JP2018106397A - Schedule arbitration system and schedule arbitration method - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To make resource allocation possible when a mismatch with a constraint occurs between multiple systems.SOLUTION: A schedule arbitration system 10 is configured to include a schedule arbitration server 1 comprising an arithmetic unit 11-01 that generates a modified schedule for each server on the basis of a schedule and creation constraint information of each server and whole optimal constraint information which is a constraint related to whole arbitration between schedules when a mismatch in the schedule of each server is detected, calculates a credit value corresponding to claim strength of a priority of the schedule of each server according to a degree of the modification, and transmits a start notification of schedule arbitration including the modified schedule and information on the credit value to each of the corresponding servers.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 7

Description

  The present invention relates to a schedule arbitration system and a schedule arbitration method.

  In recent years, with the globalization of production, opportunities to produce the same device in multiple bases are increasing.

  Here, as a technique for controlling a plurality of production bases, for example, a production model for performing production across a plurality of production bases including production bases with different business management by vertical integration / horizontal development of business. , The delivery and inventory quantity after a certain period is predicted based on the production lead time of each production base and the lead time of procurement parts, and the priority of the production models of the plurality of production bases is based on the predicted delivery and inventory quantity. A production control system (see Patent Document 1) having a plurality of production site prediction feedback means for optimizing the ranking and the shipping plan has been proposed.

JP 2012-141806 A

  However, in the prior art, it is not considered that inconsistencies occur in the constraints of the production systems at a plurality of production bases. Therefore, it is difficult to allocate resources that cause inconsistency among a plurality of systems.

  Therefore, an object of the present invention is to provide a technique that enables resource allocation even when there is a constraint inconsistency among a plurality of systems.

  The schedule arbitration system of the present invention that solves the above-mentioned problem acquires a schedule relating to each of a plurality of events and creation constraint information of the schedule from each server that manages each of the events, and the schedule and the creation of each server Based on the constraint information and the overall optimum constraint information that is a constraint on the entire mediation between schedules, inconsistency determination processing for detecting inconsistencies between schedules of the servers, and when the inconsistencies are detected, A schedule re-creation process for correcting a schedule to generate a correction schedule, a credit calculation process for calculating a credit value corresponding to the assertion strength of the priority of the schedule in each server according to the degree of the correction, and the correction Schedule including schedule and credit value information The start notification Lumpur arbitration, a transmission process of transmitting corresponding to the server each comprising a schedule mediation server having an arithmetic unit for executing that.

Further, in the schedule arbitration method of the present invention, the information processing system acquires a schedule related to each of a plurality of events and creation constraint information of the schedule from each server that manages each of the events, and the schedule and Based on the creation constraint information and global optimum constraint information that is a constraint on the entire mediation between schedules, a mismatch detection process that detects mismatches between schedules of the servers, and when each mismatch is detected, A schedule re-creation process for correcting the schedule of the server to generate a correction schedule, a credit calculation process for calculating a credit value corresponding to the assertion strength of the priority of the schedule in each server according to the degree of the correction, A schedule including information on the correction schedule and the credit value The start notification module arbitration, a transmission process of transmitting corresponding to the server each, characterized in that the run.

  According to the present invention, it is possible to allocate resources even when there is a constraint inconsistency among a plurality of systems.

It is a figure which shows the conceptual example of the symbiotic autonomous distributed system in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structural example of the schedule mediation system in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structural example of the valve | bulb adjustment system in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structural example of the meeting scheduling system of this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a whole sequence of the schedule mediation system in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a display screen of the autonomous individual server group in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structural example of the hardware of the server of a schedule arbitration server in this embodiment, and an autonomous individual server group. It is a figure which shows the example of object of schedule mediation in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of the initial maintenance schedule of the road surface in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of an initial maintenance schedule of the lamp in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of the initial maintenance schedule of the traffic in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of the initial maintenance schedule of the electric power in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the software structural example of the server of the autonomous individual server group in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a constraint condition of the schedule in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of the content of the message of the initial maintenance schedule in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the software structural example of the schedule arbitration server in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the competition example in the initial stage maintenance schedule between the road surface maintenance plan server and lamp maintenance plan server in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the competition example in the initial stage maintenance schedule between the road surface maintenance plan server and lamp maintenance plan server in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of contention in the initial maintenance schedule between the electric power maintenance plan server and traffic management server in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of contention in the initial maintenance schedule between the electric power maintenance plan server and traffic management server in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of GUI of the schedule creation policy viewer in this embodiment. It is an example which described the pattern of mediation in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of GUI of the mediation time input part in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a screen which sets the priority point issue policy in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a correction schedule of the road surface maintenance schedule with respect to the initial stage maintenance schedule in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a correction schedule of the lamp maintenance schedule with respect to the initial maintenance schedule in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a correction schedule of the electric power maintenance schedule with respect to the initial maintenance schedule in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a correction schedule of the traffic schedule with respect to the initial maintenance schedule in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a correction schedule of a road surface maintenance plan server when a priority point is sent from the road surface maintenance plan server with respect to the schedule arbitration server in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a correction schedule of a lamp maintenance plan server when a priority point is sent from the road surface maintenance plan server to the schedule mediation server in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of the content of the offer assertion message in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the comparative example (comparison in a road surface maintenance plan server) of the initial maintenance schedule and schedule restrictions in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the comparative example (comparison in a lamp maintenance plan server) of the initial maintenance schedule and schedule restrictions in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of the reassertion assertion message in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of the assertion message which refuses offer in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of the assertion message which offers a schedule in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a state transition of the server of the autonomous individual server group of this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of an assertion message containing only the maintenance area and required time in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of the time slot | zone when the reject assertion message in this embodiment is easy to be issued. It is a figure which shows the example of a flow of mediation using the agent program in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of an arbitration algorithm of the cooperation field agent in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the membership function of the fuzzy inference used with the autonomous individual agent in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of the fuzzy rule of the autonomous individual agent in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the simulation result using the cooperation field agent and autonomous individual agent in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows evaluation of the whole KPI when the priority point in this embodiment is not used and when it is used. It is a figure which shows the structural example of the system which mediates the sightseeing schedule of a tourist in this embodiment, and the bus schedule of a bus company. It is a figure which shows the algorithm of GA in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structural example of the chromosome used by GA in this embodiment. It is a flowchart which shows the mode of mediation of both the bus operation schedule of the next day in this embodiment, and the smart phone user's sightseeing schedule. It is a figure which shows the schedule before and behind mediation in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the schedule before and behind mediation in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structural example of the system which mediates operation of a taxi with the user who wants to use the taxi which has a smartphone in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a GUI screen of the smartphone which the smartphone user in this embodiment owns. It is a figure which shows the flow which matches a dispatch condition in the smart phone user and taxi company in this embodiment.

  <Overview of symbiotic autonomous distributed system>

  FIG. 1 is a diagram showing a concept of a symbiotic autonomous distributed system in the present embodiment. New investment in the social infrastructure business in Japan is saturated, and competition for overseas infrastructure is intensifying, making entry difficult. In addition, although mergers, mergers, or business tie-ups of the same type have been carried out, only the cost reduction effect can be expected by sharing facilities and services.

  Under such circumstances, there is a search for ways to create unknown new services and businesses by creating a place (hereinafter referred to as “place”) where the same or different businesses can collaborate, and by coexisting multiple existing systems in that place. ing. A system that realizes such symbiosis is called a symbiotic autonomous distributed (registered trademark) system, and a service created by the system is called a symbiotic autonomous distributed service.

Here, the implementation entity of the heterogeneous or the same type of business in the heterogeneous or the same type of business is “autonomous”, and the implementation entity providing the symbiotic “place” to the server of the autonomous server group 2 is “cooperative field” (FIG. 1).
--- Example 1 ---
<Application example of symbiotic autonomous distributed system>

  FIG. 2 is a diagram showing a configuration of the schedule arbitration system 10 in the present embodiment. The schedule arbitration system 10 according to the present embodiment includes at least the schedule arbitration server 1. The schedule arbitration server 1 is a server corresponding to the above-described “cooperative field”.

  On the other hand, the existence corresponding to the above-mentioned “autonomous pieces” in the present embodiment can be assumed to be, for example, a server responsible for various maintenance tasks on an expressway. Among the configurations illustrated in FIG. 2, a road surface maintenance plan server 2-T, a lamp maintenance plan server 2-L, a power maintenance plan server 2-P, and a traffic management server 2-O are servers that correspond to autonomous units. Become. Hereinafter, these servers are collectively referred to as an autonomous individual server group 2.

  A specific configuration example corresponding to each of the above-described autonomous individual server group 2 and the schedule arbitration server 1 of the cooperation field will be described later (FIGS. 10 and 13).

  Each server constituting the autonomous individual server group 2 is a component of a system for achieving the purpose in the autonomous individual server group 2, and this is called an autonomous individual system. The servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 hold information on KPI (Key Performance Indicator) that operates the autonomous individual system. This KPI is referred to as “individual KPI”. The autonomous individual system exists to achieve or maximize the individual KPI in the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2. The autonomous individual system may be any system such as a railway traffic management system, a railway maintenance system, and a power management system, and may be an existing system, a new system, or an operating system.

  On the other hand, the schedule arbitration server 1 is also a system component for achieving the purpose of the cooperative field, and this is called a cooperative field system. There is a KPI that operates the cooperative field system in the cooperative field, and this is referred to as an “overall KPI”. A collaborative field system exists to achieve or maximize this overall KPI. The schedule arbitration server 1 that embodies such a cooperative field system is referred to as a cooperative field server.

  “Symbiosis” in symbiotic autonomous decentralization refers to a state in which the cooperative field aims at maximizing the total KPI, and at the same time, each autonomous individual coexists for the purpose of maximizing its own individual KPI. Ideally, it is desirable that both the entire KPI and the individual KPI are always maximized at the same time. However, the entire KPI and the individual KPI may have a conflicting relationship.

  The schedule arbitration server 1 and the autonomous individual server group 2 which are the above-described cooperative field servers exchange assertion messages based on a predetermined arbitration protocol. Hereinafter, this exchange of assertion messages is referred to as “arbitration”.

  Here, the “assertion message” refers to a message describing the content of claiming the request. An “assertion” is an assertion that takes into account the other party's claim, and differs from the “claim” in terms of its point of view, in that it involves explanation of its own situation, consultation with the other party, and concession to the other party.

