JP6674887B2 - Schedule arbitration system and schedule arbitration method - Google Patents

Description

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

  In recent years, with the globalization of production, opportunities for producing the same device at multiple locations have been increasing.

  Here, as a technique for controlling a plurality of production bases, such a technique is, for example, a production model in which production is performed across a plurality of production bases including production bases having different business managements by vertical integration / horizontal development of business. Predicts the delivery and inventory amount after a certain period based on the production lead time of each production site and the lead time of the procured parts, and based on the predicted delivery and inventory amount, gives priority to the production models of the plurality of production sites. A production control system (see Patent Document 1) having a plurality of production site prediction feedback means for optimizing the order and the shipping plan has been proposed.

JP 2012-141806 A

  However, the prior art does not consider that inconsistencies occur in the constraints of the production systems at a plurality of production sites. 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 technology that enables resource allocation even when a constraint mismatch occurs between a plurality of systems.

The schedule arbitration system of the present invention that solves the above-described 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 acquires 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 arbitration between schedules, an inconsistency determination process for detecting inconsistency between the schedules of the respective servers; and 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 a schedule priority claim strength in each server according to the degree of the correction; Schedule containing schedule and credit value information The start notification Lumpur arbitration, a transmission process of transmitting corresponding to the server each saw including a schedule mediation server having an arithmetic unit for executing the schedule mediation server, and the past schedule adjustment information in each server Arbitration content information including at least the history of approval or rejection of the correction schedule and receipt of the credit value obtained for each of the servers, and the arithmetic device performs the schedule re-creation processing. At this time, the schedule of each server is modified based on the schedule modification information, a modified schedule is generated, and the contents of the creation constraint of each server are estimated based on the information of the arbitration contents, and the subsequent schedule modification is performed. At an opportunity, the schedule is modified based on the contents of the creation constraint There, characterized in that.

Further, in the schedule arbitration method of the present invention, the information processing system acquires a schedule for each of a plurality of events and creation constraint information of the schedule from each server that manages each of the events, and Based on the creation constraint information and the overall optimal constraint information that is a constraint on the entire arbitration between schedules, an inconsistency determination process for detecting an inconsistency between the schedules of the respective servers; A schedule re-creation process for correcting a schedule of a server and generating a corrected schedule, and a credit calculation process for calculating a credit value corresponding to a claim strength of a priority of a schedule in each server according to the degree of the correction, A scan including the modification schedule and the credit value information. The start notification module arbitration, a transmission process of transmitting corresponding to the server each is intended to run, the past schedule adjustment information in each server, the is obtained for each server, authorization for said revised schedule or Rejection, and the information of the arbitration contents including at least each history of the credit value reception, at the time of the schedule re-creation processing, based on the schedule correction information, based on the schedule correction information, to correct the schedule of each server, to correct Generating a schedule, estimating the content of the creation constraint of each server based on the information of the arbitration content, and performing schedule modification based on the content of the creation constraint at a subsequent schedule modification opportunity. I do.

  ADVANTAGE OF THE INVENTION According to this invention, it becomes possible to allocate resources even in the case where inconsistency in restrictions occurs between a plurality of systems.

FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating a conceptual example of a symbiotic autonomous decentralized system according to an embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of composition of the schedule arbitration system in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of composition of the valve adjustment system in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of composition of the meeting scheduling system of this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of the whole sequence of the schedule arbitration system in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of a display screen of an autonomous individual server group in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of composition of the hardware of the server of the schedule arbitration server and the autonomous individual server group in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of a target of schedule arbitration in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of the initial maintenance schedule of the road surface in this embodiment. It is a figure showing an example of an initial maintenance schedule of a lighting fixture in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of the initial maintenance schedule of traffic in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of the initial maintenance schedule of electric power in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of software composition of the server of the autonomous individual server group in this embodiment. FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating an example of a constraint condition of a schedule according to the embodiment. FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating an example of the contents of an initial maintenance schedule message according to the embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of software composition of the schedule arbitration server in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of contention generation in the initial maintenance schedule between the road surface maintenance plan server and the lamp maintenance plan server in the present embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of contention generation in the initial maintenance schedule between the road surface maintenance plan server and the lamp maintenance plan server in the present embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of contention generation in the initial maintenance schedule between the electric power maintenance plan server and the traffic management server in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of contention generation in the initial maintenance schedule between the electric power maintenance plan server and the traffic management server in this embodiment. FIG. 9 is a diagram illustrating an example of a GUI of a schedule creation policy viewer according to the embodiment. It is the example which described the pattern of arbitration in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of GUI of the arbitration time input part in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of a screen which sets a priority point issue policy in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a correction schedule of a road surface maintenance schedule with respect to an initial maintenance schedule in this embodiment. It is a figure showing an example of a correction schedule of a lamp maintenance schedule to an initial maintenance schedule in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of the correction schedule of the power maintenance schedule 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 the road maintenance plan server when a priority point is sent from the road maintenance plan server to the schedule arbitration server in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the example of a correction schedule of the lamp maintenance plan server when a priority point is sent from the road surface maintenance plan server to the schedule arbitration server in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of contents of the offer assertion message in this embodiment. It is a figure showing a comparative example (comparison in road maintenance plan server) of an initial maintenance schedule and schedule constraints in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the comparative example (comparison in a lamp maintenance plan server) of an initial maintenance schedule and a schedule constraint condition in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of the assertion message of the re-suggestion in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of the assertion message which rejects an offer in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of the assertion message which offers the schedule in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of state transition of the server of the autonomous individual server group of this embodiment. FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating an example of an assertion message including only a maintenance section and a required time in the embodiment. FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating an example of a time zone in which a reject assertion message is easily issued in the embodiment. FIG. 9 is a diagram illustrating an example of a flow of arbitration using an agent program in the present embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of the arbitration algorithm of the cooperation field agent in this embodiment. FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating a membership function of fuzzy inference used in an autonomous individual agent in the embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of the fuzzy rule of the autonomous individual agent in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the simulation result using the cooperation field agent and the autonomous individual agent in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the evaluation of the whole KPI in the case where the priority point is not used and the case where it is used in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of composition of the system which mediates the sightseeing schedule of the tourist and the bus schedule of the bus company in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the algorithm of GA in this embodiment. It is a figure showing the example of structure of the chromosome used by GA in this embodiment. It is a flowchart which shows the mode of arbitration of both the bus operation schedule of the next day and the sightseeing schedule of a smart phone user in this embodiment. It is a figure showing a schedule before and after arbitration in this embodiment. It is a figure showing a schedule before and after arbitration in this embodiment. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating a configuration example of a system for arbitrating taxi operation with a person who wants to use a taxi having a smartphone in the present embodiment. FIG. 9 is a diagram illustrating an example of a GUI screen of a smartphone owned by a smartphone user according to the embodiment. It is a figure which shows the flow which performs matching of the dispatch condition by the smart phone user and the taxi company in this embodiment.

  <Overview of Symbiotic Autonomous Decentralized System>

  FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating the concept of a symbiotic autonomous decentralized system according to the present embodiment. New investment in the social infrastructure business in Japan is saturated, and competition in overseas infrastructure is also intensifying, making entry difficult. In addition, although mergers, mergers or business alliances of the same type have been carried out between companies, there is a situation in which only the effect of cost reduction by sharing facilities and services can be expected.

