Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
filters
f
2
and
f
3
correspond to the association of the action
move towards a location
with the contexts
closest victim discovery
(
f
2
)and
handled victim discovery
(
f
3
). The
context
closest victim discovery
happens when an agent perceives the closest victim to
evacuate in its perception field. The context
closest victim discovery
depicts the situa-
tion where an agent
medical porter
perceives a victim that is handled by another medical
porter. The filter
f
4
activates the action
wait
and triggers when a medical porter is alone
close to a victim to evacuate (context
victim proximity
). The filter
f
5
corresponds to
the association between the action
evacuate victim
and the context
rescue victim
.This
context appears when two medical porters with the complementary skill are close to a
victim ready to be evacuated. This context is related to the following information: the
availability of the porters, the location of the porter and the victim. The comparison
between
S
1
and
S
2
enables to study the cost of the activation process.
S
3
and
S
4
are the extensions of respectively the scenarios
S
1
and
S
2
with the com-
munication filters
f
recept
and
f
accept
, and the associated activation filters
f
6
and
f
7
.The
filters
f
recept
and
f
accept
provide the support for the communication process:
f
recept
enables the reception of the request messages and
f
accept
enables the reception of their
answer(s). When the agents communicate, the simulation has to manage two new agent
actions that are activated by the filters
f
6
and
f
7
. The filter
f
6
is related to the action
contact
: an agent puts a request message in the environment and waits for an answer.
The filter is activated when the agent is close to a victim to evacuate but does not have
another agent nearby to evacuate this victim. The filter
f
7
is related to the action
coor-
dination
: an agent answers to the contact agent and moves towards the victim location.
The context of this filter is the reception of a request message containing the location of
the victim. The comparison between
S
3
and
S
4
enables to study the cost of the activa-
tion when the medical porters use communication protocol to contact another medical
porter with the skill required.
Activation.
We have run three series of simulations characterized by two parameters:
number of agents
medical porters
and field of vision. For each series of simulations,
we evaluate our model using the average run-time over 50 simulations with similar
parameters. In the first group, we have experimented with 5 medical porters with the
skill “medical monitoring”, 5 medical porters with the skill “victim handling” and 5
victims, in the second group with 15 of each, and in the third group with 20 of each.
Figure 2 shows the result for the third experiment. As we can see, the scenario
S
2
is
faster than the classical scenario
S
1
, except for the lowest field of vision. For a field of
vision from
8
to
30
,
S
2
run-time curves (dotted curves) are below
S
1
run-time curves
(solid curves). The increase of the field of vision improves the knowledge of the agents
on the environment and should improve their efficiency: the probability for an agent to
perceive victims and other agents increases. This is true with the use of the environment
in the scenario
S
2
, a larger field improves the efficiency of the agents: as the field of
vision increases from
5
to
30
, run-time decreases from around
4000
s
to
800
s
. But with
the classical activation process in the scenario
S
1
, the improvement of victim perception
barely offsets the cost of local context analysis. We can observe that in most cases, the
cost of the context computing in each agent is more expensive in terms of simulation
run-time than the cost of computing the context inside the environment. The results are
similar for the first and second series of experimentations.