  FIG. 3 is a diagram showing the configuration of the valve adjustment system in the present embodiment. Moreover, the symbiotic autonomous distributed system in a present Example is applicable also to the valve adjustment system which a water utility operates, for example.

  The valve adjustment server 251 included in the valve adjustment system illustrated in FIG. 3 is a server corresponding to the “cooperative field”, that is, the above-described cooperative field server. On the other hand, the region A water operation server 252, the region B water operation server 253, the region C water operation server 254, and the region D water operation server 255 connected to the valve adjustment server 251 via the network 256 are respectively “autonomous. Corresponding to the “unit”, the autonomous individual server group 2 is configured.

  Thus, when the symbiotic autonomous distributed system in the present embodiment is applied to the valve adjustment system, the valve adjustment server 251 reduces the total power cost in the system, so that each water operation server 252 in the region A to the region D. Adjust the operation schedule of ~ 255. In addition, the water operation server in each area controls the valves such as the water distribution system according to the schedule adjusted by the valve adjustment server 251.

  FIG. 4 is a diagram showing a configuration of the conference scheduling system in the present embodiment. In addition, the symbiotic autonomous distributed system according to the present embodiment can be applied to a conference scheduling system that adjusts the date and place of a conference based on the convenience of each user, for example, regarding a conference scheduled for attendance by a plurality of users.

  The conference scheduling server 261 included in the conference scheduling system illustrated in FIG. 4 is a server corresponding to the “cooperative field”, that is, the above-described cooperative field server. On the other hand, the user A terminal 262, the user B terminal 263, the user C terminal 264, and the user D terminal 265 connected to the conference scheduling server 261 via the network 266 respectively correspond to “autonomous pieces” and are autonomous. Individual server group 2 is configured.

  As described above, when the symbiotic autonomous distributed system in the present embodiment is applied to the conference scheduling system, the conference scheduling server 261 receives the schedule information of the user from each user terminal in order to adjust the schedule of the conference attendee. Acquiring, adjusting the date and place of the meeting, and sending the relevant date and time and location information to each user's terminal.

  <Example of applying a symbiotic autonomous distributed system to a schedule arbitration system>

Various examples as described above can be considered as application targets of the symbiotic autonomous distributed system. In this embodiment, it is assumed that the schedule arbitration system 10 already shown in FIG. 2 is assumed. FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating an example of the entire sequence in the schedule arbitration system 10 according to the present embodiment. Specifically, the schedule arbitration server 1 includes a road surface maintenance plan server 2-T and a lamp maintenance plan server 2-L. This is the entire sequence for schedule arbitration.

  In the sequence, first, the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T and the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L are preliminarily stored schedule creation constraints (hereinafter, schedule creation constraints) and schedules for a predetermined period (eg, plan A, Plan B) is transmitted to the schedule arbitration server 1 (Step 2401, Step 2402).

  On the other hand, in the schedule arbitration server 1, the schedule creation policy input unit 131 (FIG. 13), which is an interface for receiving input from a predetermined person in charge, executes the execution period of all autonomous schedules from month to day. Get schedule policy information (total optimum constraint information), which is information related to the schedule policy of the entire system, such as within a period to date.

  In addition, the schedule arbitration server 1 uses the inconsistency determination unit 132 (FIG. 13) to obtain the schedule acquired from the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T and the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L, the creation restrictions thereof, and the schedule policy information described above. Inconsistency between schedules (plan A and plan B) is detected based on (Step 2403).

  The above-described inconsistency detection between schedules is performed by calculating the total KPI using, for example, the following (Equation 1).

---- Formula 1

Where n, the schedule to be submitted as the initial schedule number (in the above example, plan A, since two schedules plan B, n is "2"), A _K is maintained at the k-th schedule An area (section to be maintained on the expressway), _TK indicates a time zone (a time zone in which maintenance work is performed) in the k-th schedule.

An example of the above A _K, can be assumed a section of highway from one interchange to another interchange. Further, examples of T _K, 2 hours from 1:00 am to 3:00 am, such as can be envisaged. It should be noted that, as the unit of A _K, may be as a number of intervals between the interchange, as the unit of T _K, may be using the "minute" of the time zone.

A ′ _K and T ′ _K indicate maintenance areas and time zones that overlap between the schedule (corrected schedule) changed after the initial schedule and the initial schedule, respectively. Therefore, when all the contents of the initial schedule are exactly the same as the schedule after the arbitration (correction schedule), the KPI calculated by Equation 1 is “100%”.

For example, in the initial schedule, A _K × T _K aggregate value = number × working time of each maintenance target section maintenance target section = 8 hours, total value of A _'K × T' _K = the initial schedule and revised schedule The number of maintenance target sections that coincide with each other × the working time of each corresponding section = 6.5 hours, the KPI obtained by Equation 1 is (6.5 / 8) × 100 = 81.25% . In addition,
This KPI definition is one of the preferred methods for the scheduling problem, but it is not necessary to limit to this method.

  Subsequently, the schedule arbitration server 1 reads out the global optimum constraint information stored in advance in the storage device HDD 11-04 (see FIG. 7), and corrects the schedule (plan A and plan B) based on the global optimum constraint information. Then, a correction schedule (plan A ′, plan B ′) is generated (Step 2404).

  Next, the schedule arbitration server 1 calculates a credit according to the schedule correction degree in Step 2404 described above (Step 2405). As for the credit value, the time (minutes) corrected from the initial schedule may be used as it is. For example, the schedule arbitration server 1 calculates the credit value as “30” when the correction schedule generated for “plan A” in each schedule is corrected for a total of 30 minutes from the initial schedule.

  Subsequently, in the schedule arbitration server 1, the communication processing unit 1-2 (FIG. 13), which is a transmission unit, sends the correction schedule (plan A ′, plan B ′) and credit value information to the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T. Are transmitted to each of the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L (Steps 2406 and 2408).

  In this case, the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T and the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L display the correction schedule (plan A ′, plan B ′) received from the schedule arbitration server 1 on a predetermined display device such as a display. And accepting an input of approval or rejection by a predetermined person or the like with respect to the correction schedule, and returns this to the schedule arbitration server 1 (Steps 2407 and 2409).

  On the other hand, the schedule arbitration server 1 approves the correction schedule transmitted in Steps 2406 and 2408 described above from all servers that are autonomous servers (in this example, the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T and the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L). If it is obtained, the fact that the correction schedule and the credit are determined is transmitted to the corresponding server (Step 2410).

In this case, the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T and the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L display the correction schedule and credit information determined by the schedule arbitration server 1 on a predetermined display device such as a display (FIG. 6). : Display screen example of autonomous server group 2), and execute a predetermined process according to the correction schedule.
<Hardware configuration>

  FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating a hardware configuration example of each of the schedule arbitration server 1 and the autonomous server group 2 servers. As shown in the figure, the schedule arbitration server 1 and the servers of the autonomous individual server group have the same hardware configuration as a general computer device.

  That is, the CPU 11-01 as an arithmetic device, the memory 11-02 as a storage device, the communication NIC 11-03, a hard disk drive (hereinafter referred to as HDD) 11-04 as a storage device, an input / output controller 11-05, and a monitor controller 11- 06, which are connected by a bus 11-07 or the like. The input / output controller 11-05 is connected to a keyboard and mouse that are input devices, and the input / output controller 11-05 is connected to a display that is a display device.

The schedule arbitration server 1 having such a configuration and each server of the autonomous individual server group 2 implement necessary functions by the CPU 11-01 executing the program 11-021 in the memory 11-02.
<Specific examples of schedule mediation>

  FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating a specific example of schedule arbitration in the present embodiment. N1 to N10 in the figure indicate interchanges on a certain highway. A line connecting the interchanges indicates a highway. Regarding the maintenance work of the highway having such a configuration, the maintenance sections of the road surface (Track), the lamp (Light), the electric power (Power), and the transportation (Operation) are terminated at the interchange. The maintenance section is a unit for performing maintenance work.

  Of the above-described maintenance tasks, road surface maintenance means maintenance work on the road surface of an expressway. For example, since the road surface of an expressway continues to sink due to the weight of a passing vehicle, the work of lifting it is one of road surface maintenance work.

  What is lamp maintenance? This is a maintenance work for highway lamps. For example, replacement of a failed lamp or a lamp that has passed a predetermined period is one of lamp maintenance operations.

  In addition, the power maintenance is to repair or replace power equipment in order to stably provide power to various places on the highway. Traffic maintenance refers to maintenance work related to automobile traffic control. However, in the present embodiment, the power maintenance section and the traffic maintenance section are handled as a section through which electricity flows and a section for controlling the traffic of the automobile.

  For example, the road surface maintenance is performed with interchanges N1 to N3 as one business unit (T1). Two road surface maintenance cannot be performed in this T1 section, but it is possible to perform the section of T1 and T2 at the same time. However, since the road surface maintenance section T1 and the lamp maintenance section L1 overlap, the road surface maintenance work and the lamp maintenance work cannot be performed at the same time.

  In addition, in order to ensure the safety of workers, neither road surface maintenance nor lamp maintenance can be performed while electricity is energized in the corresponding section. That is, in the time zone in which the power maintenance section P1 is energized, maintenance work cannot be performed in any of the sections T1, T2, L1, and L2.

  On the other hand, if electricity is not energized, the car may not be able to run. Therefore, for example, while the traffic control of the automobile is performed in the traffic maintenance section O1, the power maintenance section P1 may have to be energized. It is also assumed that neither road surface maintenance nor lamp maintenance can be performed during automobile traffic control.

  Here, in order to help understanding about the embodiment of the invention, the setting is simplified as follows. First, a case is assumed in which the schedules for road surface maintenance (Track), lamp maintenance (Light), power maintenance (Power), and traffic maintenance (Operation) are adjusted once a week. Actually, the schedule may be adjusted for a longer period (one month, six months). Similarly, road maintenance and lamp maintenance are set to have only one maintenance entity (maintenance team), but in reality, two or more maintenance teams work in different maintenance sections at the same time. You may do.

  When performing schedule adjustment in the schedule arbitration server 1, it is desirable to perform schedule adjustment that does not deviate significantly from the maintenance schedule that each autonomous server first proposes to the schedule arbitration server 1 (hereinafter referred to as initial maintenance schedule). .

