Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents

Abstract Agents in agreement protocols play well-distinct roles. Proposers propose values to the acceptors, which will accept proposals and inform the learners so they detect that an agreement has been reached. A fourth role is that of the coordinator, who filters the proposals from proposers to acc...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Camargos, Lasaro [verfasserIn] Schmidt, Rodrigo Madeira, Edmundo Pedone, Fernando

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2010

Schlagwörter:	Multicoordinated Agreement Consensus Broadcast Groups

Anmerkung:	© The Brazilian Computer Society 2010

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society - London : Springer, 1996, 16(2010), 1 vom: 23. Apr., Seite 49-68
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:16 ; year:2010 ; number:1 ; day:23 ; month:04 ; pages:49-68

Links:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7

Katalog-ID:	SPR030742404

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	SPR030742404
003	DE-627
005	20230331101725.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	201007s2010 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)SPR030742404
035			\|a (SPR)s13173-010-0001-7-e
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
100	1		\|a Camargos, Lasaro \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents
264		1	\|c 2010
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
500			\|a © The Brazilian Computer Society 2010
520			\|a Abstract Agents in agreement protocols play well-distinct roles. Proposers propose values to the acceptors, which will accept proposals and inform the learners so they detect that an agreement has been reached. A fourth role is that of the coordinator, who filters the proposals from proposers to acceptors. While proposers, learners, and coordinators are easily replaced, substituting an acceptor is prohibitive. Protocols that do not employ a coordinator are less resilient to acceptor failures. Protocols that use one coordinator are more resilient to acceptor failures, at the expense of one extra communication step even in the absence of failures. Moreover, they require replacing the coordinator as soon as it fails, a reconfiguration that, although relatively inexpensive, diminishes the protocol availability. Hence, either option, i.e., one or zero coordinator, has its drawbacks. In previous works, we have presented an alternative: multicoordinated agreement protocols. Such protocols are as resilient as single-coordinated protocols but require less reconfiguration to cope with coordinator failures. In fact, most reconfiguration can be done in parallel to the execution of the protocol’s normal steps. Multicoordination can be applied to several problems. In this paper we exemplify its use in solving consensus and then introduce a fast multicoordinated agreement protocol for agents organized in groups, an abstraction for fast local area networks interconnected by slower links.
650		4	\|a Multicoordinated \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Agreement \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Consensus \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Broadcast \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Groups \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
700	1		\|a Schmidt, Rodrigo \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Madeira, Edmundo \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Pedone, Fernando \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society \|d London : Springer, 1996 \|g 16(2010), 1 vom: 23. Apr., Seite 49-68 \|w (DE-627)324613377 \|w (DE-600)2028746-X \|x 1678-4804 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:16 \|g year:2010 \|g number:1 \|g day:23 \|g month:04 \|g pages:49-68
856	4	0	\|u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7 \|z lizenzpflichtig \|3 Volltext
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_SPRINGER
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_370
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_702
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2190
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4035
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4242
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4246
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4251
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4326
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4335
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 16 \|j 2010 \|e 1 \|b 23 \|c 04 \|h 49-68

