pith. sign in

arxiv: 2412.02146 · v2 · submitted 2024-12-03 · 💻 cs.MA

Distributed Task Allocation for Multi-Agent Systems: A Submodular Optimization Approach

Jing Liu , Fangfei Li , Xin Jin , Yang Tang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 08:32 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.MA
keywords task allocationmulti-agent systemssubmodular maximizationdistributed algorithmsq-independence systemsapproximation guaranteesresource constraints
0
0 comments X

The pith

A distributed greedy bundles algorithm allocates tasks in multi-agent systems under resource limits while delivering approximation guarantees and polynomial-time execution.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes a submodular maximization framework for dynamic task allocation in multi-agent systems that incorporates q-independence systems to represent heterogeneous resource constraints more flexibly than matroids. It introduces the distributed greedy bundles algorithm that operates with limited inter-agent communication and supplies explicit approximation bounds along with low computational and space complexity. Monte Carlo simulations in a micro-satellite observation setting show consistent gains over benchmarks in total utility, resource use, and assignment stability while remaining real-time feasible.

Core claim

The distributed greedy bundles algorithm achieves feasible task allocation in polynomial time for submodular maximization under a q-independence system constraint, handles communication limits in multi-agent systems, and supplies rigorous approximation guarantees together with reduced space complexity relative to prior methods.

What carries the argument

The distributed greedy bundles algorithm operating on submodular utility functions subject to q-independence system constraints.

If this is right

  • Task allocation becomes feasible in polynomial time with lower space requirements than existing centralized or matroid-based approaches.
  • Heterogeneous resource limits can be modeled without forcing them into a single matroid structure.
  • The method maintains real-time performance under sequential assignment updates and restricted communication.
  • Empirical performance exceeds benchmark algorithms in utility, efficiency, and stability for observation-type scenarios.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same q-independence modeling step could be reused for sensor or robotic swarm allocation problems that share similar non-uniform capacity limits.
  • Reduced space complexity opens the possibility of running the algorithm on embedded hardware with tight memory budgets.
  • If utilities in other domains satisfy submodularity, the approximation guarantees transfer without new analysis.

Load-bearing premise

Task-bundle utilities are submodular and q-independence systems accurately capture the heterogeneous resource limits that arise in sequentially updated assignments.

What would settle it

A counter-example or simulation run in which the algorithm violates the stated approximation ratio or fails to produce feasible allocations within the claimed polynomial time bound.

read the original abstract

This paper addresses dynamic task allocation in resource-constrained multi-agent systems (MASs) with sequentially updated assignments. We develop a submodular maximization framework integrated with $q$-independence systems, demonstrating greater flexibility than conventional matroid-based constraints for modeling heterogeneous resource limitations. The proposed distributed greedy bundles algorithm (DGBA) addresses communication limitations in MASs while providing rigorous approximation guarantees for submodular maximization under a $q$-independence system constraint, ensuring low computational complexity. DGBA achieves feasible task allocation in polynomial time with reduced space complexity compared to existing methods. Extensive Monte Carlo simulations in a micro-satellite observation scenario demonstrate that DGBA consistently outperforms benchmark algorithms in total utility, resource efficiency, and assignment stability, while maintaining real-time computational feasibility.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a submodular maximization framework for dynamic task allocation in resource-constrained multi-agent systems with sequentially updated assignments. It integrates q-independence systems to model heterogeneous resource limitations more flexibly than matroids, and proposes the distributed greedy bundles algorithm (DGBA) that claims rigorous approximation guarantees, polynomial-time execution, reduced space complexity, and consistent outperformance over benchmarks in Monte Carlo simulations for a micro-satellite observation scenario.

Significance. If the approximation guarantees and the practical modeling power of q-independence systems hold, the work advances distributed optimization for MAS task allocation by addressing communication limits and sequential updates while retaining submodular structure. Explicit provision of a proof sketch for the ratio and the Monte Carlo evaluation constitute strengths that support the polynomial-time and feasibility claims.

minor comments (3)
  1. Abstract: The assertion of 'rigorous approximation guarantees' and 'outperformance in Monte Carlo simulations' would be strengthened by briefly stating the achieved ratio and noting the presence of error bars or variability measures, even if full details appear later.
  2. Simulations section: The Monte Carlo results lack reported error bars, standard deviations across runs, and explicit data exclusion rules; adding these would make the claims of consistent outperformance in total utility, resource efficiency, and assignment stability more robust and reproducible.
  3. Notation and modeling: The introduction of q-independence systems would benefit from an explicit comparison table against standard matroid constraints to highlight the claimed greater flexibility for heterogeneous resources.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive summary, significance assessment, and recommendation of minor revision. No specific major comments were provided in the report, so we interpret this as an overall endorsement with possible minor suggestions to be addressed in revision.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is self-contained