The reason for schedule adjustment that does not deviate significantly from the initial maintenance schedule is that the company that performs each maintenance work (hereinafter referred to as the maintenance company) creates the most convenient schedule that maximizes the individual KPI for each maintenance company. This is because it is considered.

  Specifically, it is considered that the date and time convenient for the maintenance staff, the distance from the maintenance staff to the place where the maintenance work is performed, and the like are reflected in the schedule. This is because the movement of maintenance personnel, overtime, and business hours affect costs.

  Therefore, in this embodiment, the maintenance schedule of each server in the autonomous individual server group 2 is grasped as “individual KPI”. A state where the arbitration is completed without any change in the initial maintenance schedule is considered as “a state where maximization of individual KPI (100%) has been achieved”.

  Also, for example, if the place and time for performing maintenance work for road surface maintenance (Track) and lamp maintenance (Light) overlap, one of the maintenance work must be abandoned. Suppose that maximization of individual KPIs cannot be achieved and that a disadvantage has occurred.

  On the other hand, “the state in which the total KPI is maximized” in the schedule arbitration server 1 means that each server of the autonomous server group 2 with respect to the number of cases in the initial schedule submitted from all servers of the autonomous server group 2 It is assumed that all the schedules adopted by the mediation are adopted.

  The purpose of the schedule arbitration system 10 is to maximize the individual KPI of each server of the autonomous individual server group 2 while aiming to maximize the KPI of the schedule arbitration server 1.

  Therefore, first, each server of the autonomous individual server group 2 managing each maintenance work transmits a desired initial maintenance schedule to the schedule arbitration server 1 by a predetermined date and time in order to determine a maintenance schedule for the next week. .

  As a specific example of such an initial maintenance schedule, FIG. 9-1 shows an initial maintenance schedule of a road surface (Track), and FIG. 9-2 shows an initial maintenance schedule of a lamp (Light). Similarly, FIG. 9-3 shows an initial maintenance schedule for traffic (Operation), and FIG. 9-4 shows an initial maintenance schedule for power (Power).

  On the other hand, the configuration of each server in the autonomous individual server group 2 that receives schedule arbitration will be described. FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating a software configuration stored in the memory 11-2 in each server of the autonomous server group 2. An arrow in the figure indicates a relationship in which a software module is called or referred to, and is understood as a program algorithm. These programs are expanded in the memory 11-02 of FIG. 7, and are executed by the CPU 11-01 as an arithmetic unit.

  In the configuration illustrated in FIG. 10, the storage information necessary for each module of the communication processing unit 2-2 and the online processing unit 2-3 is stored in the memory 11-02. The storage information necessary for each module of the offline processing unit 2-4 is recorded not only in the memory 11-02 but also in the HDD 11-04.

In the operation processing unit 2-1 in each server of the autonomous server group 2, an initial maintenance schedule is created in the initial maintenance schedule creation unit 2-11. This creation can be performed by an operator who operates the display, keyboard, and mouse in FIG. 7 using a predetermined tool. The created initial maintenance schedule is stored in the assertion message transmission unit 2-21 of the communication processing unit 2-2.

  Note that the creation of the initial maintenance schedule described above needs to take into account creation restrictions. FIG. 11 shows road surface maintenance (Track) schedule creation restrictions (hereinafter referred to as schedule restriction conditions).

  In the example of the schedule constraint condition shown in FIG. 11, since September 22 (Tuesday) and September 26 (Saturday) are regular holidays of a maintenance company, it indicates that maintenance work cannot be performed 100% over the entire time period. ing. In addition, the entire time zone on Sunday, September 27 indicates that it is difficult to carry out the work with a weight of 30%. In addition, after September 2nd (Monday), September 24th (Thursday), and September 25th (Friday) at 26:00, it is difficult to carry out the work with 50% weight. Also, after 27:30 on September 23 (Wednesday), it is difficult to carry out the work with a weight of 70%. Each weight in the schedule constraint condition is determined by the policy of each maintenance company that operates each server of the autonomous server group 2. As an example of an indicator of the policy, a method such as quantifying in consideration of an additional cost (overtime fee or travel cost) when performing business during the time period may be employed.

  The schedule constraint conditions described above are created by a predetermined algorithm in the schedule constraint creation unit 2-12 in the operation processing unit 2-1, and transferred to the feasibility estimation unit 2-31 in the online processing unit 2-3. This schedule constraint condition may also be created by a maintenance company operator using a predetermined tool.

  Thus, the initial maintenance schedule created in each server of the autonomous individual server group 2 is transmitted to the schedule arbitration server 1 by the assertion message transmission unit 2-21 of the communication processing unit 2-2.

  A specific example of the initial maintenance schedule transmitted from the assertion message transmission unit 2-21 is shown in FIG. FIG. 12 is a diagram illustrating the contents of an initial maintenance schedule message (suggestion assertion message) created in the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T and transmitted to the schedule arbitration server 1 among the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2. .

  In the assertion message of the initial maintenance schedule illustrated in FIG. 12, the first to fourth lines indicate the maintenance work time zone and the maintenance work section. The first line is a description that the maintenance work of the section “T1” is proposed as the initial maintenance schedule in “the time period from 25:00 to 27:00 on September 21, 2015”.

  The fifth line describes Tuesday and Saturday as days when business is not possible. This day corresponds to a regular holiday of a maintenance company, for example. Such a day is a day when work cannot be performed in the first place after the arbitration by the schedule arbitration server 1, and is always rejected by the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T. However, the description of the initial maintenance schedule is indispensable, but such regular holiday information is not indispensable.

  The initial maintenance schedule creation and transmission processes similar to those in FIG. 12 are similarly executed by the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T2-W, the power maintenance plan server 2-P, and the traffic plan server 2-O.

  Here, an example of a software configuration in the schedule arbitration server 1 will be described. FIG. 13 is a diagram illustrating a software configuration developed in the memory 11-2 of the schedule arbitration server 1. An arrow in the figure indicates a relationship in which a software module is called or referred to, and is understood as a program algorithm.

  These programs are expanded in the memory 11-02 of FIG. 7, and are executed by the CPU 11-01, which is an arithmetic unit, to implement necessary functions. The storage information necessary for each module of the communication processing unit 2-2 and the online processing unit 2-3 is stored in the memory 11-02, and the storage information necessary for each module of the offline processing unit 2-4 is stored in the memory. It is recorded not only on 11-02 but also on HDD 11-04.

  The schedule arbitration server 1 having such a configuration receives the assertion message (suggestion assertion message) of the initial maintenance schedule created in each server of the autonomous individual server group 2 via the network 3 by the communication processing unit 1-2. To do. Similarly, the assertion message of this initial maintenance schedule is received by the assertion message receiving unit 2-22 (FIG. 10) of the communication processing unit 2-2 of another server in the autonomous server group 2.

  Further, this assertion message is transferred to the assertion message confirmation unit 133 of the online processing unit 1-3 in the schedule arbitration server 1 and is subjected to a format check such as a format. .

  The assertion message subjected to the format check by the assertion message confirmation unit 133 is sent to the missing information estimation unit 134. However, since there is no missing information in the assertion message in this case, it is returned to the assertion message confirmation unit 133 as it is.

  The assertion message confirmation unit 133 generates an initial maintenance schedule assertion message (suggestion assertion message) from the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T, the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L, the power maintenance plan server 2-P, and the traffic management server 2-O. ) Are transferred, the initial maintenance schedule included therein is transferred to the inconsistency determination unit 132.

  The inconsistency determination unit 132 checks whether a schedule conflict (hereinafter referred to as “competition”) obtained from each server has occurred.

  FIGS. 14A and 14B show examples of conflicts in the initial maintenance schedule between the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T and the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L. When comparing and comparing the maintenance section shown in FIG. 8 with the initial maintenance schedule, it can be seen that the maintenance in the T1 section and the maintenance in the L1 section on September 21 (Monday) are competing. Also, the maintenance of the T3 section on 9/24 (Thu) and the maintenance of the L3 section, the maintenance of the T4 section on 9/25 (Friday), and the maintenance of the L4 section are in conflict.

  14-3 and 14-4 show examples of contention in the initial maintenance schedule between the power maintenance plan server 2-P and the traffic management server 2-O. Here, it can be seen that there is a situation where electricity is not energized during the traffic time of the vehicle from 25:00 to 29:00 on 9/26 (Sat).

  These initial maintenance schedules are input to the overall KPI calculation unit 135 of the online processing unit 1-3, and a correction schedule is generated. When the correction schedule is generated by the overall KPI calculation unit 135, schedule policy information is given from the schedule creation policy unit 131 of the operation processing unit 1-1, and the schedule is corrected by using the schedule policy as a constraint.

FIG. 15 shows a GUI example in the above-mentioned schedule creation policy viewer. The operator of the schedule arbitration server 1 designates the schedule creation policy on the GUI displayed by the schedule creation policy unit 131 on a predetermined display device such as a display as shown in FIG.

  Next, a schedule arbitration pattern will be described. FIG. 16 illustrates a schedule arbitration pattern using the schedule arbitration server 1 acting as a cooperative field server, and the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T and the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L acting as servers of the autonomous individual server group 2, for example. It is a thing.

  In the arbitration pattern A in the figure, there is no conflict between the servers of the autonomous server group 2, but there is a conflict between the schedule arbitration server 1 that wants to maximize its own KPI and the server of the autonomous server group 2. It shows the state that is occurring. If arbitration is not repeated any number of times, the schedule arbitration server 1 or the autonomous server group 2 server can claim priority based on its own credit value (hereinafter referred to as priority point). It becomes.

  This priority point can be understood as a common currency that can be used between the schedule arbitration server 1 and the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2. When the priority claim by these priority points competes, the conflict is resolved by adopting the priority claim having the larger priority point value which is the amount of the common currency.

  In other words, the “priority point” is a quantification of such priority. This is based on “hour (minute)”, which is a resource handled in mediation. For example, when 30 minutes of time is targeted for mediation, the value of that time is considered based on about 30 priority points in principle. Of course, the value of this priority point is determined by the schedule arbitration server 1 or the server of the autonomous individual server group 2 that wants the time, so the 30 priority point may be a guide only.