Indexfelder

author_variant	l c lc r s rs e m em f p fp
matchkey_str	article:16784804:2010----::utcodntdgemnfrr
hierarchy_sort_str	2010
publishDate	2010
allfields	10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7 doi (DE-627)SPR030742404 (SPR)s13173-010-0001-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Camargos, Lasaro verfasserin aut Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Brazilian Computer Society 2010 Abstract Agents in agreement protocols play well-distinct roles. Proposers propose values to the acceptors, which will accept proposals and inform the learners so they detect that an agreement has been reached. A fourth role is that of the coordinator, who filters the proposals from proposers to acceptors. While proposers, learners, and coordinators are easily replaced, substituting an acceptor is prohibitive. Protocols that do not employ a coordinator are less resilient to acceptor failures. Protocols that use one coordinator are more resilient to acceptor failures, at the expense of one extra communication step even in the absence of failures. Moreover, they require replacing the coordinator as soon as it fails, a reconfiguration that, although relatively inexpensive, diminishes the protocol availability. Hence, either option, i.e., one or zero coordinator, has its drawbacks. In previous works, we have presented an alternative: multicoordinated agreement protocols. Such protocols are as resilient as single-coordinated protocols but require less reconfiguration to cope with coordinator failures. In fact, most reconfiguration can be done in parallel to the execution of the protocol’s normal steps. Multicoordination can be applied to several problems. In this paper we exemplify its use in solving consensus and then introduce a fast multicoordinated agreement protocol for agents organized in groups, an abstraction for fast local area networks interconnected by slower links. Multicoordinated (dpeaa)DE-He213 Agreement (dpeaa)DE-He213 Consensus (dpeaa)DE-He213 Broadcast (dpeaa)DE-He213 Groups (dpeaa)DE-He213 Schmidt, Rodrigo aut Madeira, Edmundo aut Pedone, Fernando aut Enthalten in Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society London : Springer, 1996 16(2010), 1 vom: 23. Apr., Seite 49-68 (DE-627)324613377 (DE-600)2028746-X 1678-4804 nnns volume:16 year:2010 number:1 day:23 month:04 pages:49-68 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 16 2010 1 23 04 49-68
spelling	10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7 doi (DE-627)SPR030742404 (SPR)s13173-010-0001-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Camargos, Lasaro verfasserin aut Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Brazilian Computer Society 2010 Abstract Agents in agreement protocols play well-distinct roles. Proposers propose values to the acceptors, which will accept proposals and inform the learners so they detect that an agreement has been reached. A fourth role is that of the coordinator, who filters the proposals from proposers to acceptors. While proposers, learners, and coordinators are easily replaced, substituting an acceptor is prohibitive. Protocols that do not employ a coordinator are less resilient to acceptor failures. Protocols that use one coordinator are more resilient to acceptor failures, at the expense of one extra communication step even in the absence of failures. Moreover, they require replacing the coordinator as soon as it fails, a reconfiguration that, although relatively inexpensive, diminishes the protocol availability. Hence, either option, i.e., one or zero coordinator, has its drawbacks. In previous works, we have presented an alternative: multicoordinated agreement protocols. Such protocols are as resilient as single-coordinated protocols but require less reconfiguration to cope with coordinator failures. In fact, most reconfiguration can be done in parallel to the execution of the protocol’s normal steps. Multicoordination can be applied to several problems. In this paper we exemplify its use in solving consensus and then introduce a fast multicoordinated agreement protocol for agents organized in groups, an abstraction for fast local area networks interconnected by slower links. Multicoordinated (dpeaa)DE-He213 Agreement (dpeaa)DE-He213 Consensus (dpeaa)DE-He213 Broadcast (dpeaa)DE-He213 Groups (dpeaa)DE-He213 Schmidt, Rodrigo aut Madeira, Edmundo aut Pedone, Fernando aut Enthalten in Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society London : Springer, 1996 16(2010), 1 vom: 23. Apr., Seite 49-68 (DE-627)324613377 (DE-600)2028746-X 1678-4804 nnns volume:16 year:2010 number:1 day:23 month:04 pages:49-68 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 16 2010 1 23 04 49-68