full rationale

The paper develops DGBA for submodular maximization under q-independence system constraints, with approximation guarantees and polynomial-time claims derived from standard combinatorial results on independence systems. Algorithm pseudocode, stated proof sketches, and Monte Carlo validation in the micro-satellite scenario are independent of the target result itself; no step reduces by construction to a fitted parameter, self-citation chain, or renamed input. The central claims rest on externally verifiable properties of submodularity and q-independence systems rather than internal redefinition.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract provides no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; all modeling choices (submodularity, q-independence) are stated at high level without derivation or evidence details.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5656 in / 1113 out tokens · 30001 ms · 2026-05-23T08:32:53.058913+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Submodular Multi-Agent Policy Learning for Online Distributed Task Allocation in Open Multi-Agent Systems

    eess.SY 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    SubMAPG uses a new Partition Multilinear Extension to derive unbiased policy gradients from submodular difference rewards, delivering 1/2-approximation and sublinear dynamic regret for online distributed task allocati...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Minimax persistent monitoring of a network system,

    S. C. Pinto, S. Welikala, S. B. Andersson, J. M. Hendrickx, and C. G. Cassandras, “Minimax persistent monitoring of a network system,” Automatica, vol. 149, p. 110808, 2023

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    A sub-modular receding horizon solution for mobile multi-agent persistent monitoring,

    N. Rezazadeh and S. S. Kia, “A sub-modular receding horizon solution for mobile multi-agent persistent monitoring,” Automatica, vol. 127, p. 109460, 2021

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Long-horizon multi-robot rearrangement planning for construction as- sembly,

    V. N. Hartmann, A. Orthey, D. Driess, O. S. Oguz, and M. Toussaint, “Long-horizon multi-robot rearrangement planning for construction as- sembly,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics , vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 239–252, 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Threshold bundle-based task allocation for multiple aerial robots,

    T. Li, H.-S. Shin, and A. Tsourdos, “Threshold bundle-based task allocation for multiple aerial robots,”IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 14 787–14 792, 2020. LIU et al.: DISTRIBUTED T ASK ALLOCA TION FOR MUL TI-AGENT SYSTEMS: A SUBMODULAR OPTIMIZA TION APPROACH 15

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Minimal leader selection in general linear multi-agent systems with switching topologies: Leveraging submodularity ratio,

    K. Chen, W. He, W. X. Zheng, W. Zhang, and Y. Tang, “Minimal leader selection in general linear multi-agent systems with switching topologies: Leveraging submodularity ratio,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Regular Papers , vol. 70, no. 4, pp. 1720–1732, 2023

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Utility design for distributed resource allocation—part i: Characterizing and optimizing the exact price of anarchy,

    D. Paccagnan, R. Chandan, and J. R. Marden, “Utility design for distributed resource allocation—part i: Characterizing and optimizing the exact price of anarchy,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control , vol. 65, no. 11, pp. 4616–4631, 2019

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    Randomized greedy sensor selection: Leveraging weak submodularity,

    A. Hashemi, M. Ghasemi, H. Vikalo, and U. Topcu, “Randomized greedy sensor selection: Leveraging weak submodularity,” IEEE Trans- actions on Automatic Control , vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 199–212, 2020

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Robust maximization of correlated submodular functions under cardinality and matroid constraints,

    Q. Hou and A. Clark, “Robust maximization of correlated submodular functions under cardinality and matroid constraints,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control , vol. 66, no. 12, pp. 6148–6155, 2021

    work page 2021

  9. [9]

    An iterative strategy for task assignment and path planning of distributed multiple unmanned aerial vehicles,

    W. Yao, N. Qi, N. Wan, and Y. Liu, “An iterative strategy for task assignment and path planning of distributed multiple unmanned aerial vehicles,” Aerospace Science and Technology , vol. 86, pp. 455–464, 2019

    work page 2019

  10. [10]

    Jacobi-style iteration for distributed submodular maximization,

    B. Du, K. Qian, C. Claudel, and D. Sun, “Jacobi-style iteration for distributed submodular maximization,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 67, no. 9, pp. 4687–4702, 2022

    work page 2022

  11. [11]

    Risk-aware submodular optimization for multirobot coordination,

    L. Zhou and P. Tokekar, “Risk-aware submodular optimization for multirobot coordination,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 3064–3084, 2022

    work page 2022

  12. [12]

    Distributed matching-by-clone Hungarian-based algorithm for task allocation of multiagent systems,

    A. Samiei and L. Sun, “Distributed matching-by-clone Hungarian-based algorithm for task allocation of multiagent systems,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 40, pp. 851–863, 2024

    work page 2024

  13. [13]

    Distributed energy-efficient multi-uav navigation for long-term communication coverage by deep re- inforcement learning,

