Preventing selfish behaviour in distributed tactical airport planning

Geert Jonker, Henk Hesselink, Frank Dignum, John-Jules Meyer

Research output: Chapter in Book / Report / Conference proceedingConference contributionAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

In this paper, we sketch a future scenario in which arrival, gate and departure planning is done distributedly by airlines, airports, aircraft and other parties involved. Decision responsibility is shared among multiple parties instead of one. When disruptions occur, plan repair schemes are collaboratively constructed and selected. This results in a plan repair mechanism that takes into account the preferences of all participants. Often in distributed planning research, a cooperative attitude of the participants is assumed. However, it is possible that participants will show a competitive rather than a cooperative attitude. Competitive behaviour can lead to suboptimal performance, as participants care more about their own preferences than those of others. Thus, incentives for cooperative behaviour are needed. We propose the use of money as a means of providing incentives to collaborate, to ensure equitability and to find optimal solutions. We identify a problem that occurs with the use of ordinary money. We introduce a monetary system based on spender-signed money that solves the problem of selfish behaviour.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings of the 7th USA/Europe Air Traffic Management Research and Development Seminar, ATM 2007
PublisherEurocontrol
Publication statusPublished - 2007
Externally publishedYes
Event7th USA/Europe Air Traffic Management Research and Development Seminar, ATM 2007 - Barcelona, Spain
Duration: 2 Jul 20075 Jul 2007

Conference

Conference7th USA/Europe Air Traffic Management Research and Development Seminar, ATM 2007
Country/TerritorySpain
CityBarcelona
Period2/07/075/07/07

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Preventing selfish behaviour in distributed tactical airport planning'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this