allfields_unstemmed	10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7 doi (DE-627)SPR030742404 (SPR)s13173-010-0001-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Camargos, Lasaro verfasserin aut Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Brazilian Computer Society 2010 Abstract Agents in agreement protocols play well-distinct roles. Proposers propose values to the acceptors, which will accept proposals and inform the learners so they detect that an agreement has been reached. A fourth role is that of the coordinator, who filters the proposals from proposers to acceptors. While proposers, learners, and coordinators are easily replaced, substituting an acceptor is prohibitive. Protocols that do not employ a coordinator are less resilient to acceptor failures. Protocols that use one coordinator are more resilient to acceptor failures, at the expense of one extra communication step even in the absence of failures. Moreover, they require replacing the coordinator as soon as it fails, a reconfiguration that, although relatively inexpensive, diminishes the protocol availability. Hence, either option, i.e., one or zero coordinator, has its drawbacks. In previous works, we have presented an alternative: multicoordinated agreement protocols. Such protocols are as resilient as single-coordinated protocols but require less reconfiguration to cope with coordinator failures. In fact, most reconfiguration can be done in parallel to the execution of the protocol’s normal steps. Multicoordination can be applied to several problems. In this paper we exemplify its use in solving consensus and then introduce a fast multicoordinated agreement protocol for agents organized in groups, an abstraction for fast local area networks interconnected by slower links. Multicoordinated (dpeaa)DE-He213 Agreement (dpeaa)DE-He213 Consensus (dpeaa)DE-He213 Broadcast (dpeaa)DE-He213 Groups (dpeaa)DE-He213 Schmidt, Rodrigo aut Madeira, Edmundo aut Pedone, Fernando aut Enthalten in Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society London : Springer, 1996 16(2010), 1 vom: 23. Apr., Seite 49-68 (DE-627)324613377 (DE-600)2028746-X 1678-4804 nnns volume:16 year:2010 number:1 day:23 month:04 pages:49-68 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 16 2010 1 23 04 49-68
allfieldsGer	10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7 doi (DE-627)SPR030742404 (SPR)s13173-010-0001-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Camargos, Lasaro verfasserin aut Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Brazilian Computer Society 2010 Abstract Agents in agreement protocols play well-distinct roles. Proposers propose values to the acceptors, which will accept proposals and inform the learners so they detect that an agreement has been reached. A fourth role is that of the coordinator, who filters the proposals from proposers to acceptors. While proposers, learners, and coordinators are easily replaced, substituting an acceptor is prohibitive. Protocols that do not employ a coordinator are less resilient to acceptor failures. Protocols that use one coordinator are more resilient to acceptor failures, at the expense of one extra communication step even in the absence of failures. Moreover, they require replacing the coordinator as soon as it fails, a reconfiguration that, although relatively inexpensive, diminishes the protocol availability. Hence, either option, i.e., one or zero coordinator, has its drawbacks. In previous works, we have presented an alternative: multicoordinated agreement protocols. Such protocols are as resilient as single-coordinated protocols but require less reconfiguration to cope with coordinator failures. In fact, most reconfiguration can be done in parallel to the execution of the protocol’s normal steps. Multicoordination can be applied to several problems. In this paper we exemplify its use in solving consensus and then introduce a fast multicoordinated agreement protocol for agents organized in groups, an abstraction for fast local area networks interconnected by slower links. Multicoordinated (dpeaa)DE-He213 Agreement (dpeaa)DE-He213 Consensus (dpeaa)DE-He213 Broadcast (dpeaa)DE-He213 Groups (dpeaa)DE-He213 Schmidt, Rodrigo aut Madeira, Edmundo aut Pedone, Fernando aut Enthalten in Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society London : Springer, 1996 16(2010), 1 vom: 23. Apr., Seite 49-68 (DE-627)324613377 (DE-600)2028746-X 1678-4804 nnns volume:16 year:2010 number:1 day:23 month:04 pages:49-68 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 16 2010 1 23 04 49-68
allfieldsSound	10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7 doi (DE-627)SPR030742404 (SPR)s13173-010-0001-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Camargos, Lasaro verfasserin aut Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Brazilian Computer Society 2010 Abstract Agents in agreement protocols play well-distinct roles. Proposers propose values to the acceptors, which will accept proposals and inform the learners so they detect that an agreement has been reached. A fourth role is that of the coordinator, who filters the proposals from proposers to acceptors. While proposers, learners, and coordinators are easily replaced, substituting an acceptor is prohibitive. Protocols that do not employ a coordinator are less resilient to acceptor failures. Protocols that use one coordinator are more resilient to acceptor failures, at the expense of one extra communication step even in the absence of failures. Moreover, they require replacing the coordinator as soon as it fails, a reconfiguration that, although relatively inexpensive, diminishes the protocol availability. Hence, either option, i.e., one or zero coordinator, has its drawbacks. In previous works, we have presented an alternative: multicoordinated agreement protocols. Such protocols are as resilient as single-coordinated protocols but require less reconfiguration to