  Under these circumstances, there is a search for ways to create unknown new services and businesses by creating a place (hereinafter referred to as a “place”) for cooperating with similar or different businesses, and coexisting with multiple existing systems in the “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, in the heterogeneous or the same kind of business, the executing entity of the heterogeneous or the same type of business is “autonomous individual”, and the executing entity that provides a symbiotic “place” to the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 is “cooperative field”. (FIG. 1).
--- Example 1--
<Example of application of the symbiotic autonomous decentralized system>

  FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating a configuration of the schedule arbitration system 10 according to the present embodiment. The schedule arbitration system 10 of the present embodiment includes at least the schedule arbitration server 1. This schedule arbitration server 1 is a server corresponding to the above-mentioned “coordination field”.

  On the other hand, the existence corresponding to the above-mentioned “autonomous unit” in the present embodiment can be assumed to be, for example, a server that performs various maintenance operations on an expressway. In the configuration illustrated in FIG. 2, 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 correspond to the server corresponding to the autonomous unit. Become. Hereinafter, these servers are collectively referred to as an autonomous individual server group 2.

  A specific configuration example corresponding to each of the autonomous individual server group 2 and the schedule arbitration server 1 of the cooperative 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 is called an autonomous individual system. The servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 hold information of a key performance indicator (KPI) that operates the autonomous individual system. This KPI is called “individual KPI”. The autonomous individual system exists to achieve or maximize individual KPIs 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 is called a cooperative field system. There is a KPI for operating the cooperative field system in the cooperative field, and this is called “entire KPI”. A cooperative field system exists to achieve or maximize this overall KPI. The schedule arbitration server 1 that embodies such a cooperative field system is called a cooperative field server.

  "Symbiosis" in the symbiotic autonomous distribution refers to a state in which the cooperative field aims at maximizing the overall KPI, and at the same time, each autonomous individual coexists aiming at maximizing its own individual KPI. Ideally, it is desirable that both the overall KPI and the individual KPI are always maximized simultaneously, but the overall KPI and the individual KPI may have a reciprocal relationship.

  The schedule arbitration server 1 and the autonomous individual server group 2, which are the coordination 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 that describes the content asserting the user's request. An "assertion" is an assertion made in consideration of the other party's assertion, and differs from a "claim" in that it involves an explanation of one's own situation, consultation with the other party, and concession to the other party.

  FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating a configuration of the valve adjustment system according to the present embodiment. Further, the symbiotic autonomous decentralized system according to the present embodiment can be applied to, for example, a valve adjustment system operated by a water supply company.

  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 area A water operation server 252, the area B water operation server 253, the area C water operation server 254, and the area D water operation server 255, which are connected to the valve adjustment server 251 via the network 256, are each "autonomous". And an autonomous individual server group 2 is configured.

  As described above, when the symbiotic autonomous decentralized system according to the present embodiment is applied to the valve adjustment system, the valve adjustment server 251 reduces the total power cost in the system by using each of the water operation servers 252 in the regions A to D. Adjust the operation schedule of ~ 255. In addition, the water operation server in each area controls the valves of the water distribution system and the like according to the schedule adjusted by the valve adjustment server 251.

  FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating a configuration of the conference scheduling system according to the present embodiment. In addition, the symbiotic autonomous distributed system according to the present embodiment can be applied to, for example, a meeting scheduling system that adjusts the date and time and location of a meeting based on the convenience of each user in a meeting in which a plurality of users are scheduled to attend.

  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 correspond to “autonomous individuals”, respectively. An 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 transmits the schedule information of the user from the terminal of each user in order to adjust the schedule of the conference attendees. Then, the date and time of the meeting and the location are adjusted, and the information of the date and time and the location are sent to the terminal of each user.

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

Although various examples as described above can be considered as application targets of the symbiotic autonomous decentralized system, in the present embodiment, the schedule arbitration system 10 already shown in FIG. 2 is assumed. FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating an example of an overall 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 when schedule arbitration is performed.

  In this sequence, first, the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T and the lighting fixture maintenance plan server 2-L perform a schedule creation constraint (hereinafter, schedule creation constraint) stored in advance and a schedule 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 an input from a predetermined person in charge, sets the execution period of all autonomous schedules from ○ / ○ to △ / △. For example, schedule policy information (whole optimal constraint information) that is information on a schedule policy of the entire system, such as within a period up to a day.

  Further, 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 and the restrictions on the schedule, and the schedule policy information described above. , A mismatch between the schedules (plan A, plan B) is detected (Step 2403).

  The above-mentioned inconsistency between schedules is detected by calculating the overall KPI using, for example, the following (Equation 1).

−−−− Equation 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 The area (maintenance section of the expressway) and _TK indicate the time zone (time zone for performing maintenance work) 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 a maintenance area and a time zone that overlap with the schedule (modification schedule) changed after the initial schedule and the initial schedule, respectively. Therefore, when the contents of the initial schedule are all exactly the same as the schedule after the arbitration (correction schedule), the KPI calculated by Expression 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 When the number of maintenance target sections that match between the above and the work time of each corresponding section = 6.5 hours, the KPI obtained by Expression 1 is (6.5 / 8) × 100 = 81.25%. . In addition,
This definition of the KPI is one of the methods suitable for the scheduling problem, but need not be limited to this method.

  Subsequently, the schedule arbitration server 1 reads out the global optimum constraint information stored in advance in the HDD 11-04 (see FIG. 7) as a storage device, and corrects the schedule (plan A, 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) that has been modified from the initial schedule may be used as it is as a numerical value. For example, the schedule arbitration server 1 calculates the credit value as “30” when a correction schedule generated for “Plan A” of each schedule has been 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 transmitting unit, transmits each information of the correction schedule (plan A ′, plan B ′) and credit value to the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T. Is transmitted to each of the lamp maintenance plan servers 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 corrected schedule (plan A ′, plan B ′) received from the schedule arbitration server 1 on a predetermined display device such as a display. Then, an input of approval or rejection of the correction schedule by a predetermined person or the like is received, and the input is returned 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 the above-described Steps 2406 and 2408 from all servers (in this example, the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T and the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L) which are autonomous individual servers. If it is obtained, the fact that the correction schedule and the credit have been 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 each information of the correction schedule and the credit determined by the schedule arbitration server 1 on a predetermined display device such as a display (FIG. 6). : Display screen example of the autonomous individual server group 2) and execute a predetermined process according to the correction schedule.
<Hardware configuration>

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

  That is, a CPU 11-01 as an arithmetic device, a memory 11-02 as a storage device, a communication NIC 11-03, a hard disk drive (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 a mouse as input devices, and the input / output controller 11-05 is connected to a display as a display device.

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

  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. The line connecting these interchanges indicates an expressway. Regarding the maintenance work of the highway having such a configuration, each maintenance section of the road surface (Track), the lamp (Light), the power (Power), and the traffic (Operation) ends at the interchange. The maintenance section is a unit for performing maintenance work.

  Among the above-mentioned maintenance work, road maintenance means maintenance work on the road surface of an expressway. For example, since the road surface of a highway continues to sink due to the weight of passing vehicles, lifting the road surface is one of road surface maintenance operations.

  What is lamp maintenance? This is the maintenance of highway lighting. For example, replacing a failed lamp or a lamp that has passed a predetermined period is one of lamp maintenance operations.

  Power maintenance refers to repairing or replacing power equipment in order to stably supply power to various parts of the expressway. Traffic maintenance refers to maintenance work related to traffic control of automobiles. However, in the present embodiment, the power maintenance section and the traffic maintenance section are treated as a section through which electricity flows and a section for controlling the traffic of the automobile.

  For example, road maintenance is performed with the interchanges N1 to N3 as one business unit (T1). Although two road surface maintenances cannot be performed in this T1 section, it is possible to perform the sections 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 maintenance task and the lamp maintenance task cannot be performed at the same time.

