Ant Colony Optimization for Automatic Design of Strategies in an Adversarial Model

  • Pablo J. Villacorta
  • David A. Pelta
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 387)


Adversarial decision making is aimed at determining optimal strategies against an adversarial enemy who observes our actions and learns from them. The field is also known as decision making in the presence of adversaries. Given two agents or entities S and T (the adversary), both engage in a repeated conflicting situation in which agent T tries to learn how to predict the behaviour of S. One defense for S is to make decisions that are intended to confuse T, although this will affect the ability of getting a higher reward. It is difficult to define good decision strategies for S since they should contain certain amount of randomness. Ant-based techniques can help in this direction because the automatic design of good strategies for our adversarial model can be expressed as a combinatorial optimization problem that is suitable for Ant-based optimizers. We have applied the Ant System (AS) and the Max-Min Ant System (MMAS) algorithms to such problem and we have compared the results with those found by a Generational Genetic Algorithm in a previous work. We have also studied the structure of the solutions found by both search techniques. The results are encouraging because they confirm that our approach is valid and MMAS is a competitive technique for automatic design of strategies.


Automatic Design Combinatorial Optimization Problem Payoff Matrix Heuristic Information Payoff Matrice 
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.
    Amigoni, F., Gatti, N., Ippedico, A.: A game-theoretic approach to determining efficient patrolling strategies for mobile robots. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (IAT 2008), pp. 500–503 (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baldassarre, G., Nolfi, S.: Strengths and synergies of evolved and designed controllers: A study within collective robotics. Artificial Intelligence 173(7-8), 857–875 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Caro, G.D., Dorigo, M.: Antnet: Distributed stigmergetic control for communication networks. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 9, 317–365 (1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cordón, O., de Viana, I.F., Herrera, F., Moreno, L.: A new aco model integrating evolutionary computation concepts: The best-worst ant system. In: Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Ant Algorithms, ANTS 2000, pp. 22–29 (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Corne, D., Dorigo, M., Glover, F., Dasgupta, D., Moscato, P., Poli, R., Price, K.V. (eds.): New ideas in optimization. McGraw-Hill Ltd, UK (1999)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Costa, D., Hertz, A.: Ants can colour graphs. The Journal of the Operational Research Society 48(3), 295–305 (1997)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dorigo, M., Caro, G.D.: Ant algorithms for discrete optimization. Artificial Life 5(2), 137–172 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dorigo, M., Gambardella, L.M.: Ant colony system: A cooperative learning approach to the traveling salesman problem. IEEE Trans. on Evolutionary Computation 1(1), 53–66 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dorigo, M., Stützle, T.: Ant Colony Optimization. MIT Press, Cambridge (2004)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dorigo, M., Maniezzo, V., Colorni, A.: The ant system: Optimization by a colony of cooperating agents. IEEE Trans. on Systems, Man and Cybernetics - Part B 26(1), 1–13 (1996)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fidanova, S., Lirkov, I.: Ant colony system approach for protein solving. In: Proceedings of 2nd Int. Multiconf. on Computer Science and Information Technology, pp. 887–891 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kott, A., McEneany, W.M.: Adversarial Reasoning: Computational Approaches to Reading the Opponents Mind. Chapman and Hall/ CRC, Boca Raton (2007)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kott, A., Ownby, M.: Tools for real-time anticipation of enemy actions in tactical ground operations. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Krasnogor, N., Terrazas, G., Pelta, D.A., Ochoa, G.: A critical view of the evolutionary design of self-assembling systems. In: Talbi, E.-G., Liardet, P., Collet, P., Lutton, E., Schoenauer, M. (eds.) EA 2005. LNCS, vol. 3871, pp. 179–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Maniezzo, V., Colorni, A., Dorigo, M.: The ant system applied to the quadratic assignment problem. Tech. Rep. 94/28, IRIDIA, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium (1994)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    McMullen, P.R.: An ant colony optimization approach to addressing a jit sequencing problem with multiple objectives. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering 15(3), 309–317 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Park, H.S., Pedrycz, W., Oh, S.K.: Evolutionary design of hybrid self-organizing fuzzy polynomial neural networks with the aid of information granulation. Expert Systems with Applications 33(4), 830–846 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Paruchuri, P., Pearce, J.P., Kraus, S.: Playing games for security: An efficient exact algorithm for solving bayesian stackelberg games. In: Proceedings of 7th Int. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2008), pp. 895–902 (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pelta, D., Yager, R.: On the conflict between inducing confusion and attaining payoff in adversarial decision making. Information Sciences 179, 33–40 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Popp, R., Yen, J.: Emergent Information Technologies and Enabling Policies for Counter-Terrorism. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Salcedo-Sanz, S., Naldi, M., Perez-Bellido, A.M., Portilla-Figueras, A., Ortiz-Garcia, E.G.: Evolutionary design of oriented-tree networks using cayley-type encodings. Information Sciences 179(20), 3461–3472 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stützle, T., Hoos, H.H.: Max-min ant system. Future Generation Computer Systems 16(8), 889–914 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Villacorta, P., Pelta, D.: Evolutionary design and statistical assessment of strategies in an adversarial domain. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2010), pp. 2250–2256 (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pablo J. Villacorta
    • 1
  • David A. Pelta
    • 1
  1. 1.Models of Decision and Optimization Research Group, Department of Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, CITIC-UGR, ETSIITUniversity of GranadaGranadaSpain

Personalised recommendations