  The priority mentioned above is the schedule arbitration server 1 that wants to accept the arbitration plan as the correction schedule to the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2, or the initial proposal as the initial maintenance schedule, or the request to modify the correction schedule. The proposal is given from the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 that wants to accept the proposal to the schedule arbitration server 1 and given priority points (numerical values).

  In conflict resolution, as described above, the proposal or re-suggestion with the higher priority point is adopted, and the priority point moves to the side where the priority point is not adopted. In other words, the non-adopted side can make a priority claim using the priority point at another opportunity. For example, when an initial maintenance schedule is sent from a predetermined server of the autonomous individual server group 2 to the schedule arbitration server 1, the priority point is sent together (Step 2401 in FIG. 5).

  In the arbitration pattern B, there is a conflict between servers in two or more autonomous server groups 2 that want to maximize their KPI within a range that does not affect the KPI of the schedule arbitration server 1, that is, the overall KPI. Is shown. When the arbitration is not repeated no matter how many times, the servers in the autonomous individual server group 2 can claim the priority based on the priority points they have at the time of re-suggestion. The schedule mediation server 1 performs mediation according to the priority points that have been proposed by the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2. As a mediation method, mediation may be performed again in consideration of the degree of influence on other autonomous individuals. The simplest method is to adopt the proposal that has given the highest priority point first.

The priority points of the servers of the autonomous server group 2 for which the proposal has been accepted are distributed and distributed to the servers of the autonomous server group 2 that have not been accepted. The distribution may be performed in consideration of the degree of influence on other autonomous individuals, or may be distributed equally.

  In addition, the arbitration pattern C indicates a state in which all of the KPIs of the schedule arbitration server 1 and the servers of the two or more autonomous individual server groups 2 are affected, and a conflict occurs between them. When the arbitration is not repeated no matter how many times, the schedule arbitration server 1 and the autonomous server group 2 can claim the priority based on their own priority points when re-proposing. The schedule arbitration server 1 performs arbitration according to priority points proposed by the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 including the schedule arbitration server 1. The mediation method and priority point allocation shall conform to the above.

  These arbitration states are disclosed not only to the schedule arbitration server 1 but also to all servers in the autonomous server group 2. Specifically, all the assertion messages including the mediation plan and the re-suggestion are transferred to all the servers in the autonomous individual server group 2. This is because the fairness of mediation is monitored by all servers in the symbiotic autonomous distributed system.

  However, if the disclosed mediation information corresponds to disclosure of trade secret information of the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2, the mediation status may be kept secret.

  In addition, within the time specified by the schedule arbitration server 1, re-suggestion and increase of priority points can be performed any number of times, but the proposal and priority point cannot be withdrawn later.

FIG. 17 is a diagram illustrating a GUI example displayed by the arbitration time input unit 136 of the operation processing unit 1-1 in the schedule arbitration server 1. In the present embodiment, the operator of the schedule arbitration server 1 can specify the conflict resolution method in the arbitration described above.
Among the solutions that can be specified, the “auction method” is a method that can secure a time zone desired by the server of the schedule arbitration server 1 or autonomous server group 2 that presents the priority of the best condition by a predetermined time. is there. On the other hand, the “cooperative field arbitration method” is a method in which conditions can be specified by the rules of the schedule arbitration server 1. For example, the schedule arbitration server 1 can determine the upper limit of the priority point in advance, and when the priority point is reached, the entity that can claim the priority can be determined. This condition can be edited with an editor or the like that appears on the screen when the edit button is pressed.

  In the example of FIG. 17, two types of solution methods of “auction method” and “cooperative field arbitration method” are illustrated, but the present invention is not limited to this.

  The priority point issuance policy used for resolving the above-mentioned conflict is as follows. FIG. 18 is a diagram illustrating an example of a setting screen for a priority point issuance policy that the schedule arbitration server 1 and the autonomous server group 2 have.

  These issuance policies include the credit issuance policy input unit 2-13 (FIG. 10) of the operation processing unit 2-1 in each server of the autonomous individual server group 2, and the operation processing unit 1-1 in the schedule arbitration server 1. Each operator or the like inputs the credit issuance policy input unit 137.

In the “initial issue point” column shown in the figure, the first value of the priority point is set. The default value is the value of the time (minutes) in which the conflict occurs, but can also be entered manually by the operator. In the “final issue point” column, the maximum value of priority points is set. The default value is a value that is twice the time (minutes) in which contention occurs, but the operator can manually enter a multiple value. However, neither the schedule arbitration server 1 nor the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 can be granted beyond the value of the priority point possessed by them. In such a case, the grant is the upper limit value.

  The edit button in the “Auction Operation Policy” field is a script that describes various auction strategies such as the number of auction divisions, high priority points given at the start or just before the end, when pressed. The reading operation can be instructed.

Now, let us return to the explanation about the conflict resolution. The inconsistency determination unit 132 of the online processing unit 1-3 in the schedule arbitration server 1 is a new schedule that resolves the conflict according to the schedule creation policy given by the schedule creation policy input unit 131 of the operation processing unit 1-1, that is, a correction schedule. And pass this to the entire KPI calculation unit 135.
On the other hand, the total KPI calculation unit 135 creates a new correction schedule for maximizing the total KPI based on the correction schedule. If there is a conflict between the created correction schedules, the overall KPI calculation unit 135 returns the correction schedules to the inconsistency determination unit 132.

  The inconsistency determination unit 132 and the total KPI calculation unit 135 work to converge each schedule by repeating the above processing.

  19A to 19D show specific examples of the correction schedule corrected and created by the schedule arbitration server 1. The correction schedules shown here are correction schedules for road surface maintenance, lamp maintenance, power maintenance, and traffic that have resolved conflicts between the initial maintenance schedules.

  FIG. 20A is a modification schedule example of the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T when the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T sends priority points to the schedule arbitration server 1. Similarly, FIG. 20B is a modification schedule example of the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L when the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T sends priority points to the schedule arbitration server 1.

  The correction schedules in FIGS. 19-1 to 19-4, 20-1, and 20-2 indicate that, for example, the correction schedule (FIG. 19-1) from the schedule arbitration server 1 is the road surface maintenance plan server 2- Although it was transmitted to T, the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T refuses this. In this case, the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T transmits to the schedule arbitration server 1 a re-suggestion schedule (re-correction of the correction schedule by the operator of the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T) and priority points.

  On the other hand, the schedule arbitration server 1 has a higher priority point sent from the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T than any other server in the autonomous group 2 (here, the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L). Then, the re-suggestion schedule sent from the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T is permitted, and the schedule of the other servers (in this case, the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L) is further corrected. The re-correction schedule of the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T is as shown in FIG. 20-1, and the re-correction schedule of the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L is as shown in FIG. 20-2. Here, regarding the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L, when comparing the initial maintenance schedule (FIG. 9-2) and the re-correction schedule (FIG. 20-2), 9/21 (month) corresponds to one hour, Since the schedule has been revised for 24 hours (Thursday) for 2 hours and 9/25 (Friday) for 1 hour, a total of 4 hours, that is, 240 minutes, a schedule arbitration server for this lamp maintenance plan server 2-L From 1 to 240 priority points will be given.

Further, the sug of the initial maintenance schedule of the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T among the above-mentioned servers.
FIG. 21 shows an offer assertion message (corresponding to the correction schedule shown in FIG. 19A) from the schedule arbitration server 1 in response to the question assertion message. The specific content of this offer assertion message, that is, the schedule modification proposal content 16-1, is described in the 5th to 8th lines from the top, and the time limit specification 16-2 for the response to this offer assertion message is 9 “60 minutes” is written on the line.

  This offer assertion message is transferred to the assertion message transmission unit 2-21 (FIG. 10) of the communication processing unit 2-2 in the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T, and is first sent to all servers included in the autonomous server group 2. It is distributed as a result of mediation.

  By distributing the offer assertion message to all the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2, each server of the autonomous individual server group 2 can know the contents of arbitration related to other servers. You can see if you are the only one who is not disadvantaged. However, as described above, secret communication may be used as necessary.

  The assertion message received by the assertion message receiving unit 2-22 and the assertion message transmitted from the assertion message transmitting unit 2-21 are recorded in the assertion information recording unit 2-41 of the offline processing unit 2-4. . This record is stored in the past history information section 2-42 of the offline processing section 2-4.

  The assertion message is also transferred to the self-model tuning unit 2-43 of the offline processing unit 2-4. In the self-model tuning unit 2-43, information necessary for model tuning described later is extracted and used for tuning the characteristic model of each server of the autonomous server group 2.

  The assertion message from the server of the schedule arbitration server 1 or the autonomous server group 2 described above is received by the assertion message receiving unit 2-2 of the communication processing unit 2-2 in the server of the autonomous server group 2, and further online. It is transferred to the assertion message confirmation unit 2-32 of the processing unit 2-3. Further, the assertion message is transferred to the feasibility estimation unit 2-31 and compared with the schedule constraint condition created in the schedule constraint creation unit 2-12 of the operation processing unit 2-1.

  FIGS. 22-1 and 22-2 show an example of comparing the initial maintenance schedule and the schedule constraint conditions. That is, the road surface and lamp initial maintenance schedules (FIGS. 9-1 and 9-2) and the road surface maintenance schedule and lamp maintenance schedule correction schedules (FIGS. 19-1 and 19-2) are compared. .

  Among these, FIG. 22-1 is a comparison result regarding the schedule of the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T, and FIG. 22-2 is a comparison result regarding the schedule of the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L. According to both comparison results, it can be seen that in the time zone of 27: 00 to 27:30 on September 21 (Monday) and 25 (Friday), the 50% constraint condition is violated. The road surface maintenance plan server 2-T can also reject the correction schedule in which such conflict occurs. On the other hand, if this modified schedule is accepted, the cost for executing the schedule while violating the constraint conditions (for example, the overtime cost of the employee, additional travel expenses, etc.) will increase.

Therefore, for example, the feasibility estimation unit 2-31 of the online processing unit 2-3 in the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T that accepts the above-described correction schedule has a priority corresponding to the above-described cost in the correction schedule. A point is given, a “re_suggestion_with_priority assertion message” is generated and re-proposed to the schedule arbitration server 1. Here, the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T is given 30 priority points based on the fact that the correction schedule is corrected for 30 minutes from the initial maintenance schedule.