  In addition, in order to ensure the safety of the service personnel, it is assumed that neither road surface maintenance nor lamp maintenance can be performed while power is being supplied to the 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, an automobile may not be able to run without electricity. Therefore, for example, while the traffic control of the vehicle is performed in the traffic maintenance section O1, the power maintenance section P1 may need to be energized. It is assumed that neither road surface maintenance nor lamp maintenance can be performed during traffic control of the automobile.

  Here, in order to facilitate understanding of the embodiments of the present invention, the settings are simplified as follows. First, it is assumed that the schedule of road surface maintenance (Track), lamp maintenance (Light), power maintenance (Power), and traffic maintenance (Operation) is adjusted once a week. In practice, the schedule may be adjusted for a longer period (one month, six months). Similarly, the road surface maintenance and the lamp maintenance are set to have only one maintenance executing entity (maintenance team). However, in practice, two or more maintenance teams work in another maintenance section at the same time. You may do.

  When performing schedule adjustment in the schedule arbitration server 1, it is desirable that each autonomous individual server performs a schedule adjustment that does not greatly deviate from a maintenance schedule (hereinafter, referred to as an initial maintenance schedule) initially proposed to the schedule arbitration server 1. .

The reason for performing schedule adjustment that does not greatly deviate from the initial maintenance schedule is that a company that performs each maintenance operation (hereinafter referred to as a maintenance company) sets up the most convenient schedule that maximizes the individual KPI for each maintenance company. Because it is possible.

  Specifically, it is conceivable that the date and time and time convenient for the maintenance staff, the distance from the place where the maintenance staff is located 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 the present embodiment, the maintenance schedule of each server of the autonomous individual server group 2 is grasped as “individual KPI”. A state in which the arbitration is completed without any change in the initial maintenance schedule is considered as a state in which the individual KPI is maximized (100%).

  Further, for example, in the case where the maintenance work and the time for the road surface maintenance (Track) and the lamp maintenance (Light) overlap, either maintenance work must be abandoned. However, it is assumed that the individual KPI cannot be maximized, resulting in disadvantage.

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

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

  Therefore, first, each server of the autonomous individual server group 2 that manages each maintenance task 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. 9C shows an initial maintenance schedule of traffic (Operation), and FIG. 9D shows an initial maintenance schedule of electric power (Power).

  On the other hand, the configuration of each server of the autonomous individual server group 2 that undergoes 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 individual server group 2. The arrow in the figure indicates the relationship in which the software module is called or referred to, and is understood as an algorithm of the program. These programs are developed in the memory 11-02 in FIG. 7 and executed by the CPU 11-01 as an arithmetic unit.

  The storage information necessary for each module of the communication processing unit 2-2 and the online processing unit 2-3 in the configuration illustrated in FIG. 10 is stored in the memory 11-02. The storage information required 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 individual server group 2, an initial maintenance schedule is created in an initial maintenance schedule creating 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 transmitting unit 2-21 of the communication processing unit 2-2.

  Note that the creation of the above-mentioned initial maintenance schedule needs to be based on the creation restrictions. FIG. 11 shows a restriction on creating a road maintenance (Track) schedule (hereinafter, referred to as a schedule restriction condition).

  In the example of the schedule constraint condition shown in FIG. 11, it is shown that the maintenance work cannot be performed 100% over the entire time period on September 22 (Tuesday) and September 26 (Saturday) because it is a regular holiday of the maintenance company. ing. In addition, the entire time zone on September 27 (Sun) indicates that it is difficult to execute a task with a weight of 30%. Also, after 26:00 on September 21 (Mon), 9/24 (Thu) and 9/25 (Fri), it is shown that it is difficult to carry out work with a weight of 50%. Also, after 27:30 on Wednesday, September 23, the weight of 70% indicates that it is difficult to execute the business. It should be noted that each weight in the schedule constraint condition is determined by a policy of each maintenance company that operates each server of the autonomous individual server group 2. As an example of the index of the policy, it is possible to adopt a method of quantifying in consideration of an additional cost (overtime cost and moving cost) when the business is performed during the time zone.

  The above-described schedule constraint condition is 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 of the online processing unit 2-3. The schedule constraint condition may be created by a maintenance company operator or the like using a predetermined tool.

  The initial maintenance schedule created in each server of the autonomous individual server group 2 in this manner is transmitted to the schedule arbitration server 1 by the assertion message transmitting unit 2-21 of the communication processing unit 2-2.

  FIG. 12 shows a specific example of the initial maintenance schedule transmitted from the assertion message transmitting unit 2-21. FIG. 12 is a diagram showing the contents of a message (suggestion assertion message) of the initial maintenance schedule created in the road 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 a maintenance work time zone and a maintenance work section. The first first line is a description indicating that the maintenance work of the section “T1” is proposed as the initial maintenance schedule in the “time zone from 25 o'clock to 27 o'clock on September 21, 2015”.

  The fifth line describes Tuesday and Saturday as days when business cannot be performed. This day corresponds to, for example, a regular holiday of the maintenance company. Such a day is a day in which business 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 essential, but the description of such regular holiday information is not essential.

  The process of creating and transmitting the initial maintenance schedule similar to that in FIG. 12 is similarly executed in the road maintenance plan server 2-T2-W, the power maintenance plan server 2-P, and the traffic planning 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 deployed in the memory 11-2 of the schedule arbitration server 1. The arrow in the figure indicates the relationship in which the software module is called or referred to, and is assumed to be grasped as a program algorithm.

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

  In the schedule arbitration server 1 having such a configuration, the communication processing unit 1-2 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. I do. Similarly, the assertion message of the 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 individual server group 2.

  Further, the assertion message is transferred to the assertion message confirmation unit 133 of the online processing unit 1-3 in the schedule arbitration server 1, where the format check of the format is performed. If the format is defective, it is corrected by a predetermined algorithm. .

  The assertion message that has undergone the format check in 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 of this case, the assertion message is returned to the assertion message confirmation unit 133 as it is.

  The assertion message confirmation unit 133 includes an assertion message (suggestion assertion message) of the initial maintenance schedule 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 to the inconsistency determining unit 132.

  The inconsistency determining unit 132 checks whether or not a collision of the schedules obtained from the respective servers (hereinafter, referred to as a conflict) has occurred.

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

  FIGS. 14-3 and 14-4 show examples of conflicts occurring 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 in which electricity is not supplied during the traffic time of the vehicle from 25 o'clock to 29 o'clock 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 added from the schedule creation policy unit 131 of the operation processing unit 1-1, and the schedule is corrected using the schedule policy as a constraint.

FIG. 15 shows an example of a GUI in the viewer of the schedule creation policy described above. The operator of the schedule arbitration server 1 specifies a schedule creation policy on a GUI displayed by the schedule creation policy section 131 on a predetermined display device such as a display as shown in FIG.

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

  In the arbitration pattern A in the figure, no competition occurs between the servers in the autonomous individual server group 2, but competition occurs between the schedule arbitration server 1 whose maximum KPI is desired and the server in the autonomous individual server group 2. This shows the state that has occurred. If arbitration is not repeated even if repeated, the schedule arbitration server 1 or the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 can claim priority based on their own credit value (hereinafter referred to as priority point). Becomes

  This priority point can be grasped as a common currency usable between the schedule arbitration server 1 and the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2. In the case of a conflict of priority claims by such priority points, the conflict is resolved by adopting the priority claim with the larger value of the priority point which is the amount of the common currency.