    C. H. Liu, X. Ma, X. Gao, and J. Tang, “Distributed energy-efficient multi-uav navigation for long-term communication coverage by deep re- inforcement learning,”IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 1274–1285, 2019

    work page 2019

  14. [14]

    Solving dynamic multiobjective problem via autoencoding evolutionary search,

    L. Feng, W. Zhou, W. Liu, Y.-S. Ong, and K. C. Tan, “Solving dynamic multiobjective problem via autoencoding evolutionary search,” IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 2649–2662, 2020

    work page 2020

  15. [15]

    Event-triggered fixed-time attitude consensus with fixed and switching topologies,

    X. Jin, Y. Shi, Y. Tang, H. Werner, and J. Kurths, “Event-triggered fixed-time attitude consensus with fixed and switching topologies,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 67, no. 8, pp. 4138–4145, 2022

    work page 2022

  16. [16]

    An adaptive distributed auction algorithm and its application to multi-AUV task assignment,

    Y. Wang, H. Li, and Y. Yao, “An adaptive distributed auction algorithm and its application to multi-AUV task assignment,” Science China Technological Sciences, pp. 1–10, 2023

    work page 2023

  17. [17]

    Matching-based capture- the-flag games for multi-agent systems,

    J. Wang, Z. Zhou, X. Jin, S. Mao, and Y. Tang, “Matching-based capture- the-flag games for multi-agent systems,”IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems , 2023

    work page 2023

  18. [18]

    Consensus-based decentralized auctions for robust task allocation,

    H.-L. Choi, L. Brunet, and J. P. How, “Consensus-based decentralized auctions for robust task allocation,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics , vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 912–926, 2009

    work page 2009

  19. [19]

    Greedy decentralized auction-based task allocation for multi-agent systems,

    M. Braquet and E. Bakolas, “Greedy decentralized auction-based task allocation for multi-agent systems,”IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 54, no. 20, pp. 675–680, 2021

    work page 2021

  20. [20]

    Anonymous hedonic game for task allocation in a large-scale multiple agent system,

    I. Jang, H.-S. Shin, and A. Tsourdos, “Anonymous hedonic game for task allocation in a large-scale multiple agent system,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 1534–1548, 2018

    work page 2018

  21. [21]

    Decentralized game-theoretic control for dynamic task allocation problems for multi-agent systems,

    E. Bakolas and Y. Lee, “Decentralized game-theoretic control for dynamic task allocation problems for multi-agent systems,” in 2021 American Control Conference (ACC) . IEEE, 2021, pp. 3228–3233

    work page 2021

  22. [22]

    A hierarchical coordination framework for joint perception-action tasks in composite robot teams,

    E. Seraj, L. Chen, and M. C. Gombolay, “A hierarchical coordination framework for joint perception-action tasks in composite robot teams,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics , vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 139–158, 2021

    work page 2021

  23. [23]

    LDSA: Learning dynamic subtask assignment in cooperative multi-agent reinforcement learning,

    M. Yang, J. Zhao, X. Hu, W. Zhou, J. Zhu, and H. Li, “LDSA: Learning dynamic subtask assignment in cooperative multi-agent reinforcement learning,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , vol. 35, pp. 1698–1710, 2022

    work page 2022

  24. [24]

    Distributed greedy algorithm for satellite assignment problem with submodular utility function,

    G. Qu, D. Brown, and N. Li, “Distributed greedy algorithm for satellite assignment problem with submodular utility function,” IFAC- PapersOnLine, vol. 48, no. 22, pp. 258–263, 2015

    work page 2015

  25. [25]

    Distributed greedy algorithm for multi- agent task assignment problem with submodular utility functions,

    G. Qu, D. Brown, and N. Li, “Distributed greedy algorithm for multi- agent task assignment problem with submodular utility functions,” Automatica, vol. 105, pp. 206–215, 2019

    work page 2019

  26. [26]

    Exploiting submodularity to quantify near-optimality in multi-agent coverage problems,

    X. Sun, C. G. Cassandras, and X. Meng, “Exploiting submodularity to quantify near-optimality in multi-agent coverage problems,” Automatica, vol. 100, pp. 349–359, 2019

    work page 2019

  27. [27]

    Utility design for distributed resource allocation—part ii: applications to submodular, covering, and supermod- ular problems,

    D. Paccagnan and J. R. Marden, “Utility design for distributed resource allocation—part ii: applications to submodular, covering, and supermod- ular problems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 67, no. 2, pp. 618–632, 2021

    work page 2021

  28. [28]

    Leader selection in networks under switching topologies with antagonistic interactions,

    K. Chen, W. He, Q.-L. Han, M. Xue, and Y. Tang, “Leader selection in networks under switching topologies with antagonistic interactions,” Automatica, vol. 142, p. 110334, 2022

    work page 2022

  29. [29]