  An assertion message of type “_with_priority” is a negative value as a method of requesting the other party to provide a priority point, while applying for the provision of a priority point owned by itself in order to allow the other party to accept the request. Priority points can be used.

  In other words, it is not a usage of “I want to accept this re-suggestion because I give ○○ (numerical) priority points”, but “If you give me ○○ (numeric) priority points, I will re-suggest this content Can be accepted ".

  Using such negative priority points makes it clear that the other party's request (priority points that the other party wants to provide) becomes clear, so it can be expected that arbitration will be completed in a small number of times. .

  In this case, the feasibility estimation unit 2-31 of the online processing unit 2-3 in the server of the autonomous individual server group 2 uses the priority point obtained by multiplying the time (minutes) by 50% as the first priority point. Try the request. Specifically, 30 minutes × 50% = 15 priority points for each of September 21 (Monday) and 25th (Friday).

  Of course, in the individual KPI calculation unit 2-33, it is possible to select the option of not requesting priority points by shortening the schedule on September 21 (Monday) and 25 (Friday) by 30 minutes, or schedule arbitration server It is also possible to reject the correction schedule itself presented by 1.

  In this case, the server of the autonomous individual server group 2 may be approved from the schedule arbitration server 1 for the initial maintenance schedule as originally requested, but conversely, the arbitration becomes unsuccessful, and the other autonomous individual server group 2 You have to take the risk that your server will be able to keep that time and move it in a completely different time zone. This depends on the operation policy of the operator who creates the policy of the server of the autonomous individual server group 2.

  FIG. 23 shows the contents of an assertion message in which the re-suggestion assertion message (re_suggestion_with_priority assertion message) 18-1 and the acknowledgment message (accept assertion message) 18-2 with the negative priority point described above are shown.

  FIG. 24 illustrates an example of an offer from the schedule arbitration server 1, that is, an assertion message (reject assertion message) 19-1 that rejects the correction schedule. This is a content that rejects the correction schedule from the schedule arbitration server 1 and requests to maintain the original proposal, that is, the initial maintenance schedule.

  25, the schedule arbitration server 1 receives the above-described reject assertion message (FIG. 24. or the re_proposal assertion message of FIG. 23) from the server of the autonomous server group 2, and attaches a positive priority point. The assertion message (offer_with_priority assertion message) 20-1 for offering the same schedule again to the autonomous server is shown.

The assertion message illustrated in FIG. 23 and FIG. 24 is created by a predetermined algorithm in the assertion information creation unit 2-34 (FIG. 10) of the online processing unit 2-3 in the server of the autonomous server group 2, and the communication processing unit In principle, the data is transferred from the assertion message transmission unit 2-2 of 2-2 to the schedule arbitration server 1 and all autonomous servers.

  Note that the assertion message received by the assertion message reception unit 2-22 of the communication processing unit 2-2 and the assertion message transmitted from the assertion message transmission unit 2-21 in the server of the autonomous individual server group 2 are processed offline. Is transferred to the assertion information recording unit 2-41 and the self-model tuning unit 2-43 of the unit 2-4, is databased by the past history information unit 2-42, and is tuned by the self-characteristic model unit 2-44. Used as a parameter.

  Further, the past history information section 2-42, the self-characteristic model section 2-44, and the reference assertion message recording section 2-45 of the offline processing section 2-4 are executed by the feasibility estimation section 2-31 of the online processing section 2-3. Is used as reference information when creating an autonomous individual assertion message.

  As described above, FIG. 26 illustrates state transitions in the servers of the autonomous server group 2 that execute various processes with the schedule arbitration server 1. FIG. 26 is a diagram illustrating state transitions of the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 that sends the assertion message.

  In this case, the servers of the autonomous server group 2 shift to (1) schedule creation state 21-1 after being activated. Each server that has created a schedule sends its desired schedule to the schedule arbitration server 1 that acts as a collaborative field server using the assertion assertion message, and then waits for (2) (priority point assignment) to receive a revised schedule proposal Transition to state 21-2.

  Thereafter, when the server of the autonomous individual server group 2 receives the offer or offer_with_priority assertion message from the schedule arbitration server 1, the server moves to (3) rejection, (priority point assignment) re-suggestion, and acceptance determination state 21-3.

  After that, the servers in the autonomous individual server group 2 transfer the reject, re_subjection or re_suggestion_with_priority assertion message to the schedule arbitration server 1, thereby returning to (2) (priority point grant) waiting state for the revised schedule proposal 21-2. Transition. On the other hand, the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 transmit an accept assertion message to the schedule arbitration server 1, whereby the content of the schedule is confirmed and the transition state is also terminated.

  Regarding the handling of priority points, the credit recording unit 138 of the offline processing unit 1-4 in the schedule arbitration server 1 and the credit recording unit of the offline processing unit 2-4 in each server of the autonomous individual server group 2 It will be recorded in 2-46.

Thus, the schedule which can pursue the profit of both a cooperation field server and an autonomous individual server by continuing negotiation with each server of the autonomous individual server group 2 under the arbitration by the schedule arbitration server 1 Will be completed.
--- Example 2 ---

  In the present embodiment, a case will be described in which one of the servers in the autonomous individual server group 2 does not submit a schedule in the form scheduled by the schedule arbitration server 1 acting as a cooperative field server.

  For example, let us consider a case where the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L transmits only the maintenance section and the necessary time as shown in FIG. 27 using the assertion assertion message without submitting the schedule as shown in FIG. 9-2. Note that the individual KPI in this case is considered to be “a state in which the individual KPI has been achieved 100%” regardless of the time when the maintenance section and the necessary time are achieved. In other words, if the clear intention is not displayed in the message of the initial maintenance schedule, it is an intention to accept the disadvantageous handling with the servers of the other autonomous individual server group 2.

  In addition, the maintenance company that operates the lamp maintenance plan server 2-W has a full regular holiday every day, and there are times when maintenance work is not possible depending on the day of the week. Shall not be notified. For example, this is because the information can be considered to correspond to a business secret for competitors.

  The suggestion assertion message of the lamp maintenance plan server 2-W is received by the assertion message receiving unit 139 of the communication processing unit 1-2 in the schedule arbitration server 1 acting as a cooperative field server. Further, this assertion message is transferred to the assertion message confirmation unit 133 of the online processing unit 1-3, where it is confirmed as an incomplete schedule with time information but lacking time information. Will be transferred to.

  The missing information estimation unit 134 accesses the past history information reference unit 140 of the offline processing unit 1-4, refers to the past history information for the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L, and stores past schedule information (past schedule correction). Information) is searched for a schedule that is most similar to the above-mentioned “incomplete schedule”, and is associated with this incomplete initial maintenance schedule. Specifically, in the past, for example, the maintenance work in the maintenance sections W1 to W4 is performed once a week, and the maintenance times near the current time are searched.

  Or when the past schedule information determined to be sufficiently close cannot be found, the missing information estimation unit 134 is for the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L in the autonomous individual characteristic model reference unit 141 of the offline processing unit 1-4. A region is accessed, a time zone in which a reject assertion message or re_subjection assertion message is likely to be issued in the past is extracted, and a provisional schedule that avoids these time zones is created using a predetermined algorithm.

  FIG. 28 is a diagram illustrating a time period during which a reject assertion message and a re_subjection assertion message are likely to be issued. The value described here indicates the ratio of the number of reject assertion messages and the number of re_suggestion assertion messages to the number of all assertion messages. Sending an assertion message to a time zone with a large value will be unacceptable.

  This schedule is tentatively handled as being sent from an autonomous individual server for lamp maintenance, that is, the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L. Thereafter, arbitration is performed by the method described in the first embodiment.

In the example described above, an event related to a highway maintenance schedule is described, but this can also be used in a system related to another event. For example, the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T (FIG. 2) is a track maintenance server, the lamp maintenance plan server is an overhead line maintenance plan server, the traffic plan server is an operation plan server, and the interchanges N1 to N1 (FIG. 8) are railways. By handling it as a station, it is possible to provide a schedule maintenance system for railway maintenance.

The track maintenance mentioned above refers to the maintenance work of railroad rails. For example, since the rail continues to sink due to the weight of the traveling train, an example of this is lifting the soil with gravel. Moreover, overhead wire maintenance is maintenance work of the electric wire stretched in the upper part in order to supply electric power to a train. For example, the work of replacing an electric wire worn by friction with a train panda graph is one of them. Electric power maintenance is a maintenance work for repairing or replacing electric power equipment in order to stably provide electric power to a train. The operation refers to matters relating to train operation. However, in this embodiment, the power maintenance section and the operation section are handled as a section where electricity flows and a section where the train is moved.
--- Example 3 ---

  In this embodiment, the schedule arbitration server 1 that functions as a “cooperative field”, the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T, the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L, the power maintenance plan server 2-P that function as “autonomous pieces”, And an embodiment in which the traffic management server 2-O (collectively referred to as the autonomous individual server group 2) is operated autonomously using an agent program instead of a human.

  FIG. 29 is a diagram showing a flow of mediation using this agent program. Hereinafter, an agent for “cooperative field” is referred to as a cooperative field agent, and an agent for “autonomous individual” is referred to as an autonomous individual agent.

  When the above-described cooperative field agent notifies the arbitration start message to the autonomous individual agent (Step 2901), the autonomous individual agent who wants to participate in the arbitration returns a message requesting participation to the cooperative field agent (Step 2902).

  The cooperative field agent receives the above-mentioned participation request message and accepts the participation (Step 2903).

  This participation request can be made at any timing after the above-mentioned arbitration start notification is made and until the arbitration end notification (Step 2913) is made.

  The autonomous agent requesting the participation described above creates an initial maintenance schedule desired by itself (or a schedule obtained by modifying the correction schedule for the initial maintenance schedule), and proposes (recommends an initial maintenance schedule) to the collaborative field agent. It is sent as a proposal (a proposal of a schedule obtained by modifying the correction schedule) (Step 2904).

  On the other hand, the cooperative field agent waits for a certain period of time, and if a proposal or re-suggestion is not sent from the autonomous individual agent, it performs a mediation end notification (Step 2913). Otherwise, the proposal or re-suggestion The arbitration according to the arbitration is performed (Step 2906), and a correction schedule corresponding to the arbitration result (hereinafter, arbitration schedule) is sent to the autonomous agent (Step 2907).