cope with coordinator failures. In fact, most reconfiguration can be done in parallel to the execution of the protocol’s normal steps. Multicoordination can be applied to several problems. In this paper we exemplify its use in solving consensus and then introduce a fast multicoordinated agreement protocol for agents organized in groups, an abstraction for fast local area networks interconnected by slower links. Multicoordinated (dpeaa)DE-He213 Agreement (dpeaa)DE-He213 Consensus (dpeaa)DE-He213 Broadcast (dpeaa)DE-He213 Groups (dpeaa)DE-He213 Schmidt, Rodrigo aut Madeira, Edmundo aut Pedone, Fernando aut Enthalten in Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society London : Springer, 1996 16(2010), 1 vom: 23. Apr., Seite 49-68 (DE-627)324613377 (DE-600)2028746-X 1678-4804 nnns volume:16 year:2010 number:1 day:23 month:04 pages:49-68 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 16 2010 1 23 04 49-68
language	English
source	Enthalten in Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society 16(2010), 1 vom: 23. Apr., Seite 49-68 volume:16 year:2010 number:1 day:23 month:04 pages:49-68
sourceStr	Enthalten in Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society 16(2010), 1 vom: 23. Apr., Seite 49-68 volume:16 year:2010 number:1 day:23 month:04 pages:49-68
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Multicoordinated Agreement Consensus Broadcast Groups
isfreeaccess_bool	false
container_title	Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Camargos, Lasaro @@aut@@ Schmidt, Rodrigo @@aut@@ Madeira, Edmundo @@aut@@ Pedone, Fernando @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2010-04-23T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	324613377
id	SPR030742404
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR030742404</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230331101725.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2010 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR030742404</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s13173-010-0001-7-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Camargos, Lasaro</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Brazilian Computer Society 2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Agents in agreement protocols play well-distinct roles. Proposers propose values to the acceptors, which will accept proposals and inform the learners so they detect that an agreement has been reached. A fourth role is that of the coordinator, who filters the proposals from proposers to acceptors. While proposers, learners, and coordinators are easily replaced, substituting an acceptor is prohibitive. Protocols that do not employ a coordinator are less resilient to acceptor failures. Protocols that use one coordinator are more resilient to acceptor failures, at the expense of one extra communication step even in the absence of failures. Moreover, they require replacing the coordinator as soon as it fails, a reconfiguration that, although relatively inexpensive, diminishes the protocol availability. Hence, either option, i.e., one or zero coordinator, has its drawbacks. In previous works, we have presented an alternative: multicoordinated agreement protocols. Such protocols are as resilient as single-coordinated protocols but require less reconfiguration to cope with coordinator failures. In fact, most reconfiguration can be done in parallel to the execution of the protocol’s normal steps. Multicoordination can be applied to several problems. In this paper we exemplify its use in solving consensus and then introduce a fast multicoordinated agreement protocol for agents organized in groups, an abstraction for fast local area networks interconnected by slower links.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Multicoordinated</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Agreement</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Consensus</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Broadcast</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Groups</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Schmidt, Rodrigo</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Madeira, Edmundo</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pedone, Fernando</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society</subfield><subfield code="d">London : Springer, 1996</subfield><subfield code="g">16(2010), 1 vom: 23. Apr., Seite 49-68</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)324613377</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2028746-X</subfield><subfield code="x">1678-4804</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:16</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2010</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:23</subfield><subfield code="g">month:04</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:49-68</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">16</subfield><subfield code="j">2010</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">23</subfield><subfield code="c">04</subfield><subfield code="h">49-68</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Camargos, Lasaro
spellingShingle	Camargos, Lasaro misc Multicoordinated misc Agreement misc Consensus misc Broadcast misc Groups Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents
authorStr	Camargos, Lasaro
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)324613377
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut
collection	springer
remote_str	true
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	1678-4804
topic_title	Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents Multicoordinated (dpeaa)DE-He213 Agreement (dpeaa)DE-He213 Consensus (dpeaa)DE-He213 Broadcast (dpeaa)DE-He213 Groups (dpeaa)DE-He213
topic	misc Multicoordinated misc Agreement misc Consensus misc Broadcast misc Groups
topic_unstemmed	misc Multicoordinated misc Agreement misc Consensus misc Broadcast misc Groups
topic_browse	misc Multicoordinated misc Agreement misc Consensus misc Broadcast misc Groups
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society
hierarchy_parent_id	324613377
hierarchy_top_title	Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society
isfreeaccess_txt	false
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)324613377 (DE-600)2028746-X
title	Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents
ctrlnum	(DE-627)SPR030742404 (SPR)s13173-010-0001-7-e
title_full	Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents
author_sort	Camargos, Lasaro
journal	Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society
journalStr	Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	false
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2010
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	49
author_browse	Camargos, Lasaro Schmidt, Rodrigo Madeira, Edmundo Pedone, Fernando
container_volume	16
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Camargos, Lasaro
doi_str_mv	10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7
title_sort	multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents
title_auth	Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents
abstract	Abstract Agents in agreement protocols play well-distinct roles. Proposers propose values to the acceptors, which will accept proposals and inform the learners so they detect that an agreement has been reached. A fourth role is that of the coordinator, who filters the proposals from proposers to acceptors. While proposers, learners, and coordinators are easily replaced, substituting an acceptor is prohibitive. Protocols that do not employ a coordinator are less resilient to acceptor failures. Protocols that use one coordinator are more resilient to acceptor failures, at the expense of one extra communication step even in the absence of failures. Moreover, they require replacing the coordinator as soon as it fails, a reconfiguration that, although relatively inexpensive, diminishes the protocol availability. Hence, either option, i.e., one or zero coordinator, has its drawbacks. In previous works, we have presented an alternative: multicoordinated agreement protocols. Such protocols are as resilient as single-coordinated protocols but require less reconfiguration to cope with coordinator failures. In fact, most reconfiguration can be done in parallel to the execution of the protocol’s normal steps. Multicoordination can be applied to several problems. In this paper we exemplify its use in solving consensus and then introduce a fast multicoordinated agreement protocol for agents organized in groups, an abstraction for fast local area networks interconnected by slower links. © The Brazilian Computer Society 2010
abstractGer	Abstract Agents in agreement protocols play well-distinct roles. Proposers propose values to the acceptors, which will accept proposals and inform the learners so they detect that an agreement has been reached. A fourth role is that of the coordinator, who filters the proposals from proposers to acceptors. While proposers, learners, and coordinators are easily replaced, substituting an acceptor is prohibitive. Protocols that do not employ a coordinator are less resilient to acceptor failures. Protocols that use one coordinator are more resilient to acceptor failures, at the expense of one extra communication step even in the absence of failures. Moreover, they require replacing the coordinator as soon as it fails, a reconfiguration that, although relatively inexpensive, diminishes the protocol availability. Hence, either option, i.e., one or zero coordinator, has its drawbacks. In previous works, we have presented an alternative: multicoordinated agreement protocols. Such protocols are as resilient as single-coordinated protocols but require less reconfiguration to cope with coordinator failures. In fact, most reconfiguration can be done in parallel to the execution of the protocol’s normal steps. Multicoordination can be applied to several problems. In this paper we exemplify its use in solving consensus and then introduce a fast multicoordinated agreement protocol for agents organized in groups, an abstraction for fast local area networks interconnected by slower links. © The Brazilian Computer Society 2010
