Multi-Agent Mission Planning With Localized Task Allocation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing autonomous systems face challenges in dynamic and efficient coordination between agents, leading to suboptimal task allocation and response to real-world state variations, especially in large-scale deployments where perfect coordination may not be necessary.

Innovation Solution

A multi-agent mission planning system comprising a mission generator, tactical group planners, and a multi-agent planner that uses a Multi-Agent Language (MAL) to compute allocation vectors, allowing agents to perform missions while considering other agents in their tactical groups, and dynamically adapting between centralized and distributed management based on communication status.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If exact coordination optimization is implemented for all agents, then task allocation quality is improved, but computational complexity becomes intractable

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetask allocation qualityVSAvoidcomputational complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the coordination problem by introducing a correlation order parameter k that limits optimization to small groups of agents rather than all agents globally. This segmentation transforms the intractable global optimization problem into manageable local optimization problems, where only agents within distance k of each other require detailed coordination, while distant agents use rougher approximation methods.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by implementing exact coordination optimization only for agent groups within correlation distance k, rather than for all agent pairs. This partial optimization approach achieves sufficient task allocation quality for locally critical coordination while avoiding the computational intractability of global exact optimization, balancing precision where needed with efficiency elsewhere.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

2Loss of time

If strict real-time requirements are met with exact solutions, then response time is improved, but computational resources required increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveresponse timeVSAvoidcomputational resources
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the computational workload by correlation order k, requiring intensive exact optimization only for small local groups within distance k, while using efficient approximation algorithms for the remaining agent allocations. This segmentation enables meeting real-time response requirements with manageable computational resource consumption on embedded platforms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the parameter of optimization scope from global (all agents) to local (agents within correlation order k), and adjusts the solution precision parameter based on distance. This parameter change allows the system to meet real-time constraints by reducing the computational burden while maintaining sufficient accuracy for mission-critical allocations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Reliability

If perfect coordination between all agents is achieved, then system effectiveness is improved, but communication overhead increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem effectivenessVSAvoidcommunication overhead
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments communication requirements by introducing correlation order k, where agents only need detailed coordination information with other agents within distance k. Agents beyond this distance require only rough approximation coordination, dramatically reducing communication overhead while maintaining system effectiveness for locally-critical missions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies local quality by providing high-quality detailed coordination information only where physically necessary (within correlation order k), and rougher approximation information elsewhere. This local differentiation of communication quality reduces overall communication overhead while maintaining reliability for missions where coordination is physically critical.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

4Quantity of substance

If scalability is improved for large-scale deployment, then system size is improved, but coordination complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvenumber of agentsVSAvoidcoordination complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Quantity of substanceVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the coordination problem by correlation order k, allowing the system to scale to large numbers of agents without proportionally increasing coordination complexity. Each agent only needs to coordinate in detail with a limited local neighborhood, making the coordination complexity per agent constant rather than growing with total system size.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by implementing detailed coordination optimization only for a fraction of agent pairs (those within correlation distance k), while using efficient approximation for the remainder. This enables scalable deployment of large agent swarms with manageable per-agent computational and communication loads.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS20240281736A1A platform for multi-agent task planning of autonomous systems
Publication Date: 2024.08.22 RAFAEL ADVANCED DEFENSE SYST LTD
  • US20240281736A1 patent drawing
  • US20240281736A1 patent drawing
  • US20240281736A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A system for multi-agent mission planning comprises a) a mission generator (MG) configured to compute a set of Mission Agent Language (MAL) missions; b) a group of agents (TGPs), each capable of performing at least one MAL mission; and c) at least one Multi-Agent Planner (MAP) adapted to receive said set of MAL missions from said MG to build an allocation vector between said MAL missions and said agents in said group;wherein each agent (TGP) is further capable of performing its assigned MAL mission per said allocation vector, while considering all other agents in its corresponding tactical group.