  In other words, a quantification of such priority is a "priority point". This is based on “time (minutes)” which is a resource handled in arbitration. For example, if the time of 30 minutes is to be arbitrated, the value of the time is considered based on about 30 priority points in principle. Of course, since the value of this priority point is determined fluidly by the schedule arbitration server 1 or the server of the autonomous individual server group 2 who wants the time, the 30 priority points can be used as a guide only.

  The priority described above is based on the schedule arbitration server 1 that wants the server of the autonomous individual server group 2 to accept the arbitration plan as the correction schedule, or the proposal at the initial time as the initial maintenance schedule, or the request for modification to the correction schedule. The server of the autonomous individual server group 2 that wants the schedule arbitration server 1 to accept the proposal is given a priority point (numerical value) and is proposed.

  When resolving the conflict, as described above, the proposal or re-proposal 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, those who have not been recruited will be able to claim priority using the priority point at another time. For example, when the initial maintenance schedule is sent from the predetermined server of the autonomous individual server group 2 to the schedule arbitration server 1, the priority maintenance point is sent together (Step 2401 in FIG. 5).

  Also, in the arbitration pattern B, a state in which competition occurs between two or more servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 whose own KPIs are desired to be maximized without affecting the KPI of the schedule arbitration server 1, that is, the overall KPI. Is shown. If the arbitration is not repeated even if the arbitration is repeated many times, each server of the autonomous individual server group 2 can claim a priority based on its own priority point when re-proposing. The schedule arbitration server 1 performs arbitration according to the priority points proposed by the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2. As an arbitration method, re-arbitration may be performed in consideration of the degree of influence on other autonomous individuals. The easiest way is to take the proposal with the highest priority point first.

The priority points of the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 whose proposals have been accepted are distributed and allocated to the servers of the autonomous individual 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.

  Further, the arbitration pattern C shows a state in which the schedule arbitration server 1 and all of the KPIs of the servers in the two or more autonomous individual server groups 2 are affected, and a conflict occurs between them. If the arbitration is not repeated even if the arbitration is repeated a number of times, each server of the schedule arbitration server 1 and the autonomous individual server group 2 can claim a priority based on its own priority point when re-proposing. The schedule arbitration server 1 arbitrates according to the priority points proposed from the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 including the schedule arbitration server 1. The arbitration method and the allocation of priority points shall conform to the above.

  Note that these arbitration states are disclosed not only to the schedule arbitration server 1 but also to all servers in the autonomous individual server group 2. Specifically, all the assertion messages including the arbitration plan and the re-suggestion are transferred to all the servers in the autonomous individual server group 2. This is to monitor the fairness of the arbitration on all servers in the symbiotic autonomous distributed system.

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

  Also, within the time specified by the schedule arbitration server 1, re-suggestions and increase of priority points can be performed any number of times, but the proposals and priority points cannot be withdrawn later.

FIG. 17 is a diagram illustrating an example of a GUI 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 and the like can specify the method of resolving the conflict 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 a server of the schedule arbitration server 1 or the autonomous individual server group 2 that has presented the priority of the best condition by a predetermined time. is there. On the other hand, the “coordination field arbitration method” is one in which conditions can be specified by a rule 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 reaching the priority point, determine the entity that can claim the priority. These conditions can be edited by an editor or the like that appears on the screen when the edit button is pressed.

  Note that, in the example of FIG. 17, two types of solution methods, the "auction method" and the "cooperative arbitrage 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 showing an example of a setting screen of a priority point issuance policy set in the servers of the schedule arbitration server 1 and the autonomous individual server group 2.

  These issuance policies are 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. In the credit issuance policy input section 137, each operator or the like inputs.

In the "initial issue point" column shown in the figure, the first value of the priority point is set. The default value is the time (minutes) during which the conflict occurs, but can be manually entered by the operator. In the "last issue point" column, the maximum value of the priority points is set. The default value is a value that is twice the time (minutes) during which a conflict occurs, but the operator can manually enter a multiple value. However, neither the schedule arbitration server 1 nor the servers in the autonomous individual server group 2 can be given more than the value of their own priority point. In such a case, the grant is at its upper limit.

  Pressing the edit button in the “Auction Operation Policy” column displays a script that describes various auction strategies, such as the number of auction splits, and high priority points given at the start or immediately before the end. A read operation can be instructed.

Now, return to the description regarding the conflict resolution. In the schedule arbitration server 1, the inconsistency determination unit 132 of the online processing unit 1-3 performs a new schedule for resolving conflicts, that is, a correction schedule, according to the schedule creation policy given by the schedule creation policy input unit 131 of the operation processing unit 1-1. Is created and passed to the overall KPI calculation unit 135.
On the other hand, the overall KPI calculation unit 135 creates a newer modification schedule for maximizing the overall KPI based on the modification schedule. If a conflict occurs between the created correction schedules, the overall KPI calculation unit 135 returns the correction schedule to the inconsistency determination unit 132.

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

  19-1 to 19-4 show specific examples of the modified schedule created and modified by the schedule arbitration server 1. The correction schedules shown here are road surface maintenance, lamp maintenance, power maintenance, and traffic correction schedules that have solved the conflict between the initial maintenance schedules.

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

  The correction schedules of FIGS. 19-1 to 19-4, 20-1, and 20-2 indicate that, for example, the correction schedule (FIG. 19-1) is transmitted from the schedule arbitration server 1 to the road maintenance plan server 2- T was transmitted to T, but is rejected by the road maintenance plan server 2-T. In this case, the road maintenance plan server 2-T transmits to the schedule arbitration server 1 the re-suggested schedule (the modification schedule of the correction schedule by the operator of the road maintenance plan server 2-T) and the priority point.

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

In addition, sug of the initial maintenance schedule of the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T among the above-described servers.
FIG. 21 shows an offer assertion message (corresponding to the modified schedule in FIG. 19A) from the schedule arbitration server 1 in response to the request assertion message. The specific content of the offer assertion message, that is, the proposed content 16-1 of the schedule modification is described in the fifth to eighth lines from the top, and the time limit specification 16-2 of the response to the offer assertion message is 9 "60 minutes" is described in the line.

  This offer assertion message is transferred to the assertion message transmitting unit 2-21 (FIG. 10) of the communication processing unit 2-2 in the road maintenance plan server 2-T, and is initially transmitted to all servers included in the autonomous individual server group 2. Will be distributed as a result of mediation.

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

  The assertion message received by the above-mentioned 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 section 2-43, information necessary for model tuning described later is extracted and used for tuning the characteristic model of each server of the autonomous individual server group 2.

  The above-mentioned assertion message from the schedule arbitration server 1 or the server of the autonomous individual server group 2 is received by the assertion message receiving unit 2-22 of the communication processing unit 2-2 in the server of the autonomous individual server group 2, and is 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 estimating unit 2-31, and is compared with the schedule constraint condition created by the schedule constraint creating unit 2-12 of the operation processing unit 2-1.

  FIGS. 22A and 22B show an example of comparing the initial maintenance schedule with the schedule constraints. That is, the initial maintenance schedule of the road surface and the lamp (FIGS. 9-1 and 9-2) is compared with the respective correction schedules of the road surface maintenance schedule and the lamp maintenance schedule (FIGS. 19-1 and 19-2). .

  Among them, FIG. 22A shows a comparison result regarding the schedule of the road maintenance plan server 2-T, and FIG. 22B shows a comparison result regarding the schedule of the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L. According to both comparison results, it is found that the condition of 50% constraint is violated in the time zone of 27: 00 to 27: 30 on September 21 (Mon) and 25 (Fri). The road maintenance plan server 2-T can also reject the correction schedule in which such a conflict has occurred. On the other hand, if this modified schedule is accepted, the cost of executing the schedule while violating the constraints (eg, overtime for employees or additional travel costs) will increase.

