Distributed Fair Scheduling for Information Exchange in Multi-Agent Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Information exchange is a crucial component of many real-world multi-agent systems. However, the communication between the agents involves two major challenges: the limited bandwidth, and the shared communication medium between the agents, which restricts the number of agents that can simultaneously exchange information. While both of these issues need to be addressed in practice, the impact of the latter problem on the performance of the multi-agent systems has often been neglected. This becomes even more important when the agents' information or observations have different importance, in which case the agents require different priorities for accessing the medium and sharing their information. Representing the agents' priorities by fairness weights and normalizing each agent's share by the assigned fairness weight, the goal can be expressed as equalizing the agents' normalized shares of the communication medium. To achieve this goal, we adopt a queueing theoretic approach and propose a distributed fair scheduling algorithm for providing weighted fairness in single-hop networks. Our proposed algorithm guarantees an upper-bound on the normalized share disparity among any pair of agents. This can particularly improve the short-term fairness, which is important in real-time applications. Moreover, our scheduling algorithm adjusts itself dynamically to achieve a high throughput at the same time. The simulation results validate our claims and comparisons with the existing methods show our algorithm's superiority in providing short-term fairness, while achieving a high throughput.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".