  The autonomous agent can receive the above arbitration schedule, and after confirming the content according to the predetermined rule, can leave the arbitration (Step 2908, Step 2909). However, even after the departure, it may be possible to participate again (Step 2902) until a mediation end notification (Step 2913) is made.

The autonomous agent examines the arbitration schedule using a predetermined algorithm (Step 2910), and determines whether to create a new schedule and re-suggest (Step 2911).
).

  At the stage where re-suggestion is no longer performed from all autonomous individual agents, the arbitration ends (Step 2914).

  A series of arbitrations from the start of arbitration in Step 2901 to the end of arbitration in Step 2914 is referred to as “stage”. After the completion of this stage, the cooperative field agent and the autonomous individual agent can analyze the contents of the arbitration of the stage (Step 2915, Step 2916).

  For example, the collaborative field agent analyzes the schedule (time, area) that the autonomous individual agent easily concessioned in the mediation, or has not readily concessed, and aggregates the time and area specified in the analysis, so that FIG. It is possible to estimate schedule constraints as shown in FIG.

  The cooperative field agent may use the above estimation result to propose a mediation schedule (Step 2907) that avoids the estimated constraint condition at the time of mediation start notification (Step 2901) in the next stage. It is.

  Similarly, the autonomous individual agent can estimate the constraints of the schedule of other autonomous individual agents from the behavior of the cooperative field agent or other autonomous individual agents. The autonomous agent may use the estimation result to make a schedule proposal (Step 2904) that avoids the estimated constraint condition at the time of the participation request (Step 2902) in the next stage.

  In this way, by making a proposal close to the final stage of arbitration at the start of the stage, there is a high possibility that arbitration will be performed a small number of times.

  FIG. 30 is a diagram illustrating an example of a coordination field agent arbitration algorithm. When the cooperative field agent acquires a schedule from the autonomous agent (Step 1), all of these are expanded as a two-dimensional rectangle 301 in time-space (Step 2).

  In the example of FIG. 30, the respective rectangles 301 relating to the two schedules A and B are displayed, but in reality, all the schedules are expanded on the coordinates as rectangles.

  Next, the collaborative field agent checks whether or not there is a conflict in all schedules submitted by the autonomous agent by overlapping these rectangles 301. In the arbitration of the present embodiment, for easy understanding, the interchange cannot be changed and the maintenance work time cannot be changed, and only the start time and end time of the maintenance work can be changed.

  In the case illustrated in FIG. 30, since maintenance work competes in the range from interchange S2 to interchange S5, neither maintenance work can be performed with schedules A and B. However, if schedules are rescheduled so that the times from 02:30 to 03:00 do not overlap, both schedules A and B can be maintained.

  Therefore, the arbitration algorithm of the cooperative field agent calculates a schedule for avoiding this duplication. This algorithm moves the schedule with less work time. Specifically, the maintenance work time is regarded as a virtual weight (Virtual Weight (VW)), and the center of gravity 302 is calculated (Step 2). Create a schedule (Step 3).

  In the case illustrated in FIG. 30, the maintenance work time of schedule A is 120 minutes, and the maintenance work time of schedule B is 60 minutes. Therefore, a schedule in which the time is moved at a ratio of 1: 2 is proposed. become.

  Next, the validity of arbitration by this algorithm will be described below. For example, if there are a 10-minute schedule and a 3-hour schedule, if these are handled equivalently, the maintenance work requiring 3 hours may not be possible due to the 10-minute schedule.

  In the present algorithm, such a situation is considered undesirable from the viewpoint of effective utilization of resources (time and space), and a long maintenance work time is preferentially handled. Such rescheduling may naturally cause conflicts with other schedules, but in this case as well, the above conflict avoidance algorithm is executed and repeated until all the conflicting schedules are eliminated. .

  Next, fuzzy inference used in autonomous agents will be described. FIG. 31 is a diagram illustrating a fuzzy inference membership function used in an autonomous agent. As an inference method employed here, a Min-Max simple center of gravity method (disclosed in Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 05-150991) that is light in calculation load and easy to implement is assumed. FIG. 32 is a table showing an example of fuzzy rules for autonomous agents. The outline of this rule is described below.

(1) At the initial stage when the number of arbitrations is small, the autonomous individual agent adheres to its initial maintenance schedule. This is to expect other autonomous individuals to drop off.

(2) If the number of arbitrations has reached the middle stage and the schedule proposed by the collaborative field agent deviates from the initial maintenance schedule, the autonomous individual agent can use its priority points to maintain its own initial maintenance schedule. Show a sticking attitude. This is because even if the consumption of priority points is low, there is still a possibility of winning over other autonomous individuals claiming competing initial maintenance schedules.

(3) However, if your schedule is not accepted even though mediation has been performed a sufficient number of times, stop using priority points and change your policy to accept the revised schedule. This is to avoid the consumption of priority points in this stage and to make use of it in the next stage. By allowing such autonomous individual agents to substitute for humans, mediation can be completed at high speed.

  FIG. 33 shows a simulation result using the cooperative field agent and the autonomous individual agent described above. The change of the autonomous KPI which changes for every mediation is shown. In addition, the stage 2 described in the figure is performed immediately after the stage 1.

  As described above, in Stage 1, the value of KPI for lamp maintenance is large, but in Stage 2, it is switched. In this way, it can be seen that the autonomous individual agent secures a better KPI at that stage by efficiently using the priority point, and that the priority point performs the function as originally expected. .

  FIG. 34 shows the evaluation of the total KPI when the priority point is not used and when it is used. In order to maximize the individual KPI, the autonomous individual behaves so as to retain the initial maintenance schedule as much as possible by setting a long time schedule as a high importance level. Therefore, when mediation can be completed in a state close to an autonomous initial maintenance schedule, an evaluation value is calculated using the following expression 2 that is evaluated.

---- Formula 2

From this result, it is clear that the priority point functions effectively.
--- Example 4 ---

  FIG. 35 is a diagram showing a configuration of a system for mediating a tourism schedule of a tourist having a smartphone (hereinafter referred to as a smartphone) and a bus schedule of a bus company.

  The smartphone user 1 (smartphone 2-U1), the smartphone user 2 (smartphone 2-U2), the bus company 1 diagram planning server 2-B1, and the bus company 2 diagram planning server 2-B2 are described with reference to FIG. In this case, the schedule mediation server 1 is a system that mediates both the smartphone user's sightseeing schedule and the bus company's operation schedule.

  In the present embodiment, it is assumed that Genetic Algorithm (GA) is used as an example of an arbitration algorithm installed in the schedule arbitration server 1. FIG. 36 shows an algorithm used in this GA. Details of GA have already been disclosed in, for example, Japanese Laid-Open Publication No. 1944-161980.

  FIG. 37 shows the structure of the chromosome used in the above-mentioned GA. This structure includes a bus route 3601 and its departure time 3602. For example, “A → B” in the operation route 3601 represents the arrival point B from the departure point A, and “09: 0” indicates that the bus departs at 9:00 am. The travel time of “A → B” is fixed. “09: 0” is expressed as the number of minutes (binarization) of the elapsed time from “00:00” when it is expanded as an actual GA code. For example, since the time from “00:00” to “09:00” is 540 minutes, it can be expressed as a chromosome string “01000011100” when binarized.

  In the example of FIG. 37, the times “09: 0”, “11:34”, “10:23”, and “12:34” are handled as a binarized numerical sequence (GA code) of “01000011100010101101100100110111101011110010”. It becomes possible.

  Here, how to obtain the evaluation value calculated in the “evaluation” process shown in FIG. 36 will be described. Here, the following conditions are used to simplify the story.

(1) The smartphone user 1 goes from the departure place A to the sightseeing place B and returns to the departure place A again.

(2) The smartphone user 2 goes from the departure place A to the sightseeing place C and returns to the departure place A again.

(3) The bus company 1 operates the AB section and has only one bus.

(4) The bus company 2 operates the B-C section and has only one bus.

If the above condition is not satisfied, the evaluation value is zero, and the solid having the chromosome is immediately deceived.
In addition,

(1) In addition to the original sightseeing spot, another sightseeing spot can be proposed to the smartphone user.

(2) The bus company can change the bus schedule time.
Shall.

  FIG. 38 is a flow showing the state of mediation of both the bus operation schedule of the next day and the smartphone user's sightseeing schedule by the schedule mediation server 1, the smartphone users 1 and 2, and the bus companies 1 and 2.

  In this case, the schedule planning servers 2-B1 and 2-B2 of the bus companies 1 and 2 transmit the number of buses operating on the next day and a desired schedule to the cooperative field server 1 (Step 3801). Further, the smartphones 2-U1 and 2-U2 of the smartphone users 1 and 2 transmit the location and time desired for sightseeing the next day to the cooperative field server 1 (Step 3802).

  On the other hand, the schedule arbitration server 1 sets the GA code, the number of individuals (the number of smartphone users and bus companies), and the evaluation function (Step 3803). For the first time, the GA code may be set using a random number.

  After that, the schedule arbitration server 1 performs GA calculation (Step 3805), and aborts the calculation when the predetermined number of times or the average of the predetermined evaluation value is reached (Step 3806), and the calculation result derived by the GA is changed to the bus schedule and It converts into a sightseeing schedule, and transmits to the smartphones 2-U1, 2-U2 of the smartphone users 1 and 2, and the schedule planning servers 2-B1, 2-B2 of the bus companies 1 and 2 (Step 3807).

  The smartphone users 1 and 2 and the bus companies 1 and 2 determine whether or not to leave the mediation from the schedules received and viewed by the smartphones 2-U1, 2-U2 and the diagram planning servers 2-B1, 2-B2. The smartphones 2-U1, 2-U2 and the diagram planning servers 2-B1, 2-B2 receive the result of such determination by a predetermined input device (Step 3808, Step 3809).

  When the result of the above determination indicates a departure (Step 3808: Y, Step 3809: Y), the corresponding smartphone user's smartphone or the bus company's diagram planning server notifies the schedule arbitration server 1 to that effect (Step 3810). ), The process is terminated.

  On the other hand, if the result of the above determination does not leave (Step 3808: No, Step 3809: No), the corresponding smartphone user or bus company examines the schedule received from the schedule arbitration server 1 and re-suggests. Judge. In this case, the smartphones 2-U1, 2-U2 and the diagram planning servers 2-B1, 2-B2 accept the result of such determination by a predetermined input device (Step 3811, Step 3812).