Therefore, for example, the feasibility estimating unit 2-31 of the online processing unit 2-3 in the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T that accepts the above-mentioned correction schedule adds a priority corresponding to the above-mentioned cost to the correction schedule. Points are given, a “re_suggestion_with_priority assertion message” is generated, and the proposal is re-proposed to the schedule arbitration server 1. Here, the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T will be given 30 priority points based on the fact that the modification schedule has been modified for 30 minutes from the initial maintenance schedule.

  An assertion message of the "_with_priority" type offers a priority point owned by the user in order to allow the other party to approve the request, but as a method of requesting the other party to submit the priority point, a negative value is used. Priority points can be used.

  In other words, instead of using "XX (numerical) priority points, we want you to accept this re-suggestion", if you give XX (numerical) priority points, re-suggest this content May be accepted. "

  The use of such negative priority points has the advantage that arbitration can be completed in a small number of times because the request of the other party (priority point that the other party wants to provide) becomes clear from the beginning. .

  In this case, the feasibility estimating unit 2-31 of the online processing unit 2-3 in the server of the autonomous individual server group 2 determines, as the first priority point, the priority point obtained by multiplying the time (minute) by 50%. Attempt the request. Specifically, 30 minutes × 50% = 15 priority points on each of September 21 (Mon) and 25 (Fri).

  Of course, in the individual KPI calculation unit 2-33, the schedule on September 21 (Mon) and 25 (Fri) may be shortened by 30 minutes, and the option of not requesting the priority point may be selected. Alternatively, the schedule arbitration server may be used. It is also possible to reject the correction schedule itself presented by 1.

  In this case, the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 may be approved by the schedule arbitration server 1 for the initial maintenance schedule as originally requested, but the arbitration is adversely affected, and the other autonomous individual server group 2 You have to take the risk of being held up by another server and being moved to 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 the assertion message in which the re-suggestion assertion message (re_suggestion_with_priority assertion message) 18-1 and the acknowledgment message (accpet assertion message) 18-2 together with the minus priority point are described.

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

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

The assertion messages illustrated in FIG. 23 and FIG. 24 are created by a predetermined algorithm in the assertion information creating section 2-34 (FIG. 10) of the online processing section 2-3 in the server of the autonomous individual server group 2, and are executed by the communication processing section. In principle, the message is transmitted from the assertion message transmitting unit 2-21 to the schedule arbitration server 1 and all the autonomous individual servers.

  In the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2, the assertion message received by the assertion message receiving unit 2-22 of the communication processing unit 2-2 and the assertion message transmitted from the assertion message transmitting unit 2-21 are processed in the offline processing. The information is transferred to the assertion information recording unit 2-41 and the self-model tuning unit 2-43 of the unit 2-4, is also converted into a database by the past history information unit 2-42, and is tuned by the self-characteristic model unit 2-44. Used as a parameter.

  The past history information section 2-42, the self-characteristics model section 2-44, and the reference assertion message recording section 2-45 of the offline processing section 2-4 are provided by the feasibility estimating section 2-31 of the online processing section 2-3. And is used as reference information when creating an autonomous individual assertion message.

  As described above, FIG. 26 shows a state transition in the server of the autonomous individual server group 2 that executes various processes with the schedule arbitration server 1. FIG. 26 is a diagram illustrating a state transition of a server of the autonomous individual server group 2 that sends an assertion message.

  In this case, the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 shift to (1) schedule creation state 21-1 after their activation. Each server that has created the schedule transmits a schedule desired by itself to the schedule arbitration server 1 acting as a cooperative field server by using the sugugesion assertion message, and then waits for (2) (priority point assignment) a revised schedule proposal. 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 shifts to (3) rejection, (priority point assignment) re-proposal, acceptance determination state 21-3.

  Thereafter, the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 transfer the reject, re_suggestion, or re_suggestion_with_priority assertion message to the schedule arbitration server 1 again, thereby returning to the state 21-2 of (2) (priority point assignment) waiting for a correction schedule proposal. Transition. On the other hand, the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 transmit the accept assertion message to the schedule arbitration server 1, whereby the contents of the schedule are determined, and the transition state ends.

  Regarding the handling of the 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 2-46 will be recorded.

In this way, under the arbitration by the schedule arbitration server 1, the negotiation with the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 is continued, so that the schedule that can pursue both the cooperation field server and the autonomous individual server can be pursued. Will be completed.
--- Example 2--

  In the present embodiment, a case will be described in which one of the servers of the autonomous individual server group 2 does not submit a schedule in the form of 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 a maintenance section and a necessary time by using a "suggestion assertion message" as shown in FIG. 27 without submitting a schedule as shown in FIG. 9-2. In this case, if the maintenance section and the required time are achieved, the individual KPI in this case is regarded as “a state in which the individual KPI is 100% achieved” regardless of which time it is allocated. In other words, if a clear intention is not displayed in the message of the initial maintenance schedule, an intention to accept that the server of the other autonomous individual server group 2 is disadvantageously treated will be accepted.

  In addition, the maintenance company that operates the lighting fixture maintenance plan server 2-W has a complete regular holiday every week, and there are times when the maintenance work is not possible depending on the day of the week. Will not be notified. For example, here, such information can be considered to be equivalent to a trade secret to a competitor.

  The projection 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. The 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 having time information but missing time information, and the loss information estimation unit 134. Will be forwarded to

  The missing information estimating 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 obtains past schedule information (past schedule correction). Information), a schedule closest to the above-mentioned “incomplete schedule” is retrieved and associated with the incomplete initial maintenance schedule of this time. More specifically, in the past, for example, a search is performed for a maintenance section W1 to W4 that has been performed once a week and whose maintenance time is close to the current time.

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

  FIG. 28 is a diagram illustrating a time zone in which the reject assertion message and the re_suggestion assertion message are likely to be issued. The values described here indicate the ratio of the number of reject assertion messages or re_suggestion assertion messages to the total number of assertion messages. Sending the offer assertion message to a time zone having a large value of this value is difficult to accept.

  This schedule is tentatively handled as being sent from the autonomous lamp maintenance server, 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 the maintenance schedule of the expressway is described, but this can be applied to a system related to another event. For example, the road surface maintenance plan server 2-T (FIG. 2) is used as a track maintenance server, the lamp maintenance plan server is used as an overhead line maintenance plan server, and the traffic planning server is used as an operation planning server. By treating it as a station, it is possible to use it as a schedule arbitration system for railway maintenance.

The above-mentioned track maintenance is maintenance work of railway rails. For example, since rails continue to sink under the weight of a running train, a specific example is the work of lifting them with soil or gravel. In addition, overhead wire maintenance is maintenance work of electric wires stretched over the train to supply electric power to the train. For example, one of the tasks is to replace an electric wire worn by friction with a pandagraph of a train. The power maintenance is a maintenance operation for repairing or replacing power equipment in order to stably provide power to a train. The operation refers to matters related to train operation. However, in the present embodiment, the power maintenance section and the operation section are treated as a section where electricity flows and a section where the train is moved.
--- Example 3 ---

  In the present embodiment, the schedule arbitration server 1 functioning as a “coordination field”, the road maintenance plan server 2-T, the lamp maintenance plan server 2-L, the power maintenance plan server 2-P functioning as an “autonomous unit”, And an embodiment in which a traffic management server 2-O (collectively referred to as an 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 arbitration using this agent program. Hereinafter, the agent for the “cooperative field” is referred to as a cooperative field agent, and the agent for the “autonomous individual” is referred to as an autonomous individual agent.