abstract_unstemmed	Abstract Agents in agreement protocols play well-distinct roles. Proposers propose values to the acceptors, which will accept proposals and inform the learners so they detect that an agreement has been reached. A fourth role is that of the coordinator, who filters the proposals from proposers to acceptors. While proposers, learners, and coordinators are easily replaced, substituting an acceptor is prohibitive. Protocols that do not employ a coordinator are less resilient to acceptor failures. Protocols that use one coordinator are more resilient to acceptor failures, at the expense of one extra communication step even in the absence of failures. Moreover, they require replacing the coordinator as soon as it fails, a reconfiguration that, although relatively inexpensive, diminishes the protocol availability. Hence, either option, i.e., one or zero coordinator, has its drawbacks. In previous works, we have presented an alternative: multicoordinated agreement protocols. Such protocols are as resilient as single-coordinated protocols but require less reconfiguration to cope with coordinator failures. In fact, most reconfiguration can be done in parallel to the execution of the protocol’s normal steps. Multicoordination can be applied to several problems. In this paper we exemplify its use in solving consensus and then introduce a fast multicoordinated agreement protocol for agents organized in groups, an abstraction for fast local area networks interconnected by slower links. © The Brazilian Computer Society 2010
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1
title_short	Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents
url	https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7
remote_bool	true
author2	Schmidt, Rodrigo Madeira, Edmundo Pedone, Fernando
author2Str	Schmidt, Rodrigo Madeira, Edmundo Pedone, Fernando
ppnlink	324613377
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	false
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7
up_date	2024-07-03T19:51:09.286Z
_version_	1803588751104933888
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR030742404</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230331101725.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2010 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR030742404</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s13173-010-0001-7-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Camargos, Lasaro</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Brazilian Computer Society 2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Agents in agreement protocols play well-distinct roles. Proposers propose values to the acceptors, which will accept proposals and inform the learners so they detect that an agreement has been reached. A fourth role is that of the coordinator, who filters the proposals from proposers to acceptors. While proposers, learners, and coordinators are easily replaced, substituting an acceptor is prohibitive. Protocols that do not employ a coordinator are less resilient to acceptor failures. Protocols that use one coordinator are more resilient to acceptor failures, at the expense of one extra communication step even in the absence of failures. Moreover, they require replacing the coordinator as soon as it fails, a reconfiguration that, although relatively inexpensive, diminishes the protocol availability. Hence, either option, i.e., one or zero coordinator, has its drawbacks. In previous works, we have presented an alternative: multicoordinated agreement protocols. Such protocols are as resilient as single-coordinated protocols but require less reconfiguration to cope with coordinator failures. In fact, most reconfiguration can be done in parallel to the execution of the protocol’s normal steps. Multicoordination can be applied to several problems. In this paper we exemplify its use in solving consensus and then introduce a fast multicoordinated agreement protocol for agents organized in groups, an abstraction for fast local area networks interconnected by slower links.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Multicoordinated</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Agreement</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Consensus</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Broadcast</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Groups</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Schmidt, Rodrigo</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Madeira, Edmundo</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pedone, Fernando</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society</subfield><subfield code="d">London : Springer, 1996</subfield><subfield code="g">16(2010), 1 vom: 23. Apr., Seite 49-68</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)324613377</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2028746-X</subfield><subfield code="x">1678-4804</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:16</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2010</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:23</subfield><subfield code="g">month:04</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:49-68</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13173-010-0001-7</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">16</subfield><subfield code="j">2010</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">23</subfield><subfield code="c">04</subfield><subfield code="h">49-68</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.39756

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Multicoordinated agreement for groups of agents

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?