  When the result of the above determination indicates re-suggestion (Step 3813: Y, Step 3814: Y), the corresponding smartphone user's smartphone or the bus company's diagram planning server notifies the schedule arbitration server 1 to that effect. The re-suggestion may have the same content as the previous time.

The schedule arbitration server 1 determines the presence / absence of re-suggestion according to the above notification (Step 3804), and if there is a suggestion (Step 3804: Y), recalculates GA (St.
ep3805).

  On the other hand, the smartphones 1 and 2 and the bus schedule servers 1 and 2 of the bus companies 1 and 2 wait for a mediation end notification (Step 3817) from the schedule mediation server 1 after the above re-suggestion (Step 3815, Step 3816) and confirm the notification. To finish the process.

  Examples of schedules before and after the above arbitration are shown in FIGS. 39-1 and 39-2. Among these, FIG. 39-1 is a diagram showing a schedule before mediation. The smartphone user 1 uses the bus 1 (3903, 3904) to go from A to B and returns from B to A (3901), and the smartphone user 2 uses the bus 1 (3903, 3904) and the bus 2 (3905, 3906). , You can go from A to B via B and back to B, but you can't go back to A.

On the other hand, FIG. 39-2 is a diagram illustrating a schedule after arbitration. In this case, the smartphone users 1 and 2 can use bus 1 and bus 2 (3908, 3909, 3910, 3911), both go from A to B, go to C, return to B, and return to A. (3907).
--- Example 5 ---

  Next, an example in which the schedule mediation server 1 performs mediation between a taxi applicant and a taxi company that operates the taxi will be described. FIG. 40 is a diagram illustrating a configuration of a system that mediates taxi operation with a person who wants to use a taxi having a smartphone. In this case, the schedule arbitration server 1 serving as a cooperative field server is connected to the smartphones 2-U1, 2-U2 and taxi company terminals 2-T1, 2-T2, etc., which are autonomous via the network 3. .

  FIG. 41 shows an example of the GUI screen 4100 in the above-described smartphones 2-U1, 2-U2 owned by the smartphone users 1, 2. This GUI screen 4100 is provided by, for example, a predetermined application provided in the smartphones 2-U1 and 2-U2, and accepts input of vehicle allocation conditions when using a taxi.

  The left side 4101 on the GUI screen 4100 is a screen for inputting taxi dispatch conditions 4103 desired by the smartphone user. This smartphone user wants to move from Ikuta Station to Tsurukawa Station at 09:45, takes an infant, and also wants a female driver, but presents a vehicle allocation condition that allows carpooling. In addition, on the map 41011, it is possible to input the desired departure place and arrival place.

  On the other hand, the right side 4102 of the GUI screen 4100 displays the vehicle allocation conditions 4104 that can be provided by the taxi company, delivered to the application from the taxi company terminals 2-T1 and 2-T2 of the taxi company 1 or 2. It is a screen. The smartphone user browses this GUI screen 4100, compares the vehicle allocation condition 4104 presented by the taxi company with the vehicle allocation condition 4103 desired by the user, and presses one of the buttons 4105 to 4107 to thereby select the taxi. The company can show the willingness to accept, re-suggest, or withdraw from mediation regarding the vehicle allocation conditions presented by the company. In this case, the smartphone 2-U1, 2-U2 of the smartphone user notifies the schedule arbitration server 1 of a value corresponding to the pressing of the above buttons 4105 to 4107.

  FIG. 42 shows a flow for matching the vehicle allocation conditions between the smartphone user and the taxi company. In this case, taxi company terminals 2-T1 and 2-T2 of taxi companies 1 and 2 regularly provide information on the location of empty taxis and the attributes of each taxi (non-smoking cars, female drivers, child seat equipment, etc.) Continue to send to the cooperative field agent (schedule arbitration server 1) (Step 4201).

  On the other hand, the smartphones 2-U1 and 2-U2 of the smartphone users 1 and 2 transmit taxi allocation conditions as shown in FIG. 41 to the cooperative field agent (schedule arbitration server 1) (Step 4202).

  On the other hand, the above-described schedule arbitration server 1 receives the allocation conditions from the taxi company terminals 2-T1, 2-T2 and the smartphones 2-U1, 2-U2, and lists the allocation conditions of the taxi and the smartphone user at the present time ( (Step 4203), matching is attempted (Step 4205). More specifically, the departure time, the departure place, and the arrival place are close, and those having a lot of matching items among the various conditions such as whether or not to share can be specified. In addition, for example, when there are a plurality of smartphone users who may share the vehicle, matching such as combining them is tried.

  The schedule arbitration server 1 determines that the matching calculation is to be terminated by matching for a predetermined time or number of times (Step 4206: Y), and sends the mediation schedule to each smartphone user's smartphone and each taxi company's taxi company terminal for proposal. (Step 4207).

  Further, the smartphone users 1 and 2 and the taxi companies 1 and 2 determine whether or not to leave the mediation based on the schedule transmitted from the schedule mediation server 1. The smartphones 2-U1, 2-U2 and the taxi company terminals 2-T1, 2-T2 accept this determination result (Step 4208, Step 4209).

  When the above-described determination result indicates separation (Step 4208: Y, Step 4209: Y), the smartphones 2-U1, 2-U2 and taxi company terminals 2-T1, 2-T2 are connected to the schedule arbitration server 1, This is notified (Step 4210), and the process is terminated.

  On the other hand, when the above-described determination result indicates that it does not leave (Step 4208: No, Step 4209: No), the smartphone users 1 and 2 and the taxi companies 1 and 2 consider the schedule transmitted from the schedule arbitration server 1. And determine whether or not to make a re-suggestion. The re-suggestion may have the same content as the previous time.

  In this case, the smartphones 2-U1, 2-U2 and the taxi company terminals 2-T1, 2-T2 accept this determination result (Step 4213, Step 4214).

  When the above determination result indicates a re-suggestion (Step 4213: Y, Step 4214: Y), the smartphone 2-U1, 2-U2 or the taxi company terminal 2-T1, 2-T2 schedules that fact. The server 1 is notified. On the other hand, the schedule arbitration server 1 receives this notification, determines the presence / absence of re-suggestion (Step 4204), and when there is a re-suggestion, starts another matching process again.

  On the other hand, the smartphone 2-U1, 2-U2 or the taxi company terminal 2-T1, 2-T2 waits for the mediation end notification (Step 4217) from the schedule mediation server 1 after the above-mentioned re-suggestion (Step 4215: Y, Step 4216). : Y), the notification is confirmed and the process is terminated.

  Although the best mode for carrying out the present invention has been specifically described above, the present invention is not limited to this, and various modifications can be made without departing from the scope of the invention.

  According to the present embodiment, it is possible to allocate resources even when there is a constraint inconsistency among a plurality of systems.

  At least the following will be clarified by the description of the present specification. That is, in the schedule arbitration system according to the present embodiment, when the arithmetic device of the schedule arbitration server receives a notification of approval for the correction schedule from any one of the servers, the correction schedule is transmitted to the servers. And when at least one of the servers receives a notification of refusal with respect to the modification schedule, it modifies at least one of the overall optimum constraint information and the modification schedule of each of the servers. It is good also as.

  According to this, it becomes possible to modify the schedule according to the intention of the server side, that is, the side that receives the schedule arbitration, and as a result, resource allocation is efficient even in the case where inconsistencies in constraints occur between multiple systems. It becomes possible.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration system of the present embodiment, the arithmetic device of the schedule arbitration server is presented by the server that has transmitted the most credit value when receiving a predetermined credit value from at least one of the servers. The schedule may be prioritized and the schedule of the other server or the overall optimum constraint information may be re-corrected.

  According to this, it is possible to modify the schedule based on the willingness to realize the schedule on the side that receives the schedule arbitration. As a result, even if there is a mismatch in the constraints between multiple systems, resource allocation is possible. It becomes possible efficiently.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration system according to the present embodiment, the calculation device of the schedule arbitration server, in the credit calculation process, the correction schedule of at least one of the correction schedules is the creation of any of the servers If the correction is in violation of the constraint, a credit value higher than the credit value for the schedule that satisfies the creation constraint may be calculated.

  According to this, it is possible to give each server an incentive according to the inconvenience associated with schedule arbitration, and in turn, resource allocation can be efficiently performed even in the case of inconsistencies in constraints among multiple systems. It becomes.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration system according to the present embodiment, the schedule arbitration server includes a storage device that stores past schedule correction information in each of the servers. In the arithmetic device, the schedule correction information On the basis of the above, the schedule of each server may be corrected to generate a correction schedule.

  According to this, it becomes possible to modify the schedule according to the past case of the side receiving schedule arbitration, and in turn, resource allocation can be efficiently performed even when there is a mismatch in constraints among multiple systems. Become.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration system of the present embodiment, the schedule arbitration server includes at least each history of approval or rejection of the correction schedule and reception of a credit value obtained for each server in the storage device. Further memorization information is stored, and in the arithmetic unit, the content of the creation constraint of each server is estimated based on the information of the mediation content. Based on the content of the creation constraint at a subsequent schedule modification opportunity The schedule may be corrected.

According to this, it is possible to modify the schedule according to the schedule arbitration side, that is, the creation constraint, and the resource allocation can be efficiently performed even in the case where there is a mismatch in constraints among a plurality of systems. It becomes possible.

  Further, the schedule arbitration system of the present embodiment may include at least one of the servers that executes a predetermined procedure related to the event based on the correction schedule.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration system according to the present embodiment, each server receives a notification of start of the schedule arbitration from the schedule arbitration server, executes a predetermined process to participate in the schedule arbitration, and executes the predetermined process of the participation Thereafter, a predetermined process for leaving the schedule arbitration based on the contents of the arbitration or the occurrence of a predetermined event may be executed.

  According to this, it becomes possible to modify the schedule according to the intention of participation in the arbitration on the server side, that is, the side that receives the schedule mediation, and as a result, even in the case where inconsistencies in constraints occur between a plurality of systems Resource allocation is possible efficiently.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration system of the present embodiment, the arithmetic device of the schedule arbitration server detects the inconsistency and corrects the schedule with respect to schedules having different schedule configurations and creation constraints among the servers as the schedule of each server. It is good also as what performs the production | generation of a schedule, the calculation of the said credit value, and the notification of the start of the said schedule mediation at least.