  When the above-mentioned cooperative field agent notifies the autonomous individual agent of the arbitration start message (Step 2901), the autonomous individual agent wishing 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).

  It should be noted that this participation request can be made at any timing after the above-mentioned arbitration start notification is made and before the arbitration end notification (Step 2913) is made.

  The autonomous individual agent requesting the participation described above creates an initial maintenance schedule desired by itself (or a schedule obtained by modifying a modification schedule to the initial maintenance schedule) and proposes (recommends the initial maintenance schedule) to the cooperative field agent or re-creates it. The proposal is sent as a proposal (a proposal for a schedule in which the modification schedule is modified) (Step 2904).

  On the other hand, the cooperative field agent waits for a certain period of time and, if no proposal or re-proposal is sent from the autonomous individual agent, sends an arbitration end notification (Step 2913). (Step 2906), and sends a correction schedule (hereinafter, arbitration schedule) according to the arbitration result to the autonomous individual agent (Step 2907).

  The autonomous individual agent can receive the above-described arbitration schedule, confirm the contents thereof in accordance with a predetermined rule, and then leave the arbitration (Step 2908, Step 2909). However, even after the withdrawal, the user may be allowed to participate again until the arbitration completion notification (Step 2913) is issued (Step 2902).

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

  The arbitration ends when all autonomous individual agents no longer make re-suggestions (Step 2914).

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

  For example, the cooperative field agent analyzes the schedule (time, area) that the autonomous individual agent easily yielded or hardly yielded in the arbitration, and aggregates the time and area specified by the analysis, thereby obtaining the FIG. Can be estimated as shown in FIG.

  It is also preferable that the cooperative field agent proposes an arbitration schedule (Step 2907) that avoids the estimated constraints at the time of the arbitration start notification (Step 2901) in the next stage by using the result of the above estimation. It is.

  Similarly, the autonomous individual agent can also estimate the constraint condition of the schedule of the other autonomous individual agent from the behavior of the cooperative field agent or the other autonomous individual agent. The autonomous individual agent may use this 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, the possibility of arbitration being performed a small number of times increases.

  FIG. 30 is a diagram illustrating an example of the arbitration algorithm of the cooperation field agent. When acquiring the schedule from the autonomous individual agent (Step 1), the cooperative field agent develops all of them as a two-dimensional rectangle 301 in time-space (Step 2).

  In the example of FIG. 30, the respective rectangles 301 for the two schedules A and B are displayed, but actually all the schedules are developed on the coordinates as rectangles.

  Next, the cooperative field agent checks whether or not there is a conflict between all the schedules submitted by the autonomous individual agents, based on the overlap of the rectangles 301. In the arbitration of this embodiment, in order to facilitate understanding, it is assumed that the interchange cannot be changed and the maintenance work time cannot be changed, and only the maintenance work start time and end time can be changed.

  In the case illustrated in FIG. 30, since maintenance work competes in the range from the interchange S2 to the interchange S5, no maintenance work can be performed with these schedules A and B. However, if the schedules from 02:30 to 33:00 are rescheduled so that they do not overlap, maintenance work can be performed on both schedules A and B.

  Therefore, the arbitration algorithm of the cooperative field agent calculates a schedule for avoiding the duplication. This algorithm moves the schedule with less work time more. 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, since the maintenance work time of the schedule A is 120 minutes and the maintenance work time of the schedule B is 60 minutes, schedules in which the time is moved at a ratio of 1: 2 are proposed. become.

  Next, the validity of arbitration by this algorithm will be described below. For example, if there is a schedule of 10 minutes and a schedule of 3 hours, if these are treated equivalently, a maintenance work requiring 3 hours may not be performed due to the schedule of 10 minutes.

  In the present algorithm, such a situation is considered undesirable from the viewpoint of effective utilization of resources (time and space), and the one with a long maintenance work time is preferentially handled. Due to such a rescheduling, a conflict with another schedule may naturally occur in a thrashing manner. In such a case, the above-described conflict avoidance algorithm is executed and the process is repeated until all the conflicting schedules disappear. .

  Next, fuzzy inference used in the autonomous individual agent will be described. FIG. 31 is a diagram showing a membership function of fuzzy inference used in an autonomous individual agent. As an inference method adopted here, a Min-Max simplified center of gravity method (disclosed in Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 05-150991 or the like) which assumes a light calculation load and is easy to implement is assumed. FIG. 32 is a table showing an example of the fuzzy rules of the autonomous individual agent. The outline of this rule is described below.

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

(2) If the number of arbitrations reaches the middle stage and the schedule proposed by the coordination field agent deviates from the initial maintenance schedule, the autonomous individual agent will use its own priority maintenance schedule even if it uses priority points. Show a persistent attitude. This is because even if the consumption of the priority point is small, there is a possibility that other autonomous individuals who claim the conflicting initial maintenance schedule can be beaten.

(3) However, if the arbitration has been performed a sufficient number of times, but the schedule cannot be accepted, the use of the priority point is stopped, and the policy is changed to accept the modified schedule. This is to avoid consuming priority points in this stage and make use of it in the next stage. By allowing such autonomous individual agents to substitute for humans, arbitration can be completed at high speed.

  FIG. 33 shows a simulation result using the cooperative field agent and the autonomous individual agent described above. It shows a change in an autonomous KPI that changes for each arbitration. The stage 2 shown in the figure was performed immediately after the stage 1.

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

  FIG. 34 shows the evaluation of the overall KPI when the priority point is not used and when the priority point is used. In order to maximize the individual KPI, the autonomous unit behaves so as to keep the long maintenance schedule as important and keep the initial maintenance schedule as much as possible. Therefore, when the arbitration can be completed in a state close to the autonomous initial maintenance schedule, the evaluation value is calculated by using the following Expression 2 to be evaluated.

−−−− Equation 2

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

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

  The smartphone user 1 (the smartphone 2-U1), the smartphone user 2 (the smartphone 2-U2), the bus schedule server 2-B1 of the bus company 1, and the bus schedule server 2-B2 of the bus company 2 have been described with reference to FIG. In this case, the schedule arbitration server 1 is a system that arbitrates both a sightseeing schedule of a smartphone user and an operation schedule of a bus company.

  In the present embodiment, it is assumed that a 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 been disclosed in, for example, Japanese Patent Publication No. 1944-161980.

  FIG. 37 shows the structure of the chromosome used in the above GA. This structure includes a bus operation route 3601 and its departure time 3602. For example, “A → B” of the operation route 3601 indicates the place of departure A to the place of arrival B, and “09:00” indicates that the bus departs at 9:00 am. Note that the moving time of “A → B” is fixed. When “09:00” is expanded as an actual GA code, it is expressed as the number of minutes (binarization) elapsed from “00:00”. For example, since the time from “00:00” to “09:00” is 540 minutes, if this is binarized, it can be expressed as a chromosome sequence “010000011100”.

  In the example of FIG. 37, the times “09:00”, “11:34”, “10:23”, and “12:34” are treated as a binary numerical sequence (GA code) “010000011100010101101100100110111101011110010”. It becomes possible.

  Here, a method of obtaining an evaluation value calculated in the “evaluation” process shown in FIG. 36 will be described. Here, the following conditions are set for the sake of simplicity.

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

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

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

(4) The bus company 2 operates the BC section, and has only one bus.

If the above condition is not satisfied, the evaluation value is zero, and the individual having the chromosome is immediately eliminated.
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 be.

  FIG. 38 is a flowchart showing the arbitration of both the bus operation schedule of the next day and the sightseeing schedule of the smartphone user by the schedule arbitration server 1, the smartphone users 1 and 2, and the bus companies 1 and 2.