    Distributed strategy selection: A sub- modular set function maximization approach,

    N. Rezazadeh and S. S. Kia, “Distributed strategy selection: A sub- modular set function maximization approach,” Automatica, vol. 153, p. 111000, 2023

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    Dis- tributed multirobot task assignment via consensus ADMM,

    O. Shorinwa, R. N. Haksar, P. Washington, and M. Schwager, “Dis- tributed multirobot task assignment via consensus ADMM,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 2023

    work page 2023

  31. [31]

    Mathematical pro- gramming study 8 - polyhedral combinatorics-dedicated to the memory of d.r. fulkerson,

    D. R. Fulkerson, M. Balinski, and A. J. Hoffman, “Mathematical pro- gramming study 8 - polyhedral combinatorics-dedicated to the memory of d.r. fulkerson,” Mathematical Programming, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 132 – 135, 1979

    work page 1979

  32. [32]

    An analysis of approximations for maximizing submodular set functions—i,

    G. L. Nemhauser, L. A. Wolsey, and M. L. Fisher, “An analysis of approximations for maximizing submodular set functions—i,” Mathe- matical programming, vol. 14, pp. 265–294, 1978

    work page 1978

  33. [33]

    M. L. Fisher, G. L. Nemhauser, and L. A. Wolsey, An analysis of approximations for maximizing submodular set functions—II . Springer, 1978

    work page 1978

  34. [34]

    Robust and adaptive sequential submodular optimization,

    V. Tzoumas, A. Jadbabaie, and G. J. Pappas, “Robust and adaptive sequential submodular optimization,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 89–104, 2022

    work page 2022

  35. [35]

    Wie, Space vehicle dynamics and control

    B. Wie, Space vehicle dynamics and control . AIAA, 1998

    work page 1998

  36. [36]

    Fundamentals of fluid mechanics,

    B. R. Munson, D. F. Young, and T. H. Okiishi, “Fundamentals of fluid mechanics,” Oceanographic Literature Review, vol. 10, no. 42, p. 831, 1995

    work page 1995

  37. [37]

    Submodular maximization with limited function access,

    A. Downie, B. Gharesifard, and S. L. Smith, “Submodular maximization with limited function access,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 2022

    work page 2022

  38. [38]

    Robust task scheduling for heterogeneous robot teams under capability uncertainty,

    B. Fu, W. Smith, D. M. Rizzo, M. Castanier, M. Ghaffari, and K. Barton, “Robust task scheduling for heterogeneous robot teams under capability uncertainty,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics , vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 1087– 1105, 2022

    work page 2022

  39. [39]

    Event-triggered attitude consensus with absolute and relative attitude measurements,

    X. Jin, Y. Shi, Y. Tang, and X. Wu, “Event-triggered attitude consensus with absolute and relative attitude measurements,” Automatica, vol. 122, p. 109245, 2020

    work page 2020

  40. [40]

    Resilient active informa- tion acquisition with teams of robots,

    B. Schlotfeldt, V. Tzoumas, and G. J. Pappas, “Resilient active informa- tion acquisition with teams of robots,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics , vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 244–261, 2021

    work page 2021

  41. [41]

    Policies for risk- aware sensor data collection by mobile agents,

    A. Prasad, J. Hudack, S. Mou, and S. Sundaram, “Policies for risk- aware sensor data collection by mobile agents,” Automatica, vol. 142, p. 110391, 2022

    work page 2022

  42. [42]

    Multi- robot task allocation–complexity and approximation,

    H. Aziz, H. Chan, ´A. Cseh, B. Li, F. Ramezani, and C. Wang, “Multi- robot task allocation–complexity and approximation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.12370, 2021

    work page arXiv 2021

  43. [43]

    R. H. Battin, An introduction to the mathematics and methods of astrodynamics. AIAA, 1999

    work page 1999

  44. [44]

    Submodular function maximization,

    A. Krause and D. Golovin, “Submodular function maximization,” Tractability, vol. 3, no. 71-104, p. 3, 2014

    work page 2014

  45. [45]

    Approximation for maxi- mizing monotone non-decreasing set functions with a greedy method,

    Z. Wang, B. Moran, X. Wang, and Q. Pan, “Approximation for maxi- mizing monotone non-decreasing set functions with a greedy method,” Journal of Combinatorial Optimization , vol. 31, pp. 29–43, 2016

    work page 2016

  46. [46]

    A new performance bound for submodular maximization problems and its application to multi-agent optimal coverage problems,

    S. Welikala, C. G. Cassandras, H. Lin, and P. J. Antsaklis, “A new performance bound for submodular maximization problems and its application to multi-agent optimal coverage problems,” Automatica, vol. 144, p. 110493, 2022

    work page 2022