  According to this, it is possible to perform a series of processing such as inconsistency detection and schedule correction in response to situations where the schedule configuration itself differs between servers, and consequently, inconsistencies due to restrictions among multiple systems. Even when this occurs, resource allocation can be efficiently performed.

  In the schedule arbitration method of the present embodiment, when the information processing system receives a notification of approval for the correction schedule from any of the servers, the correction schedule is transmitted to the servers. When the notification of refusal with respect to the correction schedule is received from any one of the servers, at least one of the overall optimal constraint information and the correction schedule of each server may be corrected.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration method of the present embodiment, when the information processing system receives a predetermined credit value from at least one of the servers, the schedule presented from the server that has transmitted the largest credit value is prioritized. The schedule of the other server or the overall optimum constraint information may be re-corrected.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration method of the present embodiment, the information processing system, in the credit calculation process, the correction schedule of at least one of the correction schedules violates the creation constraint of any of the servers. If it is due to the correction, a credit value higher than the credit value for the schedule satisfying the creation constraint may be calculated.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration method of the present embodiment, the information processing system includes a storage device that stores past schedule correction information in each of the servers, and in the schedule re-creation process, The server schedule may be modified to generate a modified schedule.

  In the schedule arbitration method according to the present embodiment, the information processing system includes at least each history of approval or rejection of the correction schedule and reception of a credit value obtained for each server in the storage device. Further storing mediation content information, estimating the content of the creation constraints of each server based on the mediation content information, and performing schedule correction based on the content of the creation constraints at subsequent schedule correction opportunities. It is good.

  Moreover, in the schedule mediation method of this embodiment, each said server may perform the predetermined | prescribed procedure regarding an applicable event based on the said correction schedule.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration method of the present embodiment, each server receives a notification of the start of the schedule arbitration from the schedule arbitration server, executes a predetermined process for participating in the schedule arbitration, and executes the predetermined process for the participation Thereafter, a predetermined process for leaving the schedule arbitration may be executed based on the contents of the arbitration or the occurrence of a predetermined event.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration method according to the present embodiment, the information processing system detects the inconsistency and generates the correction schedule with respect to schedules having different schedule configurations and creation constraints between servers as the schedules of the servers. The credit value calculation and the schedule arbitration start notification may be executed at least.

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 Schedule arbitration server 3 Network 2-T Road surface maintenance plan server 2-L Lamp maintenance plan server 2-P Electric power maintenance plan server 2-O Traffic management server 10 Schedule arbitration system 11-01 CPU (computing device)
11-02 Memory 11-03 Communication NIC
11-04 Hard disk drive 11-05 Input / output controller 11-06 Monitor controller 110-7 Bus 2-1 Operation processing unit 2-11 Initial maintenance schedule creation unit 2-12 Schedule constraint creation unit 2-13 Credit issue policy input unit 2 -2 Communication processing unit

2-21 Assertion Message Transmitter

2-22 Assertion Message Receiving Unit 2-3 Online Processing Unit 2-31 Executability Estimation Unit

2-32 Assertion Message Confirmation Unit 2-33 Individual KPI Calculation Unit 2-34 Assertion Information Creation Unit 2-4 Offline Processing Unit 2-41 Assertion Information Recording Unit 2-42 Past History Information Unit 2-43 Self Model Tuning Unit 2- 44 Self-property model part

2-45 Reference Assertion Message Recording Unit 2-46 Credit Recording Unit 1-1 Operation Processing Unit 131 Schedule Creation Policy Input Unit 136 Arbitration Time Input Unit 137 Credit Issue Policy Input Unit 1-2 Communication Processing Unit 139 Assertion Message Reception Unit 1- 3 Online processing unit 132 Inconsistency determination unit 133 Assertion message confirmation unit 134 Missing information estimation unit 135 Overall KPI calculation unit 1-4 Offline processing unit 138 Credit recording unit

16-1, 16-2 offer assertion message

18-1 re_suggestion_with_priority assertion message

18-2 accept assertion message

19-1 Reject Assertion Message

20-1 offer_with_priority assertion message 251 Valve adjustment server 256 Network 252 Regional A shipping server 253 Regional B shipping server 254 Regional C shipping server 255 Regional D shipping server 261 Conference scheduling server 266 Network 262 User A terminal 263 User B terminal 264 User C terminal 265 User D terminal

Claims (18)

A schedule relating to each of a plurality of events and creation constraint information of the schedule are acquired from each server that manages each of the events, and the schedule and creation constraint information of each server, and the entire constraint that relates to the entire mediation between schedules Based on optimal constraint information, inconsistency determination processing for detecting inconsistencies between schedules of each of the servers,
When the inconsistency is detected, a schedule re-creation process for correcting the schedule of each server and generating a correction schedule;
Credit calculation processing for calculating a credit value corresponding to the assertion strength of the priority of the schedule in each server according to the degree of the correction;
A transmission process for transmitting a schedule arbitration start notification including the correction schedule and the credit value information to each of the corresponding servers;
A schedule arbitration system including a schedule arbitration server including an arithmetic device that executes the processing. The arithmetic device of the schedule arbitration server is:
When a notification of approval for the correction schedule is received from any one of the servers, the correction schedule is transmitted to each server,
When a notification of refusal with respect to the correction schedule is received from any one of the servers, at least one of the overall optimum constraint information and the correction schedule of each of the servers is corrected.
The schedule arbitration system according to claim 1. The arithmetic device of the schedule arbitration server is:
When a predetermined credit value is received from at least one of the servers, priority is given to the schedule presented by the server that has transmitted the largest credit value, and the schedule of the other server or the overall optimal constraint information is re-corrected Is,
The schedule arbitration system according to claim 2, wherein: The arithmetic device of the schedule arbitration server is:
In the credit calculation process, if the correction schedule of at least one of the correction schedules is due to a correction that violates any of the creation constraints of each of the servers, a credit for the schedule that satisfies the creation constraint To calculate a credit value higher than the value,
The schedule arbitration system according to claim 1. The schedule arbitration server is:
A storage device for storing past schedule correction information in each of the servers;
In the arithmetic unit,
At the time of the schedule re-creation process, based on the schedule correction information, the schedule of each server is corrected, and a correction schedule is generated.
The schedule arbitration system according to claim 1, wherein: The schedule arbitration server is:
In the storage device, information on arbitration contents including at least each history of approval or rejection of the correction schedule and reception of credit values obtained for each server is further stored,
In the arithmetic unit, the content of the creation constraint of each server is estimated based on the information of the mediation content, and the schedule is modified based on the content of the creation constraint at a schedule modification opportunity thereafter.
The schedule arbitration system according to claim 1.   The schedule arbitration system according to claim 1, further comprising at least one of the servers that executes a predetermined procedure related to the event based on the correction schedule. Each of the servers
Upon receipt of the schedule arbitration start notification from the schedule arbitration server, a predetermined process for participating in the schedule arbitration is executed, and after execution of the predetermined process of participation, the schedule arbitration based on the content of the arbitration or occurrence of a predetermined event To execute a predetermined process to leave
The schedule arbitration system according to claim 7. The arithmetic device of the schedule arbitration server is:
As the schedule of each of the servers, with respect to schedules having different schedule configurations and creation constraints between servers, detection of the inconsistency, generation of the correction schedule, calculation of the credit value, and notification of start of the schedule arbitration, At least what to do,
The schedule arbitration system according to claim 1. Information processing system
A schedule relating to each of a plurality of events and creation constraint information of the schedule are acquired from each server that manages each of the events, and the schedule and creation constraint information of each server, and the entire constraint that relates to the entire mediation between schedules Inconsistency detection processing for detecting inconsistencies between the schedules of the servers based on the optimal constraint information;
When the inconsistency is detected, a schedule re-creation process for correcting the schedule of each server and generating a correction schedule;
Credit calculation processing for calculating a credit value corresponding to the assertion strength of the priority of the schedule in each server according to the degree of the correction;
A transmission process for transmitting a schedule arbitration start notification including the correction schedule and the credit value information to each of the corresponding servers;
A schedule arbitration method comprising: The information processing system is
When a notification of approval for the correction schedule is received from any one of the servers, the correction schedule is transmitted to each server,
When a notification of refusal to the correction schedule is received from any one of the servers, correct at least one of the global optimum constraint information and the correction schedule of each server;
The schedule arbitration method according to claim 10. The information processing system is
When a predetermined credit value is received from at least one of the servers, the schedule presented by the server that has transmitted the largest credit value is prioritized, and the schedule of the other server or the overall optimal constraint information is re-corrected.
The schedule arbitration method according to claim 11, wherein: The information processing system is
In the credit calculation process, if the correction schedule of at least one of the correction schedules is due to a correction that violates any of the creation constraints of each of the servers, a credit for the schedule that satisfies the creation constraint Calculate a higher credit value than the value,
The schedule arbitration method according to claim 10. The information processing system is
A storage device for storing past schedule correction information in each of the servers;
In the schedule re-creation process, based on the schedule correction information, the schedule of each server is corrected, and a correction schedule is generated.
The schedule arbitration method according to claim 10, wherein: The information processing system is
In the storage device, information on the contents of arbitration including at least each history of approval or rejection of the correction schedule and reception of credit values obtained for each server is stored, and based on the information on the contents of arbitration Estimating the content of the creation constraint of each server, and at a subsequent schedule correction opportunity, perform schedule correction based on the content of the creation constraint.
The schedule arbitration method according to claim 10. Each of the servers is
The schedule arbitration method according to claim 10, wherein a predetermined procedure related to the event is executed based on the correction schedule. Each of the servers is
Upon receipt of the schedule arbitration start notification from the schedule arbitration server, a predetermined process for participating in the schedule arbitration is executed, and after execution of the predetermined process of participation, the schedule arbitration based on the content of the arbitration or occurrence of a predetermined event Execute a predetermined process to leave
The schedule arbitration method according to claim 16. The information processing system is
As the schedule of each of the servers, with respect to schedules having different schedule configurations and creation constraints between servers, detection of the inconsistency, generation of the correction schedule, calculation of the credit value, and notification of start of the schedule arbitration, At least run,
The schedule arbitration method according to claim 10.