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

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

  Thereafter, the schedule arbitration server 1 calculates the GA (Step 3805), terminates the calculation when the predetermined number of times or the average of the predetermined evaluation value is reached (Step 3806), and transfers the calculation result derived by the GA to the bus schedule and the The schedule is converted into a sightseeing schedule and transmitted to the smartphones 2-U1 and 2-U2 of the smartphone users 1 and 2 and the timetable servers 2-B1 and 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 arbitration based on the schedules received and browsed 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 accept the result of such determination by a predetermined input device (Step 3808, Step 3809).

  If the result of the above-mentioned determination indicates a withdrawal (Step 3808: Y, Step 3809: Y), the smartphone of the corresponding smartphone user, or the bus scheduler of the bus company notifies the schedule arbitration server 1 of the fact (Step 3810). ), And terminate the process.

  On the other hand, if the result of the above determination is not to 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 determines whether or not to make a re-suggestion. Judge. In this case, the smartphones 2-U1 and 2-U2 and the diagram planning servers 2-B1 and 2-B2 accept the result of such determination by a predetermined input device (Step 3811, Step 3812).

  If the result of the above-mentioned determination indicates a re-suggestion (Step 3813: Y, Step 3814: Y), the smartphone of the corresponding smartphone user or the timetable of the bus company notifies the schedule arbitration server 1 to that effect. Note that the re-suggestion may have the same content as the previous proposal.

The schedule arbitration server 1 determines the presence or absence of a re-suggestion in accordance with the above-mentioned notification (Step 3804), and when there is a suggestion (Step 3804: Y), re-calculates the GA (St).
ep3805).

  On the other hand, the smartphones and the timetables of the smartphone users 1 and 2 and the bus companies 1 and 2 wait for an arbitration end notification (Step 3817) from the schedule arbitration server 1 (Step 3815 and Step 3816) after re-proposing the above, and confirm the notification. To end the processing.

  Examples of schedules before and after the arbitration described above are shown in FIGS. Among them, FIG. 39-1 is a diagram showing a schedule before arbitration. The smartphone user 1 goes from A to B using the bus 1 (3903, 3904) and returns from B to A (3901). The smartphone user 2 uses the bus 1 (3903, 3904) and the bus 2 (3905, 3906). Can be used to go from A to C via B and back to B, but not 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 the buses 1 and 2 (3908, 3909, 3910, 3911), 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 arbitration server 1 arbitrates between a taxi user and a taxi company operating the taxi will be described. FIG. 40 is a diagram showing a configuration of a system that mediates the operation of a taxi with a person who wants to use a taxi having a smartphone. In this case, the schedule arbitration server 1, which is a coordination field server, is connected via the network 3 to the autonomous smartphones 2-U1, 2-U2 and the taxi company terminals 2-T1, 2-T2. .

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

  The left side 4101 of the GUI screen 4100 is a screen for inputting a taxi dispatch condition 4103 desired by the smartphone user. At 09:45, the smartphone user requests the transfer from Ikuta Station to Tsurukawa Station, brings a baby, and wishes to be a female driver. In addition, on the map 41011, it is possible to input a request of a departure place and an arrival place.

  On the other hand, the right side 4102 of the GUI screen 4100 displays the dispatch condition 4104 that can be provided by the taxi company 1 or 2, which is distributed from the taxi company terminals 2-T1 and 2-T2 to the application. Screen. The smartphone user browses the GUI screen 4100, compares the dispatch condition 4104 presented by the taxi company with the dispatch condition 4103 desired by the user, and presses any one of the buttons 4105 to 4107. With regard to the dispatch condition presented by the company, it is possible to indicate acceptance, re-proposal, or intention to withdraw from mediation. In this case, the smartphones 2-U1 and 2-U2 of the smartphone user notify the schedule arbitration server 1 of a value corresponding to the pressing of the buttons 4105 to 4107 described above.

  FIG. 42 shows a flow in which the above-mentioned smartphone user and the taxi company match the vehicle allocation conditions. In this case, the taxi company terminals 2-T1 and 2-T2 of the taxi companies 1 and 2 periodically transmit the position information of the empty taxi and the attributes of each taxi (non-smoking car, female driver, child seat equipment, etc.) The transmission continues to the coordination 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 the taxi allocation conditions as shown in FIG. 41 to the coordination hall agent (schedule arbitration server 1) (Step 4202).

  On the other hand, the above-mentioned schedule arbitration server 1 receives the dispatch conditions from the taxi company terminals 2-T1, 2-T2 and the smartphones 2-U1, 2-U2, and lists the dispatch conditions of the taxi and the smartphone user at the present time ( (Step 4203), and try matching (Step 4205). More specifically, a departure time, a departure place, and an arrival place which are close to each other and which have many matching items out of various conditions such as whether or not the vehicle can be shared are specified. In addition, for example, when there are a plurality of smartphone users who may be sharing, a matching operation such as combining them is attempted.

  After determining that the matching calculation is to be terminated by matching the predetermined time or number of times (Step 4206: Y), the schedule arbitration server 1 sends the arbitrated schedule to the smartphone of each smartphone user and the taxi company terminal of each taxi company to propose. (Step 4207).

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

  If the above determination result indicates a departure (Step 4208: Y, Step 4209: Y), the smartphones 2-U1 and 2-U2 and the taxi company terminals 2-T1 and 2-T2 are transmitted to the schedule arbitration server 1. This is notified (Step 4210), and the process ends.

  On the other hand, if the determination result indicates that the vehicle does not leave (Step 4208: No, Step 4209: No), the smartphone users 1 and 2 and the taxi companies 1 and 2 examine the schedule transmitted from the schedule arbitration server 1. Then, it is determined whether or not to make a re-suggestion. Note that the re-suggestion may have the same content as the previous proposal.

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

  If the above determination result indicates a re-suggestion (Step 4213: Y, Step 4214: Y), the smartphones 2-U1, 2-U2 and the taxi company terminals 2-T1, 2-T2 schedule arbitration to that effect. Notify the server 1. On the other hand, the schedule arbitration server 1 receives this notification and determines whether or not there is a re-suggestion (Step 4204). If there is a re-suggestion, the schedule arbitration server 1 starts another matching process again.

  On the other hand, the smartphones 2-U1 and 2-U2 and the taxi company terminals 2-T1 and 2-T2 wait for an arbitration completion notification (Step 4217) from the schedule arbitration server 1 after the above re-proposal (Step 4215: Y, Step 4216). : Y), the notification is confirmed, and the process ends.

  Although the best mode for carrying out the present invention has been specifically described above, the present invention is not limited to this, and can be variously modified without departing from the gist thereof.

  According to the present embodiment, resource allocation can be performed even in the case where a constraint mismatch occurs between a plurality of systems.

  At least the following will be made clear by the description in this specification. That is, in the schedule arbitration system of the present embodiment, when the arithmetic device of the schedule arbitration server receives a notification of approval for the correction schedule from one of the servers, And when at least one of the servers receives a rejection notification for the correction schedule from the server, the server corrects at least one of the overall optimal constraint information and the correction schedule of each server. , May be.

  According to this, the schedule can be modified according to the intention of the server side, that is, the side receiving the schedule arbitration, and the resource allocation can be efficiently performed even when a constraint mismatch occurs between a plurality of systems. Becomes possible.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration system of the present embodiment, the arithmetic device of the schedule arbitration server, when receiving a predetermined credit value from at least one of the servers, is presented from the server that has transmitted the most credit value. The schedule may be prioritized and the schedule of another server or the global 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, and therefore, even if there is a constraint inconsistency among a plurality of systems, the resource allocation can be performed. It becomes possible efficiently.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration system of the present embodiment, the arithmetic device of the schedule arbitration server may be configured such that, in the credit calculation process, at least one of the correction schedules is modified by the modification schedule of one of the servers. If the modification is based on a modification that violates the constraint, a credit value higher than the credit value for the schedule satisfying the creation constraint may be calculated.

  According to this, it is possible to give an incentive to each server according to the inconvenience caused by schedule arbitration, and therefore, even if there is a constraint mismatch between multiple systems, resource allocation can be efficiently performed Becomes

  Further, in the schedule arbitration system of the present embodiment, the schedule arbitration server includes a storage device for storing past schedule correction information in each of the servers, and in the arithmetic device, the schedule correction information The schedule of each server may be modified based on the above to generate a modified schedule.

  According to this, it is possible to modify the schedule according to the past case of the schedule arbitration side, and it is possible to efficiently allocate resources even when there is a constraint mismatch between a plurality of 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 modified schedule and reception of a credit value obtained for each server in the storage device. Further storing the information of the arbitration content, the arithmetic unit estimates the content of the creation constraint of each server based on the information of the arbitration content, and based on the content of the creation constraint at a subsequent schedule modification opportunity. The schedule may be modified.

According to this, the schedule arbitration side can adjust the schedule according to the creation constraint, that is, efficiently allocate resources even when there is a constraint inconsistency among a plurality of systems. It becomes possible.

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

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

  According to this, the server side, that is, the schedule arbitration receiving side can modify the schedule according to the intention to participate in the arbitration, and thus, even in a case where inconsistency due to constraints occurs between a plurality of systems. Resource allocation becomes possible efficiently.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration system of the present embodiment, the arithmetic device of the schedule arbitration server is configured to detect the inconsistency and correct the inconsistency as to the schedule of each server with respect to schedules having different schedule configurations and creation restrictions among servers. At least the generation of a schedule, the calculation of the credit value, and the notification of the start of the schedule arbitration may be performed.

  According to this, a series of processes such as inconsistency detection and schedule correction can be performed in response to a situation where the schedule configuration itself differs between servers, and consequently, inconsistencies due to constraints among a plurality of systems. In such a case, resource allocation can be efficiently performed.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration method of the present embodiment, if the information processing system receives a notification of approval for the correction schedule from any one of the servers, the information processing system transmits the correction schedule to the servers, When a notification of refusal 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 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, priority is given to a schedule presented from a server that has transmitted the most credit value. Then, the schedule of the other server or the global optimum constraint information may be re-corrected.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration method according to the present embodiment, the information processing system may be configured such that, in the credit calculation process, a modification schedule of at least one of the modification schedules violates the creation constraint of any of the servers. If such a modification is made, 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 for storing past schedule correction information in each of the servers, and in the schedule re-creation process, The schedule of the server may be modified to generate a modified schedule.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration method of 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 information of the arbitration contents, estimating the contents of the creation constraints of the respective servers based on the information of the arbitration contents, and performing a schedule modification based on the contents of the creation constraints at a subsequent schedule modification opportunity; It may be.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration method of the present embodiment, each server may execute a predetermined procedure related to the event based on the correction schedule.

  Further, in the schedule arbitration method according to the present embodiment, each of the servers receives the start notification of the schedule arbitration from the schedule arbitration server, executes a predetermined process of participating in the schedule arbitration, and executes the predetermined process of the participation. Thereafter, a predetermined process of withdrawing from the schedule arbitration may be executed based on the content of the arbitration or the occurrence of the 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 for the schedule of each server having a different schedule configuration and different creation restrictions as the schedule of each server. , Calculation of the credit value, and notification of the start of the schedule arbitration may be performed at least.

1 Schedule Arbitration Server 3 Network 2-T Road Surface Maintenance Planning Server 2-L Lighting Maintenance Planning Server 2-P Power Maintenance Planning 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 issuance 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 Estimating 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-characteristic model section

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 issuance policy input unit 1-2 Communication processing unit 139 Assertion message receiving unit 1- 3 Online processing unit 132 Mismatch determination unit 133 Assertion message confirmation unit 134 Loss 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 accpet assertion message

19-1 reject assertion message

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

Claims (4)

A schedule for each of a plurality of events and creation constraint information of the schedule are obtained from each server that manages each of the events, and the schedule and the creation constraint information of each server and the entire constraint as to the entire arbitration between schedules are obtained. An inconsistency determination process for detecting an inconsistency between the schedules of the respective servers based on the optimal constraint information;
When the inconsistency is detected, the schedule of each server is corrected, and a schedule re-creating process of generating a corrected schedule;
A credit calculation process for calculating a credit value corresponding to the strength of the priority of the schedule in each server according to the degree of the correction;
A transmission process of transmitting a start notification of the schedule arbitration including the information on the correction schedule and the credit value to each of the corresponding servers,
Look including a schedule mediation server with a computing device to perform,
The schedule arbitration server,
The past schedule correction information in each of the servers, and the information of the arbitration contents including at least each history of the approval or rejection of the correction schedule and the receipt of the credit value, which are obtained for each of the servers, are stored.
In the arithmetic unit,
At the time of the schedule re-creation processing, based on the schedule modification information, modify the schedule of each server, generate a modified schedule,
Estimating the content of the creation constraint of each server based on the information of the arbitration content, and performing schedule modification based on the content of the creation constraint at a subsequent schedule modification opportunity.
A schedule arbitration system characterized by the following. Including at least one of the servers that execute a predetermined procedure related to the event based on the correction schedule,
Each of the servers,
Upon receiving the start notification of the schedule arbitration from the schedule arbitration server, executing a predetermined process of participating in the schedule arbitration, and after executing the predetermined process of the participation, the schedule arbitration is performed based on the content of the arbitration or occurrence of a predetermined event. To perform a predetermined process of leaving from the
The schedule arbitration system according to claim 1, wherein: The information processing system
A schedule for each of a plurality of events and creation constraint information of the schedule are obtained from each server that manages each of the events, and the schedule and the creation constraint information of each server and the entire constraint as to the entire arbitration between schedules are obtained. An inconsistency determination process for detecting an inconsistency between the schedules of the respective servers based on the optimal constraint information;
When the inconsistency is detected, the schedule of each server is corrected, and a schedule re-creating process of generating a corrected schedule;
A credit calculation process for calculating a credit value corresponding to the strength of the priority of the schedule in each server according to the degree of the correction;
A transmission process of transmitting a start notification of the schedule arbitration including the information on the correction schedule and the credit value to each of the corresponding servers,
Is intended to run,
The past schedule correction information in each of the servers, and the information of the arbitration contents including at least each history of the approval or rejection of the correction schedule and the receipt of the credit value, which are obtained for each of the servers, are stored.
At the time of the schedule re-creation processing, based on the schedule modification information, modify the schedule of each server, generate a modified schedule,
Estimating the content of the creation constraint of each server based on the information of the arbitration content, and at a subsequent schedule modification opportunity, perform schedule modification based on the content of the creation constraint,
A schedule arbitration method characterized in that: Each server that executes a predetermined procedure for the corresponding event based on the correction schedule,
Upon receiving the start notification of the schedule arbitration from the information processing system, a predetermined process of participating in the schedule arbitration is executed, and after the execution of the predetermined process of the participation, the schedule arbitration is performed based on the content of the arbitration or occurrence of a predetermined event. Execute a predetermined process of leaving from the
4. The schedule arbitration method according to claim 3, wherein: